Citation

Morgan RM, Cui C, Marzougui D, Digges KH, Cao L, Kan CD. Proc. IRCOBI 2012; 40: 155-165.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2012, International Research Council on Biomechanics of Injury)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Based on past findings that the between-rail frontal crash has a higher trauma risk than either the full-engagement or 40% offset crash, this study investigated those three crashes with laboratory tests and finite element simulations. The focus was on these three test types as undergone by four sedans that had been rated good by IIHS: (1) 2006 Volkswagen Passat, (2) 2007 Toyota Camry, (3) 2007 Chevrolet Malibu and (4) 2007 Subaru Legacy. Using the 50th percentile male Hybrid III dummy in the driver and right front passenger seats, injury risks were calculated for five body regions: head, neck, thorax, knee-thigh-hip (KTH), and foot/ankle. Comparisons were made for the injury risk in the center pole test to the injury risk for the NCAP frontal test and the IIHS frontal test. The driver compartment intrusion in the center pole test was compared to the intrusion in the NCAP frontal test and the IIHS frontal test. Assuming that the center pole test is a satisfactory laboratory test representing the between-rail crash, a concept for a between-rail countermeasure was designed for a finite element model of a 2001 Ford Taurus. Safety performance and mass increase of the between-rail redesign of the Ford Taurus were evaluated.