Evaluation and Comparison of Thoracic Injury Risk for the Hybrid III and THOR 50th-Percentile Male Anthropomorphic Test Devices in the Rear Seat during Frontal Impacts
- 11 April 2022
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAE International in SAE International Journal of Transportation Safety
- Vol. 10 (2)
- https://doi.org/10.4271/09-10-02-0015
Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate the thoracic response and injury metrics of the Hybrid III (HIII-50M) and Test device for Human Occupant Restraint (THOR-50M) 50th-percentile male Anthropomorphic Test Devices (ATDs) during frontal, rear-seated sled tests using modern vehicles with various rear seat characteristics. Test bucks were fabricated from seven vehicles (two sedans, three midsize sport utility vehicles [SUVs], one SUV, and one minivan) that represented varying levels of rear seat designs and safety technologies, e.g., three vehicles had advanced restraints with pretensioners (PT) and load limiters (LL). Twenty-four frontal sled tests were conducted using three sled pulses derived from the vehicle-specific New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) crash pulses (NCAP85 Delta V = 56 kph, Scaled Delta V = 32 kph, and Generic Delta V = 32 kph). The HIII-50M and THOR-50M ATDs were positioned in the right and left rear seats, respectively. Maximum chest acceleration (3 ms clip), maximum chest deflection, and deflection-based thoracic injury risk were quantified for both ATDs. For the HIII-50M, the maximum chest acceleration was below the injury threshold (60 g) for all Scaled and Generic tests, but above the threshold during one NCAP85 test with conven-tional restraints. The THOR-50M maximum chest acceleration was below the injury threshold for all tests. The HIII-50M Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS)3+ maximum sternum deflection injury risk threshold was exceeded or nearly exceeded during the NCAP85 tests for three vehicles, none of which had advanced restraints. The THOR-50M AIS3+ maximum chest deflection injury risk threshold was exceeded during the NCAP85 test for one vehicle, which had PT and LL. Although this study indicates that there may be room for improvement with regard to rear-seat occupant protection, it is currently unknown whether or not either ATD provides a realistic kinematic response or injury risk prediction in the rear seat. Future matched postmortem human subjects (PMHS) testing will facilitate the assessment of the biofidelity and injury risk prediction capabilities of these ATDs in the rear seat.Keywords
This publication has 10 references indexed in Scilit:
- Submarining Protection for 50th-Percentile Male Anthropomorphic Test Devices in the Rear Seat during Frontal Crash Sled TestsSAE International Journal of Transportation Safety, 2022
- Seating preferences in highly automated vehicles and occupant safety awareness: A national survey of Chinese perceptionsTraffic Injury Prevention, 2020
- Factors contributing to serious and fatal injuries in belted rear seat occupants in frontal crashesTraffic Injury Prevention, 2019
- Evaluation of Hybrid III and THOR-M neck kinetics and injury risk under various restraint conditions during full-scale frontal sled testsTraffic Injury Prevention, 2018
- Epidemiology of injuries sustained by rear-seat passengers in frontal motor vehicle crashesJournal of Transport & Health, 2017
- Rear seat safety: Variation in protection by occupant, crash and vehicle characteristicsAccident Analysis & Prevention, 2015
- Injury risk for matched front and rear seat car passengers by injury severity and crash type: An exploratory studyAccident Analysis & Prevention, 2015
- Assessment of Vehicle and Restraint Design Changes for Mitigating Rear Seat Occupant InjuriesTraffic Injury Prevention, 2013
- A matched-cohort analysis of belted front and rear seat occupants in newer and older model vehicles shows that gains in front occupant safety have outpaced gains for rear seat occupantsAccident Analysis & Prevention, 2010
- Rear-Seat Motor Vehicle Travel in the U.S.: Using National Data to Define a Population at RiskAmerican Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2009