Automobile Head-On Collisions - - series II

Severy, Derwyn M.; Mathewson, J. H.; Seigel, A. W.

doi:10.4271/590032

Cited by 30 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In 1954, researchers at UCLA began conducting some of the first controlled and highly instrumented crash tests (Severy et al, 1959).The UCLA study was notable not only because it represented one of the first attempts to produce and record a vehicle's behavior in a crash, by controlling variables such as speed, angle of impact, and decelerative force in a laboratorylike setting, but also because it relied on an emerging theory of crash energy dynamics. Severy and colleagues laid out a detailed understanding of crash dynamics for their readers.…”

Section: In the Labmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Road to Lab to Math

Leonardi

2009

Soc Stud Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Today, in the midst of economic crisis, senior executives at US automakers and influential industry analysts frequently reflect on the progression that safety testing has taken from the crude trials done on the road, to controlled laboratory experiments, and to today's complex math-based simulation models. They use stories of this seemingly linear and natural sequence to justify further investment in simulation technologies. The analysis presented in this paper shows that change in the structures of automakers' organizations co-evolved with regulations specifying who was at fault in vehicle impacts, how vehicles should be built to withstand the force of an impact, and how testing should be done to assure that vehicles met those requirements. Changes in the regulatory environment were bolstered by new theories about crash test dynamics and changing technologies with which to test those theories. Thus, as new technological and regulatory innovations co-evolved with innovations in organizational structuring, ideas about how to best conduct crash tests shifted and catalyzed new cycles of technological, regulatory, and organizational innovation. However, this co-evolutionary story tells us that the move from road to lab to math was not natural or linear as today's managerial rhetoric would have us believe. Rather, the logic of math-based simulation was the result of technological, regulatory and organizational changes that created an industry-wide ideology that supported the move toward math while making it appear natural within the shifting structure of the industry.

show abstract

Section: In the Labmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Road to Lab to Math

Leonardi

2009

Soc Stud Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Figure 6. Limit of forward motion in 21 mph impact, using a combination lap and chest strap, floor-anchored only slightly, the chest advancing to a maxi¬ mum of about 13 inches, and the head advanc¬ ing about 24 inches ( fig. 6).…”

Section: Locations Of Third Anchormentioning

confidence: 99%

“…7). For the doorpost-anchored models, the forward move¬ ment of the chest averaged 7 inches and the head 13 inches. Significantly, the films revealed no indications of appreciable downward force exerted on the shoulders.…”

Section: Locations Of Third Anchormentioning

confidence: 99%