Supplementing Future Occupant Safety Assessments with Severe
                    Intersection Crashes Selected Using the SAFER Human Body Model

Mroz, Krystoffer; Östling, Martin; Klug, Corina; Höschele, Patrick; Lübbe, Nils

doi:10.4271/09-10-02-0011

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the HBM simulations, lumbar vertebra forces and moments were extracted in the L1-L5 vertebrae using cross-section force-moment measurements. The cross-sections were defined for each vertebra, including the cortical and trabecular bones of the vertebral body as well as the transverse and spinous processes (Mroz et al, 2020;Mroz et al, 2022). The cross-section areas were calculated for L1-L5 for both the midsized male and the large male; Table 1.…”

Section: Risk Of Lumbar Vertebrae Fracturementioning

confidence: 99%

Reducing Lumbar Spine Vertebra Fracture Risk With an Adaptive Seat Track Load Limiter

Östling

Lundgren²,

Lübbe³

et al. 2022

Front. Future Transp.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In future fully automated vehicles, sleeping or resting will be desirable during a drive. While a horizontal position currently appears infeasible, a relaxed seating position with a reclined seatback and an inclined seat pan which enables a safe, comfortable position for sleeping or resting is possible. However, the inclined seat pan increases the forces and moments acting on the lumbar spine of the occupant and thereby the risk of lumbar vertebra fractures in a frontal crash. An energy management system integrated into the longitudinal seat adjustment (a seat track load limiter: STLL) that can reduce this risk should be investigated. When evaluating the injury reduction potential of a new restraint system such as a STLL it is important to include variations in both occupant size and crash severity. Otherwise, there is a risk of sub-optimizing, that is, the restraint system is only working for a limited number of situations. The restraint systems addressing these variations are normally referred to as adaptive restraint systems. The first objective of the study is to develop an activation strategy (adaptive release time of the STLL) for different crash severities and occupant sizes, making full use of the available stroke distance without bottoming out the STLL. The second objective is to evaluate the potential of the adaptive STLL to reduce the risk of lumbar vertebra fractures by comparing it to 1) a fixed seat and 2) a passive version of the STLL. Simulated frontal impacts were performed with two male SAFER human body models (HBMs) as occupant surrogates: mid-sized (80 kg and 1.8 m) and large (130 kg and 1.9 m). Three crash pulse severity levels were evaluated: low (40 km/h), medium (50 km/h), and high (56 km/h) impact speeds. The fracture risk was evaluated for the five lumbar vertebrae (L1–L5) in three different seat conditions: 1) a seat fixed to the sled, 2) a passive STLL that moves when a given force is exceeded, and 3) an adaptive STLL which moves at a time that depends on the occupant mass and crash pulse severity. The risk for lumbar vertebra fracture increased with crash pulse severity, while HBM size had no effect on risk. For all conditions, the passive STLL reduced injury risks compared to the fixed seat, and the adaptive STLL reduced risk even further.

show abstract

Section: Risk Of Lumbar Vertebrae Fracturementioning

confidence: 99%

Reducing Lumbar Spine Vertebra Fracture Risk With an Adaptive Seat Track Load Limiter

Östling

Lundgren²,

Lübbe³

et al. 2022

Front. Future Transp.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The upper neck tension forces (C1 vertebra) and lumbar spine compression forces (L1-L5 vertebrae) were measured using crosssection measurements with respect to a local coordinate system in each vertebral center (Mroz et al, 2022). For the pelvis loading, the resultant left, and right ASIS forces were measured using cross-sections on both sides of the pelvis, defined with respect to a local coordinate system (Mroz et al, 2022).…”

Section: Occupant Kinematics and Injury Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Automated Emergency Braking and Seatbelt Pre-Pretensioning on Occupant Injury Risks in High-Severity Frontal Crashes

Mishra

Mroz

Pipkorn

et al. 2022

Front. Future Transp.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In high-severity crashes, occupant protection is challenging. Automated Emergency Braking (AEB) and seatbelt pre-pretensioning (PPT) are means to improve occupant protection; the purpose of this study was to quantify their effects on occupant injury risks in high-severity full-frontal crashes by Finite Element (FE) simulations. The SAFER Active average male Human Body Model was used as an occupant substitute. The crash pulses used were from separate full-frontal crash simulations using a Honda Accord FE model. The vehicle interior model comprised a seat, an instrument panel, a three-point pretensioned seatbelt system with a load-limiter of 3.1 kN force level, and a frontal passenger airbag. The effects of AEB and PPT were evaluated by simulating a 1 g pre-crash braking scenario for 0.5 s, with and without AEB, for three different PPT force levels: 0, 300, and 600 N. The impact speed of 80 km/h was reduced to 69 km/h by AEB. When neither system was activated, the predicted risk for an occupant to sustain two or more fractured ribs (NFR2+) was 100% for both 45- and 65-year-old male occupants. The risks were reduced when the AEB was activated, particularly for the 45-year-old occupant. When the AEB was activated, the risks of concussion and rib fractures were reduced; upper neck tension forces, pelvis Anterior Superior Iliac Spine (ASIS) forces, and lower extremity forces were also reduced. Increasing the PPT forces reduced the rib fracture risk further (to about 48% for a 45-year-old occupant with 600 N PPT force). The reduced speed due to AEB resulted in a lower concussion risk (from 71.3% to 31%). However, the concussion risk increased slightly with increased PPT forces.

show abstract

Section: Risk Of Lumbar Vertebrae Fracturementioning

confidence: 99%

DataSheet1.docx

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Supplementing Future Occupant Safety Assessments with Severe Intersection Crashes Selected Using the SAFER Human Body Model

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Reducing Lumbar Spine Vertebra Fracture Risk With an Adaptive Seat Track Load Limiter

Reducing Lumbar Spine Vertebra Fracture Risk With an Adaptive Seat Track Load Limiter

Effects of Automated Emergency Braking and Seatbelt Pre-Pretensioning on Occupant Injury Risks in High-Severity Frontal Crashes

DataSheet1.docx

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About