CASPER. March 2012 CHILD ADVANCED SAFETY PROJECT FOR EUROPEAN ROADS

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "CASPER. March 2012 CHILD ADVANCED SAFETY PROJECT FOR EUROPEAN ROADS"

Sophia Heath
6 years ago
Views:

1 CHILD ADVANCED SAFETY PROJECT FOR EUROPEAN ROADS Study on the influence of the child dummy stature reproducing real life situations on the dummy readings March 2012

2 AGENDA Context Setup Dummy Use and Misuse of Child Restrain System Results for Q6 dummy Out of position consequences (Q6 Dummy) CRS efficiency ISOFIX Efficiency Results for Q3 dummy Compliance with recommendation of the CRS Seatbelt positioner Other contributions from partners Summary of the results 2

Peugeot 807 Car body installed on sled device Pulse used for the campaign : R44 Pulse Child Restraint systems used :

3 g Context Purpose : To Study the behavior of a child dummy in attitudes reproducing situations of everyday life in frontal impact Date of Test Campaign : 16 to 18 of November 2011 Test Facilities : UTAC reverse Catapult Vehicle used : Peugeot 807 Car body installed on sled device Pulse used for the campaign : R44 Pulse Child Restraint systems used : Britax Romer Kid Fix (group 2/3) Teamtex Booster (group 2/3)

Dummy setup Initial configuration : Two Q6 dummy

and installed on the seats of the second row of the

abdominal sensors and an old neck part (no wire inside)

dummy installed on the right seat of the second row Two

4 Dummy setup Initial configuration : Two Q6 dummy equipped with 2 Abdominal sensors (provided by IFSTTAR) and installed on the seats of the second row of the vehicle Final configuration : One Q6 dummy with 2 abdominal sensors and an old neck part (no wire inside) installed on the left seat of the second row One Q3 dummy installed on the right seat of the second row Two types of auxiliary equipment used in this campaign (Patches and Silicone insert) 4

5 Use and Misuse of Child Restraint System Positions Tested Standard Bending forward or to the window Seatbelt under the arm or in the back Body Twisted 1 or 2 Feet on cushion or front seat Seatback inclined Far relax position (length of a credit card between seatback and pelvis) 5

6 Use and Misuse of Child Restrain System Misuse Tested None No use of CRS : YES / NO CRS with ISOFIX : YES / NO With only 1 of the ISOFIX connectors plugged With the seatbelt over the horns : YES / NO With a Seatbelt positioner : YES / NO 6

7 Use and Misuse of Child Restrain System Test matrix for Q6 Positions Tested : Standard Bending forward Seatbelt under the arm 1 or 2 Feet on cushion or front seat Seatback inclined Far relax position Misuse Tested : None No use of CRS : YES / NO CRS with ISOFIX : YES / NO With only 1 of the ISOFIX connectors plugged With a Seatbelt positioner : YES / NO With the seatbelt over the horns : YES / NO Test matrix for Q3 Positions Tested : Standard Bending forward or to the window Body Twisted Seatbelt under the arm or in the back 1 or 2 Feet on cushion Seatback inclined Far relax position Misuse Tested : None Use of CRS : Always CRS with ISOFIX : NO With a Seatbelt positioner : YES / NO With the seatbelt over the horns : YES / NO These misuses and positions can be mixed at wish 7

8 Results for Q6 dummy Test number Head Thorax Pelvis Abdomen Pressure (bar) 1 76,8 65,6 58,1 1, ,4 69,4 65,3 1, , ,1 0, ,3 58 0, ,9 63,8 64,1 7, , ,1 0, ,1 49,8 52,1 3, ,1 59,4 54,2 0, ,3 56,4 86,8 1, ,2 71,3 63,7 1, ,1 85,1 68,3 1, ,3 66,7 61,8 0, ,8 59,2 55, ,5 71,9 50,3 0, ,8 60,1 55,5 0,90 Not exceeding Limit of R44 criteria 10% above Limit of R44 criteria > 10% above Limit of R44 criteria Not exceeding 1 bar 1 1,2 bar > 1,2 bar 8

0,90 Feet on front seat 68,5 64 44,1 0,82 Head Acceleration : ok Thorax Acceleration : Not Ok for Feet on the front seat

9 Out of position consequences (Q6 Dummy) Three configurations tested : Standard position Bending forward position Feet on the front seat Test Head Thorax Pelvis Abdomen Pressure (bar) Standard 64,1 59,4 54,2 0,31 Bending forward 60,8 60,1 55,5 0,90 Feet on front seat 68, ,1 0,82 Head Acceleration : ok Thorax Acceleration : Not Ok for Feet on the front seat configuration Abdomen Acceleration : still acceptable with a noticeable degradation of the criteria in non standard position 9

CRS Efficiency (Q6 Dummy) Three configurations

Sleeping position Test Head Thorax Pelvis

76,8 65,6 58,1 1,11 Standard 64,1 59,4 54,2

Far relax 76,5 71,9 50,3 0,65 Sleeping without

10 CRS Efficiency (Q6 Dummy) Three configurations tested : Standard position Far relax position Sleeping position Test Head Thorax Pelvis Abdomen Pressure (bar) Standard without CRS 76,8 65,6 58,1 1,11 Standard 64,1 59,4 54,2 0,31 Far relax without CRS 68,2 71,3 63,7 1,23 Far relax 76,5 71,9 50,3 0,65 Sleeping without CRS 54,1 85,1 68,3 1,23 Sleeping 68,3 66,7 61,8 0,53 10

11 CRS Efficiency (Q6 Dummy) Focus on Abdominal criteria Standard position Far relax position Sleeping position Highlights : 1 bar limit Head Acceleration : ok Thorax Acceleration : Not Ok Pelvis Acceleration : acceptable with a slight degradation of the criteria without CRS Abdomen : Tests without CRS show a dramatic increase in the abdominal effort with a high risk of submarining 11

0,31 CRS without ISOFIX 68,8 59,2 55,2 0,28 Highlights : Increase of risk of injury for all segments in the configuration

12 ISOFIX Efficiency (Q6 Dummy) Three configurations tested : 1. No CRS 2. CRS with ISOFIX 3. CRS without ISOFIX Test Head Thorax Pelvis Abdomen Pressure (bar) Without CRS 76,8 65,6 58,1 1,11 CRS + ISOFIX 64,1 59,4 54,2 0,31 CRS without ISOFIX 68,8 59,2 55,2 0,28 Highlights : Increase of risk of injury for all segments in the configuration without CRS Similar behaviour of the CRS with or without ISOFIX mainly due to the integrated load limitator CRS with seatback and load limitation integrated in the fixations 12

Influence of the seatbelt routing with an ISOFIX CRS (Q6 dummy) Two configurations tested : Standard installation Wrong routing of the belt 1 bar limit Seatbelt above «horns» Test number Head Thorax

13 Influence of the seatbelt routing with an ISOFIX CRS (Q6 dummy) Two configurations tested : Standard installation Wrong routing of the belt 1 bar limit Seatbelt above «horns» Test number Head Thorax Pelvis Abdomen Pressure (bar) Bad routing 63,1 49,8 52,1 3,54 Standard 64,1 59,4 54,2 0,31 Highlights : Head and Thorax Criteria : ok (Belt slightly above the Thorax sensor) Abdomen : Test with bad routing lead to a dramatic increase in the abdominal effort 13

14 Results for Q3 dummy Test number Tête Accel résultante 3ms 62,3 66,4 63,8 74, ,2 49,4 48,9 65,3 66,5 83,6 81,6 77,3 60,3 57,8 71,4 61,7 Thorax Accel résultante 3ms 59,1 57,5 55, ,6 62,6 53,4 40,4 62,7 61,6 68,3 62,4 62,5 54,5 56,6 58,2 64,4 Bassin Accel résultante 3ms 54,9 52,1 45, ,4 53, ,2 53,4 52,5 66,5 61,5 54,7 51,5 51,9 63,5 62,9 Not exceeding Limit of R44 criteria > 10% above Limit of R44 criteria 10% above Limit of R44 criteria 14

résultante 3ms Neck MY Nm Thorax Accel résultante 3ms Bassin Accel résultante 3ms Standard

15 Compliance with recommendation of the CRS (Q3 dummy) Three configurations tested Standard installation Alternative child seat installation Wrong routing of the belt Test Tête Accel résultante 3ms Neck MY Nm Thorax Accel résultante 3ms Bassin Accel résultante 3ms Standard installation 77, ,5 54,7 Alternative installation 57, ,6 51,9 Wrong routing of the belt 71, ,2 63,5 15

Not Ok Sliding of the belt on the neck, MY Neck at 40 Nm instead of 30Nm for the

16 Compliance with recommendation of the CRS (Q3 dummy) Focus on films Alternative installation Wrong routing of the belt Highlights : Criteria : ok Dummy Kinematic : Not Ok Sliding of the belt on the neck, MY Neck at 40 Nm instead of 30Nm for the reference test Inadequate instrumentation of the dummy to see the influence of these misuses 16

Seatbelt positioner Two configurations tested : Q3 and Q6 dummy Q3 on booster cushion Test Tête Accel résultante 3ms Thorax Accel résultante 3ms Bassin Accel

above Limit of R44 criteria Not exceeding 1 bar 1 1,2 bar > 1,2 bar Test Head Resultant Accel 3ms Thorax Resultant Accel 3ms Pelvis Resultant Accel 3ms Abdomen

17 Seatbelt positioner Two configurations tested : Q3 and Q6 dummy Q3 on booster cushion Test Tête Accel résultante 3ms Thorax Accel résultante 3ms Bassin Accel résultante 3ms With positioner 62,3 59,1 54,9 Standard 77,3 62,5 54,7 Q6 without booster Not exceeding Limit of R44 criteria 10% above Limit of R44 criteria > 10% above Limit of R44 criteria Not exceeding 1 bar 1 1,2 bar > 1,2 bar Test Head Resultant Accel 3ms Thorax Resultant Accel 3ms Pelvis Resultant Accel 3ms Abdomen Pressure (bar) With positioner 72,4 69,4 65,3 1,87 Standard 76,8 65,6 58,1 1,11 Remark : We tested this device because of bad return in accident (device still available on the web) 17

the dummy in a specific CRS (ISOFIX : Yes /

fastening the CRS (ISOFIX + Top Tether OR

wrong belt routing "classical attachment" Q3

18 Other contributions from partners BASt campaign : Misuse concerning the stature of the dummy in a specific CRS (ISOFIX : Yes / No) (Dummy too small or too big) Q3 (reference) Q6 Q0 Use of the integrated pretensioner device (Yes / No) Method of fastening the CRS (ISOFIX + Top Tether OR seatbelt) Seatbelt routing Q3 (reference) Q3 wrong belt routing "classical attachment" Q3 wrong belt routing; non use of upper belt guidance 11 tests performed 18

(ISOFIX + support leg) Q3 and CRS group 1 Rearward facing CRS: Group 0+ Rearward facing CRS:

19 Other contributions from partners FIAT campaign : Misuse concerning the stature of the dummy in a specific CRS (ISOFIX : Yes / No) (Dummy too small or too big) Method of fastening the CRS (ISOFIX + support leg) Q3 and CRS group 1 Rearward facing CRS: Group 0+ Rearward facing CRS: Group 1 Forward facing CRS: Group 1 Forward facing CRS: Group 2 Q 1 ½ and CRS group tests planned 19

20 Summary of the results Highlights for the Q6 dummy : All these tests showed us three main factors influencing the behavior of the dummy The presence of a Child Restraint System (with or without ISOFIX) The positioning in the seat ( Far relax, Feet on front seat, sleeping) The Compliance with the recommendation of the route for the belt on the dummy and the seat Highlights for the Q3 dummy : The most significant point of this campaign for this dummy is the route of the seatbelt which generate very high risk of abdominal injuries in case of bad positioning visible with additional neck load On a Q3 dummy we were not able to see the influence of the relax position but what happens on a child of 3 years old who has a softer lumbar spine? 20

21 Summary of the results Tests without CRS show a dramatic increase in the abdominal effort with a high risk of submarining (efficiency of CRS) There are three important factors generator of abdominal injury : Belt under the arm Belt over the horn of the CRS Far relax position Tests prove that the Seatbelt positioner device amplify the risk of submarining through a poor positioning of the belt on the abdomen These tests show us that the weakest part of the Q6 dummy is the abdomen and the abdominal sensors seem to be a good tool to evaluate the risk of injury on this body part. The classic patches are less efficient than silicone inserts The main criterion is the correct wearing of the seatbelt! 21

22 Thank you for your attention! 22

CASPER. Misuse Observation. Workshop Child Safety and Cultural Approach November 30 th, Munich, Germany

CASPER. Misuse Observation. Workshop Child Safety and Cultural Approach November 30 th, Munich, Germany CHILD ADVANCED SAFETY PROJECT FOR EUROPEAN ROADS Misuse Observation Workshop Child Safety and Cultural Approach November 30 th, Munich, Germany H. Johannsen; G. Müller ( M.-C. Chevalier; P. Beillas (Université