298
Views
8
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

BioRID Dummy Responses in Matched ABTS and Conventional Seat Tests on the IIHS Rear Sled

&
Pages 339-346 | Received 01 Feb 2011, Accepted 05 Apr 2011, Published online: 08 Aug 2011
 

Abstract

Objective: This study analyzed matched rear sled tests with all belts to seat (ABTS) and conventional seats from the same vehicle model to determine differences in BioRID IIg dummy responses.

Methods: The BioRID IIg rear impact dummy was placed on ABTS or conventional seats and subjected to 10 mph rear sled tests using the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) whiplash assessment protocol. Measurements in the dummy included head and pelvis triaxial accelerations, T1 and L1 biaxial accelerations, and upper and lower neck triaxial forces and moments. High-speed video captured the dummy and seat kinematics during seat loading and rebound into the lap–shoulder belts. Four vehicles were available with conventional and ABTS seats in the same model. They were the 2007–2008 Chrysler Sebring, 2006 Ford F-150, 2005–2007 Saab 9-3, and 2006–2007 BMW 3 series. Confidence intervals were used to determine significant differences between the matched ABTS and conventional seat responses.

Results: Ten sled tests were available for the 4 vehicle models with ABTS and conventional seats. The upper neck rearward shear force was 75 percent higher (range 17%–156%, P < .05) in the matched ABTS compared to conventional seats. The upper neck tension was 44 percent higher (range 24%–94%, P < .05) and the lower neck extension moment was 102 percent higher (range 38%–187%, P < .05). The Saab 9-3 responses were lower than the 3 other vehicles for both the conventional and ABTS seats. There was less rearward shear and extension of the neck in the Saab seats.

Conclusions: The tests show that ABTS seats involved significantly higher neck tensions, rearward shear forces, and extension moments than matched conventional seats. Overall, ABTS seats applied more load on the head and spine, had less control of neck kinematics, and had higher risks for whiplash and more severe injury than conventional seats in the same vehicle model.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The rear sled testing was conducted by the IIHS using the protocol established by RCAR (2008). The availability of the test data and video is appreciated.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.