Objective: To describe the determinants of the severity of the head kinematics of a pedestrian when struck by common sport utility vehicles (SUV) and work utility vehicles (WUVs) to assess how effective assessment protocols are in assessing injury risk for SUVs and work utilities.
Methods: Three hundred twenty-four simulations of pedestrian collisions with SUVs, work utility vehicles, and sedans were performed using several vehicle geometries, pedestrian orientations, speeds, and braking levels. Contact stiffnesses in the models were based on impact test results with exemplar vehicle structures. A single contact characteristic was used for all head-to-hood contacts to allow the effects of other factors on head injury risk to be compared. Simulations of standard headform tests on the same hood characterized the structure from a subsystem test perspective.
Results: Head injury criterion values were higher in SUV/WUV simulations than sedan simulations because of high neck tension rather than through higher contact forces with the hood. In fact, the severity of the impact between the head and hood was slightly less in SUV/WUV simulations. Sedan and SUV/WUV simulations produced lower head injury criterion (HIC) values than did the subsystem tests.
Conclusions: High bonnet leading edges led to increased neck loads in these simulations of pedestrian collisions. Neck loads were influential on head injury risk in the SUV/work utility simulations but not in sedan simulations. Subsystem impact tests may overestimate head impact risk from the hood itself but fail to capture a potentially important injury mechanism in collisions with vehicles with high leading edges and thus fail to differentiate completely risks posed by such vehicles. These results may have implications for the interpretation of pedestrian subsystem test results: a given HIC value in an SUV/WUV test may represent a relatively higher risk of injury than the same results recorded in a sedan test.
|2009||Kerrigan J, Arregui C, Crandall J. Pedestrian head impact dynamics: comparison of dummy and PMHS in small sedan and large SUV impacts. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV). June 15-18, 2009; Stuttgart, Germany.|
|2007||Takeuchi K, Ikari T. Correlation between JNCAP pedestrian head protection performance tests and real-world accidents. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV). June 18-21, 2007; Lyon, France.|
|1998||EEVC Working Group 17 Report: Improved Test Methods to Evaluate Pedestrian Protection Afforded by Passenger Cars. European Enhanced Vehicle-Safety Committee (EEVC); 1998.|
|1994||EEVC Working Group 10 Report: Proposals for Methods to Evaluate Pedestrian Protection for Passenger Cars. European Enhanced Vehicle-Safety Committee (EEVC); November 1994.|
|1993||Ishikawa H, Kajzer J, Schroeder G. Computer simulation of impact response of the human body in car-pedestrian accidents. In: Proceedings of the 37th Stapp Car Crash Conference. November 7-8, 1993; San Antonio, TX. Warrendale, PA: Society of Automotive Engineers:235-248. SAE 933129.|
|2005||Anderson R, McLean J, Dokko Y. Determining accurate contact definitions in multi-body simulations for DOE-type reconstruction of head impacts in pedestrian accidents. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV). June 6-9, 2005; Washington, DC.|
|2004||Lefler DE, Gabler HC. The fatality and injury risk of light truck impacts with pedestrians in the United States. Accid Anal Prev. March 2004;36(2):295-304.|
|2004||Ballesteros MF, Dischinger PC, Langenberg P. Pedestrian injuries and vehicle type in Maryland, 1995–1999. Accid Anal Prev. January 2004;36(1):56-62.|
|1989||Lawrence GJL. The influence of car shape on pedestrian impact energies and its application to sub-system tests. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Technical Conference on Experimental Safety Vehicles (ESV). May 29–June 1, 1989; Göteborg, Sweden.1253-1265.|
|2006||Okamoto Y, Kikuchi Y. A study of pedestrian head injury evaluation method. In: Proceedings of the 2006 International IRCOBI Conference on the Biomechanics of Impact. September 20-22, 2006; Madrid, Spain.265-276.|
|2005||Roudsari BS, Mock CN, Kaufman R. An evaluation of the association between vehicle type and the source and severity of pedestrian injuries. Traffic Inj Prev. 2005;6(2):185-192.|
|2003||Chancey VC, Nightingale RW, Van Ee CA, Knaub KE, Myers BS. Improved estimation of human neck tensile tolerance: reducing the range of reported tolerance using anthropometrically correct muscles and optimized physiologic initial conditions. Stapp Car Crash J. 2003;47:135-153. SAE 2003-22-0008.|
|2005||Longhitano D, Ivarsson J, Henary B, Crandall J. Torso injury trends for pedestrians struck by cars and LTVs. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV). June 6-9, 2005; Washington, DC.|
|2003||Okamoto Y, Sugimoto T, Enomoto K, Kikuchi J. Pedestrian head impact conditions depending on the vehicle front shape and its construction: full model simulation. Traffic Inj Prev. March 2003;4(1):74-82.|
|1995||Thunnissen J, Wismans J, Ewing CL, Thomas DJ. Human volunteer head-neck response in frontal flexion: a new analysis. In: Proceedings of the 39th Stapp Car Crash Conference. November 8-10, 1995; San Diego, CA. Warrendale, PA: Society of Automotive Engineers:439-460. SAE 952721.|
|2003||Henary BY, Crandall J, Bhalla K, Mock CN, Roudsari BS. Child and adult pedestrian impact: the influence of vehicle type on injury severity. In: 47th Annual Proceedings, Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine (AAAM). September 22-24, 2003; Lisbon, Portugal.105-126.|