The influence of sub-frame geometry on a vehicle’s frontal crash response

Park, Chung-Kyu; Thomson, Robert; Krusper, Aleksandra; Kan, Cing-Dao (Steve)

Affiliations

¹National Crash Analysis Center, The George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA

²VTI-Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute, Gothenburg, Sweden

³SAFER-Vehicle and Traffic Centre, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden

Abstract

The importance of a vehicle sub-frame is often discussed in vehicle compatibility. To observe how the sub-frame geometry influences the vehicle response, three different sub-frame configurations were modeled and simulated in US NCAP crash test configurations as well as car-car simulations. The former simulations were used to observe how the design changes would influence self protection in a crash test influencing the original design of the vehicle. The latter simulations were to observe how the modification would influence vehicle compatibility under “real world” conditions.

The rigid barrier impacts could detect the changes in the design. The most forward placement of the sub-frame had a stiffer response than the other configurations as observed in acceleration pulse and barrier wall loads. Self protection also tended to be improved over the baseline configuration. In car-car testing, it was difficult to identify a clear subframe configuration that provided improved compatibility. Both the standard and forward placed subframe had better performance than the most rearward configuration. Neither the baseline nor extended sub-frame versions were clearly better for all car-car impact configurations but an extended sub-frame exhibited better self protection, especially when the vehicle was lower than its collision partner.

Links

URL: http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/esv/esv21/09-0403.pdf

Cited Works (3)

Year	Entry
2003	Edwards M, Davies H, Hobbs A. Development of test procedures and performance criteria to improve compatibility in car frontal collisions. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV). May 19-22, 2003; Nagoya, Japan.
2003	Kahane CJ. Vehicle Weight, Fatality Risk and Crash Compatibility of Model Year 1991-99 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks. Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration; October 2003. NHTSA Technical Report DOT HS 809 662.
2003	Delannoy P, Faure J. Compatibility assessment proposal close from real life accident. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV). May 19-22, 2003; Nagoya, Japan.

Cited By (2)

Year	Entry
2011	Gadekar G, C. AK, Joshi AG, Takle M. Use of secondary energy absorbing structures for improved self protection performance: experiences during the development of a chassis based vehicle. In: Proceedings of the 22nd International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV). June 13-16, 2011; Washington, DC.
2013	Stein M, Johannsen H, Thomson R. FIMCAR: influence of SEAS on frontal impact compatibility. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV). May 27-30, 2013; Seoul, South Korea.