Biofidelity of rear impact dummies in low speed rear-end impact:​ comparison of rigid seat and mass production car seat in human volunteers

Yamazaki, Kunio<sup>1</sup>; Ono, Koshiro<sup>1</sup>; Ishii, Mitsuru<sup>1</sup>

Rear impact dynamic test methodologies for reducing minor neck injuries have recently been examined internationally by EEVC, GTR, NCAP (Europe, Japan), and others. In these test methodologies, the biofidelity of the dummies is of utmost importance, so this study evaluated the biofidelity of rear impact dummies (BioRID-II, RID3D and Hybrid-III) and compared the results with those of human volunteer tests.

To evaluate the biofidelity of rear impact dummies, two test series were conducted under the same conditions as with the human volunteer tests at the impact velocity of 8 km/h: the deceleration sled test and the acceleration sled test. In the deceleration sled test, a wooden rigid seat without headrest was mounted to a sled which was moved on ramped rails and collided into a damper. In the acceleration sled test, a mass-production car seat with headrest was mounted to a sled which was accelerated horizontally. In both test series, five tests were conducted for each dummy.

In the two test series, the behavior of BioRID-II was very similar to that of the volunteers. In addition, BioRID-II showed good biofidelity for the head angle with respect to T1 (the first thoracic spine), which is considered to be an important characteristic of a rear impact dummy. These results were possible due to the spine structure flexibility of BioRID-II. On the other hand, RID3D, which has flexibility in the neck, needs flexibility between the torso and the lower neck to improve its biofidelity. For Hybrid-III, the dummy showed a very different behavioral response compared to the human volunteers; its biofidelity was lower than that of the rear impact dummies.

Keywords: rear impact; biofidelity; mini sled; back impact

Year

Entry

2007

Bortenschlager K, Hartlieb M, Barnsteiner K, Ferdinand L, Kramberger D, Siems S, Muser M, Schmitt K-U. Review of existing injury criteria and their tolerance limits for whiplash injuries with respect to testing experience and rating systems. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV). June 18-21, 2007; Lyon, France.

2005

Hynd D, van Ratingen M. Challenges in the development of a regulatory test procedure for neck protection in rear impacts: status of the EEVC WG20 and WG12 joint activity. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV). June 6-9, 2005; Washington, DC.

2002

Linder A, Svensson M, Viano D. Evaluation of the BioRID P3 and the Hybrid III in pendulum impacts to the back: a comparison with human subject test data. Traffic Inj Prev. 2002;3(2):159-166.

2007

Pramudita JA, Ono K, Ejima S, Kaneoka K, Shiina I, Ujihashi S. Head/neck/torso behavior and cervical vertebral motion of human volunteers during low speed rear impact: mini-sled tests with mass production car seat. In: Proceedings of the 2007 International IRCOBI Conference on the Biomechanics of Impact. September 19-21, 2007; Maastricht, The Netherlands.201-217.

2002