• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

日本正面、侧面、单车碰撞及汽车与行人碰撞事故中的兼容性问题。

Compatibility problems in frontal, side, single car collisions and car-to-pedestrian accidents in Japan.

作者信息

Mizuno K, Kajzer J

机构信息

Nagoya University, Japan.

出版信息

Accid Anal Prev. 1999 Jul;31(4):381-91. doi: 10.1016/s0001-4575(98)00076-1.

DOI:10.1016/s0001-4575(98)00076-1
PMID:10384231
Abstract

Compatibility problems in car-to-car frontal, side, single car and car-to-pedestrian collisions in Japan are discussed using traffic accident data. The number of serious and fatal injuries is investigated for the subject car and other cars, which are categorized by their class and mass. The aggressivity of the cars is calculated by the number of fatalities, fatality rates and by the number of car registrations. The results show that in car-to-car frontal collisions, cars with a mass of 1150 kg are the most compatible among the current car population. In both car-to-car frontal and side collisions, the sports utility vehicle and mini car are found to be the most incompatible car types with high and low aggressivity, respectively. On the other hand, the accident data show that the wagon and midsize sedan are the most compatible car types. The compatibility of fixed objects in the road environment with cars and cars with pedestrians is also discussed. In a single car collision with a fixed object, the guardrail is the most compatible object and can reduce the fatality rate on prefecture roads by about 60%. The front geometry of the car has large effect on compatibility with a pedestrian.

摘要

利用交通事故数据,讨论了日本汽车与汽车正面、侧面、单车以及汽车与行人碰撞中的兼容性问题。针对目标车辆和其他车辆,按其类别和质量进行分类,调查了严重和致命伤害的数量。通过死亡人数、死亡率以及汽车注册数量来计算汽车的攻击性。结果表明,在汽车与汽车正面碰撞中,质量为1150千克的汽车在当前汽车群体中兼容性最强。在汽车与汽车正面和侧面碰撞中,分别发现运动型多用途汽车和微型汽车是攻击性高和低的最不兼容车型。另一方面,事故数据表明旅行车和中型轿车是兼容性最强的车型。还讨论了道路环境中固定物体与汽车以及汽车与行人的兼容性。在单车与固定物体碰撞中,护栏是最兼容的物体,可将县级道路上的死亡率降低约60%。汽车的前部几何形状对与行人的兼容性有很大影响。

相似文献

1
Compatibility problems in frontal, side, single car collisions and car-to-pedestrian accidents in Japan.日本正面、侧面、单车碰撞及汽车与行人碰撞事故中的兼容性问题。
Accid Anal Prev. 1999 Jul;31(4):381-91. doi: 10.1016/s0001-4575(98)00076-1.
2
Have pedestrian subsystem tests improved passenger car front shape?行人子系统测试是否改善了乘用车前部形状?
Accid Anal Prev. 2018 Jun;115:143-150. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2018.03.014. Epub 2018 Mar 20.
3
Risks of pedestrian serious injuries and fatalities associated with impact velocities of cars in car-versus-pedestrian accidents in Japan.在日本汽车与行人事故中,与汽车碰撞速度相关的行人严重受伤和死亡风险。
Stapp Car Crash J. 2013 Nov;57:201-17. doi: 10.4271/2013-22-0008.
4
Performance of collision damage mitigation braking systems and their effects on human injury in the event of car-to-pedestrian accidents.碰撞损伤减轻制动系统的性能及其在汽车与行人事故中对人员伤害的影响。
Stapp Car Crash J. 2011 Nov;55:461-78. doi: 10.4271/2011-22-0017.
5
Vehicle registration year, age, and weight - Untangling the effects on crash risk.车辆注册年份、年龄和重量——厘清对碰撞风险的影响。
Accid Anal Prev. 2019 Feb;123:1-11. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2018.11.002. Epub 2018 Nov 15.
6
Situations of car-to-pedestrian contact.车-行人接触情况。
Traffic Inj Prev. 2013;14(1):73-7. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2012.678511.
7
Severity of vehicle bumper location in vehicle-to-pedestrian impact accidents.车辆保险杠在车撞行人事故中的严重程度。
Forensic Sci Int. 2011 Oct 10;212(1-3):205-9. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2011.06.012. Epub 2011 Jun 30.
8
Analysis of Pedestrian Fractures in Collisions Between Small Cars and Pedestrians Based on Surveillance Videos.基于监控视频的小型汽车与行人碰撞致行人骨折的分析
Am J Forensic Med Pathol. 2022 Mar 1;43(1):11-17. doi: 10.1097/PAF.0000000000000709.
9
Evolution of the crashworthiness and aggressivity of the Spanish car fleet.西班牙汽车车队的耐撞性和攻击性的演变。
Accid Anal Prev. 2010 Nov;42(6):1621-31. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2010.03.020. Epub 2010 May 7.
10
Pedestrian injury mitigation by autonomous braking.自动驾驶车辆自动制动以减轻行人伤害。
Accid Anal Prev. 2010 Nov;42(6):1949-57. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2010.05.018. Epub 2010 Jun 25.

引用本文的文献

1
Ethical Decision Making in Autonomous Vehicles: The AV Ethics Project.自动驾驶汽车中的伦理决策:AV 伦理项目。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2020 Dec;26(6):3285-3312. doi: 10.1007/s11948-020-00272-8. Epub 2020 Oct 13.
2
A field data analysis of risk factors affecting the injury risks in vehicle-to-pedestrian crashes.影响车辆与行人碰撞事故中受伤风险的危险因素的现场数据分析。
Ann Adv Automot Med. 2008 Oct;52:199-214.
3
United States pedestrian fatality rates by vehicle type.按车辆类型划分的美国行人死亡率。
Inj Prev. 2005 Aug;11(4):232-6. doi: 10.1136/ip.2005.008284.
4
Pedestrian crashes: higher injury severity and mortality rate for light truck vehicles compared with passenger vehicles.行人碰撞事故:与乘用车相比,轻型卡车的伤害严重程度和死亡率更高。
Inj Prev. 2004 Jun;10(3):154-8. doi: 10.1136/ip.2003.003814.