ProBiomechanics LLC, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan 48304-2952, USA.
Traffic Inj Prev. 2011 Aug;12(4):339-46. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2011.578909.
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.
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.
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.
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.
本研究分析了同一车型的全带至座椅(ABTS)和常规座椅的匹配后 sled 试验,以确定 BioRID IIg 假人响应的差异。
将 BioRID IIg 后碰撞假人置于 ABTS 或常规座椅上,并使用 IIHS 挥鞭伤评估协议以 10 英里/小时的后 sled 测试进行测试。假人测量包括头部和骨盆三轴加速度、T1 和 L1 双轴加速度以及上颈和下颈三轴力和力矩。高速视频捕捉了座椅加载和反弹到肩带时假人和座椅的运动学。有 4 辆具有相同型号的常规和 ABTS 座椅的车辆可供使用。它们是 2007-2008 年克莱斯勒 Sebring、2006 年福特 F-150、2005-2007 年萨博 9-3 和 2006-2007 年宝马 3 系。置信区间用于确定匹配的 ABTS 和常规座椅响应之间的显著差异。
有 10 个 sled 测试可用于具有 ABTS 和常规座椅的 4 种车型。与常规座椅相比,匹配的 ABTS 中颈部后向剪切力高 75%(范围 17%-156%,P<.05)。上颈张力高 44%(范围 24%-94%,P<.05),下颈延伸力矩高 102%(范围 38%-187%,P<.05)。与其他 3 种车辆相比,萨博 9-3 的常规和 ABTS 座椅的响应均较低。萨博座椅的颈部向后剪切和伸展幅度较小。
测试表明,ABTS 座椅比匹配的常规座椅产生的颈部张力、后向剪切力和伸展力矩明显更高。总体而言,在同一车型中,ABTS 座椅对头部和脊柱施加的力更大,对颈部运动的控制能力更小,挥鞭伤风险更高,受伤更严重。