Fredriksson Rikard, Dahlgren Mikael, van Schijndel Margriet, de Hair Stefanie, van Montfort Sjef
a Autoliv Research , Vårgårda , Sweden.
Traffic Inj Prev. 2014;15 Suppl 1:S183-9. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2014.928930.
The aim of this study was to develop a real-life-based evaluation method, incorporating vulnerable road user (VRU) full-body loading to a vehicle with a deployable protection system in relevant test setups, and use this method to evaluate a prototype pedestrian and cyclist protection system.
Based on accident data from severe crashes, the most common scenarios were selected and developed into 5 test setups, 2 for pedestrians and 3 for bicyclists. The Polar II pedestrian anthropomorphic test device was used, either standing or on a standard bicycle. These test setups could then be used to evaluate real-life performance of a prototype protection system, regarding both positioning and protection, for vulnerable road users. The protection system consisted of an active hood and a windshield airbag and was mounted on a large passenger car with a conventional hood-type front end. Injury evaluation criteria were selected for head, neck, and chest loading derived from occupant frontal and side impact test methods.
The protection system managed to be fully deployed, obtaining the intended position in time-that is, before VRU body contact-in all test setups, and head protection potential was not negatively influenced by the preceding thoracic impact. Head loading resulted in head injury criterion (HIC) values ranging up to 4400 for the standard car, and all HIC values were below 650 with the protection system. The risk of severe (Abbreviated Injury Scale [AIS] 3+) head injury decreased from 85% to 100% in 3 test setups (mainly to the windscreen frame), to less than a 20% risk in all setups. In general, there were larger differences between structures impacted than between the pedestrian and cyclist setup. Neck loading was maintained at an acceptable level or was slightly decreased by the protection system, and chest loading was decreased from high values in 2 test setups in which the cyclist was impacted laterally with chest impact mainly to the hood area.
A test method was developed to evaluate a more real-life-based test condition, as a complement to current component test methods. Being real-life based, including full-body loading, it is suggested as a complementary test method to the more simplified legal and rating component tests. Together these test methods will provide a more thorough evaluation of a protection system. The evaluated protection system performed well regarding both positioning and protection, indicating a capability to obtain the intended position in time with the potential to prevent the most common severe upper-body injuries of a pedestrian or cyclist in typical real-life accidents, without introducing negative side effects.
本研究的目的是开发一种基于实际情况的评估方法，在相关测试设置中，将弱势道路使用者（VRU）的全身负荷纳入配备可展开保护系统的车辆，并使用该方法评估行人与骑自行车者保护系统的原型。
基于严重碰撞事故数据，选择最常见的场景并将其发展为5种测试设置，其中2种针对行人，3种针对骑自行车者。使用Polar II行人模拟试验装置，该装置可以站立或安装在标准自行车上。然后，这些测试设置可用于评估原型保护系统在定位和保护方面针对弱势道路使用者的实际性能。保护系统由主动式发动机罩和挡风玻璃安全气囊组成，安装在具有传统发动机罩式前端的大型客车上。从乘员正面和侧面碰撞试验方法中选取头部、颈部和胸部负荷的损伤评估标准。
保护系统在所有测试设置中均成功完全展开，并及时获得预期位置，即在VRU身体接触之前。头部保护潜力并未受到先前胸部碰撞的负面影响。对于标准汽车，头部负荷导致的头部损伤标准（HIC）值高达4400，而使用保护系统时所有HIC值均低于650。在3种测试设置中（主要是撞到挡风玻璃框架），严重（简明损伤定级标准[AIS]3+）头部损伤的风险从85%降至100%，在所有设置中风险均降至低于20%。总体而言，受撞击结构之间的差异大于行人和骑自行车者设置之间的差异。颈部负荷保持在可接受水平，或通过保护系统略有降低，在2种测试设置中，骑自行车者胸部受到横向撞击且主要撞到发动机罩区域时，胸部负荷从较高值降低。
开发了一种测试方法，以评估更基于实际情况的测试条件，作为当前部件测试方法的补充。由于基于实际情况，包括全身负荷，建议将其作为更简化的法定和评级部件测试的补充测试方法。这些测试方法一起将对保护系统进行更全面的评估。所评估的保护系统在定位和保护方面表现良好，表明能够及时获得预期位置，有可能在典型实际事故中预防行人或骑自行车者最常见的严重上身损伤，且不会产生负面副作用。
