Kinematics and shoulder belt position of child anthropomorphic test devices during steering maneuvers

Age Differences in Occupant Motion during Simulated In-Vehicle Swerving Maneuvers

Background: With active safety and automated vehicle features becoming more available, unanticipated pre-crash vehicle maneuvers, such as evasive swerving, may become more common, and they may influence the resulting effectiveness of occupant restraints, and consequently may affect injury risks associated with crashes. Therefore, the objective of this study was to quantify the influence of age on key occupant kinematic, kinetic, and muscular responses during evasive swerving in on-road testing. Methods: Seat belt-restrained children (10–12 years old), teens (13–17 years old), and adults (21–33 years old) experienced two evasive swerving maneuvers in a recent model sedan on a test track. Kinematics, muscle activity, and seat belt load distribution were determined and analyzed. Results: Compared to teens and adults, children showed greater head and trunk motion (p < 0.03), but similar muscle activation in the into-the-belt direction of swerving. In the out–of-the-belt direction, children showed head and trunk motion more similar to teens and adults (p < 0.02), but with greater muscle activation. Conclusions: Children showed different neuromuscular control of head and trunk motion compared to older occupants. This study highlights differences in the relationship between kinematics and muscle activation across age groups, and provides new validation data for active human body models across the age range.

Characterization of the motion of booster-seated children during simulated in-vehicle precrash maneuvers

Objective: Precrash occupant motion may affect head and trunk position and restraint performance in a subsequent crash, particularly for young children. Others have studied seat belt-restrained adult drivers and adult and adolescent passengers in precrash maneuvers. For younger children, optimal restraint includes a belt-positioning booster seat, which in precrash maneuvers may contribute in unique ways to the overall body motion. Therefore, the objective of this study was to quantify booster-seated child occupant kinematic, kinetic, and muscle responses during precrash maneuvers and characterize booster movement with respect to the overall occupant kinematics.Methods: Vehicle maneuver tests were conducted with a recent model year sedan at the Transportation Research Center Inc. (TRC, Marysville, Ohio). Three precrash vehicle maneuvers were simulated: Automated and manual emergency braking (AEB and MEB) and oscillatory swerving or slalom (SLA). Each maneuver was repeated twice for each participant. Seven 6- to 8-year-old booster-seated children participated in the study and all subjects were seated in the right rear seat. Vehicle dynamics (i.e., motion, position, and orientation) were measured with an inertial and Global Positioning System navigation system (Oxford RT 3003). Kinematic data from human volunteers were collected with an 8-camera 3D motion capture system (Optitrack Prime 13 200 Hz, NaturalPoint, Inc.). Photoreflective markers were placed on participants' head and trunk. Electromyography (EMG; Trigno EMG Wireless Delsys, Inc., 2,000 Hz) sensors were placed on bilateral muscles predicted to be most likely involved in bracing behaviors.Results: Children demonstrated greater head and trunk velocity in MEB (head 123.7 ± 13.1 cm/s, trunk 77.6 ± 14.1 cm/s) compared to AEB (head 45.31 ± 11.5 cm/s, trunk 27.1 ± 5.5 cm/s; P < .001). Participants also showed greater head motion in MEB (18.9 ± 1.4 cm) vs. AEB (15.1 ± 4.8 cm) but the differences were not statistically significant (P < .1). Overall, the booster seats themselves did not move substantially (<3 cm) in the braking maneuvers. During the SLA, however, the booster seat moved laterally up to 5 cm in several subjects, contributing substantially to peak trunk (6.5-14.0 cm) and head (9.9-21.4 cm) excursion during the maneuver. Booster-seated children also exhibited a greater activation of biceps and deltoid muscles and abdominal and middle trapezii muscles than the sternocleidomastoids during these maneuvers.Conclusions: The quantification of booster seat motion and neuromuscular control and the relationship between kinematics and muscle activation in booster-seated children in precrash maneuvers provides important data on the transition between the precrash and crash phases for this young age group and may help identify opportunities for interventions that integrate active and passive safety.

Seat belt pre-pretensioner effect on child-sized dummies during run-off-road events

OBJECTIVE

Run-off-road events occur frequently and can result in severe consequences. Several potential injury-causing mechanisms can be observed in the diverse types of run-off-road events. Real-world data show that different types of environments, such as rough terrain, ditch types, and whether multiple events occur, may be important contributing factors to occupant injury. Though countermeasures addressing front seat occupants have been presented, studies on rear seat occupant retention in situations such as run-off-road events are lacking. The aim of this study was to investigate the seat belt pre-pretensioner effect on rear-seated child-sized anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) during 2 different types of run-off-road events.

METHODS

The study was carried out using 2 test setups: a rig test with a vehicle rear seat mounted on a multi-axial robot simulating a road departure event into a side ditch and an in-vehicle test setup with a Volvo XC60 entering a side ditch with a grass slope, driving inside the ditch, and returning back to the road from the ditch. Potential subsequent rollovers or impacts were not included in the test setups. Three different ATDs were used. The Q6 and Q10 were seated on an integrated booster cushion and the Hybrid III (HIII) 5th percentile female was positioned directly on the seat. The seat belt retractor was equipped with a pre-pretensioner (electrical reversible retractor) with 3 force level settings. In addition, reference tests with the pre-pretensioner inactivated were run. Kinematics and the shoulder belt position were analyzed.

RESULTS

In rig tests, the left-seated ATD was exposed to rapid inboard lateral loads relative to the vehicle. The displacement for each ATD was reduced when the pre-pretensioner was activated compared to tests when it was inactivated. Maximum inboard displacement occurred earlier in the event for all ATDs when the pre-pretensioner was activated. Shoulder belt slip-off occurred for the Q6 and Q10 in tests where the pre-pretensioner was inactivated. During in-vehicle tests, the left-seated ATD was exposed to an inboard movement when entering the road again after driving in the ditch. The maximum inboard head displacement was reduced in tests where the pre-pretensioner was activated compared to tests in which it was inactivated.

CONCLUSIONS

During both test setups, the activation of the pre-pretensioner resulted in reduced lateral excursion of the Q6, Q10, and HIII 5th percentile female due to the shoulder belt remaining on the shoulder and supporting the side of the lower torso. The results provide new insights into the potential benefits of using a pre-pretensioner to reduce kinematic responses during complex run-off-road events through supporting the seat belt to remain on the shoulder. This study addresses potential countermeasures to improve real-world protection of rear-seated children, and it provides a broader perspective including the influence of precrash kinematics.