Evaluation of static belt fit and belt torso contact for children on belt-positioning booster seats

The Influence of a Booster Seat on the Motion of the Reclined Small Female Anthropomorphic Test Device in Low-Acceleration Far-Side Lateral Oblique Impacts

Belt-positioning booster (BPB) seats may prevent submarining in reclined child occupants in frontal impacts. BPB-seated child volunteers showed reduced lateral displacement in reclined seating in low-acceleration lateral-oblique impacts. As submarining was particularly evident in reclined small adult female occupants, we examined if a booster seat could provide similar effects on the kinematics of the small female occupant to the ones found on the reclined child volunteers in low-acceleration far-side lateral oblique impacts. The THOR-AV-5F was seated on a vehicle seat on a sled simulating a far-side lateral-oblique impact (80 deg from frontal, maximum acceleration ∼2 g, duration ∼170 ms). Lateral and forward head and trunk displacements, trunk rotation, knee-head distance, seatbelt loads, and head acceleration were recorded. Three seatback angles (25 deg, 45 deg, 60 deg) and two booster conditions were examined. Lateral peak head and trunk displacements decreased in more severe reclined seatback angles (25-36 mm decrease compared to nominal). Forward peak head, trunk displacements, and knee-head distance were greater with the seatback reclined and no BPB. Knee-head distance increased in the severe reclined angle also with the booster seat (>40 mm compared to nominal). Seat belt peak loads increased with increased recline angle with the booster, but not without the booster seat. Booster-like solutions may be beneficial for reclined small female adult occupants to reduce head and trunk displacements in far-side lateral-oblique impacts, and knee-head distance and motion variability in severe reclined seatback angles.

Comparison of child and ATD belt fit and posture on belt-positioning boosters during self-selected, holding device, and nominal conditions

OBJECTIVE

Pediatric anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) are important tools for the assessment of child occupant protection and should represent realistic child belt fit and posture on belt-positioning boosters. Previous comparisons have been made to children in either self-selected or nominal postural conditions. This study compares belt fit and postural measurements between pediatric ATDs and a single cohort of children assuming different postures on boosters: self-selected, holding a portable electronic device, and nominal.

METHODS

A cohort of children (n = 25) were evaluated in a stationary vehicle on five boosters and in three postural conditions: nominal, self-selected, and a representative holding electronic device position. The Hybrid III 6- and 10-year-old and Q-Series 6- and 10-year-old ATDs were evaluated in the same five boosters and in two postural conditions: nominal and a representative holding electronic device position. A 3D coordinate measurement device was used to quantify belt fit (shoulder belt score, lap belt score, maximum gap size, and gap length) and anatomic landmark positions (head, suprasternale, ASIS, and patella). Landmark positions and belt fit were compared between ATDs and children for each booster and postural condition, and Pearson correlations (r) were assessed across boosters.

RESULTS

ATDs generally represented Nominal child postures across boosters. In the Device condition, ATDs were seldom able to be positioned to represent both the torso and head position of children, due to limited ATD spinal flexibility. When the torso position was matched, the ATD head was more rear by 63 mm. Correlations between Nominal child and ATD belt fit and belt gap metrics were generally weak and not significant, with the exception of lap belt score (all ATDs p < 0.07, r = 0.8549-0.9857).

DISCUSSION

ATDs were generally able to represent realistic child postures and lap belt fit in Nominal and short duration Self-selected postures in a laboratory setting. However, these results display the potential difficulty of utilizing ATDs to represent more naturalistic child postures, especially the more forward head positions and flexed spinal posture associated with utilizing a portable electronic device.

The effect of reclined seatback angles on the motion of booster-seated children during lateral-oblique low-acceleration impacts

Belt-positioning boosters (BPB) may prevent submarining in novel seating configurations such as seats with reclined seatbacks. However, several knowledge gaps in the motion of reclined child occupants remain as previous reclined child studies only examined responses of a child anthropomorphic test device (ATD) and the PIPER finite element (FE) model in frontal impacts. The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of reclined seatback angles and two types of BPBs on the motion of child volunteer occupants in low-acceleration far-side lateral-oblique impacts. Six healthy children (3 males, 3 females, 6-8 years, seated height: 66±3.2 cm, weight: 25.2±3.2 kg) were seated on two types of low-back BPB (standard and lightweight) on a vehicle seat and restrained by a 3-point simulated-integrated seatbelt on a low-acceleration sled. The sled exposed the participants to a low-speed lateral-oblique (80° from frontal) pulse (2 g). Three seatback recline angles (25°, 45°, 60° from vertical) with two BPB (standard and lightweight) were tested. A 10-camera 3D-motion-capture system (Natural Point Inc.) was used to capture peak lateral head and trunk displacements and forward knee-head distance. Three seat-belt load cells (Denton ATD Inc) captured peak seatbelt loads. Electromyography (EMG, Delsys Inc) recorded muscle activation. Repeated Measure 2-way ANOVAs were performed to evaluate the effect of seatback recline angle and BPB on kinematics. Tukey's post-hoc test for pairwise comparisons was used. P-level was set to 0.05. Peak lateral head and trunk displacement decreased with the increasing seatback recline angle (p < 0.005, p < 0.001, respectively). Lateral peak head displacement was greater in the 25° compared to the 60° condition (p < 0.002) and in the 45° condition compared to the 60° condition (p < 0.04). Lateral peak trunk displacement was greater in the 25° condition than the 45° condition (p < 0.009) and the 60° condition (p < 0.001), and in the 45° condition than the 60° condition (p < 0.03). Overall peak lateral head and trunk displacements and knee-head forward distance were slightly greater in the standard than the lightweight BPB (p < 0.04), however these differences between BPBs were small (∼10 mm). Shoulder belt peak load decreased as the reclined seatback angle increased (p < 0.03): the shoulder belt peak load was statistically greater in the 25° condition than the 60° condition (p < 0.02). Muscle activation from the neck, upper trunk, and lower legs showed great activation. Neck muscles activation increased with the increase in seatback recline angle. Thighs, upper arms, and abdominal muscles showed small activation and no effect of conditions. Child volunteers showed decreased displacement suggesting that reclined seatbacks placed the booster-seated children in a more favorable position within the shoulder belt in a low-acceleration lateral-oblique impact, compared to nominal seatback angles. BPB type seemed to minimally influence the children's motion: the small differences found may have been due to the slight difference in heights between the two BPBs. Future research with more severe pulses is needed to better understand reclined children's motion in far-side lateral-oblique impacts.

A naturalistic study of passenger seating position, posture, and restraint use in second-row seats

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the current study was to increase scientific understanding of rear-seat passenger seating position, postures, CRS use, and belt use through a naturalistic study. A secondary objective was to compare data from vehicles used in ride-hailing with data from other vehicles.

METHOD

Video cameras were installed in the passenger cabins of the vehicles of 75 drivers near the center of the windshield. The video data were downloaded after the vehicles were operated by their owners for two weeks. Video frames were sampled from near the ends and in the middle of each trip, and at five-minute intervals in trips longer than 15 min. A total of 7,323 frames with second-row passengers were manually coded.

RESULTS

A total of 444 unique second-row passengers were identified in video frames from 1,188 trips taken in 65 of the 75 vehicles in the study. Two of the vehicles that were driven for commercial ride-hailing during the study period accounted for 199 (45%) of the passengers. Considering multiple passengers in some trips, a total of 1,899 passenger-trips were identified. For passengers not using child restraint systems (CRS), the belt use rate was 65% in the non-ride-hailing vehicles versus 32% among passengers in the ride-hailing vehicles. No CRS use was observed in the ride-hailing vehicles. Among children using backless boosters, the shoulder belt was lateral to the clavicle or under the arm in 26% of frames. Among belted passengers not using CRS, the belt was lateral to the clavicle or on the neck about 6% of the time. Belted passengers not using CRS were observed leaning to the left or right about 27% of the time, with leaning away from the shoulder belt more common than leaning into the belt.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to report seating position, posture, and belt fit observations for a large naturalistic sample of second-row passengers that includes adult occupants. The data suggest that low rear seat belt use rates remain a concern, particularly in ride-hailing vehicles. Non-nominal belt placement and posture may also be common in second-row seating positions.