Head Injury Reduction Potential of Integrated Pedestrian Protection Systems Based on Accident and Experimental Data - Benefit of Combining Passive and Active Systems

The aim of this study was to investigate the potential pedestrian head injury reduction from passive and active protection systems compared to an integrated system. The GIDAS database was queried from 1999 to 2013 for severely (AIS3+) head injured pedestrians when struck by car fronts. This resulted in 68 cases. To estimate the protecting performance, headform tests to different impact locations in the hood, A‐pillar and lower windshield areas were performed on cars with and without deployable hood and airbags. The active protection system was an autonomous braking system, which was activated one second prior to impact if the pedestrian was visible to a forward‐looking sensor. The integrated system was a direct combination of the passive and active protection systems. Case by case the effect from each of the active, passive and integrated systems was estimated. The individual active (AEB) and passive (deployable hood and windshield airbag) pedestrian protection systems were effective to reduce severe head injury, but combining the two systems was more effective than either of the two systems alone, with 32‐42% higher integrated effectiveness than the best single system. Even for the most advanced single system there was a benefit to combine into an integrated system.

[1]  Jeffrey Richard Crandall,et al.  Influence of vehicle body type on pedestrian injury distribution , 2005 .

[2]  Ulrich Sander,et al.  Pedestrian fatality risk as a function of car impact speed. , 2009, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[3]  Robert Anderson,et al.  The effect of impact speed on the HIC obtained in pedestrian headform tests , 2012 .

[4]  Rikard Fredriksson,et al.  Integrated pedestrian countermeasures: potential of head injury reduction combining passive and active countermeasures , 2012 .

[5]  Koji Mizuno,et al.  Comparative analysis of vehicle-bicyclist and vehicle-pedestrian accidents in Japan. , 2003, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[6]  Anders Lie,et al.  The Correlation Between Pedestrian Injury Severity in Real-Life Crashes and Euro NCAP Pedestrian Test Results , 2011, Traffic injury prevention.

[7]  Rikard Fredriksson,et al.  EVALUATION OF A NEW PEDESTRIAN HEAD INJURY PROTECTION SYSTEM WITH A SENSOR IN THE BUMPER AND LIFTING OF THE BONNET’S REAR PART , 2001 .

[8]  King H Yang,et al.  A field data analysis of risk factors affecting the injury risks in vehicle-to-pedestrian crashes. , 2008, Annals of advances in automotive medicine. Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine. Annual Scientific Conference.

[9]  A. Kullgren,et al.  Priorities of pedestrian protection--a real-life study of severe injuries and car sources. , 2010, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[10]  Kip Smith,et al.  Pedestrian injury mitigation by autonomous braking. , 2010, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[11]  Erik Rosen,et al.  Autonomous Emergency Braking for Vulnerable Road Users , 2013 .

[12]  Rikard Fredriksson,et al.  Pedestrian Injuries By Source: Serious and Disabling Injuries in US and European Cases. , 2012, Annals of advances in automotive medicine. Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine. Annual Scientific Conference.