The Role of Door Orientation on Occupant Injury in a Nearside Impact: A CIREN, MADYMO Modeling and Experimental Study

Objective. This study addressed the effects of vehicle height mismatch in side impact crashes. A light truck or SUV tends to strike the door of a passenger car higher causing the upper border to lead into the occupant space. Conversely, an impact centered lower on the door, from a passenger car, causes the lower border to lead. We proposed the hypothesis that the type of injury sustained by the occupant could be related to door orientation during its intrusion into the passenger compartment. Method. Data on door orientation and nearside occupant injuries were collected from 125 side impact crashes reported in the CIREN database. Experimental testing was performed using a pendulum carrying a frame and a vehicle door, impacting against a USDOT SID. The frame allowed the door orientation to be changed. A model was developed in MADYMO (v 6.2) using the more biofidelic dummies, BIOSID, and SIDIIs as well as USDOT SID. Results. In side impact crashes with the lower border of the door leading, 81% of occupants sustained pelvic injury, 42% suffered rib fractures, and the rate of organ injury was 0.84. With the upper border leading, 46% of occupants sustained pelvic injury, 71% sustained rib fracture, and the rate of organ injuries per case increased to 1.13. The differences in the groups with respect to pelvic injury were significant at p = 0.01, rib fracture, p = 0.10, and organ injury, p = 0.001. Experimental testing showed that when the door angle changed from lower to upper border leading, peak T4 acceleration increased by 273% and pelvic acceleration decreased by 44%. The model demonstrated that when the door angle changed from lower to upper border leading, the USDOT SID showed a 29% increase in T4 acceleration and a 57% decrease in pelvic acceleration. The BIOSID dummy demonstrated a 36% increase in T1 acceleration, a 44% increase in abdominal rib 1 deflection, a 91% increase in thoracic rib 1 deflection, and a 33% decrease in pelvic acceleration. Conclusions. These data add more insight to the problem of mismatch during side impacts, where the bumper of the striking vehicle overrides the door beam, causing the upper part of the door to lead the intrusion into the passenger compartment. Even with the same delta V and intrusion, with the upper border of the door leading, more severe chest and organ injuries resulted. This data suggests that door orientation should be considered when testing subsystems for side impact protection.

[1]  Shuji Yamaguchi,et al.  Numerical analysis of side impact phenomena using MADYMO-3D DOT-SID dummy , 1996 .

[2]  David C. Viano,et al.  Evaluation of the Benefit of Energy-Absorbing Material in Side Impact Protection: Part II , 1987 .

[3]  Jeffrey Richard Crandall,et al.  INTERNATIONAL HARMONIZATION OF SIDE IMPACT STANDARDS: VEHICLE DESIGN AND THORACIC INJURY CRITERIA TRENDS , 2003 .

[4]  William T. Hollowell,et al.  DEPTH: a relationship between side impact thoracic injury and vehicle design , 1989 .

[5]  Pete Thomas,et al.  MECHANISMS OF ANKLE AND HIND-FOOT INJURIES TO DRIVERS AND PASSENGERS IN FRONTAL CRASHES AS DEDUCED FROM FIELD STUDIES , 1999 .

[6]  S. Siegel,et al.  Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences , 2022, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[7]  David C. Viano,et al.  The effect of limiting impact force on abdominal injury: a preliminary study , 1986 .

[8]  Joseph M. Nolan,et al.  VEHICLE DEFORMATION IN REAL-WORLD SIDE IMPACT CRASHES AND REGULATORY CRASH TESTS , 2001 .

[9]  Michael B. James,et al.  Injury and Intrusion in Side Impacts and Rollovers , 1984 .

[10]  Hampton C. Gabler,et al.  Side Impact Crashworthiness Design: Evaluation of Padding Characteristics Through Mathematical Simulations , 1991 .

[11]  Randa Radwan Samaha,et al.  NHTSA SIDE IMPACT RESEARCH: MOTIVATION FOR UPGRADED TEST PROCEDURES , 2003 .

[12]  Keith Seyer,et al.  THE DEPENDENCE OF SIDE IMPACT INJURY RISK ON MDB CONFIGURATION , 2001 .

[13]  E R Braver,et al.  Two-vehicle side impact crashes: the relationship of vehicle and crash characteristics to injury severity. , 1997, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[14]  Joseph M. Nolan,et al.  INSURANCE INSTITUTE FOR HIGHWAY SAFETY SIDE IMPACT CRASHWORTHINESS EVALUATION PROGRAM: IMPACT CONFIGURATION AND RATIONALE , 2003 .

[15]  Rory A. Austin,et al.  EFFECT OF VEHICLE AND CRASH FACTORS ON OLDER OCCUPANT INJURY , 2003 .

[16]  Clifford C. Chou,et al.  High Strain-Rate Tensile Testing of Door Trim Materials , 1997 .

[17]  M. G. Langdon Requirements for minimising thoracic injury in side impact accidents , 1986 .

[18]  David C. Viano Evaluation of armrest loading in side impacts , 1991 .

[19]  A. Tencer,et al.  Factors affecting pelvic and thoracic forces in near-side impact crashes: a study of US-NCAP, NASS, and CIREN data. , 2005, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[20]  D. Viano,et al.  The Viscous Criterion - Bases and Applications of an Injury Severity Index for Soft Tissues , 1986 .

[21]  John M. Cavanaugh,et al.  Pelvic biomechanical response and padding benefits in side impact based on a cadaveric test series , 1993 .

[22]  Jeffrey Richard Crandall,et al.  Multibody modelling of a side impact test apparatus , 1999 .

[23]  Roger P. Daniel,et al.  Research and Development for Lower Lateral Force Armrests , 1995 .

[24]  Stephen W. Rouhana,et al.  The Effect of Door Topography on Abdominal Injury in Lateral Impact , 1989 .

[25]  Ronald L. Woolley,et al.  Application of Kinematic Concepts to Side Impact Injury Analysis , 1990 .

[26]  Ian V. Lau,et al.  A Comparison of Frontal and Side Impact: Crash Dynamics, Countermeasures and Subsystem Tests , 1991 .