Seat Properties Affecting Neck Responses in Rear Crashes: A Reason Why Whiplash Has Increased

Whiplash has increased over the past two decades. This study compares occupant dynamics with three different seat types (two yielding and one stiff) in rear crashes. Responses up to head restraint contact are used to describe possible reasons for the increase in whiplash as seat stiffness increased in the 1980s and 1990s. Three exemplar seats were defined by seat stiffness ( k ) and frame rotation stiffness ( j ) under occupant load. The stiff seat had k = 40 kN/m and j = 1.8°/kN representing a foreign benchmark. One yielding seat had k = 20 kN/m and j = 1.4°/kN simulating a high-retention seat. The other had k = 20 kN/m and j = 3.4°/kN simulating a typical yielding seat of the 1980s and 1990s. Constant vehicle acceleration for 100 ms gave delta-V of 6, 10, 16, 24, and 35 km/h. The one-dimensional model included a torso mass loading the seatback, head motion through a flexible neck, and head restraint drop and rearward displacement with seatback rotation. Neck displacement was greatest with the stiff seat due to higher loads on the torso. It peaked at 10 km/h rear delta-V and was lower in higher-severity crashes. It averaged 32% more than neck displacements with the 1980s yielding seat. The high-retention seat had 67% lower neck displacements than the stiff seat because of yielding into the seatback, earlier head restraint contact and less seatback rotation, which involved 16 mm drop in head restraint height due to seatback rotation in the 16 km/h rear delta-V. This was significantly lower than 47 mm with the foreign benchmark and 73 mm with the 1980s yielding seat. Early in the crash, neck responses are proportional to ky / m T , seat stiffness times vehicle displacement divided by torso mass, so neck responses increase with seat stiffness. The trend toward stiffer seats increased neck responses over the yielding seats of the 1980s and 1990s, which offers one explanation for the increase in whiplash over the past two decades. This is a result of not enough seat suspension compliance as stronger seat frames were introduced. As seat stiffness has increased, so have neck displacements and the Neck Injury Criterion (NIC). High-retention seats reduce neck biomechanical responses by allowing the occupant to displace into the seatback at relatively low torso loads until head restraint contact and then transferring crash energy. High-retention seats resolve the historic debate between stiff (rigid) and yielding seats by providing both a strong frame (low j ) for occupant retention and yielding suspension (low k ) to reduce whiplash.

[1]  Klaus Langwieder,et al.  Proposal of an International Harmonized Dynamic Test Standard for Seats/Head Restraints , 2002 .

[2]  Johan Davidsson DEVELOPMENT OF A MECHANICAL MODEL FOR REAR IMPACTS: EVALUATION OF VOLUNTEER RESPONSES AND VALIDATION OF THE MODEL , 2000 .

[3]  Derwyn M. Severy,et al.  BACKREST AND HEAD RESTRAINT DESIGN FOR REAR-END COLLISION PROTECTION , 1968 .

[4]  David C. Viano,et al.  Neck Biomechanical Responses with Active Head Restraints: Rear Barrier Tests with BioRID and Sled Tests with Hybrid III , 2002 .

[5]  Michael B. James,et al.  Occupant protection in rear-end collisions, II: the role of seat back deformation in injury reduction , 1991 .

[6]  N. Delson,et al.  NECK INJURY CRITERION BASED ON INTERVERTEBRAL MOTIONS AND ITS EVALUATION USING AN INSTRUMENTED NECK DUMMY , 1999 .

[7]  Kenneth J. Saczalski,et al.  Field Accident Evaluations and Experimental Study of Seat Back Performance Relative to Rear-Impact Occupant Protection , 1993 .

[8]  David C. Viano,et al.  Energy Transfer to an Occupant in Rear Crashes: Effect of Stiff and Yielding Seats , 2003 .

[9]  D. Viano,et al.  The effectiveness of active head restraint in preventing whiplash. , 2001, The Journal of trauma.

[10]  Derwyn M. Severy,et al.  Collision Performance, LM Safety Car , 1967 .

[11]  D. Viano,et al.  Neck Displacements of Volunteers, BioRID P3 and Hybrid III in Rear Impacts: Implications to Whiplash Assessment by a Neck Displacement Criterion (NDC) , 2002 .

[12]  Derwyn M. Severy,et al.  Vehicle design for passenger protection from high-speed rear-end collisions , 1968 .

[13]  Michael B. James,et al.  Evaluation of Seat Back Strength and Seat Belt Effectiveness in Rear End Impacts , 1987 .

[14]  Narayan Yoganandan,et al.  Frontiers in whiplash trauma : clinical and biomechanical , 2000 .

[15]  J. H. Mathewson,et al.  Controlled automobile rearend collisions, an investigation of related engineering and medical phenomena. , 1955, Canadian services medical journal.

[16]  Y C Deng,et al.  Anthropomorphic dummy neck modeling and injury considerations. , 1989, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[17]  David C. Viano,et al.  High retention seat performance in quasistatic seat tests , 2003 .

[18]  David C. Viano,et al.  A NEW METHOD TO DETERMINE THE BIOMECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF HUMAN AND DUMMY JOINTS , 1995 .

[19]  Michael S. Varat,et al.  Automotive Seat Design Concepts for Occupant Protection , 1993 .

[20]  M. Richter,et al.  Whiplash-type neck distortion in restrained car drivers: frequency, causes and long-term results , 2000, European Spine Journal.

[21]  Harold J. Mertz,et al.  Size, Weight and Biomechanical Impact Response Requirements for Adult Size Small Female and Large Male Dummies , 1989 .

[22]  L. M. Patrick,et al.  Strength and response of the human neck , 1971 .

[23]  Harold J. Mertz,et al.  Performance Requirements and Characteristics of Mechanical Necks , 1973 .

[24]  Priya Prasad,et al.  Relationships between passenger car seat back strength and occupant injury severity in rear end collisions: field and laboratory studies , 1997 .

[25]  David C. Viano,et al.  Role of the Seat in Rear Crash Safety , 2002 .

[26]  J. Cassidy,et al.  Impairment and work disability due to whiplash injury following traffic collisions. An analysis of insurance material from the Swedish Road Traffic Injury Commission. , 1999, Scandinavian journal of public health.

[27]  Björn Lundell,et al.  Guidelines for and the Design of a Car Seat Concept for Improved Protection against Neck Injuries in Rear End Car Impacts , 1998 .

[28]  K Ono,et al.  Influences of the physical parameters on the risk to neck injuries in low impact speed rear-end collisions. , 1996, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[29]  C. Galasko,et al.  Neck sprains after road traffic accidents: a modern epidemic. , 1993, Injury.

[30]  K. Wiklund,et al.  Saab Active Head Restraint (SAHR) - Seat Design to Reduce the Risk of Neck Injuries in Rear Impacts , 1998 .

[31]  Harald Zellmer,et al.  Biomechanics of Cervical Spine Injuries in Rear End Car Impacts: Influence of Car Seats and Possible Evaluation Criteria , 2002 .