Comparison of University of Michigan CIREN Cases to Existing Types of Crash Tests

A comparison of U-M CIREN (University of Michigan Crash Injury Research and Engineering Network) cases to crash tests used in the automotive industry is presented in this paper. 442 U-M CIREN crashes were compared to crash test configurations used throughout the industry. Of those 442 cases, 49% were similar in crash configuration and crash extent to industry crash tests. 32% of the cases were similar to one of the industry crash tests in configuration but had greater extent. 20% of the cases did not match any of the current industry crash tests. This analysis concluded that the majority of injuries in this study occurred in crash configurations similar to existing crash tests while only 20% of cases had crash configurations that were not represented by current crash tests. Any consideration of increasing test severity to address those crashes that produce a greater extent of crash deformation than that produced in crash tests must consider a broader spectrum of collisions including non-injury producing crashes. This analysis must be done in a way that does not increase the risk to the current uninjured population that is not included in the CIREN database. The full text of this paper may be found at: http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/esv/esv21/09-0185.pdf For the covering abstract see ITRD E145407.

[1]  Pete Thomas,et al.  Assessment of Injury Severity of Nearside Occupants in Pole Impacts to Side of Passenger Cars in European Traffic Accidents - Analysis of German and UK In-Depth Data , 2009 .

[2]  Joel D Stitzel,et al.  A population-based comparison of CIREN and NASS cases using similarity scoring. , 2007, Annual proceedings. Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine.

[3]  Richard W. Kent,et al.  Development of an age-dependent thoracic injury criterion for frontal , 2003 .

[4]  Huw Davies,et al.  REVIEW OF THE EUROPEAN FRONTAL AND SIDE IMPACT DIRECTIVES , 2001 .

[5]  Guy S. Nusholtz,et al.  Vehicle Mass and Stiffness: Search for a Relationship , 2004 .

[6]  Pascal Delannoy,et al.  Compatibility assessment proposal close from real life accident , 2003 .

[7]  Aloke Prasad,et al.  Offset Test Design and Preliminary Results , 2007 .

[8]  Keith Seyer.  International harmonised research activities side impact working group. Status report , 2001 .

[9]  E C Chirwa,et al.  An offset rigid barrier-based test: equivalence to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety frontal offset impact safety test , 2006 .

[10]  Krystoffer Mroz,et al.  Validation of a Human Body Model for Frontal Crash and its Use for Chest Injury Prediction , 2008 .

[11]  Hideki Yonezawa,et al.  Japanese research activity on future side impact test procedures , 2001 .

[12]  Sanjay Patel,et al.  NHTSA's Recent Vehicle Crash Test Program on Compatibility in Front-to-Front Impacts , 2007 .

[13]  Rolf H. Eppinger,et al.  LOWER EXTREMITY INJURIES AND ASSOCIATED INJURY CRITERIA , 2001 .

[14]  Rolf H. Eppinger,et al.  LOWER EXTREMITY RESPONSE AND TRAUMA ASSESSMENT USING THE THOR-LX/HIIIR AND THE DENTON LEG IN FRONTAL OFFSET VEHICLE CRASHES , 2001 .

[15]  Guy S. Nusholtz,et al.  OPTIMAL FRONTAL VEHICLE CRASH PULSES - A NUMERICAL METHOD FOR DESIGN , 2003 .

[16]  Mukul K. Verma,et al.  Relationship of Crash Test Procedures to Vehicle Compatibility , 2003 .

[17]  Hugo Mellander,et al.  Car Driver Protection at Frontal Impacts up to 80 km/h (50 mph) , 2005 .

[18]  H. C. Joksch,et al.  VEHICLE DESIGN VERSUS AGGRESSIVITY , 2000 .

[19]  Pete Thomas,et al.  Head and chest injury outcomes in struck-side crashes , 2005 .

[20]  Aloke Prasad,et al.  NHTSA's Frontal Offset Research Program , 2004 .

[21]  William T. Hollowell,et al.  NHTSA's Compatibility Research Program Update , 2001 .

[22]  Koji Mizuno,et al.  WHAT WE LEARNED FROM JNCAP AND OUR PROPOSALS , 2003 .

[23]  Koji Mizuno,et al.  Update on Investigation of New Side Impact Test Procedures in Japan , 2003 .

[24]  Anders Kullgren.  Validity and reliability of vehicle collis : crash pulse recorders for impact severity and injury risk assessment in real-life frontal impacts , 1998 .

[25]  Hugo Mellander,et al.  On the combined effect of the variation of driver restraint configuration and crash pulse for high and very high impact velocities , 2006 .

[26]  Pete Thomas,et al.  The Importance of Non-struck Side Occupants in Side Collisions , 2000 .

[27]  B. Kamren,et al.  Advanced accident data collection: description and potentials of a comprehensive data collection system , 1991 .

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

[29]  F Bendjellal,et al.  Comparison of Thoracic Injury Risk in Frontal Car Crashes for Occupant Restrained without Belt Load Limiters and Those Restrained with 6 kN and 4 kN Belt Load Limiters. , 2001, Stapp car crash journal.

[30]  William T. Hollowell,et al.  NHTSA'S VEHICLE AGGRESSIVITY AND COMPATIBILITY RESEARCH PROGRAM , 1996 .