2002Traffic Injury PreventionOpen access

Evaluation of the BioRID P3 and the Hybrid III in Pendulum Impacts to the Back: A Comparison with Human Subject Test Data

Astrid Linder, Mats Y. Svensson, David C. Viano

Open full text 20 citations

Abstract

Crash test dummies able to mimic the motion of a human are needed to assess the protective performance of seats and head restraints in crash tests. This study evaluates both a newly developed dummy for rear impacts (BioRID P3) and the Hybrid III dummy by means of a recently available set of human subject data. The study also meets the need for validation of the BioRID P3 at a higher impact severity than that previously achieved. The BioRID P3 and the Hybrid III were evaluated by means of pendulum impacts to the back and compared with data from previously run cadaver tests. Seated dummies were struck with a pendulum with a mass of 23 kg and an impact velocity of 4.6 m/s at the level of the 6th thoracic vertebra. The results showed that peak values and temporal responses of the BioRID P3 was closer to that of the corridor of the cadavers than the Hybrid III in terms of horizontal, vertical, and angular displacement of the head and of the head relative to T1.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Crash test dummies able to mimic the motion of a human are needed to assess the protective performance of seats and head restraints in crash tests. This study evaluates both a newly developed dummy for rear impacts (BioRID P3) and the Hybrid III dummy by means of a recently available set of human subject data. The study also meets the need for validation of the BioRID P3 at a higher impact severity than that previously achieved. The BioRID P3 and the Hybrid III were evaluated by means of pendulum impacts to the back and compared with data from previously run cadaver tests. Seated dummies were struck with a pendulum with a mass of 23 kg and an impact velocity of 4.6 m/s at the level of the 6th thoracic vertebra. The results showed that peak values and temporal responses of the BioRID P3 was closer to that of the corridor of the cadavers than the Hybrid III in terms of horizontal, vertical, and angular displacement of the head and of the head relative to T1.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 20 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Crash test dummies able to mimic the motion of a human are needed to assess the protective performance of seats and head restraints in crash tests. This study evaluates both a newly developed dummy for rear impacts (BioRID P3) and the Hybrid III dummy by means of a recently available set of human subject data. The study also meets the need for validation of the BioRID P3 at a higher impact severity than that previously achieved. The BioRID P3 and the Hybrid III were evaluated by means of pendulum impacts to the back and compared with data from previously run cadaver tests. Seated dummies were struck with a pendulum with a mass of 23 kg and an impact velocity of 4.6 m/s at the level of the 6th thoracic vertebra. The results showed that peak values and temporal responses of the BioRID P3 was closer to that of the corridor of the cadavers than the Hybrid III in terms of horizontal, vertical, and angular displacement of the head and of the head relative to T1.

Key concepts: Test (biology), Pendulum, Subject (documents), Poison control, Engineering, Test data, Occupational safety and health, Human factors and ergonomics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Evaluation of the BioRID P3 and the Hybrid III in Pendulum Impacts to the Back: A Comparison with Human Subject Test Data — Research Paper | ScholarLens