2008PubMedOpen access

Torso side airbag out-of-position evaluation using stationary and dynamic occupants.

Jason J. Hallman, Narayan Yoganandan, Frank A. Pintar

Open full text 11 citations

Abstract

The risk of injury from torso side airbags in out-of-position (OOP) scenarios is assessed using stationary occupant conditions. Although stationary tests have been effective in frontal airbag assessments, their applicability to torso side airbags remains uncertain. Using the MADAYMO facet occupant model, thoracic OOP injury was evaluated using full-chest compression criteria (%C) and viscous criteria (VC) under stationary occupant conditions and occupant impact velocities of 6.0 m/s, 7.0 m/s, 8.0 m/s, and 9.0 m/s. During airbag deployment with a stationary occupant, peak %C = 21.8 % while peak VC = 0.86. At 6.0 m/s impact velocity, peak %C increased to 35.1 %; at 9.0 m/s impact velocity %C = 45.0 %. Similarly, peak VC increased from 1.19 at 6.0 m/s and to 1.96 at 9.0 m/s. These results demonstrated that thoracic injury metrics %C and VC increased in dynamic testing conditions. Therefore dynamic occupant tests may be required to effectively assess OOP thoracic injury risk.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The risk of injury from torso side airbags in out-of-position (OOP) scenarios is assessed using stationary occupant conditions. Although stationary tests have been effective in frontal airbag assessments, their applicability to torso side airbags remains uncertain. Using the MADAYMO facet occupant model, thoracic OOP injury was evaluated using full-chest compression criteria (%C) and viscous criteria (VC) under stationary occupant conditions and occupant impact velocities of 6.0 m/s, 7.0 m/s, 8.0 m/s, and 9.0 m/s. During airbag deployment with a stationary occupant, peak %C = 21.8 % while peak VC = 0.86. At 6.0 m/s impact velocity, peak %C increased to 35.1 %; at 9.0 m/s impact velocity %C = 45.0 %. Similarly, peak VC increased from 1.19 at 6.0 m/s and to 1.96 at 9.0 m/s. These results demonstrated that thoracic injury metrics %C and VC increased in dynamic testing conditions. Therefore dynamic occupant tests may be required to effectively assess OOP thoracic injury risk.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 11 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

The risk of injury from torso side airbags in out-of-position (OOP) scenarios is assessed using stationary occupant conditions. Although stationary tests have been effective in frontal airbag assessments, their applicability to torso side airbags remains uncertain. Using the MADAYMO facet occupant model, thoracic OOP injury was evaluated using full-chest compression criteria (%C) and viscous criteria (VC) under stationary occupant conditions and occupant impact velocities of 6.0 m/s, 7.0 m/s, 8.0 m/s, and 9.0 m/s. During airbag deployment with a stationary occupant, peak %C = 21.8 % while peak VC = 0.86. At 6.0 m/s impact velocity, peak %C increased to 35.1 %; at 9.0 m/s impact velocity %C = 45.0 %. Similarly, peak VC increased from 1.19 at 6.0 m/s and to 1.96 at 9.0 m/s. These results demonstrated that thoracic injury metrics %C and VC increased in dynamic testing conditions. Therefore dynamic occupant tests may be required to effectively assess OOP thoracic injury risk.

Key concepts: Torso, Airbag, Compression (physics), Simulation, Computer science, Automotive engineering, Medicine, Materials science

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Torso side airbag out-of-position evaluation using stationary and dynamic occupants. — Research Paper | ScholarLens