International Journal of Automotive Technology

The Korean Society of Automotive Engineers (한국자동차공학회)
권호 표지

INJURY PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF THE CHILD RESTRAINT SYSTEMS

  • Shin, Y.J. (Delphi Korea Corporations) ;
  • Kim, H. (Production Technology Center, Korea Institute of Industrial Technology) ;
  • Kim, S.B. (Design Engineering Group, LG Electronics Product Engineering Research Institute, PERI) ;
  • Kim, H.Y. (Mechanical Engineering, Kangwon National University)
  • Published : 2007.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The new FMVSS 208, 213, 225 regulations include automatic suppression of airbags to prevent low-risk airbag deployment and the use of child seats with a rigid-bar anchor system. The regulations mean that children must sit in the rear seat, but do not include other specific safety measures for their protection. In the rear, restraint equipment consists of three-point shoulder/lap belts for the outside seats and a static two-point lap belt in the middle, with no additional devices such as pretensioners or load limiters; this is far from optimal for children. This study investigated injury rates using a 3-year-old-child dummy. ECE R44 sled tests used a booster, a speed of 48 km/h, and a 26- to 32-g rectangular deceleration pulse. While seated on a booster, the dummies were restrained by an adult shoulder/lap three-point belt. HIC_15 msec, Chest G and Nij were somewhat lower with an emergency locking retractor (ELR)+pretensioner+load limiter than with only an ELR or with ELR+pretensioner. However, the current seat-belt system results in injury rates that exceed the limit for OOP performance under the new FMVSS 208 regulations.

Keywords

References

  1. Anderson, S. J. (1991). Theory of magnetically damped crash sensor calibration and testability. SAE Paper No.910278, 79-91
  2. Czernakowski, W. and Bell, R. (1997). The effects of belt pretensioners on various child restraint designs in frontal impacts. SAE Paper No. 973314, 217-229
  3. Henderson, M., Brown, J. and Griffiths, M. (1997). Children in adults seat belts and child harnesses: crash sled comparisons of dummy responses. SAE Paper No. 973308, 159-163
  4. Hoffmann, R., Ulrich, D., Protard, J. B., Wester, H., Jaehn, N. and Scharnhorst, T. (1990). Finite element analysis of occupant restraint system interaction with PAM-CRASH, SAE Paper No. 902325, 289-300
  5. Janssen, E. G., Huijskens, C. G., Verschut, R. and Twisk, D. (1993). Cervical spine loads induced in restrained child dummies II. SAE Paper No. 933102, 195-208
  6. NHTSA (1999). Child Restraint Systems. FINAL ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT, FMVSS No. 213, FMVSS No. 225, Child Restraint Anchorage Systems Office of Regulatory Analysis Plans and Policy
  7. NHTSA, Department of Transportation (1998). Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Child Restraint Systems; Child Restraint Anchorage Systems. 49 CFR Parts 571, 596 [Docket No. 98-3390, Notice 2] RIN 2127-AG50
  8. Pincemaille, Y., Caillibot, P., Burn-Cassan, F., Vallee, H. and Le Coz, J. Y. (1993). Booster cushions: from experimentation to usage in france. SAE Paper No. 933096, 133-148
  9. PSI (2000). $PAM-CRASH^{TM}/PAM-SAFE^{TM}$ VERSION 2000 User's Manual. Rungis
  10. Rattenbury, S. J. and Gloyns, P. F. (1993). A population study of UK car accidents in which restrained children were killed. SAE Paper No. 933080, 1-9
  11. TNO Automotive (1999). Madymo V5. 4 Database Manual. Delft
  12. Yoo, W. S., Park, D.W., Kim, M. S. and Hong, K. S. (2005). Optimum air pressure for an air-cell seat to enhance ride comfort. Int. J. Automotive Technology 6, 3, 251-257
  13. Yoo, W. S., Park, S. J., Park, D. W., Kim, M. S., Lim, O. K. and Jeong, W. B. (2006). Comparison of ride comforts via experiment and computer simulation. Int. J. Automotive Technology 7, 3, 309-314