• Journal of Auto-vehicle Safety Association
• /
• v.6 no.1
• /
• pp.16-21
• /
• 2014

Recently Korea and many countries are legislated for pedestrian protection as following the GTR(Global Technical Regulation). Most NCAP organization have been applying pedestrian protection results in their own rating system in individual or overall rating. Euro NCAP agency has been introduced it first. From the beginning, Euro NCAP had assessed occupant and pedestrian protection. It has become to strengthen a pedestrian protection protocol every time published. Korea NCAP also has been rating pedestrian protection with overall rating system. This paper proposed to study new pedestrian protection protocol especially upper leg in order to find injury response based on physical test. On Euro NCAP, the upper leg injury are assessed two kind of value which are bending moment and force.

• Journal of Auto-vehicle Safety Association
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.31-37
• /
• 2016

The Child Occupant Safety Assessment was first introduced and carried out by Euro NCAP in 2003, with the goal of ensuring manufacturers to develop safe vehicles for passengers of all ages; the objective was to evaluate the safety and protection offered by different Child Restraint Systems (CRS) in the event of a crash. In 2013, the formerly used P child dummy series was replaced by newer and more biofidelic Q1.5 and Q3 child dummies, representing 1.5 and 3 year old children respectively. The frontal and side impact dynamic performances of the Q1.5 and Q3 were tested within all classes of vehicles assessed by Euro NCAP at the time. As an extension to that initiative, Q6 and Q10 child dummies were later developed representing children of 6 and 10 years old. Since the protection of larger children during vehicle crashes relies greatly on the interaction of vehicle restraint systems such as seat belt and the CRS, instrumented Q6 and Q10 dummies will be used to assess the protection offered in the event of front and side impact crashes. In this paper, we focused on injury criteria of Q6 and Q10 child dummies at 64 kph 40% offset frontal crash test. The whole procedure was designed with DFSS analysis. The full vehicle sled test results of both dummies were conducted with different restraint systems settled through previous sled test. It showed that several injury criteria and image data were collected as the result of the full vehicle sled test. Based on the results of these investigations, this paper describes which factor is most important and combination shows the best performance when evaluating rear seat occupant protection for Q6 and Q10 child dummies.

• Journal of Auto-vehicle Safety Association
• /
• v.7 no.3
• /
• pp.7-13
• /
• 2015

Occupant protection performance in frontal crashes has been developed and assessed for mainly front seat occupants over many years, and in recent years protection of rear seat occupants has also been extensively discussed. Unlike the front seats, the rear seats are often occupied by children seated in rear-facing or forward - facing child restraint systems, or booster seats. In the ENCAP, child occupant protection assessments using 18-month-old(P1.5) and 3-year-old(P3) test dummies in the rear seat have already been changed to new type of 18-month-old (Q1.5)and 3-year-old(Q3) test dummies. In addition, ENCAP are scheduled with the development and introduction of test dummies of 6-year-old (Q6) and 10.5-year-old children(Q10) starting 2016. In KNCAP, Q6 and Q10 child dummies will be introduced in 2017 as well. Automobile manufacturers need to develop safety performance for new child dummies closely. In this paper, we focused on Q6 and Q10 child dummies sitting in child restraint system. Offset frontal crash tests were conducted using two types of test dummies, Q6 and Q10 child dummies, positioned in the rear seat. Q6 and Q10 were used to compare dummy kinematics in rear seating positions between Q6 behind the driver's seat and Q10 behind the front passenger's seat. The full vehicle sled test results of both dummies were conducted with different restraint systems. It showed that several injury and image data was collected as the result of the full vehicle sled test. Based on the results of these investigations, this paper describes which factor is most important and combination is the best performance when evaluating rear seat occupant protection for Q6 and Q10 child dummies.

• Journal of Auto-vehicle Safety Association
• /
• v.7 no.1
• /
• pp.7-12
• /
• 2015

NCAP(New Car Assessment Program) makes vehicle manufacturer improve safety performance through free competition and customers guarantee vehicle selection by providing information of vehicle safety. That's why it is important not only to meet the regulation, but also to cope with NCAP. EuroNCAP(European New Car Assessment Program) side tests have conducted by using Progressive MDB and Euro SID II in order to reproduce crash test between two vehicles over 10 years. However various researches report that Progressive MDB and Euro SID II do not reflect evolving vehicle design, impact performance and biofidelity of human. Therefore EuroNCAP has the plan to conduct AE-MDB side crash test using WorldSID which is more evolved from 2015 by replacing Progressive MDB and EuroSID II. Automobile manufacturers need to develop safety performance for new test closely. This paper is to find test set-up parameters which affect into dummy injury instead of restraint system and to research on its tendency. It is processed with mini and small car to know influence as changing vehicle size and also analyzed by DFSS(Design for six sigma) which is one of optimization tools. DFSS is vaildated by simulating CAE with L18 orthogonal array of 6 control factors adjustable as EuroNCAP requirement.

• Transactions of the Korean Society of Automotive Engineers
• /
• v.18 no.3
• /
• pp.149-155
• /
• 2010

Currently various safety tests are being performed in many countries with growing interest in vehicle safety. However the vehicles which have good safety performance in these tests could not secure the good performance in real car to car accident. So new test protocol using progressive deformable barrier (PDB) was proposed by EEVC in Europe, NHTSA in USA and some vehicle manufacturers, etc. The target of PDB test is to control partner protection in addition to self-protection on the same test. The proposal is to update current ECE R.94 frontal ODB test. So barrier, impact speed, overlap are changed to avoid bottoming-out in the test configuration. In this paper 3 different tests (R.94, EuroNCAP and PDB test) were carried out using current production vehicles with same structure. The results of these tests were compared to understand PDB test. As a result PDB test shows the highest vehicle deceleration and dummy injury because PDB offers a progressive increase in stiffness in depth and height. However vehicle intrusion was affected with rather test velocity than stiffness of deformable barrier. PDB deformation data is used for partner protection assessment using PDB software and it shows that the test vehicle is rather not aggressive.