Citation

Seppi J, Toczyski J, Crandall JR, Kerrigan J. Traffic Injury Prev. 2017; 18(7): 748-754.

Affiliation

a UVA, Center for Applied Biomechanics , 4040 Lewis & Clark Dr., Charlottesville , VA 22911 United States.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2017, Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1080/15389588.2016.1204445

PMID

27824504

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To provide an objective basis on which to evaluate the repeatability of vehicle crash test methods, a recently developed signal analysis method was used to evaluate correlation of sensor time history data between replicate vehicle crash tests. The goal of this study was to evaluate the repeatability of rollover crash tests performed with the Dynamic Rollover Test System (DRoTS) relative to other vehicle crash test methods.

METHODS: Test data from DRoTS tests, Deceleration Rollover Sled (DRS) tests, frontal crash tests, frontal offset crash tests, small overlap crash tests, Small Overlap Impact (SOI) crash tests, and oblique crash tests were obtained from the literature and publicly available databases (the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration vehicle database and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety TechData) to examine crash test repeatability.

RESULTS: Signal analysis of the DRoTS tests showed that force and deformation time histories had good to excellent repeatability, while vehicle kinematics showed only fair repeatability due to the vehicle mounting method for one pair of tests and slightly dissimilar mass properties (2.2%) in a second pair of tests. Relative to the DRS, the DRoTS tests showed very similar or higher levels of repeatability in nearly all vehicle kinematic data signals with the exception of global X' (road direction of travel) velocity and displacement due to the functionality of the DRoTS fixture. Based on the average overall scoring metric of the dominant acceleration, DRoTS was found to be as repeatable as all other crash tests analyzed. Vertical force measures showed good repeatability and were on par with frontal crash barrier forces. Dynamic deformation measures showed good to excellent repeatability as opposed to poor repeatability seen in SOI and oblique deformation measures.

CONCLUSIONS: Using the signal analysis method as outlined in this paper, the DRoTS was shown to have the same or better repeatability of crash test methods used in government regulatory and consumer evaluation test protocols.

Language: en