nhtsa international dummy meeting - unece · nhtsa meeting washington dc, november 5, 2009 nhtsa...

18
1 NHTSA International Dummy Meeting NHTSA International Dummy Meeting Washington DC Washington DC November 5, 2009 November 5, 2009 Suzanne Tylko Chair of the Americas, WorldSID Advisory Group

Upload: others

Post on 27-May-2020

3 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

1

NHTSA International Dummy MeetingNHTSA International Dummy MeetingWashington DCWashington DC

November 5, 2009November 5, 2009Suzanne Tylko

Chair of the Americas, WorldSID Advisory Group

Gianotti
Text Box
WS-1-1

2

A New Advanced Side Impact DummyA New Advanced Side Impact DummyA New Advanced Side Impact Dummy

3

NHTSA International Dummy MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

NHTSA International Dummy MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

Project OrganisationProject Organisation

WorldSIDTask Group

ISO TC22 / SC12 / WG5 Working Group -

Anthropomorphic Test Devices

IHRA

Project

Manager

DesignTeam

EuropeanAdvisory

Group

Asia-PacificAdvisory

Group

AmericasAdvisory

Group

World-widegovernments

Co-ordination

4

NHTSA International Dummy MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

NHTSA International Dummy MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

• 50th percentile, adult male dummy anthropometryStanding height: 1753 mmSeated height: 911 mmMass: 77,3 kg

• Biofidelity to be rated “good“ to “excellent“ on ISO side impact dummy rating scale

• Symmetrical behaviour (left / right)

• Impact performance ± 30°

• 50th percentile, adult male dummy anthropometryStanding height: 1753 mmSeated height: 911 mmMass: 77,3 kg

• Biofidelity to be rated “good“ to “excellent“ on ISO side impact dummy rating scale

• Symmetrical behaviour (left / right)

• Impact performance ± 30°

Design TargetsDesign Targets

NHTSA MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

NHTSA MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009 5

• Jun. 1997 Resolution by ISO/TC22/SC12/WG5 – establishing a task group, chaired by Tri-Chair Committee

• Sep. 1999 Final set of specifications/design targets• Jun. 2000 Prototype design signed-off• Sep. 2000 First assembly• Dec. 2000 Prototype demonstration• Oct. 2002 Pre-production version - design freeze• Nov. 2002 Manufacture of 11 pre-production dummies• Dec. 2002 End of prototype prelim. evaluation (> 400 tests)• Apr. - Delivery of 11 pre-production dummies

July2003 Start of WorldSID world wide evaluation --

• Feb. 2004 Production version - design freeze• Mar. 2004 Release of production version• Aug. 2008 NHTSA WorldSID biofidelity evaluation• May 2009 Introduction of multi-point sensing

• Jun. 1997 Resolution by ISO/TC22/SC12/WG5 – establishing a task group, chaired by Tri-Chair Committee

• Sep. 1999 Final set of specifications/design targets• Jun. 2000 Prototype design signed-off• Sep. 2000 First assembly• Dec. 2000 Prototype demonstration• Oct. 2002 Pre-production version - design freeze• Nov. 2002 Manufacture of 11 pre-production dummies• Dec. 2002 End of prototype prelim. evaluation (> 400 tests)• Apr. - Delivery of 11 pre-production dummies

July2003 Start of WorldSID world wide evaluation --

• Feb. 2004 Production version - design freeze• Mar. 2004 Release of production version• Aug. 2008 NHTSA WorldSID biofidelity evaluation• May 2009 Introduction of multi-point sensing

WorldSIDWorldSID Development Development -- History / ScheduleHistory / Schedule

6

NHTSA International Dummy MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

NHTSA International Dummy MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

ISO - WorldSID 50th EvaluationISO ISO -- WorldSIDWorldSID 5050thth EvaluationEvaluation

• WorldSID Biofidelity rating according to ISO TR9790

• WorldSID Testing conducted by OSRP, Transport Canada, and NHTSA

• WorldSID Task Group and NHTSA conducted similar sled tests Data is similar between the two

organizations Calculated ISO biofidelity rating using ISO

data and NHTSA data

• WorldSID Biofidelity rating according to ISO TR9790

• WorldSID Testing conducted by OSRP, Transport Canada, and NHTSA

• WorldSID Task Group and NHTSA conducted similar sled tests Data is similar between the two

organizationsCalculated ISO biofidelity rating using ISO

data and NHTSA data

7

NHTSA International Dummy MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

NHTSA International Dummy MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

Biofidelity Rating according to ISO TR9790

Comparison of ES-2re vs WorldSID

Biofidelity Rating according to ISO TR9790

Comparison of ES-2re vs WorldSID

unacceptable marginal fair good excellent

0 2.6 4.4 6.5 8.6 10

unacceptableunacceptable marginal fair good marginal fair good excellentexcellent

00 2.62.6 4.44.4 6.56.5 8.68.6 1010

ISO - WorldSID 50th EvaluationISO ISO -- WorldSID 50WorldSID 50thth EvaluationEvaluation

WorldSIDFord (OSRP)

4.87.37.58.35.510

8.08.05.19.38.2105.310

4.24.23.24.14.04.54.25

ES-2re

OverallOverallPelvisAbdomenThoraxShoulderNeckHead

Body Region

WorldSIDNHTSA/VRTC

7.27.2 “GOOD”““GOODGOOD””

8

NHTSA International Dummy MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

NHTSA International Dummy MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

Collaborators:Collaborators:Collaborators:

9

NHTSA International Dummy MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

NHTSA International Dummy MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

The Benefits of CollaborationThe Benefits of CollaborationThe Benefits of Collaboration

• The collaboration of industry & governmental organizations worldwide has made it possible to:

Conduct extensive testing & evaluation;

Prepare drawings and user manual

• Collaboration continues through ISO to facilitate the development of pertinent risk curves for each body injury measure; and

• Develop a practical seating procedure that can be used in the world market.

• The collaboration of industry & governmental organizations worldwide has made it possible to:

Conduct extensive testing & evaluation;

Prepare drawings and user manual

• Collaboration continues through ISO to facilitate the development of pertinent risk curves for each body injury measure; and

• Develop a practical seating procedure that can be used in the world market.

10

NHTSA International Dummy MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

NHTSA International Dummy MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

The Benefits of CollaborationThe Benefits of CollaborationThe Benefits of Collaboration

International collaboration encourages industry involvement and increases funding opportunities. For example:•Proposal under consideration by ACEA to fund the development of injury risk curves for the WS 5th; •Toyota contribution to arm biofidelity research;

International collaboration encourages industry involvement and increases funding opportunities.For example:•Proposal under consideration by ACEA to fund the development of injury risk curves for the WS 5th;•Toyota contribution to arm biofidelity research;

NHTSA MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

NHTSA MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009 11

WorldSIDWorldSID Development of Injury Risk CurvesDevelopment of Injury Risk Curves

1. In depth literature review of PMHS data

2. Defined the criteria for the selection of appropriate PMHS data for the construction of the injury risk curves

3. Scaled the PMHS data to account for the differences of anthropometry between the PMHS and the 50th

percentile dummy

NHTSA MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

NHTSA MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009 12

WorldSIDWorldSID Development of Injury Risk Curves contDevelopment of Injury Risk Curves cont’’dd

4. Adjusted the scaled data to account for the influence of age on the injuries;

5. Collated all WorldSID 50th test results;

6. Constructed the injury risk curves by pairing the scaled WorldSID data adjusted to the PMHS injuries, using the methods commonly used in the literature

Published in the Stapp Car Crash Journal (2009)

NHTSA MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

NHTSA MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009 13

Guidelines for Guidelines for selectionselection ofof IRC IRC construction construction methodmethod(s)(s)1. Description of commonly used methods and their

underlying assumptions;2. Definition of dataset characteristics; For example,

boundary conditions, censoring, injury mechanisms3. Design of decision tree to match dataset

characteristics with most appropriate method(s);4. Application to biomechanical dataset to evaluate

and validate the process. 5. Reality check

14

NHTSA International Dummy MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

NHTSA International Dummy MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

Further ActivitiesFurther ActivitiesFurther Activities

ISO:

• Development of methodology for the selection of injury risk curves for WorldSID 50th Male;

• Revision of ISO TR9790• Evaluation of WS 5th

• Preparation of ISO documentation for WS 5th

ISO:

• Development of methodology for the selection of injury risk curves for WorldSID 50th Male;

• Revision of ISO TR9790• Evaluation of WS 5th

• Preparation of ISO documentation for WS 5th

NHTSA MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

NHTSA MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009 15

Other ActivitiesOther ActivitiesOther Activities

TRANSPORT CANADA:

• Evaluation of multipoint sensing (RibEye) in WorldSID 50th and SIDIIs;

• Evaluation of advanced on board data acquisition to use with RibEye;

• Biofidelity evaluation of updated WorldSID 5th

Female;

• Evaluation of updated WorldSID 5th Female in full scale reconstruction of a pole crash.

TRANSPORT CANADA:

• Evaluation of multipoint sensing (RibEye) in WorldSID 50th and SIDIIs;

• Evaluation of advanced on board data acquisition to use with RibEye;

• Biofidelity evaluation of updated WorldSID 5th

Female;

• Evaluation of updated WorldSID 5th Female in full scale reconstruction of a pole crash.

NHTSA MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

NHTSA MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009 16

WS 50th Activities by Transport CanadaWS WS 5050thth Activities by Transport CanadaActivities by Transport Canada

Evaluation of multipoint sensing (RibEye)

• Completed 5 triplicate FMVSS 214 pole tests comparing WS 50th / WS 50th Rib Eye / ES2 RE in the driver position;

• Completed 5 paired car-to-car tests comparing WS 50th / WS 50th Rib Eye

• Complete 1 paired FMVSS 214 of WS 50th RibEye in a vehicle with and without seat mounted airbag.

Evaluation of multipoint sensing (Evaluation of multipoint sensing (RibEyeRibEye))

•• Completed 5 triplicate FMVSS 214 pole tests comparing Completed 5 triplicate FMVSS 214 pole tests comparing WS 50WS 50thth / WS 50/ WS 50thth Rib Eye / ES2 RE in the driver position;Rib Eye / ES2 RE in the driver position;

•• Completed 5 paired carCompleted 5 paired car--toto--car tests comparing WS 50car tests comparing WS 50thth / / WS 50WS 50thth Rib EyeRib Eye

•• Complete 1 paired FMVSS 214 of WS 50Complete 1 paired FMVSS 214 of WS 50thth RibEyeRibEye in a in a vehicle with and without seat mounted airbag.vehicle with and without seat mounted airbag.

NHTSA MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009

NHTSA MeetingWashington DC, November 5, 2009 17

WS 5th Activities by Transport CanadaWS WS 55thth Activities by Transport CanadaActivities by Transport Canada

• Completed the partial biofidelity evaluation of updated WorldSID 5th Female;

• Completed the evaluation of updated WorldSID 5th

Female in full scale reconstruction of a pole crash;

• Completed 1 triplicate FMVSS 214 comparison of WS 5th/ SIDIIs/ SIDIIs RibEye

• May complete 3 paired IIHS barrier tests SIDIIs RibEye/ WS 5th

• Completed the partial biofidelity evaluation of updated WorldSID 5th Female;

• Completed the evaluation of updated WorldSID 5th

Female in full scale reconstruction of a pole crash;

• Completed 1 triplicate FMVSS 214 comparison of WS 5th/ SIDIIs/ SIDIIs RibEye

• May complete 3 paired IIHS barrier tests SIDIIs RibEye/ WS 5th

Thank you !www.worldsid.org

Thank you !Thank you !www.worldsid.orgwww.worldsid.org