Characterizing neck and spinal response in booster seated reclined children in frontal impacts.

OBJECTIVE: Belt-positioning booster seats (BPB) and pre-pretensioner (PPT) belts may be effective in preventing injuries from submarining and head excursion in reclined children. It is unknown if injuries at the neck and spine could still occur. This study's goal is to characterize neck and spine responses in reclined children with and without the BPB and the PPT. METHODS: Eleven frontal impact sled tests were performed (56 kph) with the Large Omnidirectional Child (LODC) dummy on a production vehicle seat. A 3-point simulated seat-integrated-belt was used with a load-limiter (∼4.5 kN). Testing was conducted with and without the BPB with the seatback at ∼25°, ∼45° and repeated once. One test was conducted at ∼60° with the BPB. 100 mm of belt-slack was removed to simulate PPT in two 45° BPB tests and the BPB 60° test. The LODC peak thoracic spine accelerations and angular rotations, and peak neck and lumbar force/moment loads were compared between conditions. RESULTS: Neck shear forces were the highest in the 60° BPB & PPT (-1.9 kN) and 45° noBPB (-1.3 kN) than all other BPB conditions (-0.5 to -0.8 kN). The highest peak neck moments were found in the 45° noBPB (-40.5 N-m), and in the 60° BPB & PPT (-34.2 N-m) conditions compared to all others (-20.8 to -27.9 N-m.). The 60° BPB and PPT condition demonstrated thoracic forward rotation similar to the 25° noBPB condition (25° noBPB -24.8 to -35.0 deg, 60° BPB&PPT -27.5 to -43.2 deg.). Thoracic spine peak resultant accelerations (T1, T6, T12) were higher in the 25° and 45° noBPB conditions (53 g to 71 g) and in the 60° BPB & PPT (T6: 61.8 g) compared to all other BPB conditions (48.4 g to 53.1 g). The lumbar peak shear forces and moments were the highest in the 45° noBPB (4.9 kN, -296 N-m) and the 60° BPB & PPT condition (1.7 kN, -146 N-m). CONCLUSION: These findings show similarities in neck, spine, and lumbar responses between the 60° reclined condition with BPB and PPT and the 25° and 45° conditions without the same countermeasures. This study highlights the need for future restraint developments to protect moderate and severe reclined BPB-seated child occupants.

The effect of a startle-based warning, age, sex, and secondary task on takeover actions in critical autonomous driving scenarios.

Introduction: In highly autonomous driving scenarios, it is critical to identify strategies to accelerate reaction times since drivers may take too long to take over control of the vehicle. Previous studies reported that an Acoustic Startling Pre-Stimulus (ASPS, i.e., a loud warning preceding an action) accelerated reaction times in simple ankle flexion exercises. Methods: In this study, we examined if an ASPS warning leads to shorter takeover reaction times in a sled-simulated evasive swerving maneuver. Twenty-eight participants (seven male adults, seven male teenagers, seven female adults, and seven female teenagers) were instructed to align a marker on the steering wheel with a marker on a lateral post as fast as they could as soon as the lateral sled perturbation (0.75 g) started. Four conditions were examined: with and without an ASPS (105 dB, played 250 ms before sled perturbation for 40 ms), and with and without a secondary task (i.e., texting). A catch trial (ASPS only) was used to minimize anticipation. Human kinematics were captured with an 8-camera 3D motion capture system. Results: Results showed that the drivers' hands lifted towards the steering wheel more quickly with the ASPS (169 ± 55 ms) than without (194 ± 46 ms; p = 0.01), and that adult drivers touched the steering wheel quicker with the ASPS (435 ± 54 ms) than without (470 ± 33 ms; p = 0.01). Similar findings were not observed for the teen drivers. Additionally, female drivers were found to lift their hands towards the steering wheel faster than male drivers (166 ± 58 ms vs. 199 ± 36 ms; p = 0.009). Discussion: Our findings suggest that the ASPS may be beneficial to accelerate driver reaction times during the initiation of a correction maneuver, and that autonomous vehicle warnings may need to be tailored to the age and sex of the driver.

Repositioning forward-leaning vehicle occupants with a pre-pretensioner belt and a startle-based warning in pre-crash scenarios.

OBJECTIVE: Pre-pretensioner (PPT) seatbelts have been found to be effective in controlling vehicle occupants' motion response to disturbances in optimally positioned occupants, but it is not clear how the PPT performs when the occupant is initially forward leaning. Previous work demonstrated that an acoustic startling pre-stimulus (ASPS) reduced trunk out-of-position in sled-simulated pre-crash maneuvers. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine if coupling the PPT with the ASPS could reduce the needed magnitude and rate of belt tension of the PPT to reposition forward leaning occupants to their optimal position within the seatbelt. METHODS: Sixteen belt-restrained adult human volunteers (8 males and 8 females) restrained by a 3-point seatbelt on a vehicle seat in a forward leaning posture on a sled simulating pre-crash braking (approx. 1 g of maximum acceleration and 0.3 s duration) were exposed to sled perturbations with three belt configurations (low and high force PPT and no PPT), and two warning conditions (ASPS and no-ASPS). Head and trunk positions were extracted from the 3D motion-capture data. Repeated measure ANOVAs were used to understand the effect of sex, PPT, ASPS, and repetition on head and trunk positions. A survival analysis was also performed to understand the probability of the occupants moving rearward in the different conditions. RESULTS: The probability of the head and trunk to move rearward from the initial position was greater with the PPT than without the PPT (p = 0.01) and with the high force level than the low force level (p = 0.01). The interaction effect of ASPS x PPT showed that with no PPT, there was a greater probability for the head to move rearward from the initial position with ASPS than without ASPS (p < 0.03). The trunk shows a similar trend to the head, but the ASPS vs no-ASPS differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.06). No sex differences were found. CONCLUSIONS: The PPT, particularly the high level, may be an effective countermeasure on its own to reduce trunk and head out-of-position in forward leaning postures in pre-crash scenarios. The ASPS reduced the occupants' head forward position when the PPT was not available.

Quantitative characterization of AEB pulses across the modern fleet.

OBJECTIVE: Characteristics of specific Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB) pulses can result in increased motion of the occupant, which can lead to the occupant being out-of-position such that when a crash occurs protection may be compromised. Quantifying these variations across the modern fleet is crucial to understand the loading environment to which vehicle occupants are exposed. Therefore, we categorized the AEB pulses based on acceleration pulse features such as deceleration magnitude, jerk, and ramp time. METHODS: A total of 2278 AEB vehicle tests (years 2013-2019) were extracted from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) database and analyzed. The following pulse characteristics were extracted: Jerk (g/s), Ramp-time (s), and Maximum deceleration (g). A subset of tests in which the tested vehicle did not contact the foam target (n = 1665) was analyzed further, with the following additional variables extracted: Deceleration time (s), Steady-state deceleration (g), and Duration (s). Other non-pulse related features were also considered: Test speed (20 and 40 km/h), Curb weight (Kg), and Vehicle Model Year. Using machine learning methods, the pulses were categorized into clusters. One-way ANOVAs for continuous variables and X2 for categorical features were used to assess differences between clusters (p ≤ 0.05). RESULTS: Using the entirety of the AEB vehicle tests extracted (n = 2278), a total of 3 clusters were selected. The three clusters showed significantly different Jerk, Ramp-time, and Maximum deceleration (p < 0.001). Target contact decreased in AEB tests with more recent vehicle model years (rate of contact 66% in 2014 vs 1.7% in 2019). In one cluster, Jerk and Maximum deceleration increased with vehicle model year. Using the subset of tests in which there was no contact with the foam target (n = 1665), 4 categories of pulses were selected. In both sets of clusters, Ramp-time and Jerk showed moderate inverse correlation (r = -0.7), while all other features showed a low correlation. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that AEB technology improved over the years in obstacle avoidance. The identification of AEB pulse clusters is important in order to describe distinct approaches to achieving AEB and to be able to reproduce representative AEB pulses in the laboratory and understand the influences of those pulses on occupants' motion.