Responses of the Q6/Q6s ATD Positioned in Booster Seats in the Far-Side Seat Location of Side Impact Passenger Car and Sled Tests.

Passenger car side impact crash tests and sled tests were conducted to investigate the influence of booster seats, near-side occupant characteristics and vehicle interiors on the responses of the Q6/Q6s child ATD positioned in the rear, far-side seating location. Data from nine side impact sled tests simulating a EuroNCAP AEMD barrier test were analyzed with data obtained from 44 side impact crash tests. The crash tests included: FMVSS 214 and IIHS MDB, moving car-to-stationary car and moving car-to-moving car. A Q6 or prototype Q6s ATD was seated on the far-side, using a variety of low and high back booster seats. Head and chest responses were recorded and ATD motions were tracked with high-speed videos. The vehicle lateral accelerations resulting from MDB tests were characterized by a much earlier and more rapid rise to peak than in tests where the bullet was another car. The near-side seating position was occupied by a Hybrid III 10-year-old ATD in the sled tests, and a rear or front facing child restraint or a 5th percentile side impact ATD in the crash tests. Head impacts occurred more frequently in vehicles where a forward facing child restraint was present behind the driver seat for both the low and high back booster seats. Pretensioners were found to reduce lateral head displacements in all sled test configurations but the greatest reduction in lateral excursion was obtained with a high back booster seat secured with LATCH and tested in combination with pretensioners.

The effect of breast anthropometry on the Hybrid III 5th female chest response.

Two manufacturers, Denton ATD and FTSS, currently produce the Hybrid III 5th percentile female dummy. In response to concerns raised by industry that differences in the anthropometry of the molded breasts between the two manufacturers may influence chest responses, Transport Canada conducted a comparative testing program. Thorax biofidelity tests were conducted to compare force-deflection characteristics; full frontal rigid-barrier tests were conducted at 40, 48 and 56 km/h to compare chest responses, and out-of-position chest on module static airbag deployment tests were conducted to compare peak chest deflections of the Denton and FTSS dummy jackets and of a prototype jacket without breasts. Differences in force-deflection characteristics were observed during biofidelity pendulum impacts of the two dummies, with much of the differences attributed to the different chest jackets. Differences of up to 11 mm in the peak sternum deflection and of the order of 15 g for the 3-ms chest acceleration clips were noted in rigid-barrier vehicle tests. In the out-of-position airbag-deployment tests, differences in the magnitude of peak chest deflections were observed. The prototype chest jacket without breasts was found to improve repeatability in the belted crash tests and in out-of-position airbag testing. Though neither the Denton nor the FTSS chest jackets fully meet the original design intent of the Hybrid III 5th percentile dummy, the Denton dummy more closely met the drawing specifications and had less manufacturing variability. The results demonstrate the importance of detailed chest flesh assembly specifications, provide evidence that a fully molded jacket design would eliminate manufacturing variability and suggest that removal of the breasts may further improve test repeatability.