Trends in aggressivity and driver risk for cars, SUVs, and pickups: Vehicle incompatibility from 1989 to 2016.

Objective: When 2 vehicles of different sizes collide, the occupants of the smaller vehicle are more likely to be injured than the occupants of the larger vehicle. The larger vehicle is both more protective of its own occupants and more aggressive toward occupants of the other vehicle. However, larger, heavier vehicles tend to be designed in ways that amplify their incompatibility with smaller, lighter vehicles (by having a higher ride height, for example). A 2012 study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) concluded that fatalities caused by design incompatibility have decreased in recent years. The current study was conducted to update the 2012 IIHS analysis and to explore trends in vehicle incompatibility over time. Methods: Analyses examined deaths in crashes involving 1- to 4-year-old passenger vehicles from 1989 to 2016 collected from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS). Trends in driver risk were examined by comparing driver death rates per million registered vehicle years across vehicle type and size. Trends in aggressivity were examined by comparing partner driver death rates across vehicle type and size. Results: Cars and SUVs have continued their trend toward reduced incompatibility. In 1989-1992, SUVs were 132% more likely to kill the driver in a partner car compared with when a car crashed with another car. By 2013-2016, this value had dropped to 28%. Pickups and cars remain just as incompatible in 2013-2016 as they were in 1989-1992, however (159% vs. 158%). Remaining pickup incompatibility may be largely due to excess curb weight rather than to shape or design features, because light pickups were just 23% more likely to kill the driver in a partner car compared with when a car crashed with another car. Conclusions: The trend toward reduced fleet incompatibility has continued in the latest crash data, particularly for cars and SUVs. Although pickup-car incompatibility has also decreased over time, pickups remain disproportionately aggressive toward other vehicles, possibly due to their greater average curb weight. Reducing the weight of some of the heaviest vehicles and making crash avoidance technology fitment more widespread may be promising means to reduce remaining fleet incompatibility. Identifying the source of remaining incompatibility will be important for safety improvements going forward.

Structural Design Strategies for Improved Small Overlap Crashworthiness Performance.

In 2012, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) began a 64 km/h small overlap frontal crash test consumer information test program. Thirteen automakers already have redesigned models to improve test performance. One or more distinct strategies are evident in these redesigns: reinforcement of the occupant compartment, use of energy-absorbing fender structures, and the addition of engagement structures to induce vehicle lateral translation. Each strategy influences vehicle kinematics, posing additional challenges for the restraint systems. The objective of this two-part study was to examine how vehicles were modified to improve small overlap test performance and then to examine how these modifications affect dummy response and restraint system performance. Among eight models tested before and after design changes, occupant compartment intrusion reductions ranged from 6 cm to 45 cm, with the highest reductions observed in models with the largest number of modifications. All redesigns included additional occupant compartment reinforcement, one-third added structures to engage the barrier, and two modified a shotgun load path. Designs with engagement structures produced greater glance-off from the barrier and exhibited lower delta Vs but experienced more lateral outboard motion of the dummy. Designs with heavy reinforcement of the occupant compartment had higher vehicle accelerations and delta V. In three cases, these apparent trade-offs were not well addressed by concurrent changes in restraint systems and resulted in increased injury risk compared with the original tests. Among the 36 models tested after design changes, the extent of design changes correlated to structural performance. Half of the vehicles with the lowest intrusion levels incorporated aspects of all three design strategies. Vehicle kinematics and dummy and restraint system characteristics were similar to those observed in the before/after pairs. Different combinations of structural improvement strategies for improving small overlap test performance were found to be effective in reducing occupant compartment intrusion and improving dummy kinematics in the IIHS small overlap test with modest weight increase.

Development of a frontal small overlap crashworthiness evaluation test.

OBJECTIVES: Small overlap frontal crashes are those in which crash forces are applied outboard of the vehicle's longitudinal frame rails. In-depth analyses of crashes indicate that such crashes account for a significant proportion of frontal crashes with seriously injured occupants. The objective of this research was to evaluate possible barrier crash tests that could be used to evaluate the crashworthiness of vehicles across a spectrum of small overlap crash types. METHODS: Sixteen full-scale vehicle tests were conducted using 3 midsize passenger vehicles in up to 6 different test configurations, including vehicle-to-vehicle and barrier tests. All vehicles were tested at 64 km/h with an instrumented Hybrid III midsize male driver dummy. RESULTS: All test configurations resulted in primary loading of the wheel, suspension system, and hinge pillar. Vehicles underwent substantial lateral movement during the crash, which varied by crash configuration. The occupant compartments had significant intrusion, particularly to the most outboard structures. Inboard movement of the steering wheel in combination with outboard movement of the dummies (due to the lateral vehicle motion) caused limited interaction with the frontal air bag in most cases. CONCLUSIONS: When assessing overall crashworthiness (based on injury measures, structural deformation, and occupant kinematics), one vehicle had superior performance in each crash configuration. This was confirmation that the countermeasures benefiting performance in a single small overlap test also will provide a benefit in other crash configurations. Based on these test results, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety has developed a small overlap crashworthiness evaluation with the following characteristics: a rigid flat barrier with a 150-mm corner radius, 25 percent overlap, 64 km/h test speed, and a Hybrid III midsize male driver dummy.

Is passenger vehicle incompatibility still a problem?

OBJECTIVE: Passenger cars often are at a disadvantage when colliding with light trucks (sport utility vehicles [SUVs] and pickups) due to differences in mass, vehicle structural alignment, and stiffness. In 2003, vehicle manufacturers agreed to voluntary measures to improve compatibility, especially in front-to-front and front-to-side crashes, with full adherence to be achieved by September 2009. This study examined whether fatality rates are consistent with the expected benefit of this agreement. METHODS: Analyses examined 2 death rates for 1- to 4-year-old passenger vehicles during 2000-2001 and 2008-2009 in the United States: occupant deaths per million registered vehicle years in these vehicles and deaths in other cars that collided with these vehicles in 2-vehicle crashes per million registered vehicle years. These rates were computed for each study period and for cars/minivans (referred to as cars), SUVs, and pickups by curb weight (in 500-pound increments). The latter death rate, referred to as the car crash partner death rate, also was computed for front-to-front crashes and front-to-side crashes where the front of the 1- to 4-year-old vehicle struck the side of the partner car. RESULTS: In both study periods, occupant death rates generally decreased for each vehicle type both with increasing curb weight and over time. SUVs experienced the greatest declines compared with cars and pickups. This is due in part to the early fitment of electronic stability control in SUVs, which drastically reduced the incidence of single-vehicle rollover crashes. Pickups had the highest death rates in both study periods. Car crash partner death rates generally declined over time for all vehicle categories but more steeply for SUVs and pickups colliding with cars than for cars colliding with cars. In fact, the car crash partner death rates for SUVs and cars were nearly identical during 2008-2009, suggesting that the voluntary design changes for compatibility have been effective. Car crash partner death rates also declined for pickups, but their rates were consistently the highest in both study periods. CONCLUSION: It is impossible to disentangle the individual contributions of the compatibility agreement, improved crashworthiness of cars, and other factors in reducing car crash partner fatality rates. However, the generally larger reductions in car crash partner death rates for SUVs and pickups indicate the likely benefits of the agreement. Overall, this study finds that the system of regulatory testing, voluntary industry initiatives, and consumer information testing has led to a passenger vehicle fleet that is much more compatible in crashes.

Comparison of Hybrid III and THOR dummies in paired small overlap tests.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) is investigating small overlap crash test procedures for a possible consumer information program. Analysis of real-world small overlap crashes found a strong relationship between serious head and chest injuries and occupant compartment intrusion. The main sources of serious head injuries were from the A-pillar, dash panel, or door structure, suggesting head trajectories forward and outboard possibly bypassing the airbag. Chest injuries mainly were from steering wheel intrusion and seat belt loading. In developing this program, two test dummies were evaluated for predicting occupant injury risk: midsize male Hybrid III and THOR. In the collinear small overlap crash tests conducted here, results from the two dummies were similar. Both predicted a low risk of injury to the head and chest and sometimes a high risk of injury to the lower extremities. Head and torso kinematics also were similar between dummies. Other test scenarios might show larger differences between the dummies.

Crash compatibility between cars and light trucks: benefits of lowering front-end energy-absorbing structure in SUVs and pickups.

Passenger vehicles are designed to absorb crash energy in frontal crashes through deformation or crush of energy-absorbing structures forward of the occupant compartment. In collisions between cars and light trucks (i.e., pickups and SUVs), however, the capacity of energy-absorption structures may not be fully utilized because mismatches often exist between the heights of these structures in the colliding vehicles. In 2003 automakers voluntarily committed to new design standards aimed at reducing the height mismatches between cars and light trucks. By September 2009 all new light trucks will have either the primary front structure (typically the frame rails) or a secondary structure connected to the primary structure low enough to interact with the primary structures in cars, which for most cars is about the height of the front bumper. To estimate the overall benefit of the voluntary commitment, the real-world crash experience of light trucks already meeting the height-matching criteria was compared with that of light trucks not meeting the criteria for 2000-2003 model light trucks in collisions with passenger cars during calendar years 2001-2004. The estimated benefits of lower front energy-absorbing structure were a 19 percent reduction (p<0.05) in fatality risk to belted car drivers in front-to-front crashes with light trucks and a 19 percent reduction (p<0.05) in fatality risk to car drivers in front-to-driver-side crashes with light trucks.

Comparison of EuroSID-2 and SID-IIs in Vehicle Side Impact Tests with the IIHS Barrier.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has recently developed and evaluated a new side impact barrier to represent the front profile of pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles for a new consumer information program. In the development of this program, two dummies were considered for assessing driver injury risk in side-struck vehicles: EuroSID-2 (50th percentile male dummy) and SID-IIs (5th percentile female dummy). The purpose of this study was to compare injury responses and kinematics for these two dummies in side impact crash tests. The findings suggest that SID-IIs will be more effective in driving relevant improvements in side impact crash protection.