Responses of Hybrid III 3YO and Q3 Dummies in Various CRSs Tested Using ECE R44 Impact Conditions
Responses of Hybrid III 3YO and Q3 Dummies in Various CRSs Tested Using ECE R44 Impact Conditions
复制标题
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2009
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Yoshinori Tanaka;Hideki Yonezawa;N. Hosokawa;Y. Matsui;K. Mizuno;M. Yamaguchi;Ryoichi Yoshida
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Yoshinori Tanaka;Hideki Yonezawa;N. Hosokawa;Y. Matsui;K. Mizuno;M. Yamaguchi;Ryoichi Yoshida
儿童约束系统（CRS）有多种类型，儿童在碰撞中的运动响应行为根据所使用的CRS类型而不同。一般来说，P3， Q3和Hybrid III 3岁（3YO）假人被用来评估在雪橇和碰撞试验中的前面向CRSs的性能。在这项研究中，Hybrid III 3YO和Q3假人被安置在7种类型的CRSs中，并在ECE R44规定的冲击条件下进行了测试。测试的crs包括一个5点安全带和一个防撞罩，它们在汽车座椅上的安装是通过使用安全带或带有顶部系绳的ISOFIX完成的。比较假人的反应和损伤措施。在5点安全带CRS中颈部弯曲，由于肩带约束，胸部偏转较小。在防冲击CRS中，胸部受载荷，胸部挠度较大。在冲击防护CRS中，胸部偏转取决于防护结构，当防护支撑骨盆时，胸部偏转较小。对于5点式安全带CRS，带有上系绳的ISOFIX CRS中假人的伤害测量值小于安装安全带的CRS，特别是头部偏移。对于防撞CRS，带有顶系绳的ISOFIX CRS与安装安全带的CRS的伤害措施相当。Hybrid III 3YO假人与Q3假人的整体运动学行为相当，但Q3假人表现出更灵活的行为。Q3的低刚度特性影响了头部的运动学行为。在5点安全带CRS中，Q3的颈部张力高于Hybrid III 3YO，可能是因为Q3的头部严重接触胸部，因为它的颈部不那么僵硬。Q3的胸挠度大于Hybrid III 3YO。这种大的胸部偏转在胸部直接载荷的冲击屏蔽CRS中更为突出。混合型III 3YO位于防撞罩CRS中，发生了胸部触底。本文全文可在以下网址找到：http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/esv/esv21/09-0242.pdf有关摘要，请参阅ITRD E145407。
There are various types of child restraint systems (CRSs), and the child kinematic response behavior during a crash is different according to which CRS type is being used. In general, P3, Q3 and Hybrid III 3-year-old (3YO) dummies are used to evaluate the performance of the forward-facing CRSs in sled and crash tests. In this study, the Hybrid III 3YO and Q3 dummies were seated in 7 types of CRSs and were tested under the impact conditions specified in ECE R44. The tested CRSs include a 5-point harness and an impact shield, and their installations on the vehicle seat were accomplished by using the seat belt or the ISOFIX with a top tether. The dummy response and injury measures were compared. The neck flexed in the 5-point harness CRS and the chest deflection was small due to the shoulder harness restraint. In the impact shield CRS, the chest was loaded and the chest deflection was large. The chest deflection in the impact shield CRS depends on the shield structure, and it was small when the shield supported the pelvis. For the 5-point harness CRS, the injury measures of the dummy were smaller in the ISOFIX CRS with a top tether than in the seat belt installed CRS, especially that for the head excursion. For the impact shield CRS, the injury measures were comparable between the ISOFIX CRS with a top tether and in the seat belt installed CRS. The global dummy kinematic behavior was comparable between the Hybrid III 3YO and Q3 dummies, though the Q3 showed more flexible behavior. The less-stiff characteristics of the Q3 affected the head kinematic behavior. In the 5-point harness CRS, the neck tension force of the Q3 was higher than that for the Hybrid III 3YO, possibly because the Q3 head severely contacted the chest due to its less-stiff neck. The chest deflection of the Q3 was larger than that of Hybrid III 3YO. This large chest deflection was more prominent for the impact shield CRS where the chest was directly loaded. The bottoming-out of the chest occurred for the Hybrid III 3YO seated in the impact shield CRS. The full text of this paper may be found at: http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/esv/esv21/09-0242.pdf For the covering abstract see ITRD E145407.