偏置碰撞中落地式油门踏板对驾驶员小腿损伤特征及保护

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8484.2024.01.004

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

研究了Euro NCAP正面偏置碰撞工况中落地式油门踏板对驾驶员大腿及小腿产生的伤害机理，并制定了相应的腿部保护策略。对同一个平台上分别搭载悬挂式油门踏板和落地式油门踏板的2款车型，在整车碰撞过程中的脚部运动响应、伤害曲线特征进行分析研究；通过试验及有限元仿真分析，制定了相应的腿部保护策略；进行了整车试验验证。结果表明：悬挂式油门踏板对小腿的伤害产生在小腿下部，伤害形式为脚掌外翻产生的X向弯矩；落地式油门踏板脚掌外翻幅度较小，产生的伤害在小腿上部和大腿部位，伤害形式为由小腿胫骨撞击仪表板产生的胫骨弯曲导致的小腿上部Y向弯矩和膝盖滑动位移。与优化前相比，落地式油门踏板优化后的保护策略，使膝盖滑动位移（D_S）降低72.2%，小腿右上胫骨指数（TI）降低48.6%；相对于同平台装载悬挂式油门踏板车型的情况，D_S降低11.5%，TI降低25%。

关键词: 汽车被动安全, 正面偏置碰撞, 油门踏板, 小腿伤害, 大腿伤害

Abstract:

The driver's femur and tibia injury characteristics from the accelerator pedal mounted on floor in Euro NCAP frontal offset crash were investigated with formulating corresponding femur and tibia protection strategy. Including analyzing the characteristics of the foot kinematics and the injury curves during crash test for two kinds of vehicles equipped respectively with a body front panel and a floor mounted accelerator pedal on a same platform. An advanced strategy of femur and tibia protection was proposed by using tests and finite element simulation analysis, and was verified in the vehicle crash test. The results show that the tibia injury for the accelerator pedal on body front panel generates mainly in the lower tibia with the high bending moment in X direction caused by foot outward rotation; The injuries of the floor mounted accelerator pedal are small, which occurred in the upper tibia and femur with a high bending moment in Y direction and knee slider displacement caused by the impact of the tibia on the dashboard. By using the advanced strategy, the knee slider is improved by 72.2% with an upper tibia index (TI) of 48.6% compared to the strategy before optimization, while the knee slider displacement (D_S) is improved by 11.5% with an upper tibia index of 25% compared to the stages of vehicle mounted accelerator pedal on body front panel.

Key words: vehicle passive safety, frontal offset collision, accelerator pedal, tibia injury, femur injury

中图分类号:

U467.1

康巍, 王刚, 鞠春贤, 王宇, 郭建保. 偏置碰撞中落地式油门踏板对驾驶员小腿损伤特征及保护[J]. 汽车安全与节能学报, 2024, 15(1): 39-46.

KANG Wei, WANG Gang, JU Chunxian, WANG Yu, GUO Jianbao. Injury characteristics and protection of driver's tibia caused by accelerator pedal mounted on floor in frontal offset collision[J]. Journal of Automotive Safety and Energy, 2024, 15(1): 39-46.

图/表 18

图1 假人腿部结构及传感器布置图

评价	限值	车型A		车型B
评价	限值	伤害	得分	伤害	得分
右大腿力	3.8~9.07 kN	1.4 kN	4.00	1.2 kN	4.00
右膝滑移	6~15 mm	2.6 mm	4.00	8.3 mm	2.98
小腿右上TI	0.4~1.3	0.38	4.00	0.76	2.40
小腿右下TI	0.4~1.3	0.52	3.47	0.27	4.00
小腿右上F_Z	2~8 kN	1.40 kN	4.00	1.89 kN	4.00
小腿右下F_Z	2~8 kN	1.62 kN	4.00	2.40 kN	3.73

表1 车型A和车型B腿部伤害评价

图2 B车型小腿上部MX和MY曲线

图3 不同车型小腿上部MY伤害曲线对比

图4 试验小腿上部和下部剪切力Fx曲线

图5 小腿仿真标定模型

图6 仿真标定小腿上下部剪切力Fx曲线

图7 小腿胫骨受力模型

图8 2款车型脚掌前端自由行程空间

图9 车型A和车型B小腿下部弯矩Mx

图10 车型A和车型B脚部姿态

图11 2种油门踏板情况下小腿伤害差异

图12 膝盖滑动位移仿真与试验对标

图13 小腿弯矩MY仿真与试验对标

图14 车型B腿部优化方案

	大腿	小腿
	D_S / mm	M_Y / Nm	TI
整车试验	8.30	168	0.76
仿真对标	7.13	156	0.70
方案1	5.70	136	0.63
方案2	5.50	132	0.60
方案3	1.70	63	0.33

表2 仿真优化结果

图15 整车试验优化前与优化后脚部姿态对比

	大腿	小腿
	D_S / mm	M_Y / Nm	TI
整车试验优化前	8.3	168	0.76
整车验证优化后	2.3	82	0.39

表3 试验验证结果

参考文献 12

[1]	Höglund N, Lövsund P, Viano D, Et al. Foot and ankle safety evaluation in real life crash situations[C]// Proc 2003 Int’l IRCOBI Conf Biomech Impact. 2003: 163-175.
[2]	Morgan R M, Eppinger R H, Hennessey B C. Ankle joint injury mechanism for adults in frontal automotive impact[R]. SAE Tech Paper, 1991, No 912902.
[3]	中国汽车技术研究中心有限公司. C-NCAP 管理规则(2021年版)[S/OL]. (2022-01-18). https://www.c-ncap.org.cn.
	China Automotive Technology and Research Center Co Ltd C-NCAP management rules (2021)[S/OL]. (2022-01-18). https://www.c-ncap.org.cn. (in Chinese)
[4]	Euro NCAP. Euro-NCAP-assessment-protocol-aop-v921, 2022[S/OL]. (2022-11-14). https://cdn.euroncap.com.
[5]	刘志新. 基于 NCAP 规则的正面碰撞乘员小腿伤害分析[J]. 汽车工程, 2008, 30(11): 969-971, 983.
	LIU Zhixin, CHEN Hong, LIU Yuguang, et al. An analysis on lower leg injury of occupants in frontal crash based on NCAP rules[J]. Autom Engineering, 2008, 30(11): 969-971, 983. (in Chinese)
[6]	李宝玉, 方取玉, 赵金丽, 等. 某车型前碰试验前排假人小腿伤害优化分析[C]// 第13届国际汽车交通安全研讨会论文集, 2016: 513-520.
	LI Baoyu, FANG Quyu, ZHAO Jinli, et al. An optimization and analysis of frontal dummies’ tibia injuries in frontal crash tests for a car[C]// Proc 13th Int’l Forum Auto Traf Safety. 2016: 513-520. (in Chinese)
[7]	商恩义, 高劲松. A级车正面全宽碰撞试验中假人小腿伤害研究[J]. 汽车技术, 2012(7): 5-9.
	SHANG Enyi, GAO Jinsong. Study on the dummy lower leg injury of a-class vehicle in full frontal collsion[J]. Autom Tech, 2012(7): 5-9. (in Chinese)
[8]	马立军, 张凯, 陈现玲, 等. 正面碰撞中乘员小腿伤害的分析研究[C]// 汽车安全技术学术会议, 2011: 339-343.
	MA Lijun, ZHANG Kai, CHEN Xianling. et al. Study of the lower leg injuries for the front crash[C]// Proc Conf Auto Safety Tech, SAE China, Beijing. 2011: 339-343. (in Chinese)
[9]	Euro NCAP. Euro-NCAP-mpdb-testing-protocol-v113, 2022[S/OL]. (2022-07-01). https://cdn.euroncap.com.
[10]	商恩义, 韩刚, 柳惠君, 等. 正碰中假人小腿y向弯矩与x向剪切力间的关联性研究[J]. 汽车技术, 2018(3): 25-29.
	SHANG Enyi, HAN Gang. LIU Huijung, et al. Study on the relevance between tibia M_y and tibia F_x in frontal full crash test[J]. Autom Tech. 2018(3): 25-29. (in Chinese)
[11]	商恩义. 偏置碰撞中驾驶员假人脚掌翻转对小腿伤害的影响[J]. 汽车技术, 2016(1): 47-48.
	SHANG Enyi. Influence of sole flexion of driver dummy to tibia injuries in frontal offset impact test[J]. Autom Tech. 2016(1): 47-48. (in Chinese)
[12]	USA Society of Automotive Engineers.Instrumentation for impact test-part1-electronic instrumentation, rev [S/OL]. MAR 2014: SAE J211-1, 2014. (2014-03-31). https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j211/1_201403/.

[1]	唐友名, 谢祥键, 孙贵斌, 王平, 张义, 孙冠豫. 男性老龄乘员年龄增长对损伤风险的影响[J]. 汽车安全与节能学报, 2023, 14(4): 413-420.
[2]	邹铁方, 王冠, 胡林, 武和全, 刘朱紫. 车—摩托车碰撞中骑乘人员运动学响应的差异 [J]. 汽车安全与节能学报, 2020, 11(2): 174-181.
[3]	曹毅，周华，肖凌云，胡文浩，王琰，李平飞，谭正平，曲现国，罗俊任. 基于NAIS 数据库中视频信息的人—车碰撞事故特征分析[J]. JASE, 2020, 11(1): 44-52.
[4]	董宇喆，王波，张金换. 某车载圆柱形货箱防护装置的碰撞安全性设计改进[J]. JASE, 2019, 10(4): 467-473.
[5]	曹立波，张超，颜凌波，戴宏亮，张瑞锋 . 两车斜角碰撞工况下的约束系统优化趋势分析[J]. JASE, 2019, 10(3): 308-316.
[6]	吴俊，宋志强，曹立波，等. 集成主动预紧式安全带的乘员可接受度与优化措施[J]. JASE, 2018, 9(4): 379-385.
[7]	解文娜，颜凌波，张伟锋，等. 汽车碰撞试验假人零部件质心测量方法及装置[J]. JASE, 2018, 9(3): 281-287.
[8]	罗欣，段利斌,陈涛，杜展鹏. 基于一维混合元胞自动机模型的汽车变厚度B 柱设计[J]. JASE, 2018, 9(2): 186-193.
[9]	王丙雨，聂进，Dietmar OTTE，王方，韩勇，彭倩. 碰撞速度和行人年龄对下肢严重损伤风险的影响[J]. JASE, 2018, 9(01): 25-31.
[10]	胡远志，何恩泽. 基于 SAE J2114 翻滚试验的 THUMS 人体模型损伤研究[J]. JASE, 2017, 08(02): 128-135.
[11]	许述财，黄杨，付海龙，王戈，张金换. 爆炸冲击载荷下乘员小腿伤害评价指标的对比分析[J]. JASE, 2016, 07(04): 371-376.
[12]	张金换, 杨洁, 金鑫, 沈明, 罗逍, 马春生. 中美人体尺寸差异及对车辆正碰中驾驶员损伤风险的影响( 英文)[J]. 汽车安全与节能学报, 2016, 07(02): 175-181.
[13]	郭建保，孙晴，刘珍海，胡跃伟，岳国辉，陈现岭. 乘用车轮胎动态冲击的试验与仿真分析[J]. JASE, 2016, 07(01): 49-54.
[14]	牛卫中，刘金鑫，潘胜娟. 汽车侧面柱碰位置与速度对车体安全性的影响[J]. JASE, 2016, 07(01): 55-59.
[15]	祁洪娟，申波，尹高纪，王鹏翔，周大永,刘卫国. 基于理论推导的前端结构耐撞性设计[J]. 汽车安全与节能学报, 2015, 6(04): 341-345.