“AEB + 碰撞”一体化安全测评加载方法对比分析

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8484.2026.05.003

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为对比“一段式”与“分段式”加载方法在模拟“AEB +碰撞”工况下的乘员响应差异，该文在验证车辆约束系统模型和对比Hybrid Ⅲ与THOR假人自动紧急制动系统（AEB）制动离位响应基础上，分别构建2种加载方法的“AEB+碰撞”仿真模型，对比假人运动学与损伤响应。结果表明：“分段式”加载方法下假人头部、胸部及髋部的前向与侧向位移整体大于“一段式”，2种加载方法在头部HIC₁₅和3ms合成加速度、颈部损伤指标N_ij等指标上差异较小（< 7%），但在颈部弯矩、胸部压缩速率及粘性指标（η_VC）指标上差异显著（17%~31%）。鉴于“一段式”和“分段式”加载在假人关键损伤指标上不可忽略的偏差，建议一体化安全虚拟测评中采用“一段式”加载。该文的研究结果能为主被动安全一体化虚拟测评方法的选取与规程制定提供定量依据。

关键词: 主被动一体化安全, AEB+碰撞, 虚拟测评, 加载方法

Abstract:

To compare the differences in occupant responses between the prevalent “one-stage” and “multi-stage” loading methods under “AEB+crash” conditions, this study validated the vehicle restraint system model and compared the out-of-position responses of Hybrid III and THOR dummies under autonomous emergency braking (AEB) loads. On this basis, “AEB+crash” simulation models were constructed for both loading methods, and the differences in dummy kinematics and injury responses were compared. The results show that the out-of-position responses of the THOR dummy under braking are closer to those of the human body, making it more suitable for integrated assessment. Under the “multi-stage” loading method, the forward and lateral displacements of the dummy's head, chest, and pelvis are generally greater than those under the “one-stage” method. The differences between the two methods are relatively small (<7%) in terms of HIC₁₅, 3 ms resultant acceleration, and neck injury indicators (N_ij), but are significant (17%-31%) in neck bending moment, chest compression rate, and viscous criterion (η_VC). Given the non-negligible discrepancies in key dummy injury indicators between the “one-stage” and “multi-stage” loading methods, it is recommended that the “one-stage” loading method, which better reflects the actual mechanical process of real-world accidents, be adopted in integrated safety virtual assessment. The findings of this paper provide a quantitative basis for the selection and procedural standardization of integrated active and passive safety virtual assessment methods.

Key words: integrated active-passive safety, AEB+crash, virtual assessment, loading methods

中图分类号:

叶彬, 杨睿, 谢静思, 常意, 赵恒平, 杨佩龙. “AEB + 碰撞”一体化安全测评加载方法对比分析[J]. 汽车安全与节能学报, 2026, 17(5): 538-546.

YE Bin, YANG Rui, XIE Jingsi, CHANG Yi, ZHAO Hengping, YANG Peilong. Comparative analysis of loading methods for “AEB+Crash” integrated safety assessment[J]. Journal of Automotive Safety and Energy, 2026, 17(5): 538-546.

图/表 10

图1 约束系统模型验证工况及仿真模型定义

图2 A、B、C点三向加载波形

图3 仿真过程中的沙漏能占比及仿真与试验中的假人头部和胸部加速度响应对比

图4 AEB制动简化加速度波形

图5 Hybrid Ⅲ假人和THOR假人初始姿态和制动最大前向离位姿态

图6 Hybrid Ⅲ假人与THOR假人头部前向位移曲线及最大位移与其他文献志愿者试验数据对比

图7 AEB制动+SOB碰撞仿真“一段式”加载和“分段式”加载方法流程

图8 不同加载方法下的SOB碰撞阶段假人前向位移对比

图9 不同加载方法下的SOB碰撞阶段假人侧向位移对比

身体部位及损伤指标		头部		颈部		胸部
身体部位及损伤指标		HIC₁₅	3 ms合成加速度/ g	N_ij	伸张弯矩， M_y / Nm	压缩量， D / mm	压缩速率， V / (m·s^-1)	粘性指标， η_VC / (m·s^-1)
一段式		533.10	67.98	0.39	40.05	47.83	2.97	0.42
分段式	保留安全带拉力	550.33	69.73	0.40	52.09	49.73	3.48	0.52
	相对一段式差异	3.23%	2.57%	2.30%	30.04%	3.97%	17.17%	23.74%
	不保留安全带拉力	543.64	69.92	0.42	50.42	50.92	3.89	0.44
	相对一段式差异	1.98%	2.85%	5.87%	25.87%	6.46%	30.98%	4.56%

表1 不同加载方法下的假人头部、颈部及胸部损伤指标对比

参考文献 24

[1]	杨帅, 张金换, 钱占伟, 等. 汽车安全多领域融合的研究与展望[J]. 汽车安全与节能学报, 2022, 13(1): 29-47.
	YANG Shuai, ZHANG Jinhuan, QIAN Zhanwei, et al. Research and prospect of multi-domain integration of automotive safety[J]. J Autom Safe Energ, 2022, 13(1): 29-47. (in Chinese)
[2]	胡林, 谷子逸, 王丹琦, 等. 汽车安全性测评规程现状及趋势展望[J]. 汽车工程, 2024, 46(2): 187-200.
	HU Lin, GU Ziyi, WANG Danqi, et al. Current status and trend of automotive safety procedures/programs[J]. Autom Engineering, 2024, 46(2): 187-200. (in Chinese)
[3]	黄慧丽, 王刚. 主流汽车安全评价体系发展研究[J]. 标准科学, 2019, 4: 61-65, 77.
	HUANG Huili, WANG Gang. Research on the develop-ment of main-stream automobile safety evaluation system[J]. Stand Sci, 2019, 4: 61-65, 77. (in Chinese)
[4]	中国汽车工程研究院股份有限公司. 中国汽车综合测评技术研究报告(2024)[M]. 北京: 机械工业出版社, 2024: 125-140.
	China Automotive Engineering Research Institute Co., Ltd. China Automotive Comprehensive Evaluation Technology Research Report (2024)[M]. Beijing: China Machine Press, 2024: 125-140. (in Chinese)
[5]	任立海, 谭政, 陈浩, 等. 自动紧急转向工况下驾驶员离位响应的一体化仿真研究. 湖南大学学报 (自然科学版), 2024, 51(10): 27-36.
	REN Lihai, TAN Zheng, CHEN Hao, et al. Integrated simulation research on driver out-of-position response of AES scenarios. J Hunan Univ (Nat Sci), 2024, 51(10): 27-36. (in Chinese)
[6]	王方, 谢一帆, 胡林, 等. 智能汽车自动紧急转向作用下乘员主被动安全研究[J]. 汽车工程, 2025, 47(2): 222-235.
	WANG Fang, XIE Yifan, HU Lin, et al. Research on driver active and passive safety during automatic emergency steering for autonomous vehicles[J]. Autom Engineering, 2025, 47(2): 222-235. (in Chinese)
[7]	Hwang H, Kim T. Responses of vehicular occupants during emergency braking and aggressive lane-change maneuvers[J]. Sensors, 2024, 24: 6727. doi: 10.3390/s24206727 URL
[8]	Östh J, Olafsdãttir J M, Davidsson J, et al. Driver kinematic and muscle responses in braking events with standard and reversible pre-tensioned restraints: validation data for human models[J]. Stapp Car Crash J, 2013, 57: 1-41. pmid: 24435725
[9]	任立海, 罗志秦, 陈浩, 等. 假人与人体模型在AEB作用下的驾驶员离位响应对比[J]. 汽车安全与节能学报, 2023, 14(4): 448-456.
	REN Lihai, LUO Zhiqin, CHEN Hao, et al. Comparison of driver’s out-of-position response of dummy and human models under AEB[J]. J Autom Safe Energ, 2023, 14(4): 448-456. (in Chinese)
[10]	Matsuda T, Yamada K, Hayashi S, et al. Simulation of occupant posture changes due to evasive manoeuvres and injury predictions in vehicle frontal and side collisions[C]// Proc IRCOBI Conf, Athens, Greece, 2018.
[11]	Donlon J, Richardson R, Jayathirtha M, et al. Kinematics of inboard-leaning occupants in frontal impacts[J]. Traf Inju Prev, 2020. 21(4): 272-277.
[12]	崔东, 祁志楠, 张慧. 紧急制动下的驾驶员运动姿态变化与碰撞损伤研究[J]. 汽车工程, 2020, 42(8): 1060-1065.
	CUI Dong, QI Zhinan, ZHANG Hui. Study on the motion posture change and crash injury of driver under autonomous emergency braking[J]. Autom Engineering, 2020, 42(8): 1060-1065. (in Chinese)
[13]	孙振东, 朱海涛, 彭伟强, 等. 汽车预碰撞制动下乘员离位影响及参数优化分析[J]. 汽车工程, 2023, 45(1): 112-118.
	SHU Zhendong, ZHU Haitao, PENG Weiqiang, et al. Analysis on the influence of occupant displacement and parameter optimization under pre-crash braking condition[J]. Autom Engineering, 2023, 45(1): 112-118. (in Chinese)
[14]	AHNG Xuerong, FENG Benchi, XUE Zhixiang, et al. The effectiveness of Q6 and PIPER 6-year-old models on quantification of the change of child sitting posture with AEB and its impact on child’s injures in frontal crash[J]. Traf Inju Prev, 2024, 25(6): 825-831.
[15]	Maheshwari J, Sarfare S, Falciani C, et al. Pediatric occupant human body model kinematic and kinetic response variation to changes in seating posture in simulated frontal impacts-with and without automatic emergency braking[J]. Traf Inju Prev, 2020, 21(sup1): S49-S53.
[16]	Woitsch G, Sinz W. Influences of pre-crash braking induced dummy-Forward displacements on dummy behaviour during Euro-NCAP frontal crash test[J]. Accid Anal Prev, 2014, 62: 268-275 doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2013.10.012 pmid: 24211558
[17]	C-NCAP. C-NCAP管理规则(2027年版),附录E: 正面主被动离位乘员保护虚拟测评规程[S]. 天津: 中国汽车技术研究中心有限公司, 2026.
	C-NCAP. C-NCAP Management Regulation (2027 Edit)-Appendix E: Virtual testing protocol for frontal active-passive out-of-position occupant protection[S]. Tianjin: China Automotive Technology and Research Center Co., Ltd., 2026. (in Chinese)
[18]	胡雷, 许艾, 尹长青, 等. 乘员离位状态下的后碰鞭打损伤及试验方法研究[C]// 第19届国际汽车交通安全学术会议(INFATS 2025), 中国, 宁波, 2025.
	HU Lei, XU Ai, YIN Changqin, et al. Research on whiplash injury and test methods in rear impact with out-of-position occupants[C]// Proc 19th Int’l Foru Autom Traf Safe (INFATS 2025), Ningbo, China, 2025. (in Chinese)
[19]	C-IASI. 中国保险汽车安全指数规程(2023版),第2部分: 车内乘员安全指数, 驾驶员侧正面25%偏置碰撞试验规程[S]. 重庆: 中国汽车工程研究院股份有限公司, 2023.
	CIASI. China insurance automotive safety index manage-ment regulation (Vers 2023)-Part 2: Vehicle occupant safety index, small overlap frontal driver-side crash test protocol[S]. Chongqing, China Automotive Engineering Research Institute Co., Ltd., 2023. (in Chinese)
[20]	FAN Tiqiang, NIE Zhenlong, WAN Xinming, et al. Investi-gation of the driver injury risks in small overlap impact with automatic emergency braking[J]. Transport Safe Envi, 2025, 7(1): 028-31.
[21]	任立海, 陈建卓, 范体强, 等. 小偏置碰撞工况下假人与人体模型的碰撞响应对比[J]. 湖南大学学报(自然科学版), 2025, 52(10): 75-86.
	REN Lihai, CHEN Jianzhuo, FAN Tiqiang, et al. Compari-son of collision responses between dummies and human model in small overlap frontal crash[J]. J Hunan Univ (Nat Sci), 2025, 52(10): 75-86. (in Chinese)
[22]	商恩义, 周大永, 李月明, 等. AEB制动下主动安全带对乘员胸部损伤的影响[J]. 汽车零部件, 2020, 7: 23-27.
	SHANG Enyi, ZHOU Dayong, LI Yueming, et al. Effect of active pre-tensioning seatbelt on occupant chest injury when AEB braking[J]. Autom Parts, 2020, 7: 23-27. (in Chinese)
[23]	LI Pingfei, LEI Yi, LIAO Jingqian, et al. Study of AEB and active seat belt on driver injury in vehicle-vehicle frontal oblique crash[J]. Sci Rep, 2023, 13: 22621. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-48729-7
[24]	于潇, 杨睿, 杨佩龙, 等. AEB曲线特征与驾驶员离位响应关联性分析[J]. 汽车工程学报, 2026, 6(1): 93-103.
	YU Xiao, YANG Rui, YANG Peilong, et al. Effect of AEB braking profiles on occupant displacement kinematics[J]. Chin J Autom Engi, 2026, 6(1): 93-103. (in Chinese)