Influence of pedestrian’s emergency posture on pedestrian injury in vehicle - pedestrian collision

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8484.2021.04.003

Abstract

Abstract:

A multi-rigid body model of frontal collision between pedestrians and vehicles was established by PC-Crash software to investigate the influence of pedestrian emergency posture on head, chest and lower limb injuries in frontal collision between vehicles and pedestrians. The accident reconstruction and model verification were carried out according to the real accident cases in the National Automobile Accident In-Depth Investigation System (NAIS). The simulation experiments were carried out to study the influence of different emergency postures and action amplitudes on pedestrian collision damage when vehicles collide at different speeds and steering angles. The weighted value was used to evaluate the comprehensive damage of pedestrians under different postures. The results show that the collision with vehicle speed higher than 50 km/h causes great damage to pedestrians. When the squat angle reaches 30°, the head injury decreases, and when the squat angle exceeds 50°, the pedestrian has the rolling risk. The tilt and jump postures are relatively dangerous postures leading to severe head and chest injuries. Head injury is the most serious when jumping height is 0.5 m. When the vehicle has emergency steering, pedestrian squatting and jumping cause greater chest injury, while head injury is the opposite.

Key words: traffic safety, pedestrian-vehicle collision, pedestrian injury, emergency posture

CLC Number:

X951

ZHANG Daowen, LIU Qi, QIU Jianbing, LIAO Wenjun, MU Yaoyao, JIN Siyu. Influence of pedestrian’s emergency posture on pedestrian injury in vehicle - pedestrian collision[J]. Journal of Automotive Safety and Energy, 2021, 12(4): 456-466.

Figures/Tables 27

References 23

[1]	World Health Organization. Global status report on road safety 2018[R]. *Geneva: WHO Press*, 2018.
[2]	尹均, 张道文, 肖凌云, 等. 人车事故中不同体型行人应急姿态仿真研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(2):51-56.
	YIN Jun, ZHANG Daowen, XIAO Lingyun, et al. Simulation study on emergency posture of pedestrians with different body types in human-vehicle accidents[J]. Chin Safe Sci J, 2018, 28(2):51-56. (in Chinese)
[3]	张鹏. 应急姿态对人车碰撞后行人运动形态和损伤研究[D]. 成都:西华大学, 2019.
	ZHANG Peng. Effect of emergency posture on pedestrian movement and injury after pedestrian vehicle collision[D]. Chengdu: Xihua University, 2019. (in Chinese)
[4]	刘卓异. 行人与厢式汽车碰撞事故中行人应急姿态对自身损伤影响研究[D]. 成都: 西华大学, 2020.
	LIU Zhuoyi. Study on the impact of pedestrian emergency attitude on self-injury in pedestrian and vane vehicle collision accident[D]. Chengdu: Xihua University, 2020. (in Chinese)
[5]	李丹, 李平飞, 廖文俊, 等. 运动状态对人车碰撞事故中行人损伤的影响[J]. 科学技术与工程, 2019, 19(20):383-388.
	LI Dan, LI Pingfei, LIAO Wenjun, et al. Effect of pedestrian movement on pedestrian injury in pedestrian vehicle collision[J]. Sci Tech Engi, 2019, 19(20):383-388. (in Chinese)
[6]	杨济匡, 赵淑婧. 大客车与行人碰撞中动力学响应及损伤参数的仿真[J]. 汽车安全与节能学报, 2014, 5(2):151-158.
	YANG Jikuang, ZHAO Shujing. Simulation of dynamic response and damage parameters in collision between bus and pedestrian[J]. J Autom Safe Energ, 2014, 5(2):151-158. (in Chinese)
[7]	陈奇, 张道文, 王鑫. 行人与厢式客车碰撞后的运动形态及损伤研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2015, 25(9):133-138
	CHEN Qi, ZHANG Daowen, WANG Xin. Study on motion pattern and injury of pedestrian and van bus after collision[J]. Chin Safe Sci J, 2015, 25(9):133-138. (in Chinese)
[8]	Simms C K, Wood D P. Effects of pre-impact pedestrian position and motion on kinematics and injuries from vehicle and ground contact[J]. *Int’l J Crashworthiness*, 2006, 11(4):345-355.
[9]	Gianmarco C, Simone P, Marco P, et al. The influence of vehicle front-end design on pedestrian ground impact[J]. *Accid Anal Prevent*, 2015, 79:56-69. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2015.03.009 URL
[10]	Elliott R, Simms C K, Wood D P. Pedestrian head translation, rotation and impact velocity: the influence of vehicle speed, pedestrian speed and pedestrian gait[J]. *Accid Anal Prevent*, 2012, 45(1):342-353. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2011.07.022 URL
[11]	张诗波, 刘澜. 行人被面包车碰撞的运动学规律[J]. 中国公路学报, 2018, 31(4):262-269.
	ZHANG Shibo, LIU Lan. Kinematics of pedestrian impacted by Van[J]. Chin J Highway Transport, 2018, 31(4):262-269. (in Chinese)
[12]	Severy D, Brink H. Auto pedestrian collision experiments[C]// *Automotive Engineering Congress and Exposition. San Diego: Society of Automotive Engineers*, 1966: 323-371.
[13]	Versace J. A review of the severity index[C]// 15th Stapp Car Crash Conference. San Diego: Society of Automotive Engineers, 1971: 771-796.
[14]	XU Jun, SHANG Shi, YU Guizhen, et al. Are electric self-balancing scooters safe in vehicle crash accidents?[J]. *Accid Anal Prevent*, 2016, 87:102-116. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2015.10.022 URL
[15]	Fildes B N, Lane J C, Lenard J, et al. Passenger cars and occupant, injury Report[R]. *Monash University Accident Research Center, No. cr95*, 1991.
[16]	马伟杰, 史永万, 刘志新. 基于线性回归的头部损伤评价指标分析[J]. 中国汽车, 2019(8):52-56.
	MA Weijie, SHI Yongwan, LIU Zhixin. Analysis of head injury evaluation index based on linear regression[J]. China Auto, 2019 (8):52-56. (in Chinese)
[17]	Euro NCAP. Assessment protocol-pedestrian protection (version7.0)[S]. *European: European New Car Assessment Program*, 2014.
[18]	杨济匡. 汽车与行人碰撞中的损伤生物力学研究概览[J]. 汽车工程学报, 2011, 1(3):81-93.
	YANG Jikuang. An overview of biomechanics research on damage in vehicle-pedestrian collision[J]. Chin J Autom Engi, 2011, 1(3):81-93. (in Chinese)
[19]	Tobias N, Mirko J, Stefanie A. Pedestrian injury risk functions based on contour lines of equal injury severity using real world pedestrian/passenger-car accident Data[C] // 57th Ann Sci Conf Asso Advan Autom Medi. Québec: Ann Adv Automot Med, 2013: 145-154.
[20]	Viano D C, Arepally S. Assessing the safety performance of occupant restraint systems[J]. *Soc Autom Engin Trans*, 1990, 43(43):1407-1413.
[21]	曹毅, 周华, 肖凌云, 等. 基于NAIS数据库中视频信息的人:车碰撞事故特征分析[J]. 汽车安全与节能学报, 2020, 11(1):44-52.
	CAO Yi, ZHOU Hua, XIAO Lingyun, et al. Characteristics analysis of human vehicle collision accidents based on video information in NAIS database[J]. J Autom Safe Energ, 2020, 11(1):44-52. (in Chinese)
[22]	庹永恒. 基于PC-CRASH的汽车与行人碰撞事故再现仿真研究[D]. 重庆: 重庆交通大学, 2009.
	TUO Yongheng. Simulation Research on vehicle pedestrian collision reconstruction based on PC-Crash[D]. Chongqing: Chongqing Jiao tong University, 2009. (in Chinese)
[23]	中国国家标准化管理委员会. 道路交通事故车辆速度鉴定(GB/T633195-2016)[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2016.
	China National Standardization Management Committee. Identification for the speed of vehicle involved in road traffic accident (GB/T633195-2016)[S]. Beijing: China Standard Press, 2016. (in Chinese)

应急姿态	碰撞模型	动作幅度
侧倾应急姿态（简称为侧倾姿态）：身体朝向约为145 °,双腿自然弯曲15 °,双臂上抬30 °,肘部上抬50 °;上躯弯曲与竖直方向形成的夹角定义为下倾角β。
下蹲应急姿态（简称为下蹲姿态）：重心降低20%至30%,躯干前倾15 °,双臂上抬15 °,肘部上抬60 °,两小腿后倾20 °;将下肢大腿与纵向夹角定义为下蹲角θ。
跳跃应急姿态（简称为跳跃姿态）：身体弯曲,躯干前倾30 °,两臂上抬40 °,肘部上抬80 °,双腿大腿上抬70 °,两小腿后倾30 °;以离地高度定义为跳跃高度h。
跑步应急姿态（跑步姿态）：跑步时身体呈现拱形,头部颈部向前弯曲25 °,躯干前倾25 °,左臂前倾20 °,肘部上抬80 °,右臂后倾30 °肘部上抬60 °,右大腿上抬65 °,右小腿后倾5 °,左大腿上抬22 °,左小腿后倾30 °;跑步避让瞬间,人的运动速度定义为v_p。

应急姿态	碰撞模型	动作幅度
侧倾应急姿态（简称为侧倾姿态）：身体朝向约为145 °,双腿自然弯曲15 °,双臂上抬30 °,肘部上抬50 °;上躯弯曲与竖直方向形成的夹角定义为下倾角β。
下蹲应急姿态（简称为下蹲姿态）：重心降低20%至30%,躯干前倾15 °,双臂上抬15 °,肘部上抬60 °,两小腿后倾20 °;将下肢大腿与纵向夹角定义为下蹲角θ。
跳跃应急姿态（简称为跳跃姿态）：身体弯曲,躯干前倾30 °,两臂上抬40 °,肘部上抬80 °,双腿大腿上抬70 °,两小腿后倾30 °;以离地高度定义为跳跃高度h。
跑步应急姿态（跑步姿态）：跑步时身体呈现拱形,头部颈部向前弯曲25 °,躯干前倾25 °,左臂前倾20 °,肘部上抬80 °,右臂后倾30 °肘部上抬60 °,右大腿上抬65 °,右小腿后倾5 °,左大腿上抬22 °,左小腿后倾30 °;跑步避让瞬间,人的运动速度定义为v_p。

参与方信息	调查数据
行人信息	行人大约60岁,体重55 kg,身高160 cm,胸腹部大面积挫伤肋骨骨折,右臂骨折死亡原因是颅脑损伤。
车辆信息	车辆进气格栅损坏,发动机盖下陷,挡风玻璃坐下端破裂呈蜘蛛网纹。
道路环境信息	天气良好双向6车道,最高限速80 km/h。

参与方信息	调查数据
行人信息	行人大约60岁,体重55 kg,身高160 cm,胸腹部大面积挫伤肋骨骨折,右臂骨折死亡原因是颅脑损伤。
车辆信息	车辆进气格栅损坏,发动机盖下陷,挡风玻璃坐下端破裂呈蜘蛛网纹。
道路环境信息	天气良好双向6车道,最高限速80 km/h。

事故车辆参数	数值
长×宽×高	4 718 mm×1 802 mm×1 466 mm
整备质量	1 295 kg
满载质量	1 745 kg
轴距	2 700 mm
前轮距/后轮距	1 540 / 1 558 mm
前保险杠下端离地高度	240 mm
前保险杠宽度	460 mm
发动机罩前端离地高度	760 mm
发动机罩长度	780 mm