Simulation experiments for the passenger injuries with different sitting positions in autonomous vehicle collisions

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8484.2024.04.004

Abstract

Abstract:

Frontal crash simulation experiments were made with a comparative analysis of the kinematics and loads of its occupants, to investigate the crash safety of occupants in autonomous vehicles with different sitting positions such as representative occupant attitudes (including variations in head, upper limbs and torso). The results show that in the frontal collision simulation experiment, the comprehensive injury risk of leaning passengers is higher than that of other postures. Compared to the conversational posture, the leaning posture resulted in a 45.5% increase in chest compression, more rib fractures, and a 48.8% increase in visceral organ strain. The left leaning posture significantly reduces the risk of injury, with a 49.1% decrease in head injury risk and a 14.4% decrease in chest injury risk. Therefore, the occupant injury can be reduced by adjusting the occupant posture before the vehicle collision, so as to improve the collision safety of autonomous vehicle.

Key words: autonomous vehicles, frontal collision, simulation experiments, passenger injury risk, passenger non-standard sitting posture

CLC Number:

U471.3

WU Hequan, LI Yihui, LIU Jin, ZHANG Shenao. Simulation experiments for the passenger injuries with different sitting positions in autonomous vehicle collisions[J]. Journal of Automotive Safety and Energy, 2024, 15(4): 484-491.

Figures/Tables 13

References 25

[1]	Leledakis A, Östh J, Davidsson J, et al. The influence of car passengers’sitting postures in intersection crashes[J]. Accid Anal Preven, 2021, 157: Paper No 106170.
[2]	Koppel S, Jiménez Octavio J, Bohman K, et al. Seating configuration and position preferences in fully automated vehicles[J]. Traffic Inju Preven, 2019, 20(S2): S103-S109.
[3]	Jorlöv S, Bohman K, Larsson A. Seating positions and activities in highly automated cars-a qualitative study of future automated driving scenarios[C]// Int’l Res Conf Biomech Impact. IRCOBI, 2017: 13-22.
[4]	Östling M, Larsson A. Occupant activities and sitting positions in automated vehicles in China and Sweden[C]// 26th Int’l Tech Conf Enha Safe Vehi (ESV), Eindhoven, Netherlands. 2019: 10-13.
[5]	Diez M, Abajo J, de Prada J V, et al. Sitting posture influence in autonomous vehicles for the evaluation of occupant safety in side impact[J]. Safety Science, 2023, 159: Paper No 106002.
[6]	Zellmer H, Manneck F. Assessing injury risk of car occupants on rearward facing seats in a full frontal impact-sled tests in a generic test environment[C]// 26th Enha Safety Vehi (ESV) Conf, 2019:1-10.
[7]	Guardini L A S, Spalanzani A, Laugier C, et al. Employing severity of injury to contextualize complex risk mitigation scenarios[C]// 2020 IEEE Intell Veh Symp (IV), IEEE, 2020: 1839-1845.
[8]	苏占领, 谭龙, 徐建勋, 等. 基于前车偏置场景的AEB系统性能测试与分析[J]. 公路与汽运, 2023, 214(1): 1-4+26.
	SU Zhan, TAN Long, XU Jianxun, et al. Performance testing and analysis of AEB system based on front vehicle bias scenario[J]. Highways Automotive Appl, 2023, 214(1): 1-4+26. (in Chinese)
[9]	JIANG Binhui, REN Hongze, ZHU Feng, et al. A preliminary study on the restraint system of self-driving car[J]. SAE Int J Adv Curr Pract Mobil, 2020, 2(4): 2401-2410.
[10]	Acosta S M, Ash J H, Lessley D J, et al. Comparison of whole body response in oblique and full frontal sled tests[C]// Proc IRCOBI Conf, 2016: 740-754.
[11]	DONG Ruichun, HE Lei, DU Wei, et al. Effect of sitting posture and seat on biodynamic responses of internal human body simulated by finite element modeling of body-seat system[J]. J Sound Vibr, 2019, 438: 543-554.
[12]	Leledakis A, Östh J, Davidsson J, et al. The influence of car passengers’sitting postures in intersection crashes[J]. Accid Anal Preven, 2021, 157: Paper No 106170.
[13]	Haddington P, Rauniomaa M. Technologies, multitasking, and driving: Attending to and preparing for a mobile phone conversation in a car[J]. Human Commu Res, 2011, 37(2): 223-254.
[14]	Savino G, Giovannini F, Fitzharris M, et al. Inevitable collision states for motorcycle-to-car collision scenarios[J]. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst, 2016, 17(9): 2563-2573.
[15]	Versace J. A review of the severity index[C]// 15th Stapp Car Crash Conf, 1971: 771-796.
[16]	Mertz H J, Irwin A L, Prasad P. Biomechanical and scaling basis for frontal and side impact injury assessment reference values[J]. Stapp Car Crash J, 2016, 47(10): 155-188.
[17]	Takhounts E G, Craig M J, Moorhouse K, et al. Development of brain injury criteria (BrIC)[J]. Stapp Car Crash J, 2013, 57(11): 243-66.
[18]	Mallory A, Kender A, Watkins L, et al. Methods used to develop a model for crash and injury projections for 2020-2030[R]. US Depart Transp, National Highway Traffic Safety Admi, 2021, Report No. DOT HS 813 147.
[19]	Gabler L F, Crandall J R, Panzer M B. Assessment of kinematic brain injury metrics for predicting strain responses in diverse automotive impact conditions[J]. Anna Biomed Eng, 2016, 44: 3705-3718.
[20]	武和全, 周惠来, 李羿辉, 等. 汽车正面碰撞中后排不同坐姿乘员损伤生物力学分析[J]. 汽车安全与节能学报, 2023, 14(6): 688-697.
	WU Hequan, ZHOU Huilai, LI Yihui, et al. Biomechanical analysis of occupant damage in different sitting positions in the rear seat in a frontal collision[J]. J Auto Safe Energy, 2023, 14(6): 688-697. (in Chinese)
[21]	Yoganandan N, Kumaresan S, Pintar F A. Geometric and mechanical properties of human cervical spine ligaments[J]. J Biomech Eng. 2000, 122(6): 623-629.
[22]	Kitagawa Y, Yasuki T. Correlation among seatbelt load, chest deflection, rib fracture and internal organ strain in frontal collisions with human body finite element models[C]// Proc IRCOBI Conf, 2013: 282-316.
[23]	LÜ Wenle, RUAN Shijie, LI Haiyan, et al. Development and validation of a 6-year-old pedestrian thorax and abdomen finite element model and impact injury analysis[J]. Int’l J Vehi Safe, 2015, 8(4): 339-356.
[24]	Stitzel J D, Gayzik F S, Hoth J J, et al. Development of a finite element-based injury metric for pulmonary contusion part I: Model development and validation[J]. Stapp Car Crash J, 2005, 49(11): 271-89.
[25]	Shigeta K, Kitagawa Y. Development of next generation human FE model capable of organ injury prediction[C]// Enha Safe Vehi Conf, 2009: 15-18.

姿态	HIC₁₅	P_head(AIS3+) / %	头部3 ms加速度 / g	BrIC
交谈	296.2	4.91	49.1	0.904
自然	283.1	4.55	45.1	0.905
倚靠	317.8	5.54	69.5	0.714
娱乐	281.6	4.51	46.6	0.887
通讯	330.6	5.92	54.8	0.949
左倾	196.2	2.46	31.8	0.627
右倾	231.9	3.26	40.9	0.649

姿态	HIC₁₅	P_head(AIS3+) / %	头部3 ms加速度 / g	BrIC
交谈	296.2	4.91	49.1	0.904
自然	283.1	4.55	45.1	0.905
倚靠	317.8	5.54	69.5	0.714
娱乐	281.6	4.51	46.6	0.887
通讯	330.6	5.92	54.8	0.949
左倾	196.2	2.46	31.8	0.627
右倾	231.9	3.26	40.9	0.649

颈部韧带	损伤应变阈值	颈部韧带损伤应变
颈部韧带	损伤应变阈值	交谈姿态	自然姿态	倚靠姿态	娱乐姿态	通讯姿态	左倾姿态	右倾姿态
前纵向韧带，ALL	0.350	0.268	0.227	1.915	0.780	0.295	0.140	0.181
后纵向韧带，PLL	0.340	0.442	0.402	0.665	0.721	0.443	0.565	0.423
关节囊韧带，CL	1.480	1.100	1.100	2.519	1.508	0.106	1.871	0.902
黄韧带，LF	0.880	0.266	0.231	1.050	0.231	0.229	0.426	0.322
棘突间韧带，ISL	0.680	1.425	1.696	3.657	1.276	1.630	1.600	1.293

颈部韧带	损伤应变阈值	颈部韧带损伤应变
颈部韧带	损伤应变阈值	交谈姿态	自然姿态	倚靠姿态	娱乐姿态	通讯姿态	左倾姿态	右倾姿态
前纵向韧带，ALL	0.350	0.268	0.227	1.915	0.780	0.295	0.140	0.181
后纵向韧带，PLL	0.340	0.442	0.402	0.665	0.721	0.443	0.565	0.423
关节囊韧带，CL	1.480	1.100	1.100	2.519	1.508	0.106	1.871	0.902
黄韧带，LF	0.880	0.266	0.231	1.050	0.231	0.229	0.426	0.322
棘突间韧带，ISL	0.680	1.425	1.696	3.657	1.276	1.630	1.600	1.293

胸部损伤指标		胸部损伤应变
胸部损伤指标		交谈姿态	自然姿态	倚靠姿态	娱乐姿态	通讯姿态	左倾姿态	右倾姿态
胸部变形量/mm	上侧	-2.32	2.38	-9.05	1.35	-2.44	-4.20	-2.00
	下侧	18.98	16.70	-8.85	17.00	16.90	16.50	14.10
	左上侧	-13.50	-13.90	-12.7	-15.50	-13.90	-11.90	-27.30
	右上侧	13.00	-11.70	-18.00	-11.50	-12.50	-18.00	-9.88
	左下侧	23.60	27.10	27.40	21.70	28.50	20.00	18.10
	右下侧	-23.90	-26.20	-17.90	-28.90	-31.00	13.10	-40.80
胸部VC值		1.18	1.01	0.95	1.21	1.23	1.01	1.05
胸部压缩量/mm		-18.00	-20.40	-26.20	-19.10	-21.90	-16.10	-25.70