Biofidelity of current legform impactor in pedestrian safety test

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8484.2021.04.005

Abstract

Abstract:

This paper explored the difference between the leg impactor for current pedestrian protection and the real human body in an actual vehicle structure collision. Selected the impactor with high biological fidelity and more scientific evaluation methods which reflect the human body injury in the actual collision accident. Analyzed the kinematic response and damage response for three leg impactors and human body models by using a finite element method on a sedan and a Sports Utility Vehicle (SUV). Compared the injury values of leg, thigh, knee and pelvis. The results show that the bio-fidelity of the Medial Collateral Ligament (MCL) of the Advanced Pedestrian Legform Impactor (aPLI) is better than that of the Flex Pedestrian Legform Impactor (Flex-PLI); and the thigh bending moment of the aPLI is better than that of the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL), but the aPLI cannot reflect the cover damage of the front edge of an SUV model to the pelvis. Therefore, the use of aPLI and TRL test in the evaluation of pedestrian lower limbs can more comprehensively evaluate the pedestrian’s injury.

Key words: vehicle safety, pedestrian protection, human body model, high biological fidelity, leg impactor, test protocol

CLC Number:

LONG Yongcheng, HAO Haizhou, LI Fan, FEI Jing. Biofidelity of current legform impactor in pedestrian safety test[J]. Journal of Automotive Safety and Energy, 2021, 12(4): 475-482.

Figures/Tables 18

References 18

[1]	公安部交通管理局. 中华人民共和国道路交通事故统计年报(2018年度)[R]. 无锡:公安部交通管理科学研究所, 2019.
	Traffic Administration of the Ministry of Public Security. Annual report of the People’s Republic of China on road traffic accidents (2018)[R]. Wuxi: Research Institute of Traffic Management, Ministry of Public Security, 2019. (in Chinese)
[2]	European Enhanced Vehicle-Safety Committee Working Group 17. Improved test methods to evaluate pedestrian protection afforded by passenger cars[R]. *Euro Enhan Vehicle-Safety Commi, Tech Report*, 2006, PS/187/Rev.1. https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/doc/2006/wp29grsp/ps-187r1e.pdf
[3]	Euro NCAP. Euro NCAP Pedestrian Test Protocol V8.0[S/OL]. [2014-06-12]. http://www.euroncap.com/files/Euro-NCAP-Pedestrian-Protocol-v8.0-June-2014---0-0ab54ac7-2de4-48b3-90a5-722410b1fd5c.pdf.
[4]	中国汽车工程研究院股份有限公司, 中保研汽车技术研究院有限公司. 中国保险汽车安全指数:车外行人安全指数试验规程(2020版)[S/OL]. [2021-02-05]. https://www.ciasi.org.cn/Uploads/Download/2021-02-05/601c2a803e89a.pdf.
	China Automotive Engineering Research Institute Co Ltd and CIRI Auto Technology Institute Co Ltd. China insurance automobile safety index:Pedestrian safety index test protocol(2020 Ver)[S/OL]. [2021-02-05]. https://www.ciasi.org.cn/Uploads/Download/2021-02-05/601c2a803e89a.pdf. (in Chinese)
[5]	中国汽车技术研究中心有限公司. C-NCAP管理规则(2021版)附录B: 行人保护试验方法[S/OL]. [2020-08-26]. http://www.c-ncap.org.cn/cms/picture/357309660978524160.pdf.
	China Automotive Technology and Research Center Co. Ltd. C-NCAP management regulation(2021 ed)Appendix B:Pedestrian Protection testing methods[S/OL]. [2020-08-26]. http://www.c-ncap.org.cn/cms/picture/357309660978524160.pdf. (in Chinese)
[6]	Isshiki T, Konosu A, Takahashi Y. Development of an appropriate pedestrian legform impact test method which can be used for all types of vehicles including high bumper vehicles: Development of a simplified upper body part (SUBP) FE model[C]// *Proc Int’l Res Council on Biomech Injury (IRCOBI) Conf*, 2014: 759-784.
[7]	Isshiki T, Konosu A, Takahashi Y. Analysis of the causes of differences in impact responses between a human lower limb and the flexible pedestrian legform impactor under low and high bumper vehicle impact situations[C]// *Proc Int’l Res Council on Biomech Injury (IRCOBI) Conf, Lyons, France*. 2015: 401-413.
[8]	Isshiki T, Konosu A, Takahashi Y. Development and evaluation of the advanced pedestrian legform impactor prototype which can be applicable to all types of vehicles regardless of bumper height-Part 1: finite element model[C]// *Proc Int’l Res Council on Biomech Injury (IRCOBI) Conf*, 2016: 770-785.
[9]	Isshiki T, Antona-Makoshi J, Konosu A, et al. Consolidated technical specifications for the advanced pedestrian legform impactor (aPLI)[C]// *Proc Int’l Res Council on Biomech Injury (IRCOBI) Conf*, 2018: 284-301.
[10]	Takahashi Y, Kikuchi Y, Mori F, et al. Advanced FE lower limb model for pedestrians[C]// 18th Proc Int’l Tech Conf Enha Safety Vehi. Nagoya, Japan, Paper No. 218, 2003.
[11]	Kikuchi Y, Takahashi Y, Mori F. Development of a finite element model for a pedestrian pelvis and lower limb[R]. *SAE Tech Paper*, 2006-01-0683.
[12]	Kikuchi Y, Takahashi Y, Mori F. Full-scale validation of a human FE model for the pelvis and lower limb of a pedestrian[R]. *SAE Tech Paper*, 2008-01-1243.
[13]	Takahashi Y, Matsuoka F, Okuyama H, et al. Development of injury probability functions for the flexible pedestrian legform impactor[J]. *SAE Int’l J Passenger Cars-Mech Syst*, 2012, 5:242-252.
[14]	Zander O, Wisch M, Ott J, et al. Development and evaluation of an upper body mass (UBM) for the flexible pedestrian legform impactor (FlexPLI) and for incorporation within improved test and assessment procedures-results from SENIORS[C]// *Proc Int’l Res Council on Biomech Injury (IRCOBI) Conf*, 2019: 397-415.
[15]	Mo F, Arnoux P J, Cesari D, et al. The failure modelling of knee ligaments in the finite element model[J]. *Int’l J Crashworthiness*, 2012, 17(6):630-636.
[16]	Matsui Y, Ishikawa H, Sasaki A. Validation of pedestrian upper legform impact test-reconstruction of pedestrian accidents[C]// 16th Int’l Tech Conf Expe Safety Vehi-Proce. 1998: 2152-2167.
[17]	Snedeker J G, Muser M H, Walz F H. Assessment of pelvis and upper leg injury risk in car-pedestrian collisions: comparison of accident statistics, impactor tests and a human body finite element model[R]. *SAE Tech Paper*. 2003-22-0019.
[18]	Snedeker J G, Walz F H, Muser M H, et al. Assessing femur and pelvis injury risk in car-pedestrian collisions: comparison of full body PMTO impacts, and a human body finite element model[C]// 19th Int’l Tech Conf Enha Safety of Vehi (ESV), 2005. (2005-06-09). https://www-esv.nhtsa.dot.gov/Proceedings/19/05-0103-O.pdf.

参数	Euro NCAP/C-IASI 2020版
参数	高性能值	低性能值
碰撞角度 / (°)	垂直保险杠内部基准线和 WAD930的连线
碰撞速度 / （km·h^-1）	20~33（根据碰撞角度）
合力 / kN	5	6
弯矩 / Nm	285	350

参数	Euro NCAP/C-IASI 2020版
参数	高性能值	低性能值
碰撞角度 / (°)	垂直保险杠内部基准线和 WAD930的连线
碰撞速度 / （km·h^-1）	20~33（根据碰撞角度）
合力 / kN	5	6
弯矩 / Nm	285	350

参数	C-NCAP 2021版
参数	高性能值	低性能值
碰撞速度 / (km·h^-1）	40	40
距地高度 / mm	25	25
大腿弯矩 / Nm	275	320
小腿弯矩 / Nm	390	440
MCL / mm	27	32

参数	C-NCAP 2021版
参数	高性能值	低性能值
碰撞速度 / (km·h^-1）	40	40
距地高度 / mm	25	25
大腿弯矩 / Nm	275	320
小腿弯矩 / Nm	390	440
MCL / mm	27	32

试验工况	参数	Euro NCAP/C-IASI 2020版		ECE R127/GTR 9
试验工况	参数	高性能值	低性能值	高性能值	低性能值
TRL上腿型（水平冲击）	碰撞位置	保险杠上、下基准线的中间位置		保险杠上、下基准线的中间位置
	碰撞速度 / (km·h^-1）	40	40	40	40
	合力 / kN	5	6	-	7.5
	弯矩 / Nm	285	350	-	510
Flex-PLI	碰撞速度 / (km·h^-1）	40	40	40	40
	距地高度 / mm	75	75	-	75
	小腿弯矩 / Nm	282	340	-	340
	MCL / mm	19	22	-	22
	ACL/PCL / mm	10	10	-	13