Pretensioner loading to rear-seat occupants during static and dynamic testing

Influence of retractor and anchor pretensioning on dummy responses in 40 km/h rear sled tests

OBJECTIVE

This study compared dummy kinematics and biomechanical responses with and without retractor pretensioning in a severe rear sled test. It compliments an earlier study with buckle pretensioning.

METHODS

Three rear tests were run at 40 km/h (25 mph) delta V with a lap-shoulder belted Hybrid III 50^th male dummy on a 2013-18 Ford Escape driver seat and belt restraint. One test was with the lap-shoulder belts only, a second with retractor and anchor pretensioning and a third with only retractor pretensioning. The head, chest and pelvis were instrumented with triaxial accelerometers. The upper and lower neck, thoracic spine and lumbar spine had transducers measuring triaxial loads and moments. Lap belt load was measured. High-speed video recorded different views of the dummy motion. Dummy kinematics and biomechanical responses were compared to determine the influence of retractor belt pretensioning.

RESULTS

The dummy kinematics and biomechanical responses were essentially similar with and without retractor or retractor and anchor pretensioning in rear sled tests. There was an initial spike in lap belt load with pretensioning, but it did not result in different dummy head, neck or chest responses. In the tests, the dummy moved rearward away from the shoulder belt. The belts were tightened with the rapid pull on the webbing by pretensioning. The dummy loaded the seat, which yielded rearward restraining its motion. There was no significant effect of pretensioning on the dynamics of the dummy until late in rebound.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences in dynamics of the Hybrid III with and without retractor or retractor and anchor pretensioning in a 40 km/h (25 mph) rear sled test. Belt pretensioning did not influence biomechanical responses in the rear impact because the seat supported the dummy.

The Effect of Booster Seat Use on Pediatric Injuries in Motor Vehicle Frontal Crashes

BACKGROUND

Motor vehicle crashes are a significant source of pediatric mortality and morbidity. Studies indicate that booster seats significantly improve seat belt fit for children who have not attained a height of 145 cm (4' 9"). This study examined injuries occurring in booster age children up to age 12, as the majority of children do not attain 145 cm until this age. The purpose of the study was to identify differences in injuries due to the type of restraint used, with attention to musculoskeletal injuries.

METHODS

Vehicle and occupant data were obtained from a publically available statistical sample of tow-away crashes. Frontal crashes over an 8-year period were examined. A data set of cases was created involving children ages 5 to 12 years who were unrestrained, restrained using the vehicle's lap and shoulder belt, and restrained using a booster seat with the vehicle's lap and shoulder seat belt. Injury severity, frequency, and patterns of distribution were compared.

RESULTS

Unrestrained children experienced moderate to severe injuries 3.8 to 19 times more frequently than children using restraints. There were more injuries to the head and face in unrestrained versus restrained children, but the head and face was the most frequently injured region for all groups. There were no serious cervical spine injuries reported for any group. Lower extremity fractures were not observed in booster seat users but occurred at similar rates in both unrestrained and seat belt restrained children. These fractures occurred in older children who were involved in more severe crashes.

CONCLUSIONS

Unrestrained children were more likely to experience moderate and severe injuries than restrained children. The data sample suggests that booster use may reduce the risk of extremity fracture, as there were no extremity fractures in children restrained with booster seats.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This work provides evidence for the efficacy of booster use for preventing orthopaedic injury in children. This evidence can be used to inform parents and establish recommendations for best practices in transporting children.