Two Highway Safety Research Institute (HSRI) dummies were tested and evaluated. Based on the analysis given, the HSI dummy should not be used for vehicle qualification testing. However, many of its components offer viable alternatives for future dummy development.The dummy was found to have inadequate biomechanical fidelity in the head, neck, and chest, although its characteristics were very promising and, as a whole, biomechanically superior to the Hybrid II. Its repeatability and reproducibility in dynamic component tests were better than the Hybrid II dummy. In particular, the HSRI friction joints were outstanding in repeatability and had a significant advantage in usability in that they do not require resetting between tests.In three-point harness and ACRS systems tests, the values of injury criteria produced by the HSRI dummy were generally lower than those obtained with the Hybrid II, especially the femur loads in the ACRS tests. However, the repeatability and reproducibility of the HSRI dummy were significantly poorer than the Hybrid II. Also, significant durability problems exist with the skin and lumbar spine of the HSRI dummy.Two Highway Safety Research Institute (HSRI) dummies were tested and evaluated. Based on the analysis given, the HSI dummy should not be used for vehicle qualification testing. However, many of its components offer viable alternatives for future dummy development.The dummy was found to have inadequate biomechanical fidelity in the head, neck, and chest, although its characteristics were very promising and, as a whole, biomechanically superior to the Hybrid II. Its repeatability and reproducibility in dynamic component tests were better than the Hybrid II dummy. In particular, the HSRI friction joints were outstanding in repeatability and had a significant advantage in usability in that they do not require resetting between tests.In three-point harness and ACRS systems tests, the values of injury criteria produced by the HSRI dummy were generally lower than those obtained with the Hybrid II, especially the femur loads in the ACRS tests. However, the repeatability and reproducibility of the HSRI dummy were significantly poorer than the Hybrid II. Also, significant durability problems exist with the skin and lumbar spine of the HSRI dummy.


    Zugriff

    Zugriff prüfen

    Verfügbarkeit in meiner Bibliothek prüfen

    Bestellung bei Subito €


    Exportieren, teilen und zitieren



    Titel :

    The Highway Safety Research Institute Dummy Compared with General Motors Biofidelity Recommendations and the Hybrid II Dummy


    Weitere Titelangaben:

    Sae Technical Papers


    Beteiligte:

    Kongress:

    3rd International Conference on Occupant Protection (1974) ; 1974



    Erscheinungsdatum :

    1974-02-01




    Medientyp :

    Aufsatz (Konferenz)


    Format :

    Print


    Sprache :

    Englisch




    WorldSID Dummy Head-Neck Biofidelity Response

    Been, Bernard / Philippens, Mat / van Ratingen, Michiel et al. | SAE Technical Papers | 2004


    Biofidelity of the European Side Impact Dummy - EUROSID

    Janssen,E.G. / Vermissen,A.C. / TNO Road-Vehicles Research Inst.,NL | Kraftfahrwesen | 1988


    Biofidelity of the European Side Impact Dummy – EUROSID

    Vermissen, A. C. M. / Janssen, E. G. | SAE Technical Papers | 1988


    2004-22-0019 WorldSID Dummy Head-Neck Biofidelity Response

    Been, B. / Philippens, M. / de Lange, R. et al. | British Library Conference Proceedings | 2004


    Biofidelity of the WorldSID small female revision 1 dummy

    Eggers,A. / Schnottale,B. / Been,B. et al. | Kraftfahrwesen | 2009