ISO/TR 9790:1999
(Main)Road vehicles — Anthropomorphic side impact dummy — Lateral impact response requirements to assess the biofidelity of the dummy
Road vehicles — Anthropomorphic side impact dummy — Lateral impact response requirements to assess the biofidelity of the dummy
This Technical Report describes laboratory test procedures and impact response requirements suitable for assessing the lateral impact biofidelity of the head, neck, shoulder, thorax, abdomen and pelvis of crash test dummies, subcomponent test devices, and math models that are used to represent a 50th percentile adult male. The method used by ISO to determine an overall biofidelity rating for a given side impact surrogate has been added to this Technical Report.
Véhicules routiers — Mannequin anthropomorphe pour essai de choc latéral — Exigences de réponse en choc latéral pour évaluer la biofidélité du mannequin
General Information
Relations
Standards Content (Sample)
TECHNICAL ISO/TR
REPORT 9790
First edition
1999-12-01
Road vehicles — Anthropomorphic side
impact dummy — Lateral impact response
requirements to assess the biofidelity of
the dummy
Véhicules routiers — Mannequin anthropomorphe pour essai de choc
latéral — Exigences de réponse en choc latéral pour évaluer la biofidélité
du mannequin
Reference number
©
ISO 1999
PDF disclaimer
This PDF file may contain embedded typefaces. In accordance with Adobe's licensing policy, this file may be printed or viewed but shall not
be edited unless the typefaces which are embedded are licensed to and installed on the computer performing the editing. In downloading this
file, parties accept therein the responsibility of not infringing Adobe's licensing policy. The ISO Central Secretariat accepts no liability in this
area.
Adobe is a trademark of Adobe Systems Incorporated.
Details of the software products used to create this PDF file can be found in the General Info relative to the file; the PDF-creation parameters
were optimized for printing. Every care has been taken to ensure that the file is suitable for use by ISO member bodies. In the unlikely event
that a problem relating to it is found, please inform the Central Secretariat at the address given below.
© ISO 1999
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, no part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic
or mechanical, including photocopying and microfilm, without permission in writing from either ISO at the address below or ISO's member body
in the country of the requester.
ISO copyright office
Case postale 56 � CH-1211 Geneva 20
Tel. + 41 22 749 01 11
Fax + 41 22 734 10 79
E-mail copyright@iso.ch
Web www.iso.ch
Printed in Switzerland
ii © ISO 1999 – All rights reserved
Contents
Foreword.vi
1 Scope .1
2 Biomechanical basis .1
2.1 Head Tests.1
2.2 Neck Tests.1
2.3 Shoulder Tests.1
2.4 Thorax Tests.2
2.5 Abdomen Tests.2
2.6 Pelvis Tests .2
3 Overall biofidelity calculation.2
4 Pendulum impacts.4
4.1 Shoulder Test 1.4
4.1.1 Original Data.4
4.1.2 Test Setup.4
4.1.3 Instrumentation.4
4.1.4 Response Requirements.4
4.2 Thorax Tests 1 and 2 .4
4.2.1 Original Data.4
4.2.2 Test Setup.4
4.2.3 Instrumentation.4
4.2.4 Response Requirements.5
4.3 Pelvis Tests 1 and 2.5
4.3.1 Original Data.5
4.3.2 Test Setup.5
4.3.3 Instrumentation.5
4.3.4 Response Requirements.5
5 Lateral drops .5
5.1 Head Test 1.5
5.1.1 Original Data.5
5.1.2 Test Setup.5
5.1.3 Instrumentation.6
5.1.4 Response Requirement.6
5.2 Head Test 2.6
5.2.1 Original Data.6
5.2.2 Test Setup.6
5.2.3 Instrumentation.6
5.2.4 Response Requirement.6
5.3 Thorax Tests 3 & 4 and Pelvis Tests 3 - 6 .6
5.3.1 Original Data.6
5.3.2 Test Setup.7
5.3.3 Instrumentation.7
5.3.4 Response Requirements.7
5.4 Abdomen Tests 1 and 2 .7
5.4.1 Original Data.7
5.4.2 Test Setup.7
5.4.3 Instrumentation.7
5.4.4 Response Requirements.7
6 Sled tests.8
6.1 Neck Test 1 and Shoulder Test 2 .8
© ISO 1999 – All rights reserved iii
6.1.1 Original Data.8
6.1.2 Test Setup.8
6.1.3 Instrumentation.8
6.1.4 Response Requirements.8
6.2 Neck Test 2 .8
6.2.1 Original Data.8
6.2.2 Test Setup.9
6.2.3 Instrumentation.9
6.2.4 Response Requirements.9
6.3 Neck Test 3 and Shoulder Test 3 .9
6.3.1 Original Data.9
6.3.2 Test Setup.9
6.3.3 Instrumentation.9
6.3.4 Response Requirements.10
6.4 Thorax Test 5 and Pelvis Tests 7 - 9 .10
6.4.1 Original Data.10
6.4.2 Test Setup.10
6.4.3 Instrumentation.10
6.4.4 Response Requirements.10
6.5 Shoulder Test 4, Thorax Test 6, Abdomen Tests 3 - 5, and Pelvis Tests 10 - 13 .11
6.5.1 Original Data.11
6.5.2 Test Setup.11
6.5.3 Instrumentation.11
6.5.4 Response Requirements.11
7 References.11
Annex A Analysis of Association PEUGEOT-RENAULT lateral shoulder impact.24
A.1 Original Data.24
A.2 Normalized data .24
A.3 Force versus time response requirements .25
A.4 Maximum deflection response requirement .25
Annex B Analysis of HSRI lateral thoracic impact data.30
B.1 Original Data.30
B.2 Normalized data .30
B.3 Response requirements.31
Annex C Analysis of WSU/GMR oblique lateral thoracic impact data.38
C.1 Original Data.38
C.2 Normalized data .38
C.3 Comparison of lateral and oblique lateral test results.39
C.4 Comparison of oblique lateral results to HSRI lateral results.40
C.5 Elimination of massively damaged cadavers .40
C.6 Response requirements.40
C.6.1 Normalized Impactor Force Versus Time Corridor for 4,3 m/s Impacts.40
C.6.2 Normalized Impactor Force Versus Time Corridor for 6,7 m/s Impacts.40
Annex D Analysis of onser lateral pelvic impact data .49
D.1 Original Data.49
D.2 Normalized data .49
D.3 Peak impactor force response requirements.50
Annex E Analysis of HODGSON and THOMAS lateral head impact data .54
E.1 Original data .54
E.2 Response requirement.54
Annex F Analysis of Association PEUGEOT-RENAULT lateral head impact data.56
F.1 Original data .56
F.2 Response requirement.56
Annex G Analysis of Association PEUGEOT-RENAULT lateral thoracic impact data .58
G.1 Original Data.58
G.2 Normalized data .58
iv © ISO 1999 – All rights reserved
G.3 Elimination of massively damaged cadavers .59
G.4 Response requirements.59
Annex H Analysis of Association Peugeot-Renault lateral pelvic impact data.71
H.1 Original Data.71
H.2 Normalized data .71
H.3 Peak acceleration response requirements .72
Annex I Characteristics of APR padding.74
Annex J Analysis of Association Peugeot-Renault — Lateral abdominal impact data.75
J.1 Original Data.75
J.2 Normalized data .75
J.3 Force versus time corridors .76
J.4 Peak T12 acceleration requirements .76
J.5 Peak acceleration requirements of the near side rib .77
J.6 Abdominal penetration.77
Annex K Analysis of EWING – Lateral neck bending and shoulder displacement data .89
K.1 Original data.89
K.2 Response requirements.89
Annex L Analysis of Patrick and Chou — Lateral neck bending response data .95
L.1 Original data.95
L.2 Response requirements.95
Annex M Analysis of TARRIERE lateral neck bending response data.97
M.1 Original data.97
M.2 Response requirements.97
Annex N Analysis of University of Heidelberg — Lateral Thoracic impact data.99
N.1 Original Data.99
N.2 Normalized data .99
N.3 Inclusion of massively damaged cadavers.100
N.4 Response requirements.100
Annex O Analysis of University of Heidelberg — Lateral pelvic impact data .109
O.1 Original Data.109
O.2 Normalized data .109
O.3 Comparison of normalized test results from both series.110
O.4 Response requirements.110
Annex P Analysis of Wayne State University — Lateral shoulder and thoracic impact data.112
P.1 Original Data.112
P.2 Normalized data .112
P.3 Elimination of massively damaged cadavers .113
P.4 Response requirements.113
Annex Q Analysis of Wayne State University – Lateral abdominal impact data.121
Q.1 Original Data.121
Q.2 Normalized data .121
Q.3 Response requirements.122
Annex R Analysis of Wayne State University – Lateral pelvic impact data.131
R.1 Original Data.131
R.2 Normalized data .131
R.3 Response requirements.132
Annex S Weighting factors for the body regions, impact conditions and responses .142
© ISO 1999 – All rights reserved v
Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards bodies (ISO
member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out through ISO technical
committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical committee has been established has
the right to be represented on that committee. International organizations, governmental and non-governmental, in
liaison with ISO, also take part in the work. ISO collaborates closely with the International Electrotechnical
Commission (IEC) on all matters of electrotechnical standardization.
International Standards are drafted in accordance with the rules given in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 3.
The main task of technical committees is to prepare International Standards. Draft International Standards adopted
by the technical committees are circulated to the member bodies for voting. Publication as an International
Standard requires approval by at least 75 % of the member bodies casting a vote.
In exceptional circumstances, when a technical committee has collected data of a different kind from that which is
normally published as an International Standard ("state of the art", for example), it may decide by a simple majority
vote of its participating members to publish a Technical Report. A Technical Report is entirely informative in nature
and does not have to be reviewed until the data it provides are considered to be no longer valid or useful.
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this Technical Report may be the subject of patent
rights. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
ISO/TR 9790, was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 22, Road vehicles, Subcommittee SC 12, Restraint
systems.
This first edition cancels and replaces the ISO/TR 9790 parts 1 to 6 (1989), which have been reviewed, updated
and organized into a single Technical Report.
vi © ISO 1999 – All rights reserved
TECHNICAL REPORT ISO/TR 9790:1999(E)
Road vehicles — Anthropomorphic side impact dummy — Lateral
impact response requirements to assess the biofidelity of the
dummy
1 Scope
This Technical Report describes laboratory test procedures and impact response requirements suitable for
assessing the lateral impact biofidelity of the head, neck, shoulder, thorax, abdomen and pelvis of crash test
dummies, subcomponent test devices, and math models that are used to represent a 50th percentile adult male.
The method used by ISO to determine an overall biofidelity rating for a given side impact surrogate has been added
to this Technical Report.
2 Biomechanical basis
The impact response requirements presented in this Technical Report are the result of a critical evaluation of data
selected from experiments agreed to by experts as being the best and most up-to-date information available. The
following describes the biomechanical data used to describe response requirements for the head, neck, shoulder,
thorax, abdomen and pelvis.
2.1 Head Tests
Two lateral head impact tests are defined. Head Test 1 is based on the rigid surface cadaver impacts conducted by
Hodgson and Thomas (1). Head Test 2 is based on the padded surface cadaver impacts of the Association
Peugeot-Renault (APR) (2). Padded surface impact tests of Hodgson and Thomas (1), McElhaney et al. (3),
Nahum et al. (4), Nahum et al. (5), Schneider et al. (6) and Got et al. (7) were not used since either the padding
characteristics were not specified or a given piece of padding was subjected to multiple impacts, changing its
response characteristics. Detailed discussions of the influences of these factors on head acceleration data are
given by Mertz (8), Mertz et al. (9) and Mertz (10). The rigid surface impacts of McElhaney et al. (3) were not used
because the impact velocities were not given for each test. The rigid surface impact data of Got et al. (7) were not
used since significant skull fractures were produced.
2.2 Neck Tests
Three lateral neck bending tests are defined. Neck Test 1 is based on the human volunteer data of Ewing et al.
(11), and the requirements are based on the analysis of Wismans et al. (12). Neck Test 2 is based on the human
volunteer data of Patrick and Chou (13). Neck Test 3 is based on the cadaver tests of the APR (2). To evaluate if
the biofidelity requirements are met, the respective sled test environments that were used to obtain the human
volunteer and/or cadaver data must be duplicated.
2.3 Shoulder Tests
Four lateral impact test conditions are defined for the shoulder. Shoulder Test 1 is based on impactor tests
conducted by the APR using unembalmed cadavers (14). Shoulder Test 2 is based on the Ewing et al. (11)
volunteer sled tests. Shoulder Test 3 is based on the cadaver sled tests of Tarriere (30). In both of these sled tests,
the dummy must mimic the shoulder reaction with the rigid vertical side board in order for the kinematics of its
upper thoracic spine to meet the T1 response requirements. Shoulder Test 4 is based on the cadaver sled tests of
Wayne State University (WSU) (15, 16). Shoulder response data from the APR and WSU were normalized to
© ISO 1999 – All rights reserved 1
represent the response characteristics of a 50th percentile adult male using the method described by Mertz (17).
No adjustments were made to the cadavers’ responses to account for muscle tone.
2.4 Thorax Tests
Six lateral thoracic impact test conditions are defined. Thorax Tests 1 and 2 are based on cadaver impactor tests
conducted by the Highway Safety Research Institute (HSRI) (18) and WSU (19). Thorax Tests 3 and 4 are based
on the cadaver drop tests of the APR (20, 21, 22). Thorax Test 5 is based on cadaver sled tests of the University of
Heidelberg (23). Thorax Test 6 is based on cadaver sled tests of WSU (15, 16). All thoracic data were normalized
to represent the response characteristics of a 50th percentile adult male using either the method described by
Mertz (17) or an extension of the method developed by Lowne (24). The force versus time response corridors for
Thorax Tests 1 and 2 were constructed around the normalized cadaver curve and then shifted 700 N upward to
account for muscle tone. The force versus time response corridors of Thorax Tests 3 - 6 were not adjusted to
account for muscle tone. Cadavers with more than 5 rib fractures were not used in defining the response
requirements, except for Thorax Test 5 where results from cadavers with 2, 7 and 9 fractured ribs were all used.
2.5 Abdomen Tests
Five lateral abdominal impact test conditions are defined. Abdomen Tests 1 and 2 are based on the lateral cadaver
drop tests conducted by the APR (25, 14). Abdomen Tests 3 - 5 are based on cadaver sled tests of WSU (16). All
data were normalized to represent the responses of a 50th percentile adult male using the method described by
Mertz (17).
2.6 Pelvis Tests
Thirteen lateral pelvic impact test conditions are defined. Pelvis Tests 1 and 2 are based on impactor tests of
ONSER (26, 27, and 28). Pelvis Tests 3 - 6 are based on free fall cadaver tests of the APR (29). Pelvis Tests 7 - 9
are based on cadaver sled tests of the University of Heidelberg (23). Pelvis Tests 11 - 13 are based on cadaver
sled tests of WSU (16). All pelvic data were normalized to represent the responses of a 50th percentile adult male
using the method described by Mertz (17).
Note that it may be difficult to develop a dummy that meets all of the prescribed requirements. For example, some
of the neck response requirements are based on the responses of volunteers, while others are based on the
response of a cadaver whose neck fractured. In some thoracic requirements, the force has been increased to
account for muscle tone present in the driving population, but absent in flaccid, unembalmed cadavers used to
define the requirements. In conducting the tests, especially the whole body tests, it is important to duplicate the
timing of the impacts to the various body regions in order to meet the requirements.
The response requirements are arranged in terms of the type of tests. Clause 4 requirements are based on
pendulum impacts, Clause 5 requirements are based on lateral drop tests, and Clause 6 requirements are based
on sled tests. Table 1 lists the various requirements by body region, gives the corresponding clause number that
describes each requirement, and identifies which annex describes how the requirements were derived.
3 Overall biofidelity calculation
An overall biofidelity rating of the impact responses of any 50th percentile adult male surrogate (dummy or math
model) which is proposed for evaluating side impact collision occupant protection can be calculated using the
following formula:
UB
� ii
i�12,,�6
B�
U
� i
i�12,,�6
where
B The overall rating which will have a value between 0 (poorest) and 10 (best).
2 © ISO 1999 – All rights reserved
B The biofidelity rating of each of the six body regions (B - Head, B -Neck, B - Shoulder, B - Thorax, B -
i 1 2 3 4 5
Abdomen, and B - Pelvis).
U The weighting factor for each body region.
i
i A subscript which takes on integer values from 1 to 6 to represent specific body regions (i=1 Head, i=2
Neck, i=3 Shoulder, i=4 Thorax, i=5 Abdomen, and i=6 Pelvis).
Values for the body region weighting factors, U , were determined by averaging the results of a poll of the
i
ISO/TC22/SC12/WG5 experts and are given in Table S.1 of annex S.
The biofidelity ratings for the six body regions, B , are calculated using the following formula:
i
F I
VWR W
ij,,i j,k ij,,k i,j,k
� ��
H K
jm�12, ,. kn��12, ,. kn12, ,.
B �
i
V
� ij,
jm�12,,�
where
V The weighting factor for each test condition for a given body region.
i,j
W The weighting factor for each response measurement for which a requirement is given.
i,j,k
R The rating of how well a given response meets its requirement.
i,j,k
i The subscript denoting the body region.
j The subscript denoting the test condition for a given body region, i.
k The subscript denoting the response measurement for a given test condition, j, and body region, i.
Values for the weighting factors for the various test conditions, V , and response measurements, W ,were
i,j i,j,k
determined by averaging the results of a poll of the ISO/TC22/SC12/WG5 experts and are given in Tables S.2
through S.7 of annex S.
The experts agreed on the following method for assigning values to R .
i,j,k
R = 10 If response meets requirement.
i,j,k
R = 5 If response is outside requirement, but lies within one corridor width of the requirement.
i,j,k
R = 0 If neither of the above is met.
i,j,k
Using this method, the overall biofidelity rating, B, will have a value between 0 and 10. Five classifications
indicating the degree of biofidelity were established for the overall biofidelity rating. These are,
Excellent Biofidelity: 8,6 � B � 10,0
Good Biofidelity: 6,5� B � 8,6
Fair Biofidelity: 4,4 � B � 6,5
Marginal Biofidelity: 2,6 � B � 4,4
Unacceptable Biofidelity: 0,0 � B � 2,6
Further, the WG5 experts stipulated that the overall biofidelity value, B, of a side impact dummy (or math model)
had to be greater than 2,6 to be acceptable for assessing side impact occupant protection.
© ISO 1999 – All rights reserved 3
4 Pendulum impacts
4.1 Shoulder Test 1
4.1.1 Original Data
Researchers of the APR subjected 4 cadavers to lateral impact delivered to the shoulder by the flat end of a 23 kg
rigid cylinder of 150 mm diameter (14). Each cadaver was seated on a horizontal hardwood surface with a vertical
backrest. The impact was delivered laterally to the shoulder. The force of the impactor was recorded. Response
data and normalization procedures are summarized in annex A.
4.1.2 Test Setup
A 23 kg rigid, 150 mm diameter cylinder with a flat impact face is required. Seat the dummy upright with its arm
down and align the axis of the impactor with the center of the shoulder joint, as illustrated in Figure 1. Impact the
dummy's shoulder laterally with an impact velocity between 4,4 and 4,6 m/s.
4.1.3 Instrumentation
Instrument the dummy to monitor acceleration of the thoracic spine. Instrument the impactor to measure its
acceleration during impact. Filter the acceleration measurements at channel frequency class 1000 Hz, according to
the requirements of SAE Recommended Practice J211. Calculate the impactor force versus time history by
multiplying each impactor acceleration value by the impactor mass of 23,4 kg.
4.1.4 Response Requirements
The original force versus time histories of the impactor were normalized (see annex A) using the technique
suggested by Mertz (17). The maximum deflection of the shoulder should lie within the bounds given in Table 2 and
the force versus time history of the impactor should lie within the corridor described in Table 5.
4.2 Thorax Tests 1 and 2
4.2.1 Original Data
Cadavers were used in two series of impactor tests of the thorax. Lateral impacts were conducted by the HSRI (18)
and oblique lateral impacts were conducted at WSU for the General Motors Research Laboratories (GMR) (19).
Accelerations of the impactor and thorax were recorded in both studies. Response data and normalization
procedures are summarized in annexes B and C for the HSRI and WSU/GMR test series, respectively.
4.2.2 Test Setup
A 23 kg rigid, 150 mm diameter cylinder with a flat impact face is required. Seat the dummy upright with its arm
raised so that the side of its thorax can be impacted. Center the face of the impactor, both vertically and fore/aft, on
the lateral aspect of the thoracic rib structure. Impact the dummy's thorax laterally at a velocity of 4,3 m/s for
Thorax Test 1. Repeat the impact at 6,7 m/s for Thorax Test 2.
4.2.3 Instrumentation
Instrument the dummy with an accelerometer to measure the lateral acceleration of the thorax. Instrument the
impactor to measure its acceleration during impact. Record all measurements according to the requirements of
SAE Recommended Practice J211. Calculate the impactor force versus time history by multiplying each impactor
acceleration value by the impactor mass of 23,4 kg. The impactor force and lateral thoracic spine acceleration must
be filtered using the 100 Hz FIR filter (18) in order to compare to the response corridors.
4 © ISO 1999 – All rights reserved
4.2.4 Response Requirements
The original impactor force was normalized using an extension of the method described by Mertz (17), as
developed by Lowne (24). The normalization procedure is summarized in annexes B and C for the HSRI and
WSU/GMR impactor forces, respectively. For the HSRI tests, the lateral acceleration of T1 was also normalized as
summarized in annex B. The lateral acceleration of T1 for the WSU/GMR impacts was not available.
For lateral impacts by a 23,4 kg rigid pendulum at 4,3 and 6,7 m/s, the force versus time histories must lie within
the corridors described in Table 6. The thoracic acceleration versus time history for a 4,3 m/s lateral impact by a
23,4 kg rigid pendulum must lie within the corridor described in Table 4. No requirement has been set for the
thoracic acceleration resulting from a 6,7 m/s impact.
4.3 Pelvis Tests 1 and 2
4.3.1 Original Data
Researchers of ONSER studied the responses of 22 unembalmed cadavers to lateral impacts delivered to the
greater trochanter (26, 27, 28). Pelvic acceleration was measured by an accelerometer attached to the posterior of
the sacrum. The unbelted cadavers were seated without lateral support. The impacts were delivered at various
speeds by either a rigid or padded impactor. Accelerations of the impactor were measured. Data from these tests
are summarized in annex D.
4.3.2 Test Setup
A 17,3 kg, rigid impactor with a spherical segment impact face (R=175 mm, r=60 mm) is required. Seat the dummy
upright as illustrated in Figure 2. Impact the greater trochanter region with a velocity of 6 m/s for Pelvis Test 1.
Repeat the impact at a velocity of 10 m/s for Pelvis Test 2.
4.3.3 Instrumentation
Instrument the dummy to monitor acceleration of the pelvis. Filter the acceleration measurements at channel
frequency class 1000 Hz, according to the requirements of SAE Recommended Practice J211. Calculate the
impactor force versus time history by multiplying each impactor acceleration value by the impactor mass of 17,3 kg.
4.3.4 Response Requirements
The peak impactor forces were normalized (see annex D) using the technique suggested by Mertz (17). For
dummy impacts between 6 and 10 m/s, the peak impactor force should lie within the corridor described in Table 3.
5 Lateral drops
5.1 Head Test 1
5.1.1 Original Data
Hodgson and Thomas (1) conducted a series of non-fracture, cadaver head impact tests. In these tests, the
cadavers were strapped on their sides to a pallet that was free to pivot about one end. The cadaver's head and
neck were allowed to extend over the free end of the pallet. The pallet was rotated upwards to achieve a prescribed
distance between the head and the impact surface. Then the pallet was released producing the desired head
impact. Results from these tests are given in annex E.
5.1.2 Test Setup
A flat, rigid horizontal surface and a “quick-release” mechanism are required. Conduct the test using only the
dummy's head. Position the dummy’s head with a 200 mm space between it and the impact surface. Orient the
head so that its midsagittal plane makes an angle of 35� with the impact surface and its anterior-posterior axis is
© ISO 1999 – All rights reserved 5
horizontal. The response requirement is for the peak resultant head acceleration of a point on the non-impacted
side of the head. Also record the peak resultant acceleration of the center of gravity of the head.
5.1.3 Instrumentation
Instrument the dummy's head with a triaxial accelerometer located at the center of gravity of the head. Attach a
second triaxial accelerometer, within the head cavity, to the non-impacted side at a point on the transverse axis that
passes through the center of gravity of the head. Filter the accelerations at channel frequency class 1000 Hz,
according to the requirements of SAE Recommended Practice J211.
5.1.4 Response Requirement
The peak resultant head acceleration of a point on the non-impacted side of the head should lie within the bounds
given in Table 2 for a 200 mm free fall drop onto a flat, rigid surface.
5.2 Head Test 2
5.2.1 Original Data
The APR (2) conducted a series of lateral head impact tests. Four cadavers were dropped from a height of 1200
mm onto a rigid surface covered by a 5 mm thick rubber pad. Two of these cadavers received skull fractures.
Results from the remaining two cadavers are given in
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.
Loading comments...