Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 4 – uploaded by Hermann Steffan

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Figure 3. Styrodur-element. elements disintegrated and the vehicle had _ large deformations. The front axle went back and 60 ms after the impact the axis reached the A-pillar, the element was smashed and the windshield was dropped, the rear axle lost the contact to the ground. The vehicle went up about 40° and rotated left (about 15°), after 950 ms it stood still.

Figure 3 Styrodur-element. elements disintegrated and the vehicle had _ large deformations. The front axle went back and 60 ms after the impact the axis reached the A-pillar, the element was smashed and the windshield was dropped, the rear axle lost the contact to the ground. The vehicle went up about 40° and rotated left (about 15°), after 950 ms it stood still.

Related Figures (15)

Also simulations for the estimation of the occupant loads using the MADYMO (MAthematical DYnamic MOdel; multibody and FEM computer package) tool of PC-CRASH (program for the simulation of motor vehicle accidents) were executed.
Also simulations for the estimation of the occupant loads using the MADYMO (MAthematical DYnamic MOdel; multibody and FEM computer package) tool of PC-CRASH (program for the simulation of motor vehicle accidents) were executed.
2,39 x 0,66 [m] and it was fixed 0,2 m above the ground (see Figure 2). The impact velocity was 89 kph, the angle of impact was 0° with 100% overlap. The mean deceleration during a crash time of 200 ms was 136 m/s? with a maximum of 29 g. There were no intrusions into the passenger compartment and the doors opened without restriction. The pedals were displaced minor, the deformations of the vehicle front reached the front axle, the base plate, the A-pillar and the top were not damaged.
2,39 x 0,66 [m] and it was fixed 0,2 m above the ground (see Figure 2). The impact velocity was 89 kph, the angle of impact was 0° with 100% overlap. The mean deceleration during a crash time of 200 ms was 136 m/s? with a maximum of 29 g. There were no intrusions into the passenger compartment and the doors opened without restriction. The pedals were displaced minor, the deformations of the vehicle front reached the front axle, the base plate, the A-pillar and the top were not damaged.
Figure 4. Tire pile. The crash element contained tires which were stored in metal barrels (see Figure 4.). The element with the dimension 1,70 x 1,15 x 1,05 [m] was impacted by a Ford Escort with an impact speed of 93 km/h and 100% overlap. The mean deceleration was 125 m/s’, the peak value about 35g. The deceleration pulse showed three sections with peak values after 20, 50 and 110 ms (see Appendix).
Figure 4. Tire pile. The crash element contained tires which were stored in metal barrels (see Figure 4.). The element with the dimension 1,70 x 1,15 x 1,05 [m] was impacted by a Ford Escort with an impact speed of 93 km/h and 100% overlap. The mean deceleration was 125 m/s’, the peak value about 35g. The deceleration pulse showed three sections with peak values after 20, 50 and 110 ms (see Appendix).
Figure 5. Honycomb-element. This element was built of 0,36 mm tinplate, which was buckled and welded to a honeycomb structure (see Figure 5.).
Figure 5. Honycomb-element. This element was built of 0,36 mm tinplate, which was buckled and welded to a honeycomb structure (see Figure 5.).
The element (dimension 0,94 x 1,50 x 0,50 [m])} was impacted by a Ford Escort with an impact speed of 80 km/h. The mean deceleration was 166 m/s* with a peak value of 32 g (see Appendix). The steering wheel and the pedals were displaced, the dashboard twisted, also the base plate was deformed and the seats had a frontal inclination. A dent on the roof near the B-pillar and front axle deformations could be observed and the front door opened only by large forces.
The element (dimension 0,94 x 1,50 x 0,50 [m])} was impacted by a Ford Escort with an impact speed of 80 km/h. The mean deceleration was 166 m/s* with a peak value of 32 g (see Appendix). The steering wheel and the pedals were displaced, the dashboard twisted, also the base plate was deformed and the seats had a frontal inclination. A dent on the roof near the B-pillar and front axle deformations could be observed and the front door opened only by large forces.
A mixture of concrete and granulated plastic Prottelith®) was used for this element (see Figure 7.). The element was installed 0,20 m above the ground (dimension 1,00 x 2,00 x 0,60 [m]) and impacted by a Ford Escort with an impact speed of 80 km/h and 100% overlap. The mean deceleration during 120 ms was 187 m/s? with a peak value of 31 g (see Appendix).
A mixture of concrete and granulated plastic Prottelith®) was used for this element (see Figure 7.). The element was installed 0,20 m above the ground (dimension 1,00 x 2,00 x 0,60 [m]) and impacted by a Ford Escort with an impact speed of 80 km/h and 100% overlap. The mean deceleration during 120 ms was 187 m/s? with a peak value of 31 g (see Appendix).
Figure 9. Vehicles after the impact against the rigic barrier with 83 kph (left) and impact against the ‘Styroporbeton’ cushion with 81 kph. The vehicle front was shortened approx. 20 cm, the deformations reached up to the a-column. The wheel base left was shortened around 9 cm and on the right around 15 cm. The passenger space remained intact, the injury risk for the occupants depends mainly on the acceleration load.
Figure 9. Vehicles after the impact against the rigic barrier with 83 kph (left) and impact against the ‘Styroporbeton’ cushion with 81 kph. The vehicle front was shortened approx. 20 cm, the deformations reached up to the a-column. The wheel base left was shortened around 9 cm and on the right around 15 cm. The passenger space remained intact, the injury risk for the occupants depends mainly on the acceleration load.
Figure 10. Deformation work and dynamic deformation for different element
Figure 10. Deformation work and dynamic deformation for different element
Figure 12. Model for simulation
Figure 12. Model for simulation
Figure 11. Comparison of injury parameters calculation for passenger side
Figure 11. Comparison of injury parameters calculation for passenger side
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved