<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>The Need to Control Belt Routing for Silver NCAP Ratings</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1488595</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In 2011 NHTSA made changes to the NCAP (New Car Assessment Program) frontal full-width test rating that introduced a chest deflection metric. The dummy seating protocol did not specify routing procedures that consistently control shoulder belt positioning on the dummy. Thus, most NCAP tests were conducted with the D-ring in the fully up position, placing the shoulder belt far above the center chest potentiometer. Sled and full-vehicle crash tests of a 2011 Dodge Caliber demonstrated that for the 5th percentile small female passenger dummy, the high D-ring position causes the belt to cross the chest above the location of the deflection potentiometer. The ribeye gauges show that this belt configuration produces deflection measurements that are higher than those measured by the center potentiometer. The differences in chest deflection measurement caused by variations in belt routing are not trivial. For the Caliber, the NHTSA NCAP test produced a chest deflection of 11.8 mm, corresponding to a risk of serious chest injury for older females of 0.6%. A crash test conducted by IIHS under the same conditions but with the belt routed across the deflection potentiometer produced a chest deflection of 34.5 mm, corresponding to a risk of serious chest injury for older females of 44.7%.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Nov 2017 09:59:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1488595</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Parameter Study for Child Injury Mitigation in Near-Side Impacts Through FE Simulations</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1143696</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The objective of this study is to investigate the effects of crash-related car parameters on head and chest injury measures for 3- and 12-year-old children in near-side impacts. The evaluation was made using a model of a complete passenger car that was impacted laterally by a barrier. The car model was validated in 2 crash conditions: the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) and the US New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) side impact tests. The Small Side Impact Dummy (SID-IIs) and the human body model 3 (HBM3) (Total HUman Model for Safety [THUMS] 3-year-old) finite element models were used for the parametric investigation (HBM3 on a booster). The car parameters were as follows: vehicle mass, side impact structure stiffness, a head air bag, a thorax-pelvis air bag, and a seat belt with pretensioner. The studied dependent variables were as follows: resultant head linear acceleration, resultant head rotational acceleration, chest viscous criterion, rib deflection, and relative velocity at head impact. The chest measurements were only considered for the SID-IIs. The head air bag had the greatest effect on the head measurements for both of the occupant models. On average, it reduced the peak head linear acceleration by 54 g for the HBM3 and 78 g for the SID-IIs. The seat belt had the second greatest effect on the head measurements; the peak head linear accelerations were reduced on average by 39 g (HBM3) and 44 g (SID-IIs). The high stiffness side structure increased the SID-IIs? head acceleration, whereas it had marginal effect on the HBM3. The vehicle mass had a marginal effect on SID-IIs' head accelerations, whereas the lower vehicle mass caused 18 g higher head acceleration for HBM3 and the greatest rotational acceleration. The thorax?pelvis air bag, vehicle mass, and seat belt pretensioner affected the chest measurements the most. The presence of a thorax-pelvis air bag, high vehicle mass, and a seat belt pretensioner all reduced the chest viscous criterion (VC) and peak rib deflection in the SID-IIs. The head and thorax?pelvis air bags have the potential to reduce injury measurements for both the SID-IIs and the HBM3, provided that the air bag properties are designed to consider these occupant sizes also. The seat belt pretensioner is also effective, provided that the lateral translation of the torso is managed by other features. The importance of lateral movement management is greater the smaller the occupant is. Light vehicles require interior restraint systems of higher performance than heavy vehicles do to achieve the same level of injury measures for a given side structure.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2012 10:07:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1143696</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Seatbelt effectiveness for rear seat occupants in full and offset frontal crash tests</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1098704</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In Japan, it became mandatory for rear seat occupants to wear seatbelts as of 2008. This paper summarises the results of full car crash tests for rear seat occupants, and compares the kinematics and injury risk to belted and unbelted rear sear occupants in order to show the effectiveness of seatbelts. Full-width rigid barrier and offset frontal impact tests were conducted using Hybrid III fifth percentile female and 3-year-old dummies in belted or unbelted conditions in the rear seat. In both full and offset frontal tests, the injury measures of the belted fifth female and 3-year-old dummies in the rear seat were relatively low because contact with the car interior was prevented by the seatbelt, although the head injury criterion and the chest deflection of the fifth female dummy were relatively large. In the tests with the fifth female dummy not belted, its knees and head made contact with the front seatback and the head of the front seat dummy, respectively. Due to this impact by the fifth female dummy, the injury measures of the driver dummy became high. The unbelted 3-year-old dummy moved in the passenger compartment, making contact with several locations in the car. These test results were comparable with accident analyses that show high injury risks to the chest of belted rear seat occupants, and high injury risks to the head and lower extremities in unbelted rear seat occupants.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2011 12:25:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1098704</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Optimisation of vehicle side interior panels for occupant safety in side impact</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1086071</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In a car side crash, the interior panels of the door and B-pillar could have a direct contact with the occupant of a struck car, which is a risk for occupant chest injuries. Therefore, the objective of the study is to enhance car safety performance for occupant chest protection by optimising the interior panel's properties and design parameters. A production passenger car finite-element model was developed and used to analyse the interior panels design for occupant protection. Prescribed structural motion technology was employed to reduce the computation time. The elastic modulus and thickness of the interior panels of the door and B-pillar are considered as design parameters. An optimisation of the interior panels was carried out by using the response surface methodology with quadratic functions. The efficiency of the optimisation was identified by reducing the risk of thorax injury by 25%.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jan 2011 10:52:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1086071</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Thoracic Injury Metrics With Side Air Bag: Stationary and Dynamic Occupants</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/935530</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Injury risk from side air bag deployment has been assessed using stationary out-of-position occupant test protocols. However, stationary conditions may not always represent real-world environments. Therefore, the objective of the present study was to evaluate the effects of torso side air bag deployment on close-proximity occupants, comparing a stationary test protocol with dynamic sled conditions. Chest compression and viscous metrics were quantified from sled tests utilizing postmortem human specimens (PMHS) and computational simulations with 3 boundary conditions: rigid wall, ideal air bag interaction, and close-proximity air bag deployment. PMHS metrics were quantified from chestband contour reconstructions. The parametric effect of ΔV on close-proximity occupants was examined with the computational model.  PMHS injuries suggested that close-proximity occupants may sustain visceral trauma, which was not observed in occupants subjected to rigid wall or ideal air bag boundary conditions. Peak injury metrics were also elevated with close-proximity occupants relative to other boundary conditions. The computational model indicated decreasing influence of air bag on compression metrics with increasing ΔV. Air bag influence on viscous metric was greatest with close-proximity occupants at ΔV = 7.0 m/s, at which the response magnitude was greater than linear summation of metrics resulting from rigid impact and stationary close-proximity interaction. These results suggest that stationary close-proximity occupants may not represent the only scenario of side air bag deployment harmful to the thoraco-abdominal region. The sensitivity of the viscous metric and implications for visceral trauma are also discussed.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Oct 2010 14:52:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/935530</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Comparison of Hybrid III Child Test Dummies to Pediatric PMHS in Blunt Thoracic Impact Response</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/935524</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The limited availability of pediatric biomechanical impact response data presents a significant challenge to the development of child dummies. In the absence of these data, the development of the current generation of child dummies has been driven by scaling of the biomechanical response requirements of the existing adult test dummies. Recently published pediatric blunt thoracic impact response data provide a unique opportunity to evaluate the efficacy of these scaling methodologies. However, the published data include several processing anomalies and nonphysical features. These features are corrected by minimizing instrumentation and processing error to improve the fidelity of the individual force-deflection responses. Using these data, biomechanical impact response corridors are calculated for a 3-year-old child and a 6-year-old child. These calculated corridors differ from both the originally published postmortem human subject (PMHS) corridors and the impact response requirements of the current child dummies. Furthermore, the response of the Hybrid III 3-year-old test dummy in the same impact condition shows a similar deflection but a significantly higher force than the 3-year-old corridor. The response of the Hybrid III 6-year-old dummy, on the other hand, correlates well with the calculated 6-year-old corridor. The newly developed 3-year-old and 6-year-old blunt thoracic impact response corridors can be used to define data-driven impact response requirements as an alternative to scaling-driven requirements.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Oct 2010 14:52:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/935524</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Chest Deflections and Injuries in Oblique Lateral Impacts</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/859067</link>
      <description><![CDATA[A majority of laboratory-driven side-impact injury assessments are conducted using postmortem human subjects (PMHS) under the pure lateral mode. Because real-world injuries occur under pure and oblique modes, this study was designed to determine chest deflections and injuries using PMHS under the latter mode. Anthropometrical data were obtained and x-rays were taken. Specimens were seated on a sled and lateral impact acceleration corresponding to a change in velocity of 24 km/h was applied such that the vector was at an angle of 20 or 30 degrees. Chestbands were fixed at the level of the axilla (upper), xyphoid process (middle), and tenth rib (lower) location. Deflection contours as a function of time at the levels of the axilla and mid-sternum, representing the thorax, and at the tenth rib level, representing the abdomen, were evaluated for peak magnitudes. All data were normalized using mass-scaling procedures. Injuries were identified following the test at autopsy. Trauma graded according to the Abbreviated Injury Score, 1990 version, indicated primarily unilateral rib fractures and soft tissue abnormalities such as lung contusion and diaphragm laceration occurred. Mean peak deflections at the upper, middle, and lower levels of the chest for the 30-degree tests were 96.2, 78.5, and 76.8 mm. For the 20-degree tests, these magnitudes were 77.5, 89.9, and 73.6 mm. Statistical analysis indicated no significant (p > 0.05) differences in peak chest deflections at all levels between the two obliquities although the metric was significantly greater in oblique than pure lateral impacts at the mid and lower thoracic levels. These response data are valuable in oblique lateral impact assessments.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2008 11:42:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/859067</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Injury Patterns in Side Pole Crashes</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/840250</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Pole/tree side impacts are realistic crash environments that can induce severe injuries to the occupant. The mechanisms of injury are unique to this unusual environment. The antero-lateral chest is loaded in an oblique configuration because of the intruding door. The head translates laterally to often strike the intruded pole/tree producing linear skull fractures, commonly through the skill base. Because the human many be more vulnerable ion this type of crash scenario, it is imperative that the dummy models used for injury mitigation design mimic the antero-lateral chest loading response seen in this study.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 09:57:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/840250</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Effects of Tethering Rear-Facing Child Restraint Systems on ATD Responses</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/794225</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper describes a series of sled tests that were performed to analyze the responses of an anthropomorphic test device (ATD), particularly neck forces, when rear-facing child restraint systems (CRS) are tethered.  Nominally identical rear-facing CRS were tested in four tether conditions:  untethered; tethered down to the floor, tethered down to the bottom of the vehicle seat; and tethered rearward to a point above the back of the vehicle seat.  The CRABI 12MO ATD with head, upper neck, and chest instrumentation was used for all of the tests.  The tests were conducted using the ECE R44.02 test bench and both frontal and rear impacts were performed and each condition was repeated for a total of 16 sled tests.  Motions of the CRS and ATD were recorded using high-speed digital video (1000 fps).  The highest ATD accelerations, forces, and moments were observed during the primary impact of a frontal test, rather than on rebound.  The loads observed during rebound from frontal impact were similar in magnitude to the peak loads collected during rear impacts.  The four tethering geometries produced distinct loading patterns.  The lowest HIC, neck forces, and chest accelerations in both impact directions were observed with the rearward tether.  The upper neck moment data did not show a clear trend relative to tethering geometry. ATD and CRS motions were best controlled in frontal impact by the rearward tethering geometry while the motions in rear impact were best controlled by tethering to the floor.  The data show a potential benefit in both frontal and rear impacts of tethering rear-facing CRS to a point above the vehicle seatback.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Nov 2006 14:52:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/794225</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Residual Injuries after Recent Safety Improvements</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/794221</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper examines the residual injuries that were reported in the National Automotive Sampling System/Crashworthiness Data System (NASS/CDS) 1997-2004 by crash mode, crash severity, body region and the age of the occupants.  It examines how serious injuries are distributed in present day crashes and it also identifies opportunities for further injury reduction.  In planar crashes, approximately 66% of the MAIS 3+ injuries occur in crashes less severe than 25 mph delta-V.  Chest injuries predominate in these crashes, particularly among elderly occupants.  A reduction in chest injuries to belted elderly occupants during low severity frontal crashes offers a prime opportunity for further improvement of safety systems.  Younger occupants could also benefit from improved chest protection.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Nov 2006 14:52:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/794221</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A REVIEW OF FATAL INJURIES TO PEDESTRIANS INDUCED BY URBAN TRUCK CRASHES</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/458273</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Crashes between pedestrians and trucks, which were fatal to the pedestrians and occurred during 1986-90, were studied.  Police reports were used to develop a crash typology.  Comparisons were made with crashes between pedestrians and other vehicles. Pedestrian fatalities in crashes with trucks were more likely to occur at intersections, at traffic signals, during daylight, and to involve older pedestrians.  Most fatal injuries were to the head and chest regions.  Obstruction of driver visibility, caused by truck design, appears to be a factor in crashes at intersections.  Emphasis should be placed on separating pedestrians and trucks and on designing trucks to improve visibility. For the covering abstract of the conference see TRIS 00663162.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Mar 2000 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/458273</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A METHOD FOR ESTIMATING THE EFFECT OF VEHICLE CRASHWORTHINESS DESIGN CHANGES ON INJURIES AND FATALITIES</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/473820</link>
      <description><![CDATA[A general methodology is developed for estimating the change in the number of injuries and fatalities expected as a result of a change in vehicle crashworthiness design.  It is assumed that crash tests have provided information on dummy response measurements, such as the maximum chest acceleration in a crash, and that based on these test results a conclusion has been reached as to the most likely effect of the design change on the response measurements.  Cadaver injury risk curves, which give the probability of injury in terms of test crash measurements, and crash data injury risk curves, which give the probability of injury in terms of crash characteristics available in the actual crash data (such as delta-v in the National Automotive Sampling System database), are used to translate the conclusions expressed in terms of the test crash measurements to conclusions expressed in terms of the crash characteristics available in the crash database.  The crash database in then used to estimate the injuries and fatalities expected on the road.  Detailed calculations are presented for the case of estimating the expected increase in chest injuries and the related fatalities as a result of the depowering of air bags.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 1998 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/473820</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>NEW CAR ASSESSMENT PROGRAM (NCAP) TEST RESULTS (RATINGS) FOR MODEL YEAR 1997</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/471879</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This document presents charts with NHTSA's frontal crash test results for most recent models of cars, trucks, vans and sport utility vehicles.  All of the vehicles are crashed into a fixed barrier at 35 mph.  The information recorded during the crash tests measures the likelihood of injury to the head, chest, and thighs.  A five star rating indicates the best head and chest protection.  The crash dummies are always belted, so the test results do not apply to unbelted occupants. Air bags are tested when they are available.  When using the charts, vehicles should be compared against other vehicles in the same weight class.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 1997 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/471879</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>NEW CAR ASSESSMENT PROGRAM (NCAP) TEST RESULTS (NUMBERS) FOR MODEL YEAR 1997</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/471880</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This document contains charts which have frontal crash test results for different models of cars, trucks, vans, and sport utility vehicles.  The information on each vehicle model includes the curb weight, vehicle size category, and the type of occupant protection used during the test.  The crash test results include injuries to the head, chest, and leg.  The lower the numbers are for the head, chest, and femur load, the lower the potential is for injury in a 35 mph frontal crash. All of the vehicles are crashed into a fixed barrier at a speed of 35 mph, and the dummies in the crash tests are always belted. The test results do not apply to unbelted occupants.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 1997 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/471880</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>NEW OFFSET CRASH TESTS SPREAD ALARM, NOT FACTS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/474635</link>
      <description><![CDATA[With an alarming warning that "your car may not be as safe as you think", ABC's "Dateline" recently unveiled the results of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's (IIHS) offset barrier crash tests at 40 mph.  Of 14 midsize cars tested, only three - Chevy Lumina, Ford Taurus GL, and Volvo 850 - scored well enough on the leg-injury portion to earn a "best pick" rating.  Several auto makers pointed out, though, that while IIHS and "Dateline" chose to underscore poor results in injuries to the lower legs, the show glossed over the important fact that all 14 vehicles received "good" marks in the category of fatal or serious injury to head and chest-which is where NHTSA places its highest priority.  NHTSA said they do not have enough funds to conduct offset crash tests, and when asked if they would use additional funding for offset crash tests they said no. They would use the funds to investigate side impact crashes.  The other 11 models tested, in descending order, scored poorly for structural intrusion of engine and chassis components and metallic supports into the passenger cabin: Toyota Camry, Subaru Legacy, Honda Accord, Mazda Millennia, Saab 900, Ford Contour, Volkswagen Passat, Chevrolet Cavalier, Mitsubishi Gallant, Chrysler Cirrus, and Nissan Maxima.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 1997 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/474635</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>