<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>Effect of Aftermarket Modifications on ADAS Functionality – 2022 Chevrolet Silverado Light Vehicle</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2367116</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) are becoming common on passenger cars and pickup trucks. Accordingly, the manufacturers and installers of aftermarket equipment for these vehicles have an interest in confirming the functionality of ADAS when their equipment is put in place. However, there is very little publicly available information on the effect of aftermarket components on original equipment ADAS. To address this deficiency, a research program was undertaken in which a 2022 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 light truck was tested in four different hardware configurations, including stock as well as three modified conditions. Aftermarket modifications to the vehicle consisted of increased tire diameters, a level kit, and two different lift kits. A series of physical tests were carried out to evaluate the ADAS performance of the vehicle with modifications. Tests were designed to investigate differences in driver alerts including lane departure warnings, forward collision warnings, blind spot detections, and rear cross traffic alerts. These tests were also developed to assess the variation in vehicle responses when driver assistance technologies intervened. Intervention scenarios examined include lane keeping support, crash imminent braking, and traffic jam assistance. In general, results from the tests did not indicate significant ADAS performance differences when the vehicle was subject to modifications. Nevertheless, some tests showed a greater range in alert distances in certain modified configurations.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 May 2024 16:31:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2367116</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Special Crash Investigations: On-Site Rollover Crash Investigation Vehicle: 2016 Chevrolet Silverado
Location: Alabama Crash Date: April 2018</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1700410</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This report documents the on-site investigation of a rollover crash involving a 2016 Chevrolet Silverado 1500, which resulted in police-reported non-incapacitating (B-level) injuries to a belted 19-year-old male driver. The Chevrolet was equipped with front seat belt pretensioners, certified advanced 208-compliant (CAC) frontal air bags, front-seat-mounted side impact air bags, and dual-sensing (side impact and rollover) inflatable curtain (IC) air bags. The IC air bags were certified by the vehicle’s manufacturer to comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 226, which established the requirements for ejection mitigation systems to reduce the likelihood of complete and partial ejections of vehicle occupants through side windows during rollovers or side impact events. The Chevrolet became involved in the rollover crash after the driver experienced a police-reported medical emergency. It departed the edge of a divided roadway, struck a guardrail system, then initiated a rollover along the guardrail and down an embankment. The seat belt pretensioners actuated and the driver’s frontal, left front seat-mounted, and both IC air bags deployed in the crash. The driver was transported by ambulance to a regional trauma center where he was treated and released.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2020 12:24:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1700410</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Special Crash Investigations On-Site Guardrail End Terminal Investigation
Vehicle: 2010 Chevrolet Silverado
Location: Missouri
Crash Date: April 2016</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1602886</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This report documents the on site investigation of a pickup truck impact to an ET-2000 guardrail end terminal. This crash occurred in an interchange area of a four-lane, divided, interstate highway. The Chevrolet was a 4- door crew cab pickup truck equipped with multi-stage frontal air bags, front seat-mounted side impact air bags, and side impact inflatable curtain (IC) air bags. A belted 37-year-old male driver occupied the vehicle. The Chevrolet was traveling northwest in the left northwest-bound lane and a 2006 Pontiac Montana was in the adjacent lane. The driver of the Chevrolet changed lanes to the right lane and the front plane struck the back plane of the Pontiac (Event 1). The Chevrolet departed the right side of the road and plane struck a mile marker (Event 2). The impact displaced the mile marker and it struck the hood and windshield (Event 3). The vehicle continued northwest through the grassy roadside and the front plane struck a delineator (Event 4). The vehicle then crossed an entrance ramp to the interstate highway and continued northwest with the left side wheels on the shoulder of the interstate and the right-side wheels on the grass. The front plane then struck a second delineator (Event 5). The vehicle continued northwest and the front plane struck the end terminal (Event 6). The vehicle remained in contact with the end terminal and 14.8 m (48.7 ft) of guardrail was extruded prior to the vehicle coming to final rest heading west with the end terminal remaining in contact with the front plane. The Pontiac came to final rest on the shoulder of the entrance ramp heading west. The driver of the Chevrolet sustained police-reported “C” (possible)injuries and was transported by a hospital where he was treated in the emergency room for minor injuries and released. The Chevrolet was towed from the crash scene due to damage. The 45-year-old male driver of the Pontiac sustained no police-reported injuries. The driver drove the Pontiac from the crash scene.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 May 2019 16:50:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1602886</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Special Crash Investigations On-Site Guardrail End Treatment Investigation Vehicle: 2016 Chevrolet K1500 Silverado Location: Missouri Crash Date: February 2017</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1607229</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This report documents the on-site investigation of a Chevrolet pickup truck that struck an X-Lite guardrail end terminal, a crash of interest to the Federal Highway Administration. This crash occurred on the median roadside of a four-lane, divided interstate highway. The Chevrolet K1500 Silverado was a 4-door, double cab pickup truck equipped with frontal air bags, seat-mounted side impact air bags, rollover/side impact inflatable curtain air bags, and an event data recorder. A belted 59-year-old male driver occupied the vehicle. The Chevrolet was traveling east in the left lane when the vehicle departed the left side of the road and the front plane struck the end terminal. The end terminal penetrated the engine compartment and contacted the engine resulting in the guardrail separating from the end terminal and penetrating through the cowl and instrument panel and into the driver’s seating area. The guardrail then struck the driver and displaced him and his seat out of the vehicle through the back of the cab as nine sections of guardrail penetrated through the vehicle. The driver sustained fatal injuries and was pronounced deceased at the crash scene. The Chevrolet came to final rest heading east, impaled by the guardrail. The driver The vehicle was towed from the crash scene due to damage.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 May 2019 16:50:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1607229</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Special Crash Investigations On-Site Guardrail End Treatment Crash Investigation Vehicle: 2015 Chevrolet Silverado 3500 Location: Missouri Crash Date: November 2016</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1607227</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This report documents the on-site investigation of an impact to an ET-Plus guardrail end treatment by a 2015 Chevrolet Silverado 3500 that resulted in fatal injuries to the vehicle’s 50-year-old unbelted male driver. The Chevrolet was traveling west when it departed the left side of the road and struck the ET-Plus guardrail end treatment located in the median of a two-lane, divided highway. The Chevrolet deformed and then overrode the guardrail, traveled along the median, and struck a non-breakaway pole and its concrete base. The vehicle was then redirected over the guardrail system back into the roadway, where it came to final rest. The driver was transported from the crash site by ambulance for police-reported incapacitating (A-level) injuries but succumbed to his injuries and was pronounced deceased at the hospital. Although the Chevrolet was equipped with frontal air bags, they did not deploy in the crash.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 May 2019 16:50:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1607227</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Structural Countermeasure/Research Program
Mass and Cost Increase Due to Oblique Offset Moving Deformable Barrier Impact Test</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1579353</link>
      <description><![CDATA[NHTSA awarded a contract to EDAG, Inc., to identify changes to a vehicle’s structure in order to reduce the occupant compartment intrusions from NHTSA’s oblique offset frontal crash condition. Review of test results and literature indicated that for the four passenger car segments, sub-compact, compact, mid-size and large car, the sub-compacts structural performance have higher structural intrusions and higher passenger compartment decelerations from the other three and would require more significant changes. Vehicles studied were:1. Mid-Size sedan structure – 2014 Honda Accord, representing passenger cars; and 2. Light Duty pickup structure – 2014 Chevrolet Silverado 1500. Additional structural reinforcements required to reduce the passenger compartment intrusions added a mass of 4.3 kg to the 2014 Accord costing $24.37. Changes to the 2014 Silverado to improve performance in the IIHS small overlap test add 9.0 kg costing $17.35. The study considered structural reinforcement of both the driver and passenger sides of the vehicle for left- and right-side oblique offset impacts.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 2019 09:31:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1579353</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Assessing Tether Anchor Labeling and Usability in Pickup Trucks</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1505483</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The objective of this study was to investigate vehicle factors associated with child restraint tether use and misuse in pickup trucks and evaluate 4 labeling interventions designed to educate consumers on proper tether use.  Volunteer testing was performed with 24 subjects and 4 different pickup trucks. Each subject performed 8 child restraint installations among the 4 pickups using 2 forward-facing restraints: a Britax Marathon G4.1 and an Evenflo Triumph. Vehicles were selected to represent 4 different implementations of tether anchors among pickups: plastic loop routers (Chevrolet Silverado), webbing routers (Ram), back wall anchors (Nissan Frontier), and webbing routers plus metal anchors (Toyota Tundra). Interventions included a diagram label, Quick Response (QR) Code linked to video instruction, coordinating text label, and contrasting text tag.  Subjects used the child restraint tether in 93% of trials. However, tether use was completely correct in only 9% of trials. An installation was considered functional if the subject attached the tether to a tether anchor and had a tight installation (ignoring routing and head restraint position); 28% of subjects achieved a functional installation. The most common installation error was attaching the tether hook to the anchor/router directly behind the child restraint (near the top of the seatback) rather than placing the tether through the router and attaching it to the anchor in the adjacent seating position. The Nissan Frontier, with the anchor located on the back wall of the cab, had the highest rate of correct installations but also had the highest rate of attaching the tether to components other than the tether anchor (seat adjustor, child restraint storage hook, around head restraint). None of the labeling interventions had a significant effect on correct installation; not a single subject scanned the QR Code to access the video instruction. Subjects with the most successful installations spent extensive time reviewing the vehicle manuals.  Current implementations of tether anchors among pickup trucks are not intuitive for child restraint installations, and alternate designs should be explored. Several different labeling interventions were ineffective at achieving correct tether use in pickup trucks.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2018 09:18:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1505483</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Investigation of Opportunities for Light-Weighting a Body-on-frame Vehicle Using Advanced Plastics and Composites</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1361017</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper investigates the opportunities for light-weighting a current body-on-frame type vehicle using  advanced plastics and composites. In addition, the  safety benefits of structural plastics and composites  applications in future lighter vehicles are identified  and evaluated by frontal impact simulations as part of  implementing the plastics and composites intensive  vehicle (PCIV) safety roadmap of the National  Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).  The methodology of the study includes two steps: (1)  developing a light-weight vehicle based on a current  finite element (FE) vehicle using advanced plastics  and composites, and  (2) evaluating the  crashworthiness of the light-weighted vehicle by  frontal New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) test  simulations. An FE model of a 2007 Chevrolet  Silverado, which is a body-on-frame pickup truck,  was selected as the baseline vehicle for light- weighting.   By light-weighting components in the Silverado, the  vehicle weight was reduced 19%. As a result, the  content of plastics and composite in the light-weight  vehicle becomes about 23.6% of the total weight of  the light-weight vehicle. Frontal NCAP simulations  of the light-weighted vehicle show that the light- weighted vehicles using advanced plastics and  composites provide equivalent structural performance  (intrusion and crash pulse)  to the baseline vehicle in  the full frontal impact condition. This study  demonstrates that (1) using plastics and composites  can reduce the vehicle weight efficiently; and (2) the  Silverado, light-weighted using advanced plastics and  composites, provides equivalent structural  performance in the frontal impact condition as the  baseline vehicle.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2015 15:56:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1361017</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Evaluation of crashworthiness of a carbon-fibre-reinforced polymer (CFRP) ladder frame in a body-on-frame vehicle</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1299293</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper investigates the opportunities of lightweighting a steel ladder frame, which is a primary structural component in a body-on-frame vehicle, using a carbon-fiber-reinforced polymer (CFRP) composite. The finite element (FE) model of a 2007 Chevrolet Silverado, which is a body-on-frame pickup truck, is selected as a baseline. The steel ladder frame of the baseline vehicle is replaced with a CFRP ladder frame. A two-dimensional triaxial carbon-thermoset-braided composite is utilized as the substitute for steel. The structural performance of the CFRP ladder frame is evaluated by FE simulations of stiffness tests and frontal impact tests. The results show that the CFRP ladder frame with twice the thickness of the original frame rails can provide a similar performance to the original steel ladder frame in terms of its stiffness and impact energy absorbing capability. Consequently, the weight reduction of the original steel ladder frame reaches up to 32% in the CFRP ladder frame.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2014 11:45:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1299293</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Extended Validation of the Finite Element Model for the 2007 Chevrolet Silverado Pick-Up Truck (MASH 2270kg Vehicle)</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1241557</link>
      <description><![CDATA[A finite element (FE) model based on a 2007 Chevrolet Silverado quad-cab pick-up truck was developed through the process of reverse engineering at the National Crash Analysis Center of The George Washington University. This detailed FE model was constructed to include full functional capabilities of the suspension and steering subsystems. This model was initially validated by comparing the simulation of the New Car Assessment Program frontal wall impact with actual data from National Highway Traffic Safety Administration tests for a comparable vehicle. This was supplemented with comparison to inertial and suspension response data that compared the vehicle before tear down to the FE model. Acceptable results of the initial validation led to the release of the FE model. Subsequently, interior elements were added to the model and additional validations were conducted. The first validation involved comparing data from other full frontal wall tests to the simulated test with the updated model. The model was also successfully validated against a side impact test. The robustness of the model was demonstrated by simulations of a centerline pole impact and damage consistency comparisons for rigid wall, offset deformable barrier, and centerline pole impacts at varying speeds. The simulations executed without error in these runs and the results reflected the expected responses and consistency with varying parameters. This led to the conclusion that the model was robust across various impact scenarios.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Apr 2013 09:12:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1241557</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>2003 Silverado/2001 Civic Head-on at 75 mph Closing Speed</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/864130</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This article reports results of a 0% offset, 0 degree, vehicle-to-vehicle impact test conducted for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Vehicle Research and Test Center. The aim was to evaluate the aggressiveness of the bullet vehicle, a 2003 Chevrolet Silverado pickup, and the vehicle and occupant response of the target vehicle, a 2001 Honda Civic 2-door sedan, in this vehicle-to-vehicle impact mode.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2008 09:23:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/864130</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>2003 Silverado/2002 Focus Head-On at 81 mph Closing Speed</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/813563</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This article describes a 0% offset, 0 degree, vehicle-to-vehicle impact test conducted for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Vehicle Research and Test Center. The aim was to evaluate the aggressiveness of the bullet vehicle, a 2003 Chevrolet Silverado, and the vehicle and occupant response of the target vehicle, a 2002 Ford FocusSE 4-door sedan in a vehicle-to-vehicle impact mode collision at 81 mph closing speed. Test procedures and results are provided and discussed.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2007 10:56:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/813563</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>2002 Focus Struck Head-On By 2003 Silverado Traveling 70 mph</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/813568</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This article describes a 0% offset, 0 degree, vehicle-to-vehicle impact test conducted for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Vehicle Research and Test Center. The aim was to evaluate the aggressiveness of the bullet vehicle, a 2003 Chevrolet Silverado, and the vehicle and occupant response of the target vehicle, a 2002 Ford FocusSE 4-door sedan in a vehicle-to-vehicle impact mode at 70 mph. Test procedures and results are provided and discussed.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2007 10:56:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/813568</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>2003 Silverado/2002 Focus Head-On at 75 mph Closing Speed</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/813562</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This article describes a 0% offset, 0 degree, vehicle-to-vehicle impact test conducted for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Vehicle Research and Test Center. The aim was to evaluate the aggressiveness of the bullet vehicle, a 2003 Chevrolet Silverado, and the vehicle and occupant response of the target vehicle, a 2002 Ford FocusSE 4-door sedan in a vehicle-to-vehicle impact mode collision at 75 mph closing speed. Test procedures and results are provided and discussed.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2007 10:56:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/813562</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>