<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>COMPARISON OF THORACIC INJURY RISK IN FRONTAL CAR CRASHES FOR OCCUPANT RESTRAINED WITHOUT BELT LOAD LIMITERS AND THOSE RESTRAINED WITH 6 KN AND 4 KN BELT LOAD LIMITERS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/734022</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper reports on 347 real-world frontal accidents where the EES (Equivalent Energy Speed) ranged from 35 to 75 km/h. One hundred and ninety-eight of these accidents involved cars equipped with the 6 kN load limiter, and 149 involved cars equipped with the 4 kN load limiter. Based on this accident data, the study compares the thoracic injury risk for two occupant populations: belted occupants involved in accidents in which vehicles were not equipped with a load limiter (378 cases with pyrotechnic pretensioners), and belted occupants involved in accidents in which vehicles were equipped with 4 or 6 kN load limiters and pyrotechnic pretensioners (347 cases). One observes that a 4 kN load limitation results in a very important reduction of thoracic injury risk for all Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) levels, compared to other samples. 50 to 60% reduction for AIS 2+ was observed, as well as 75 to 85% for AIS 3+. The complete absence of AIS 4+ with a 4 kN load limiter must be stressed, though it remains more than 8% for the other samples (no limiter and 6 kN limiter). For the covering abstract of the conference see ITRD E206605.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2003 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/734022</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>ABDOMINAL IMPACT RESPONSE TO RIGID-BAR, SEATBELT, AND AIRBAG LOADING</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/733373</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The objective of this study was to resolve discrepancies and fill in some of the gaps in the biomechanical impact response of the human abdomen to frontal impact loading.  Three types of abdominal loading were described:  rigid-bar impacts; seatbelt loading; and close-proximity (out-of-position) airbag deployments.  This describes how eleven rigid-bar free-back tests were performed into the mid and upper abdomens of unembalmed instrumented human cadavers using nominal impact speeds of 6 and 9 m/s.  Seven fixed-back rigid-bar testes were also conducted in 3, 6, and 9 m/s using one cadaver to examine the effects of body mass, spinal flexion, and repeated testing. It describes how load-penetration corridors were developed and compared to those previously established by other researchers. Six seatbelt tests were conducted using three cadavers and a peak-loading rate of 3 m/s.  The seatbelt loading tests were designed to maximize belt/abdomen interaction and were not necessarily representative of real-world crashes.  The results were compared to previously obtained data using swine and they were used to establish a new abdominal load-penetration corridor belt loading.  Passenger frontal airbags were deployed into the closely positioned abdomen of three unembalmed cadavers.  The penetration-time histories were used to guide the development of a repeatable high-speed surrogate airbag-loading device that uses a low-mass cylinder to stimulate the initial breakout phase of close-proximity passenger airbag loading of the abdomen.  The device was used to conduct simulated out-of-position airbag tests into three cadaver abdomens.  The abdomen response data from these standardized tests were used to develop a load-penetration corridor for abdomen response to out-of-position airbag deployments.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2003 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/733373</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>DEVELOPMENT OF A REUSABLE, RATE-SENSITIVE ABDOMEN FOR THE HYBRID III FAMILY OF DUMMIES</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/733374</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The objective of this project was to develop a reusable and rate-sensitive dummy abdomen that has the capability of assessing abdominal injury.  The goal was to develop a abdomen with good biofidelity in a variety of loading situations that could be encountered in an automobile collision.  This paper will present a review of the previous crash dummy abdomens designs, a description of the development of the new abdomen dummy design, the results of testing with the new abdomen and instrumentation designed and suggestions for future work in crash dummy abdominal design.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2003 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/733374</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>DEVELOPMENT AND TESTING OF A PROTOTYPE PREGNANT ABDOMEN FOR THE SMALL-FEMALE HYBRID III ATD</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/733375</link>
      <description><![CDATA[A new prototype pregnant abdomen for the Hybrid III small-female Anthromorphic Test Device (ATD) has been developed and evaluated in a series of component and whole-dummy tests.  The new abdomen uses a fluid-filled silicone-rubber bladder to represent the uterus at 30-weeks gestation, and incorporates improved anthropometry with a midline contour that is more representative of the pregnant abdomen than that of the first pregnant dummy. The new abdomen has been designed with more humanlike mechanical response to dynamic rigid-bar, belt, and close-proximity airbag loading.  An effort was made to instrument the fluid-filled abdomen to assess for the likelihood of fetal loss through two injury mechanisms that are believed to be the most likely causes of placental abruption in motor-vehicle crashes.  Although the instrumentation problems could not be fully resolved within the time and funding constraints of the current program, the results obtained offer promise to future development efforts. The risk of fetal loss in the final prototype pregnant dummy, or MAMA-2B (Maternal Anthropomorphic Measurement Apparatus, version 2B) is determined by measuring the anterior pressure within the fluid filled bladder.  Peak internal bladder pressures measured in series of sled-test simulations of frontal crashes of different severities and occupant-restraint conditions have been correlated to the likelihood of fetal loss based on fetal-loss risk curves developed from real-world crash investigations.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2003 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/733375</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>DEVELOPMENT OF A FINITE ELEMENT MODEL OF THE HUMAN ABDOMEN</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/733376</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This project developed a 3-D finite element model of the human abdomen (WSUHAM) that is different from previous studies.  The model that has been developed in this study includes not only the boy skeleton and soft tissues, but also a detailed description of some of the internal solid organs.  The model provided information on how internal organs would interact during a pendulum impact, a lateral drop test and a lower abdominal frontal impact test.  More research is needed in order to conduct a more rigorous validation of the WSUHAM so that the mechanisms responsible for abdominal injury may be clearly defined.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2003 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/733376</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>INJURY AND RESPONSE OF THE SHOULDER IN LATERAL SLED TESTS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/733377</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The biomechanical response and injury tolerance of the shoulder in lateral impacts is not clearly understood.  Data from these impacts is needed to better understand human injury tolerance, validate finite element models and develop biofidelic shoulders in side impact dummies.  The data from seventeen side impact cadaver tests were analyzed.  The maximum forces of thorax and shoulder vary from test to test, but overall, increase with subject velocity and padding stiffness.  This paper presents the peak acceleration in the upper sternum and the direction of the decrease of this force with the use of soft padding.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2003 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/733377</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>MATERIAL PROPERTIES FOR MODELING TRAUMATIC AORTIC RUPTURE</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/733378</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Traumatic aortic rupture is a significant cause of fatalities in frontal automobile crashes.  However, these ruptures are very difficult to reproduce experimentally in cadaveric surrogates as well as to observe dynamic aortic response.  This study is an investigation of the physical parameters and mechanisms of human aortic rupture.  The study includes both experimental study of local and global visoelastic properties and failure properties of aortas using aortic tissue samples cadaver thoraxes.  This study is the first phase in a program to develop a finite element computer model of aorta injury to examine the mechanisms of aorta injury in automobile crashes.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2003 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/733378</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>DEVELOPMENT OF A COMPUTER MODEL TO PREDICT AORTIC RUPTURE DUE TO IMPACT LOADING</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/733379</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Aortic injuries during blunt thoracic impacts can lead to life threatening hemorrhagic shock.   Experimental approaches designed to study the mechanism of aortic rupture such as the testing of cadavers is not only expensive and time consuming but has also been relatively unsuccessful.  The objective of this study was to develop a computer model to use to predict modes of loading that are most likely to produce aortic rupture.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2003 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/733379</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>THE INFLUENCE OF SUPERFICIAL SOFT TISSUES AND RESTRAINT CONDITION ON THORACIC SKELETAL INJURY PREDICTION</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/733380</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The purpose of this study is to evaluate the hard tissue injury-predictive value of various thoracic injury criteria when the restraint conditions are varied.  The right-front passenger position is a useful position to evaluate restraints and thoracic injury criteria.  Restraint conditions evaluated in this study are (1) force-limiting belt and depowered airbag, (2) non-depowered airbag with no torso belt, and (3) standard seat belt a d depowered airbag.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2003 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/733380</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>COMPARISON OF THORACIC INJURY RISK IN FRONTAL CAR CRASHES FOR OCCUPANT RESTRAINED WITHOUT BELT LOAD LIMITERS AND THOSE RESTRAINED WITH 6 KN AND 4 KN BELT LOADER LIMITERS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/733381</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Accident research studies show that a large proportion of restrained occupants who sustain severe or fatal injuries are involved in frontal impacts.  The main purpose of this paper was to compare the thoracic injury risk for three samples from real world accidents with both cars that are equipped with or not equipped with different shoulder belt load limitations.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2003 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/733381</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF A NEW REAR-IMPACT CRASH DUMMY: THE RID 2</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/733382</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Whiplash injuries resulting from car collisions cause human suffering and high social costs because of the long-term impairment of victims.  Low severity neck injuries are a serious problem in our society.  In 1997, the European Whiplash project started with the aim to develop passive safety methodologies in order to reduce the frequency of neck injuries in rear-end impacts.  This project has resulted, among others, in a rear impact crash dummy, the so-called RID2.  The objective of this paper is to present the design of the dummy and to present its performance in comparison with human volunteer and post mortem human subject (PMHS) tests.  A comparison is also made with the Hybrid III dummy in similar test conditions.  In general, the responses of the head-neck system of the RID2 in low severity rear impact evaluations correlate better to the human subject tests than the Hybrid III responses, in both the car seat tests and the rigid tests.  In the comparison with human volunteers in a real car seat, both the RID2 and the HYBRID III showed realistic kinematics.  In this paper, the RID2 dummy has been compared with two sets of human subject data.  It is strongly recommended to evaluate the dummy in other test conditions for which data has recently become available.  The world-wide testing of the dummy is planned for 2001 and 2002 and includes several of such evaluations and also includes comparison testing with alternative test devices like the THOR dummy and the BioRID dummy.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2003 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/733382</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>KINETIC AND KINEMATIC RESPONSES OF THE RID2A, HYBRID III AND HUMAN VOLUNTEERS IN LOW-SPEED REAR-END COLLISIONS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/733383</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The biomechanics of whiplash injury have been studied using human subjects, cadavers, anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) and mathematical models - all with the goal of understanding and ultimately preventing whiplash injuries.  ATDs play an important role in the design and compliance testing of automobiles and seats, because, unlike cadavers and human subjects, they are repeatable and can be used over a broad range of collision severities without injurious consequences.  However, as models of the human response to whiplash loading, the dynamic response must first be validated using human subjects.  The primary objective of this paper was to quantify the biofidelity of new rear-impact ATD, the RID2a, by comparing its dynamic response to those of human subjects under identical test conditions.  For this paper, a RID2a and a Hybrid III ATD were each exposed to 10 low-speed rear-end collisions:  five at a speed change of 4 km/h and five at a speed change of 8 km/8.  Sagittal plane kinematics of the head and upper torso, head restraint contact forces, and the reaction loads and moment at the atlanto-occipital joint were determined and compared to the response of eleven male human subjects.  Both ATDs produced repeatable response corridors.  The results of this study indicated that the RID2a was able to model the overall kinematic and kinetic responses relevant to some recently-proposed mechanisms of whiplash injury.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2003 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/733383</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A COMPARISON OF THE HYBRID III AND BIORID II DUMMIES IN LOW-SEVERITY, REAR-IMPACT SLED TESTS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/733384</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Occupant Safety Research Partnership (OSRP) of the United States Council for Automotive Research (USCAR) has conducted a rear impact evaluation program on a production representative BioRID II and Hybrid III (50 percent) male test dummies.  The original intent of the program was to compare the responses of the Hybrid III and BioRid II in side-by-side rear-impact HYGE sled simulations.  A total of 50 sled tests were conducted at the laboratories of DaimlerChrysler Corporation, Ford Motor Company, and General Motors Corporation.  The tests were conducted at changes in speeds ranging from 8 to 40 km/hr using different seats and head restraint types and positions.  During the analysis of the BIORID II data generated in the program, the presence of an axial neck load that acted on the head, bypassing the upper neck load cell, was discovered in most of the tests. The design intent of the BioRID II upper neck load is to measure the triaxial forces and moment reactions that occur between the head and the neck.  These unmeasured axial forces precluded making meaningful comparisons of the BioRID II and Hybrid III neck loads, which was considered to be one of the primary objectives of the OSRP program.  The objective of this paper was to discuss the issues found with the BioRID II using a subject of the 50 tests to illustrate the various issues.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2003 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/733384</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>WORLDSID PROTOTYPE DUMMY BIOMECHANICAL RESPONSES</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/733385</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper presents the results of the biomechanical testing of the WorldSID prototype dummy.  The WorldSID dummy is a new, advanced, Worldwide Side Impact Dummy that has the anthropometry of mid sized adult male.  This paper describes how the WorldSid project was aimed at designing and building an advanced, biofidelic, world harmonized side impact dummy.  The biofidelity analysis, based on a large number of pendulum, drop and sled tests, indicates that this objective has already been achieved for the thorax and the head with the first prototype.  For the other body segements, the analysis of test results shows that the biofidelity can be reached without changing the design principles.  It is expected that the pre-production prototype will be the mos biofidelic side impact dummy available and should be released in the near future.  Most of the biofidelity tests were repeated three times, and for those tests it was possible to evaluate the repeatability of the WorldSID in different test conditions.  The analysis of pendulum and rigid sled test results indicated a very good repeatability, corresponding  to less than 3.30% of overall response variation.  The CV values found in drop tests and padding sled tests was much higher.  However, the poor repeatability observed is because of test setup difficulty and padding variation, respectively.  For these tests, the CV's calculated do not accurately reflect the dummy repeatability, and mainly due to poor test repeatability.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2003 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/733385</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>THE HYBRID III 10-YEAR-OLD DUMMY</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/733386</link>
      <description><![CDATA[A prototype Hybrid III 10-year-old dummy has been designed and evaluated by the SAE Hybrid III dummy Family Task Group.  Based on comparisons of its head, neck, thorax, and knee response to their biofidelity requirements, the SAE Task Group concluded that the dummy had acceptable biofidelity.  Durability and usability issues noted in restraint system testing have been resolved.  The SAE Task Group has approved the prototype design for production and calibration specifications will be based on responses of production dummies from both manufacturers.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2003 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/733386</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>