WHY THE ISSUE IS LOSS REDUCTION RATHER THAN ONLY CRASH PREVENTION

THERE IS NO REASON WHY HIGHWAY LOSS REDUCTION COUNTERMEASURE PRIORITIES MUST PARALLEL THE RANK OF CAUSES. TRADITIONAL EMPHASIS ONLY ON CRASH PREVENTION IGNORES MAJOR OPPORTUNITIES FOR REDUCING LOSSES TO DAMAGED PEOPLE AND PROPERTY. A STANDARD METHOD IS NEEDED FOR RATING VEHICLES' OCCUPANT PROTECTION CONSIDERING LIMITS SET BY PHYSICS AND BODY FORCE TOLERANCES. THE USE OF STRUCTURAL DAMAGE FOR CRASH ENERGY ABSORPTION, PARTICULARLY AT 5 TO 20 M.P.H., IS ARCHAIC IN COMPARISON WITH AIRCRAFT STRUT DESIGN. IT IS PREDICTED THAT THE PRESENT, STRUCTURAL-DAMAGE APPROACH TO LOW SPEED ENERGY ABSORPTION WILL SOON BECOME PUBLICLY UNACCEPTABLE. /AUTHOR/

• Supplemental Notes:
  • Paper 700196, 16 PP
• Corporate Authors:

  Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)

  400 Commonwealth Drive
  Warrendale, PA  United States  15096
• Authors:
  • HADDON, W
• Publication Date: 1970

Subject/Index Terms

• TRT Terms: Crashes; Energy absorption; Losses; Protection; Ratings; Reduction (Chemistry); Vehicle occupants; Vehicles
• Old TRIS Terms: Reduction
• Subject Areas: Highways; Passenger Transportation; Safety and Human Factors; Security and Emergencies; Vehicles and Equipment;

Filing Info

• Accession Number: 00220880
• Record Type: Publication
• Files: TRIS
• Created Date: Jun 22 1970 12:00AM