AUTOMATIVE OCCUPANT PROTECTIVE SAFETY AIR SUCHION EXPENDITURE/BENEFIT STUDY
This study of the economics of the various restraint systems which are candidates for widespread vehicle installation considered 4 systems: the lap belt, the present 3-point lap torso system, and the air cushion restraint system, with and without the use of lap belts. The benefits and expenditures were evaluated using an accident project model. Comparisons of the total societal economics of the lap/shoulder belt systems at 26% usage levels with air cushion restraint system and lap belts indicate that equality of payoff would require lap/shoulder belt usage to be over 90% in the driver position and over 100% in the fight front passenger position. Belts offer little practical protection for center front seat passengers of 6-passenger cars, whereas the air bag offers complete protection in front and quasi-frontal crash modes. The findings are conclusively in favor of the air cushion restraint system for front seats.
- Prepared for the Allstate Insurance Company, Northbrook, Illinois. Major subcontractors: Minicars Incorporated, Goleta, California, and Dr. Charles Warner, Brighman Young University.
DeLorean (John Z.) CorporationBloomfield Hills, MI United States
- Publication Date: 1975-8
- Features: Appendices; Figures; References; Tables;
- Pagination: 225 p.
- TRT Terms: Air bags; Automobiles; Drivers; Economics; Frontal crashes; Highway safety; Manual safety belts; Passengers; Restraint systems; Shoulder harnesses
- Old TRIS Terms: Passenger restraints
- Subject Areas: Economics; Highways; Passenger Transportation; Safety and Human Factors;
- Accession Number: 00144052
- Record Type: Publication
- Report/Paper Numbers: 74-14-N01-173a Res. Rpt.
- Files: TRIS
- Created Date: Dec 22 1976 12:00AM