OF OTHER VEHICLES Basuki Suratno 1 David Black 2 Ross Dal Nevo 2 Michael Paine 3 and Keith Simmons 1 1 Centre for Road Safety Transport for NSW 2 Crashlab Roads and Maritime Services ID: 740318
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "DO NON-COMPLYING BULL-BARS INCREASE THE ..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
DO NON-COMPLYING BULL-BARS INCREASE THE RISKS OF INJURIES TO OCCUPANTSOF OTHER VEHICLES?
Basuki Suratno1, David Black2, Ross Dal Nevo2, Michael Paine3 and Keith Simmons1
1 Centre for Road Safety, Transport for NSW 2 Crashlab, Roads and Maritime Services3 Vehicle Design and Research
Presented by Evan Walker
1Slide2
Introduction
Bull-bars are commonly fitted to 4WDs.In NSW, bull-bars fitted to vehicles under 3.5 tonnes GVM that were manufactured after 1 January 2003 must comply with the AS 4876.1-2002 (except clause 3.2 – road user protection requirement).Some 4WDs are raised to enable them to operate under extreme off-road conditions.
2In NSW in 2010, there were nearly 20,000 intersection crashes resulting in 76 deaths and 8904 injuries. Slide3
“Geometrically” Complying and Non-complying Bull-bars
Geometrically complying bull-bar
Geometrically non-complying bull-bar Slide4
Focal Question and Aims
The study compared the injury risk of the occupant of the target vehicle side-impacted by:4A 4WD without a bull-bar,Standard height and raised height 4WD vehicles fitted with a geometrically complying bull-bar, and
A 4WD vehicle fitted with geometrically complying and non-complying bull-bars at raised ride height.For the near side occupant of a struck vehicle in side impact crashes, what injury risks are associated with a bull bar that complies with the Australian Standard compared to a non-complying bull-bar when fitted to 4WDs at standard and raised ride heights?Slide5
Methodology
Test No
Test Description
Bullet Vehicle
Bullet Vehicle’s test specifications
Bull-bar
Weight (kg)
Speed (kph)
Front mid chassis height (mm)
1
ANCAP Side Impact
Trolley
950
50
425
No bull-bar
2
Baseline
Rodeo
1690
37.5510No bull-bar3Std Height CompliantRodeo169037.5510Complying4Raised & CompliantHilux156538.9600Complying5Raised & Non-compliantHilux156538.9600Non-complying
Note: Bullet vehicle speeds were moderated to ensure total impact energy
equivalent to ANCAP test Slide6
ANCAP Side Impact Test
Camry 2011ANCAP 5 star Score 4 out of 4 in all body regions (head, chest, abdomen and pelvis)Side-impacted by 950 kg trolley at speed of 50 kphLow risk of injuriesSlide7
No Bull-bar
Bullet VehicleHolder RodeoStandard heightWeight:1690 kgsImpact speed: 37.5 kphRisk of Injury:
No appreciable increase compared to ANCAP Slide8
Complying Bull-bar Std Height
Bullet vehicle:Holden RodeoStandard heightComplying bull-barWeight: 1690 kgsImpact speed: 37.5 kphRisk of Injury (AIS3+)
7% increase compared to ANCAPSlide9
Complying Bull-bar Raised
Bullet VehicleToyota HiluxRaised heightComplying bull-barWeight: 1565 kgsImpact speed: 38.9 kphRisk of Injury (AIS3+)
Double compared to ANCAP or no bull-barSlide10
Non-complying Bull-bar Raised
Bullet VehicleToyota HiluxRaised heightNon-complying bull-barWeight: 1565 kgsImpact speed: 38.9 kph
Risk of Injury compared to complying bull-bar at standard heightDouble in AIS3+Triple in AIS4+Slide11
Results
Test No
Test Description
HIC
Rib Compress (mm)
Rib Viscous Criterion (m/s)
APF (N)
PSPF (N)
Up
Mid
Low
Up
Mid
Low
1
ANCAP Side Impact
28
14.30
0.04
640
17502Baseline2913.111.914.80.040.060.0866025303Std Height Compliant5520.319.222.9
0.11
0.11
0.20
900
2400
4
Raised & Compliant
104
36.8
34.2
33.3
0.43
0.42
0.34
750
1270
5
Raised & Non-compliant12223.633.848.00.220.501.0810201860
Results highlighted in yellow show the state of the art protection in the struck vehicle has been overcome. Slide12
Key Findings
No appreciable increase in 4WD with no bull-bar when compared to ANCAP,7% increase in risk of AIS3+ injury from standard height 4WD with complying bull-bar when compared to ANCAP,Double AIS3+ risk in raised 4WD with complying bar when compared to ANCAP or no bull-bar,Double AIS3+ risk and Triple AIS4+ risk from raised 4WD with non-complying bar when compared to complying bar at standard height.Slide13
Conclusions
Complying bull-bars fitted to standard height vehicles only produce a small increase in injury risk to occupants of the struck vehicle. Raising the height of the vehicle and/or fitting a non-complying bull bar can both individually increase the risk of injury by double that of just a compliant bull-bar. At the tested speeds, both complying and non-complying bull-bars did not prevent the correct deployment of the airbags, but further tests will be conducted to investigate their effect at normal ANCAP / ADR 72 test speed of 50 kph.
Further research is required to confirm that raising a 4WD without a bull-bar increases the risk of injury to the occupant of the struck vehicle.Broader adoption of the Australian Standard as in NSW has clear road safety benefit for all road users.