+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Injury potential at center rear seating positions in rear-facing child restraint systems in side impacts



Injury potential at center rear seating positions in rear-facing child restraint systems in side impacts



Annals of Advances in Automotive Medicine. Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine. Annual Scientific Conference 57: 281-296



Head injuries occur to occupants of rear-facing child restraint systems in side impacts. This study examined the head injury potential of center-seated occupants using sled tests at change in velocities of 35, 29 and 24 km/h. Other parameters included combinations of with and without a simulated door. A twelve-month-old child dummy was used in combination, convertible and infant rear-facing child restraint systems. Head excursions and head injury criteria (HIC) were obtained. In 35 km/h tests without simulated door, head excursions ranged from 568 to 655 mm, exceeding the simulated door intrusion plane. HIC ranged from 87 to 157, below the 390 limit. At this velocity but with the simulated door, HIC ranged from 804 to 1297. Head excursions ranged from 424 to 480 mm. In 29 and 24 km/h tests, the dummy and child restraint system impacted the simulated door. HIC ranged from 275 to 604 and 141 to 314, and head excursions ranged from 388 to 470 mm and 365 to 460 mm, respectively. Far-side belt loads were 2.4-3.2 kN and 1.7-2.3 kN for the 35 km/h tests without and with the simulated door, and 1.5-2.1 kN and 1.0-1.6 kN for 29 and 24 km/h tests with the simulated door. These findings indicate that occupants in the center seating position in smaller/medium-size vehicles may impact an intruding door and sustain head injuries. A need exists for better protection/attachment methods for center positioned rear-facing child restraint systems to reduce the injury potential in side impacts at velocities greater than 29 km/h.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 1 workday: $29.90)

Accession: 053876665

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 24406965


Related references

Effects of LATCH versus Available Seatbelt Installation of Rear Facing Child Restraint Systems on Head Injury Criteria for 6 Month Old Infants in Rear End Collisions. Traffic Injury Prevention 16(Suppl. 2): S16, 2015

The effects of tethering rear -facing child restraint systems on ATD responses. Annual Proceedings. Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine 50: 397-410, 2006

The performance of various rear facing child restraint systems in a frontal crash. Annual Proceedings. Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine 48: 303-321, 2004

Comparative Performance of Rear Facing Child Restraint Systems on the CMVSS 213 Bench and Vehicle Seats. Annals of Advances in Automotive Medicine. Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine. Annual Scientific Conference 57: 311-328, 2013

Rear seat child safety in near-side impacts: a modeling study of common sitting positions. Traffic Injury Prevention 14(2): 198-208, 2013

Rear seating and risk of injury to child occupants by vehicle type. Annual Proceedings. Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine 45: 51-60, 2001

Drivers' attitudes toward front or rear child passenger belt use and seat belt reminders at these seating positions. Traffic Injury Prevention 15(3): 278-286, 2014

Kid in the middle: a discussion of effectiveness of center rear-seat restraint systems. Annual Proceedings. Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine 50: 221-236, 2006

The risk of whiplash injury in the rear seat compared to the front seat in rear impacts. Traffic Injury Prevention 4(2): 136-140, 2003

Restraint use and rear seating were associated with fewer serious injuries and deaths for children in motor vehicle crashes. Evidence-Based Nursing 3(4): 128-128, 2000

Rear-seat seatbelt laws and restraint use in rear-seated teen passengers traveling in passenger vehicles involved in a fatal collision on a US roadway. Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery 81(4 Suppl 1): S36, 2016

Rear seat safer: seating position, restraint use and injuries in children in traffic crashes in Victoria, Australia. Accident; Analysis and Prevention 40(2): 829-834, 2008

Rear-facing versus forward-facing child restraints: an updated assessment. Injury Prevention 24(1): 55-59, 2018

Effects of initial seated position in low speed rear-end impacts: a comparison with the TNO rear impact dummy (TRID) model. Traffic Injury Prevention 6(1): 77-85, 2005

Evaluation of the internal and external biofidelity of current rear impact ATDs to response targets developed from moderate-speed rear impacts of PMHS. Stapp Car Crash Journal 56: 171-229, 2012