EUROPEAN COMMISSION
DG RTD
SEVENTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME
THEME 7
TRANSPORT - SST
SST.2007.4.1.2: Human physical and behavioral components
GA No. 218516
THORAX
Thoracic injury assessment for improved vehicle safety
Deliverable No.
THORAX D4.2
Deliverable Title
Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Dissemination level
Public
Written By
Checked by
Paul Lemmen (Humanetics), Steffi Wolf (Continental),
Cecilia Sunnevang (Autoliv),
Paul Lemmen (Humanetics)
Approved by
Cor van der Zweep (Uniresearch)
Issue date
December 18, 2012
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
Executive summary
To get a first experience on the THORAX demonstrator dummy preliminary tests were done
in two different labs. Testing included full scale vehicle tests as well as sled testing using a
body in white set-up. For reference comparisons were made with the Hybrid-III 50th dummy.
In general it was found that the demonstrator dummy performs well. It was observed that the
lower IRTRACC system is vulnerable upon rebound. Although this issue cannot be resolved
in time for the sequel of the THORAX WP4 testing it is recommended to include means for
protection of these devices in future dummy versions. Other recommendations for testing
include a clear definition of the seating procedure, and a more efficient way of processing the
dummy data.
Page | 2
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
Contents
1
Introduction .....................................................................................................................4
2
Full scale tests Autoliv .....................................................................................................5
2.1
Test condition ...........................................................................................................5
2.2
Dummy seating / positioning.....................................................................................5
2.3
Vehicle measurements .............................................................................................5
2.4
Dummy measurements ............................................................................................6
2.5
Further remarks on dummy handling / performance .................................................9
3
Sled tests Autoliv ........................................................................................................... 10
4
Continental Body in White testsing ................................................................................ 11
5
THOR seating procedure workshop............................................................................... 14
6
Conclusions and recommendations for dummy use in WP4 test program ..................... 15
7
Risk Register ................................................................................................................. 16
8
APPENDIX I Dummy Seating Procedure for WP4 ......................................................... 17
8.1
SAE Draft seating procedure with remarks from THORAX workshop ..................... 17
8.2
Open issues ........................................................................................................... 23
8.3
Draft proposal for shoulder friction setting and positioning as proposed by
Humanetics ....................................................................................................................... 23
Page | 3
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
1 Introduction
In general the aim of THORAX Work Package 4 is to assess the demonstrator dummy in
relevant load cases regarding its sensitivity against settings of modern vehicle safety
systems. Also robustness, durability and repeatability need to be addressed.
Based on results from WP1 and WP2 and experiences made in WP 3 relevant load cases for
the evaluation were defined in Deliverable D4.1. Before starting to execute the related test
matrix a first series of preliminary tests were planned to get a first experience of applying the
demonstrator dummy.
This report presents testing experiences and lessons learned as input to the execution of the
broad scale test matrix in Task 4.2. Tests were conducted at the Autoliv facilities and the
Continental facilities. Results and experiences on the use are reported in chapter 2 and 3
respectively.
Page | 4
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
2 Full scale tests Autoliv
To gain insight in the dummy performance and handling three full scale tests with a small car
were conducted.
2.1
Test condition
Three tests were done using a small vehicle under the Euro NCAP ODB 64 km/h condition.
Identical vehicles were used in all tests. In the first tests the Hybrid III 50% ile male was used
(denoted Test 1 – HIII). In the second test the driver was replaced by the TRL dummy with
demonstrator thorax / shoulder complex (denoted Test 2 – TRL Thor) and in the third test the
Autoliv dummy with demonstrator kit was used (denoted Test 3 – ALV Thor. The test
condition was chosen as it concerns a real car test with all issues related to handling and
dummy use appearing.
Figure 1 Picture of HIII dummy (left) and THOR demonstrator (right) seated in test car.
2.2
Dummy seating / positioning
For the HIII dummy the standard seating procedure was applied. The procedure for installing
the THOR dummy is still under development by SAE. In these tests the Thor dummies were
positioned with H-point aligned with the HIII H-point (+/- 10 mm), resulting seating position is
depicted in figure 2. The seat adjustment was identical for HIII and THOR tests The THOR
head C.o.G was found to be 35 mm more rearward and higher than the HIII CoG.
As the THOR seating procedure is not fully defined yet it is recommended to have a seating
workshop involving testing experts to define a clear positioning at the start of the test. This
should reduce possible variation in testing due to initial positioning.
Figure 2 Positioning of HIII (left) and THOR demonstrators (middle and right).
2.3
Vehicle measurements
Page | 5
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
Figure 3 gives accelerations and velocities at the tunnel for the three tests. It can be
observed that all tests result in almost identical accelerations. Therefore these test provide a
good basis for comparing the responses of the three dummies.
Figure 3 Vehicle signals in terms of tunnel accelerations and velocities for the three tests.
2.4
Dummy measurements
Figure 4 compares resultant head and chest accelerations of between the HIII dummy and
one of the THOR dummies showing similar acceleration to head and chest. Unfortunately the
TRL dummy was not equipped with accelerometers hence no comparison between both
THOR dummies could be made for this signal
Figure 4 Resultant head (left) and chest (right) accelerations for the HIII and the THOR dummy.
Figure 5 shows chest deflections from all tests. Note that the HIII dummy only measures a
single deflection at sternum location while the THORAX demonstrator has four IRTRACCs
located at Upper Left, Upper Right, Lower Left and Lower Right thorax locations respectively.
It can be observed that deflections measured for the THOR dummy are substantially larger
than for the HIII dummy. Values up to 40 mm are observed whereas for the HIII peak values
of about 23 mm occur. It is noted that in the test with the Autoliv THOR dummy the upper
Right IRTRACC did not provide any output data. Therefore no full comparison between the
TRL and Autoliv dummy could be made. However, comparison of the results for the other
three locations shows that deflections correspond quite well.
Page | 6
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
Figure 5 Chest X-deflections.
The THORAX demonstrators are equipped with 3D IRTRACCs. This device allows for
calculation of the deflexion in three directions. Figures 6 and 7 show chest deflections in Yand Z-directions for the TRL and the Autoliv dummy respectively. As noted the Upper Right
IRTRACC in the Autoliv dummy failed, hence no data available at that location. A comparison
between results in figures 6 and 7 shows that in general a good correlation is obtained.
Differences observed might occur from differences in belt routing in between the two tests.
This is confirmed by results of the strain gages as plotted in figure 8. Results for the TRL
dummy in the upper right region are slightly higher compared to those of the Autoliv dummy.
This might indicate a slightly different belt routing or slight difference in rotation of the
vehicles between the tests. In the other regions a very good correlation between strains is
found.
Figure 6 Chest Y- and Z-deflections for TRL dummy
Page | 7
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
Figure 7 Chest Y- and Z-deflections for TRL dummy
Figure 8 Strain gage results for TRL dummy (left) and Autoliv dummy (right). Results clustered per thorax region.
Page | 8
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
2.5
Public
Further remarks on dummy handling / performance
In addition to the remarks on the dummy positioning and performance as made in the
previous sections the testing revealed the following remarks or lessons learned for future
applications in Wp4:
• Good with the plug-and-play
• Onboard DAS quiet quick but could be more user friendly
• DAS activation warnings (ex light) needed
• Shoulder position indication and positioning procedure in general needed
• Post processing algorithms needed
From the above items the post processing algorithms and the shoulder positioning procedure
could be tackled in THORAX before the start of the WP4 testing. Other items remain open for
future dummy updates / adjustments.
Page | 9
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
3 Sled tests Autoliv
A further use case of the demonstrator dummies was considered by Autoliv repeating PMHS
tests as previously conducted by Tornvall. As these tests are also used to judge the
biomechanical performance evaluation of the dummy under task 3.3 results are included in
deliverable report D3.3 which goes into more detail. Findings on dummy handling and use for
these tests are identical to the ones mentioned in the previous section with the addition that
the lower IRTRACC’s seem to be unprotected from the rear side of the dummy. See photo in
figure 9. This results in risk of failure under severe rebound as occurring in the Tornvall tests.
For future dummy updates it is recommended to protect the device under rebound into the
seat using a floating rib or other type of shield.
Figure 9 Photo of IRTRACC assembly in lower rib region. Upon rebound into the seat this part is fairly
unprotected and damage (e.g. cable break) might occur when hitting parts in the seat.
Page | 10
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
4 Continental Body in White testsing
The tests performed at Continental Safety Engineering International GmbH were done in a
first step to gain some experience in dummy handling, respectively seating of the dummy,
installation of the data management system and processing of data.
The three tests were done with a THORAX – dummy (Version IFFSTAR) in comparision to
the regular 50% H III.
A very basic test setup was used in a first step. The rigid steel seat (very similar to the ECER 16 – seat) was fixed on a mounting plate. The instrument panel was also simulated by a
rigid steel construction. The complete setup was used for testing with a 5% H III before, so
that the distance between the seat and the contact area of the knee had to be modified to
enable a positioning of the larger dummies. The height of the seat is too high in these tests
for a 50% male-dummy, but as the goal of the tests was to get first experiences in dummy
handling and all the tests were planned under the same conditions this was not an issue
here.
The setup simulated the passenger area of a car. To simplify the setup a preinflated
passenger airbag was installed with a coated webbing. A rigid steel B- Pillar was mounted
close by the seat. The attached belt was not fired; the belt was only used to keep the dummy
in place during the test.
The general test setup is shown in the following picture.
Figure 10 Setup
The pulse used for all tests is shown below:
Figure 11 Sledpulse
Test 08705S002F and 08705S003F were done with a 50% H III. The tests were done as a
baseline. The only difference was that the first test was done without the double – sided
Teflon plates under hip and upper legs of the dummy. There were no major differences
between those two tests, the movement of the dummy and the biomechanical values were
nearly the same. The difference between Teflon coated surface and steel surface can be
neglected.
Page | 11
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
The third test was done with the THORAX dummy. The IFFSTAR – dummy was used with
the following equipment: updated SD-2 shoulder, a Thorax upgrade kit, 4 IRTRACCs and an
internal Messring M=Bus 36ch DAS.
The following pages give an overview above measured test results. Only head and pelvis can
be compared directly, the rib data of the THORAX are shown separately below.
Figure. 12 Head Acceleration H III and THORAX
Figure 13 Pelvis Accelerations H III and THORAX
Figure 14 Upper Rib Displacements THORAX
Page | 12
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
Figure 15 Lower Rib Displacements THORAX
Figure 16 Rib displacements THORAX
The general handling of the THORAX dummy was comparable to the handling of a H III. The
tests were done on a rigid seat so that the seating position as known from the H III cannot be
applied even for the H III. One problem with the THORAX dummy was to achieve a good
neck position. The H III neck can be adjusted by changing the neck angle. The THORAX
neck angle also can be adjusted with a screw on the top of the head adjusting a string
through the neck of the dummy. Positioning the dummy on the steel seat it was not possible
to achieve a neck angle of 0° measured on the cap of the head; the angle remained at 7°
because further adjustment by the screw was not possible.
The positioning on a rigid seat it not a common way to test; usually seats with foam and seat
adjustment are used. But it would make sense to keep an eye on that issue to make sure that
the adjustment range of the head/neck is sufficient.
Page | 13
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
5 THOR seating procedure workshop
Based on the observation from the full scale testing at Autoliv on the need for an adequate
seating procedure a workshop was organised between WP3 and WP4 members to review
the draft procedures as defined by SAE. The workshop was held 15-16 October at BMW.
Three different vehicles (classes) were available for exercises with one of the demonstrator
dummies.
The workshop was participated in person by THORAX partners and representatives from EU
OEM’s. In addition members from the Technical Advisory group participated via WebEx
sessions. This included representatives from UVa, VRTC, NHTSA, JAMA and JARI.
Attendees in person: Phillip Wernicke, Andre Eggers, Benny Tholin, Cecilia Sunnevang,
Bernard Been.
Attendees via WebEx: Aloke Prasad VRTC, Hohmann VW, Dhynd TRL, L.Martinez INSIA,
Greg UVA, many more, Dan Parent, NHSTA.
The workshop started with a short introduction to the dummy providing info on all available
means in the dummy to adjust the seating. This was then followed by some hands on
experience and first positioning jointly dome all participants. The procedure as drafted by
SAE in June 2011 was used as basis. Next experiences were shared between participants
and another positioning exercise was run. This in turn was followed by a WebEx with
participants from other regions to collect feedback / experience from the US and Japan.
On the second day another iteration step in terms of review, positioning exercises and
WebEx with other regions was repeated.
The workshop resulted in several recommendations for updating the SAE draft seating
procedure. For usage in WP4 a complete package of information is included in Appendix I
consisting of three sections:
1) SAE Draft seating procedure with remarks from the THORAX workshop included
2) Overview of open issues
3) First draft proposal for shoulder positioning.
Page | 14
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
6 Conclusions and recommendations for dummy use in WP4 test
program
To get a first experience on the THORAX demonstrator dummy preliminary tests were done
in two different labs. Testing included full scale vehicle tests as well as sled testing using a
body in white set-up. For reference comparisons were made with the Hybrid-III 50th dummy.
In general it was found that the demonstrator dummy performs well. It was observed that the
lower IRTRACC system is vulnerable upon rebound. Although this issue cannot be resolved
in time for the sequel of the THORAX WP4 testing it is recommended to include means for
protection of these devices in future dummy versions. Other recommendations for testing
include a clear definition of the seating procedure, and a more efficient way of processing the
dummy data. For the latter two items actions were defined in terms of a dummy seating
workshop and in terms of software (matlab) development for WP4 data processing.
The dummy seating workshop was held early October. Appendix I of this report includes a
procedure for application in Task 4.3 testing.
Page | 15
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
7 Risk Register
Risk
No.
What is the risk
WP4.3
The highest risk is the tight
timeplan. There is not much time
left for testing and analysis.
THORAX parts could be damaged
and spare parts are difficult to get.
1
Level
of
risk1
2
Solutions to overcome the risk
Testing in Task 4.2 has shown that
the demonstrator is quite durable.
Apart from IRTRACC’s no serious
damages were observed. As a
contingency to possible damage
Task 4.3 will use the two dummies
that are instrumented with strain
gages. The third demonstrator
dummy will be used to take parts
from in case needed (cannibalize)
Risk level: 1 = high risk, 2 = medium risk, 3 = Low risk
Page | 16
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
8 APPENDIX I Dummy Seating Procedure for WP4
This appendix presents the outcome of a seating workshop which was organised to define a
seating procedure for the THOR dummy to be applied in Wp4 testing. The activities were
based on the draft seating procedure as defined by the SAE in June 2011.
This appendix consists of three sections:
4) SAE Draft seating procedure with remarks from the THORAX workshop included
5) Overview of open issues
6) First draft proposal for shoulder positioning.
8.1
SAE Draft seating procedure with remarks from THORAX workshop
The procedure as defined by SAE is included below. Updates / remarks from the THORAX
workshop are included in red bold text.
1
VEHICLE PREPARATION
1.1.
Adjustments
1.1.1 Position the test seat’s adjustable lumbar supports so that the lumbar supports are in
the lowest, retracted or deflated adjustment positions.
1.1.2 Position any adjustable parts of the seat that provide additional support so that they
are in the lowest or most open adjustment position.
1.1.3 Position an adjustable seat cushion length to the retracted position.
1.1.4 Position an adjustable leg support system in its rearmost position.
1.1.5 If there is a retractable center armrest, put it in the lower position as when it is used
as an arm rest.
1.1.6 Place adjustable pedals in the full forward position (towards the front of the vehicle.)
1.1.7 Set the steering wheel hub at the geometric center of the full range of driving
positions including any telescoping positions.
1.1.8 Set the head restraint vertical position to the vehicle manufacturer’s nominal design
position for a 50th percentile adult male occupant (Or if testing without manufacturer’s
provided information, position the head restraint in the full up position.)
1.1.9 Set the head restraint longitudinal position to the vehicle manufacturer’s nominal
design position for a 50th percentile adult male occupant (Or if testing without manufacturer’s
provided information, position the head restraint in the full rearward position.)
1.1.10 Place any adjustable seat belt anchorages at the vehicle manufacturer’s nominal
design position for a 50th percentile adult male occupant. (Or if testing without
manufacturer’s provided information, position any adjustable seat belt anchorages to their full
up or full outboard positions.)
No comments
1.2.
Seat Markings
1.2.1 Define seat cushion reference points.
1.2.1.1 Identify one seat cushion reference point at the front and one at the rear on the side
of the seat bottom. These points should be on the rigid seat trim if available, if not on the
flexible seat cushion itself. Draw a line through these two seat side reference points.
Do we need this line? Or specify to use angle tool for measurement of pitch (and
adjust to mid).
1.2.2 Define seat centerline reference.
1.2.2.1 Bucket seats: Locate and mark the longitudinal centerline of the seat cushion. The
intersection of the vertical longitudinal plane that passes through the SRP and the seat
cushion upper surface determines the longitudinal centerline of a bucket seat cushion.
Adjust wording to include measurement independent of SRP, to define seat centerline.
Ex, measure seat width. Note centerline measurement for LHP.
Page | 17
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
Suggested change: In case SRP is not specified, use the half width of the seat cushion
to identify center line
1.2.2.2 Bench seats: Locate and mark the longitudinal line on the seat cushion that marks the
intersection of the vertical longitudinal plane through the centerline of the steering wheel and
the seat cushion upper surface.
1.3.
Starting Seat Position
1.3.1 Use the seat control that primarily moves the seat fore-aft to adjust the rearmost seat
reference point defined in section 1.2.1.1 to the rear most location.
1.3.2 Use the seat control that primarily moves the seat vertically to adjust the rearmost
seat reference point defined in section 1.2.1.1 to the lowest vertical location. If there are two
controls, one that moves the front of the seat vertically and another that moves the rear of the
seat vertically; activate both to lower the front and rear to their lowest positions
simultaneously.
1.4.
Seat Test Position
1.4.1 Use the seat control that primarily moves the seat fore-aft to adjust the rearmost seat
reference point defined in section 1.2.1.1 to the rear most location; Record the X position.
1.4.2 Use the seat control that primarily moves the seat fore-aft to adjust the rearmost seat
reference point defined in section 1.2.1.1 to the forward most location; Record the X position.
1.4.3 Measure and mark an X position 15mm rearward of the midpoint between the
positions defined in sections 1.4.1 and 1.4.2 (MP +15mm).
Comment: History of -15? Why not -20 mm as for WSID since they are both based on
UMTRI anthropometry? (comment also from Japan)
1.4.4 Use the seat control that primarily moves the seat fore-aft to adjust the rearmost seat
reference point defined in section 1.2.1.1 to the X position marked in section 1.4.3. If the
seat cannot be placed at exactly 15 mm rearward of the midpoint select next closest
available rearward setting.
1.4.5 Use the seat control that primarily moves the seat vertically to adjust the rearmost
seat reference point defined in section 1.2.1.1 to the lowest vertical location.
1.4.6 Determine and record the range of angles of the seat cushion pitch and using only the
control(s) that primarily adjust(s) the cushion pitch, set cushion pitch to the mid-angle. (Or if
the controls that move the front and rear of the seat are the only controls that change the
seat pitch, then use those to identify the maximum and minimum seat pitch. Then use these
two controls to set the seat in mid pitch.) The vertical position of the seat should remain in its
lowest position as much as possible while achieving the mid pitch position.
Comment: Clarify that pitch will influence the reference point, but not the seat center
vertical height. (comment also from Japan)
1.4.7 Record seat test position co-ordinates.
1.5.
Pedal and Floorpan Markings
1.5.1 Locate and mark the Right Heel Point (RHP) on the carpet.
1.5.1.1 Flat accelerator pedals: Extend a line on the surface of the pedal and through the axis
of symmetry (when viewed from the rear. The RHP is the intersection of that line with the
floorpan.
1.5.1.2 Curved accelerator pedals: Construct a line in the side view tangent to the accelerator
pedal such that the distance from the contact point on the pedal to the floorpan, along the
tangent line, is 200 mm. This line is also through the axis of symmetry of the pedal. The
RHP is at the intersection of this tangent line and the floorpan.
Comment: How to define the line for hanging pedals?
1.5.2 Locate a longitudinal line L1 and a transverse line T1 on the floorpan through the
RHP. Locate a Left Heel Point (LHP) point on the line T1 that is to the left of the seat
centerline at the same distance from the seat centerline as the RHP. Locate a longitudinal
line L2 through the LHP.
1.6.
SAE H-point Measurement
Page | 18
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
1.6.1 Using only the controls that move the seat fore-aft return the test seat to the rearmost
position to facilitate placement of the SAE J826 H-point machine.
1.6.2 Place the H-point machine in the seat and position the seat to the test position as
defined by the coordinates recorded in section 1.4.8.
1.6.3 Follow the SAE J826 procedure except that the length of the lower leg and thigh
segments of the H-point machine shall be adjusted to the 50th percentile (418 mm) and 10th
percentile (408 mm) positions, respectively.
1.6.4 Set the seat back angle to the angle specified by the manufacturer (design angle). If
the seat back design angle is not specified by the manufacturer set the seat back angle to
23º or as close to 23 º as possible (as measured by the SAE J826 H-Point machine).
1.6.5 Record the SAE H-point X, Y and Z coordinates.
1.6.6 The THOR H-point is set to 10 mm forward of SAE H-point X coordinate; Y and Z
coordinates of the SAE H-point are not adjusted.
Comment: Why 10 mm? Thor and WSID based on UMTRI anthropometry. As synergy
with WSID should be 20 mm?
2
THOR DUMMY PLACEMENT
2.1.
THOR installation
2.1.1 Adjust the THOR lumbar to the standard seating position (one of four distinct lumbar /
spine adjustment positions.)
Comment: Specify what lumbar position. Slouched or 9° is nominal? If different
position more suitable for different type of vehicle, it should be specified how to
decide and who will make such a decision.
2.1.2 If necessary to facilitate placement of THOR into the seat, move the seat fore-aft to
the rearmost position.
2.1.3 Place the THOR dummy in the seat such that the mid-saggital plane is coincident with
the centerline markings and the upper torso resting against the seat back.
2.1.4 Apply a for-aft and lateral rocking motion (approximately +/- 5 degrees) to settle the
pelvis rearward in the seat.
2.1.5 Move the seat together with the THOR to the test seat position defined in section
1.4.8.
2.1.6 Position the H-point of the dummy to match the THOR H-point coordinates recorded
in section 1.6.6 to within ± 10 mm in both the X and Z directions.
2.1.7 Adjust the head until the tilt sensors read 0º ± 1º. If necessary, adjust the lower neck
bracket to achieve a level head.
Comment: Difficult to adjust neck adjustment in vehicle. Adjustment will have slight
affect to overall position. After adjustment all tilt sensors should be checked again.
Page | 19
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
Head/neck assembly can be adjusted at upper neck, or in the head. Head angle should
however be specified in certification tests (see open issues in end). (comment also
from Japan)
To the left: Lower neck adjustment (difficult to access when dummy in vehicle)
To the right: Head angle should be kept as adjusted in certification tests [include in
certification tests]
White to white or
white to red definition?
2.1.8 Adjust the THOR until the thorax tilt sensor coincides with the angle specified by the
manufacturer. If neither the seat back angle nor the thorax tilt sensor angle is specified by
the manufacturer adjust the dummy until the thorax tilt sensor reads TBD ± 2º.
Comment: Add reference plane for tilt sensors (as backup if no sensors or non-reliable
results (0° straight). 23° for the spine => read out in tilt sensor. Possible also to
measure on shoulder rigid surface.
Page | 20
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
How adjustable is pelvis angle? Is it defined with H-point measurement and then only
angle recorded? (comment also from Japan)
2.2.
Leg Placement
2.2.1 Extend the right leg without displacing the thigh from the seat cushion. Allow the sole
of the foot to settle on the accelerator pedal (if it reaches the pedal); the heel of the shoe
should be in contact with the floor pan.
Comment: What it does not reach the pedal?
2.2.2 Extend the left leg, without lifting the thigh from the seat cushion and allow the sole of
the foot to settle on the footrest (if applicable). The heel of the shoe should be in contact with
the floorpan. In case of tibia contact slide the foot rearward, toward the seat until a 5 mm
clearance between the tibia and vehicle structure is obtained.
2.2.3 Set the left and right feet in the neutral position (longitudinal centerline of foot in the
same plane as the lower leg/thigh, foot Y angle at -15 degrees +/- 2 degrees to lower leg), as
determined by the output of the potentiometers at the ankle.
Comment: How to determine without ankle potentiometers.
2.2.4 Without moving the seat, and while keeping the right thigh and leg in the same
vertical plane, set the right foot heel on Line L1. If the vehicle interior prevents the heel from
reaching L1, place the heel as close to L1 as possible, while maintaining a clearance of 0.25”
from the vehicle interior.
2.2.5 Without moving the seat, and while keeping the left thigh and leg in the same vertical
plane, move the left foot laterally to the left as follows:
•
If there is a foot rest move the left foot until it is longitudinally in line with the center of
the foot rest, or until the edge of the foot is 0.25” from the vehicle structure, whichever occurs
first.
•
If there is no foot rest, move the left foot until the left edge of the foot is 0.25” from the
vehicle structure or until the center of the foot is TBD mm from the center of the right foot,
whichever occurs first.
2.2.6 If sections 2.8.1 through 2.8.5 can be accomplished with both the left and right foots
remaining in a neutral position (as described in section 2.8.3) then no further fore aft
adjustment of the seat is necessary; skip to section 2.9. (The right foot can be in contact with
Page | 21
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
the accelerator pedal or not, as long as the neutral position is maintained and the right heel is
on Line L1 or as close as possible as described in section 2.8.4).
2.2.7 Readjustment of seat position
2.2.7.1 If contact between the pedals (or vehicle) and either foot prohibits the maintenance of
the neutral position, then the seat should be moved rearward as follows:
2.2.7.2 Power seat adjusters: The seat should be moved an additional 10 mm rearward using
the controls that primarily move the seat fore aft. After this readjustment of the seat, sections
2.6 through 2.8.5 need to be repeated. If after an initial adjustment of 10 mm rearward, the
feet cannot be positioned in their neutral position then the seat should be adjusted one more
time 10 mm rearward (for a total of 20 mm rearward adjustment – resulting in a seat position
of 35 mm rearward of mid track). If after this final adjustment of 10 mm rearward (for a total
of 20 mm rearward adjustment) the feet cannot be placed in a neutral position, then the right
foot should be placed in contact with the accelerator pedal and with the heel on line L1 or as
close as possible to L1 as described in section 2.8.4 and the left foot positioned as described
in section 2.8.5. In this case only the feet can be positioned in a non neutral position.
2.2.7.3 Manual seat adjusters: The seat should be moved rearward one notch. After this
readjustment of the seat, sections 2.6 through 2.8.5 need to be repeated. If after an initial
adjustment of one notch rearward, the feet cannot be positioned in their neutral position then
the seat should be adjusted rearward another notch. This can be continued until the feet can
be positioned in their neutral position, but the total adjustment of the seat cannot be more
than 20 mm. If the feet cannot be positioned in their neutral axis after the seat
readjustments, then the seat should be positioned in the most rearward notch that is 20mm
or less from the original position. The right foot should be placed in contact with the
accelerator pedal and with the heel on line L1 or as close as possible to L1 as described in
section 2.8.4 and the left foot positioned as described in section 2.8.5. In this case only the
feet can be positioned in a non neutral position.
2.2.7.4 If the seat is repositioned 10 mm rearward or 20 mm rearward as described in section
2.8.7.2, then the target H point, relative to vehicle coordinates should be adjusted accordingly
in the X direction (also in the Z direction, if the fore aft adjustment of the seat causes
changes in the Z position of the seat).
2.2.8 Confirm that the THOR H-point is still on within 10 mm of the target (as described in
sections 1.6.6 and/or 2.8.7.3) in the X and Z directions.
Comment: How flexible is pelvis angle?
2.2.9 Confirm that the head is still at 0º ± 1º.
2.3.
Arm and Hand Placement
Comment: This whole section needs to be updated due to the SD3 shoulders.
Shoulder adjustments. Adjust shoulder bracket hole to match indent showing nominal
position. Difficult to reach SW with nominal shoulder position => Elbows more lifted
=> Hand position 10 to 2 o’clock. 2.3.1 to 2.3.4 will be contradicted.
Measure point on arm to have as reference for last check.
Shoulder friction?
What if hands do not reach steering wheel?
Page | 22
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
2.3.1 Place the upper arms adjacent to the torso with the centerline as close to the coronal
plane as possible.
2.3.2 Maintaining the head alignment as determined above, place the right hand with the
palm in contact with the steering wheel at the rim’s horizontal centerline and with the thumb
over the steering wheel.
2.3.3 Maintaining the head alignment as determined above place the left hand with the
palm in contact with the steering wheel at the rim’s horizontal centerline and with the thumb
over the steering wheel.
2.3.4 If the hands don’t reach the steering wheel at the horizontal centerline, maintaining
the head alignment place them at symmetric location on the wheel, below the horizontal
centerline.
2.3.5 Tape the thumb of each hand to the steering wheel by using masking tape with a
width of 0.25 inch. The length of the tape shall only be enough to go around the thumb and
steering wheel one time.
2.4.
Verify that the feet are in the neutral position (+/- 2 deg) (unless the seat was
readjusted the full 20 mm as described in section 2.8.7.2, in which case the neutral position
does not need to be met), and in their proper lateral locations as described in sections 2.8.4
(right foot) and 2.8.5 (left foot).
2.5.
Verify that the head is level (0 +/- 1 deg.)
8.2
Open issues
The following open issues and actions were identified during the workshop
•
Reference points for tilt sensors (and hardware structure to control angles on)
•
BB to calibrate (and check) tilt sensors for Autoliv dummy (w42)
•
BB to switch abdomen measurement from LH to RH
•
Head angle w.r.t. specification tests (should be included in certification procedure)
•
How to make priority between neck and head?
•
Define shoulder position and update arm positioning => Possibility to use pin for
positioning in nominal position.
•
Specification of shoulder friction
8.3
Draft proposal for shoulder friction setting and positioning as proposed by Humanetics
Draft procedure for SD3 shoulder and arm friction adjustment
Prepared: Bernard Been, Humanetics Europe GmbH, 21 Oct. 2012, v0.
Introduction
Page | 23
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
The current procedure was written to achieve a starting point and reference for adjustment of the SD3
shoulder and arm joint friction for use during prototype evaluations. It was intended to have a suitable
friction for stable positioning of the dummy in a test environment, and aimed at intermediate friction
level (i.e. lower than the current 1G settings of HIII). This is achieved by specifying adjustment to
slowly sinking of the body segment being adjusted and by bending back the lower arm and hand.
Step by step procedure
1. Place the dummy in a stable upright position, with shoulders and clavicles in a more
or less horizontal plane and the jacket removed (or unzipped at the sides and
shoulders).
2. Shoulder z-axis friction. Lift the arm up for access. With a 13mm open box spanner
adjust the friction on the lower end of the shaft. The nut is on the side of the spine in
the arm pit area, access is between the 2nd and 3rd rib. Adjust the friction for smooth
forward and backward motion of the shoulder. The shoulder spring should be able to
bring the shoulder back close to its zero position (alignment hole and mark are visible
below the shoulder moulding).
Figure 1: Shoulder z-axis adjustment
3. Wrist. Adjust the wrist joint in two directions (3/8” and 3/16” hexagon wrench) to a
practical friction for a stable hand.
4. Elbow pin joint: hold upper arm shaft hanging vertical; hold lower arm horizontal and
bend back the hand; adjust the elbow joint (1/4” hexagon wrench) such that fore arm
goes down slowly after release. For easy access to the screw rotate the lower arm
about the vertical axis side ways. With the lower arm held horizontal, the joint can be
adjusted in this position.
Page | 24
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
Figure 2: Elbow pin joint adjustment
5. Humerus (upper arm) Y-axis joint: start from upper arm hanging vertical; rotate upper
arm up-forward about y-axis until horizontal; bend back the lower arm and hand and
hold by the elbow; adjust the friction in arm pit with a 19mm (or 3/4”) ring spanner,
such that the arm goes down slowly after release.
Figure 3: Upper arm y-axis adjustment
6. Humerus (upper arm) X-axis joint: start from upper arm hanging down vertically and
lower arm forward horizontally; rotate the lower arm about the upper arm shaft (zaxis) laterally to the side; then rotate the upper and lower arm up laterally to
horizontal and bend the hand back to the head (this is the typical posture of a body
builder showing his biceps); adjust the friction on shoulder bolt with 5mm hex wrench.
Please note that the shoulder may also lift. Check by pushing down on the shoulder
that the shoulder is on the stop. The friction is properly adjusted when arm goes down
slowly from horizontal after release.
Page | 25
THORAX D4.2 – Report with first preliminary dummy test experience
Public
Figure 4: Upper arm x-axis adjustment
7. Lower arm z-axis friction (moment along upper arm shaft); start from upper arm
hanging down vertically and lower arm and hand horizontally forward (~90° angle),
rotate upper and lower arm up laterally to horizontal and hold the upper arm by the
elbow in that position; adjust z-axis friction with 4mm hex wrench through a hole in
the upper arm flesh; adjust the friction such that the lower arm and hand go down
slowly after release.
Figure 5: Lower arm z-axis adjustment
8. Repeat all steps for the opposite side shoulder and arm joints.
.
Page | 26