Assessment of Injury Federal Aviation Potential in Aircraft ......Def Belt Tension Abdomen Pelvis...

Presented to:

By:

Date:

Federal AviationAdministration

Assessment of Injury Potential in Aircraft

Side-Facing Seats Using the ES-2

Anthropomorphic Test Dummy

The Fifth Triennial International Aviation Fire and Cabin Safety Research Conference

Richard DeWeese FAA Civil Aerospace Medical Institute

October 30, 2007

Assessment of Injury Potential in Aircraft Side-Facing Seats 2Federal AviationAdministrationOctober 30, 2007

Background

• Occupant injury assessments found in dynamic seat testing requirements focus on forward and aft-facing seats.

• Current FAA policy on side-facing seats cites injury assessments based in part on Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS)


Background

• Advanced means of assessing injuries in side impacts have been developed for application to motor vehicles.– Test dummies with improved biofidelity – More specific prediction of injury

• Inflatable restraint systems now available to potentially mitigate injuries in side-facing impacts.


Project Goals

• Conduct a project to evaluate the injury risk presented by a typical side-facing seat configuration using the state-of-the-art methods.

• Assess the potential for injury mitigation provided by inflatable restraint systems.


Project Tasks

• Conducted dynamic tests with typical aircraft side-facing seat configurations using the ES-2 ATD.– ES-2 ATD cited in proposed automotive

requirements– 44 ft/s 16 G (Part 25) test condition (used to allow

comparison with previous studies)– Rigid seat used for repeatablilty


Project Tasks

• Conducted dynamic tests with typical aircraft side-facing seat configurations using the ES-2 ATD (continued).– Seat and restraint configuration based on survey of

leading seat manufacturers• Rigid seat configuration reflected the pertinent reported

dimensions • Three point (body-centered) restraint system

– Seating Scenarios• Next to a rigid wall (full body support)• Center occupant of a multiple-place couch• Next to an armrest


Project Tasks

• Evaluated the potential for injury using current, proposed, and preliminary injury criteria.– 14 CFR 25.562

• Head Injury Criterion (HIC)• Shoulder Belt Tension

– FMVSS-214• Thoracic Trauma Index (TTI)• Pelvis Acceleration

– EU 96/27/EC• Viscous Criterion (V*C)


Project Tasks

• Evaluated the potential for injury using current, proposed, and preliminary injury criteria (continued).– Proposed FMVSS-214 (Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking)• T-12 (chest) Acceleration• Rib Deflection• Abdominal Forces• Pubic Force


Project Tasks

• Evaluated the potential for injury using current, proposed, and preliminary injury criteria (continued).– FMVSS-208

• Neck Forces and Moments• Preliminary Lateral Nij

– Research Criteria• Neck Bending Angle• Femur Twisting Moment• Belt Impingement on Neck


Project Tasks

• Evaluated the ES-2 ATD’s functionality when used in the aviation environment– Interaction with restraints– Durability

• Investigated test methods unique to side-facing seats– Seating methods for consistency


Project Tasks

• Evaluated the ability of inflatable restraint systems to mitigate injuries in these seating configurations– Inflatable Shoulder Belt– Self contained crash

sensor / inflationsystem.

– Prototype similar tocurrent certified systemsfrom AmSafe


Project Tasks• Test Matrix

Configuration Restraint Type

ATD Type

Test Number

ES-2 A05066 Conventional ES-2 A05068 ES-2 A05067

Center Inflatable

ES-2 A05070 Close Wall Conventional ES-2 A05065

Conventional ES-2 A05071 Far Wall Inflatable ES-2 A05072

ES-2 A05075 Conventional ES-2 A05076 ES-2 A05073 Inflatable ES-2 A05074

Armrest

Conventional FAA H-III A06004


Wall PositionConventional Restraint

Video Deleted


Wall PositionConventional Restraint

Upper-Rib Deflection (A05071)

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Time (ms)D

efle

ctio

n (m

m)


Wall PositionInflatable Restraint

Video Deleted


Center PositionConventional Restraint

Video Deleted


Center PositionInflatable Restraint

Video Deleted


Armrest PositionConventional Restraint

Video Deleted



Video Deleted



Upper-Neck Mx (A05075)

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

800

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Time (ms)B

endi

ng M

omen

t (in

-lb)



Femur Mz vs Leg Angle

-600-400-200

0200400600800

100012001400

-20 0 20 40 60 80

Lower Leg Angle (Degrees)Tw

istin

g M

omen

t (in

-lb)

ES-2 H-3


Armrest PositionInflatable Restraint

Video Deleted


Armrest PositionH-III ATD, Conventional Restraint

Video Deleted


Head Injury Results

ES2 Head Injury Response

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500

1750

2000A

0506

6

A05

068

A05

067

A05

070

A05

065

A05

071

A05

072

A05

075

A05

076

A05

073

A05

074

Cnv Cnv Inf Inf Cnv Cnv Inf Cnv Cnv Inf Inf

Center CloseWall

Far Wall Armrest

HIC

HIC after contact HIC15


Neck Injury Results

Upper Neck Peak Response

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

800A

0506

6

A05

068

A05

067

A05

070

A05

065

A05

071

A05

072

A05

075

A05

076

A05

073

A05

074

A06

004

Cnv Cnv Inf Inf Cnv Cnv Inf Cnv Cnv Inf Inf CnvH-III

Center CloseWall

Far Wall Armrest

Load

(lb)

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

800

Mom

ent (

in-lb

)

Up Neck Shear Fy (lb) Up Neck Tension Fz (lb) Up Neck Moment Mx (in-lb)


Shoulder Belt Tension Results

Shoulder Belt Peak Response

0200400600800

100012001400160018002000

A05

066

A05

068

A05

067

A05

070

A05

065

A05

071

A05

072

A05

075

A05

076

A05

073

A05

074

A06

004

Cnv Cnv Inf Inf Cnv Cnv Inf Cnv Cnv Inf Inf CnvH-III

Center CloseWall

Far Wall Armrest

Load

(lb)

Upper Shldr Belt Tension (lb) Lower Shldr Belt Tension (lb)


Conclusions• Injury Assessment

Tested Seat Configurations (Conventional Restraint) Body

Region Center Close

Wall Far Wall Armrest

Head HIC HIC HIC15

Neck Nij Prelim Nij

Prelim Nij

Prelim

Thorax Belt Tension Rib

Def Belt

Tension

Abdomen

Pelvis

Leg Femur Mz


Conclusions• Test Method Evaluation

– Consistent initial position achieved by preloading the lower torso during installation.

• ATD evaluation– Good overall functionality– Shoulder area not biofidelic– Neck not durable

• Inflatable restraint evaluation– Mitigated most injury risks


Conclusions• Proposed injury criteria can be met using

proper seat design features and advanced restraint systems.


Recommendations• Use of the ES-2 and its associated injury

criteria for aircraft seat tests would allow a better assessment of the potential for injury than the current test methods.

• Neck injury criteria are needed to interpret the high neck loads measured.

• Improvements in the ES-2 shoulder’s biofidelity would allow better assessment of the potential for injury caused by belt contact forces.


Acknowledgments• Co-authors:

– David Moorcroft, CAMI – Tom Green, AmSafe Aviation, Inflatable Restraints Division– Mat Phlippens, TNO Netherlands

• Seat survey participants:– Cessna Aircraft– BE Aerospace– DeCrane Aircraft

• Test articles:– Restraint systems: AmSafe– Seat Cushions: BE Aerospace


References• Soltis S, Frings G, van Hoof J, et al. Development

of Side Neck Injury Criteria and Tolerances for Occupants of Sideward Facing Aircraft Seats. NATO/PFP; May 2003; RTO-MP-AVT-097.

• Green T, Barth T. Injury Evaluation and Comparison of Lateral Impacts When Using Conventional and Inflatable Restraints. Creswell, OR: SAFE Association; October 2006; E509868.

• DeWeese R, Moorcroft D, Green T, PhilippensM.M.G.M. Assessment of Injury Potential in Aircraft Side-Facing Seats Using the ES-2 Anthropomorphic Test Dummy. Washington DC: Federal Aviation Administration May 2007; Report No. DOT/FAA/AM-07/13.

Assessment of Injury Federal Aviation Potential in Aircraft ......Def Belt Tension Abdomen Pelvis...

Documents

Transcript of Assessment of Injury Federal Aviation Potential in Aircraft ......Def Belt Tension Abdomen Pelvis...