Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Side Impact

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Biomechanics of Impact Injury

Abstract

In a side impact, the struck vehicle is at a disadvantage in terms of occupant safety because of the proximity of the side structures (e.g., the side door) to the occupant compared to the space available to the occupant in a frontal impact. The seat belt system is also not effective in preventing injury from a side impact. As a result, before side impact airbags were available, the fatality rate was high even though the speed of impact of the striking vehicle is low. In fact, in the 1990s, the annual fatality rate for side impact was close to 10,000 before FMVSS 214 for side impact was implemented, as shown in Fig. 16.1. However, after the standard came into full effect in 1997, the rate showed no substantive drop. The total fatality rate was 42,013 in 1997 and it dropped from a high of 43,510 in 2005 to 32,575 in 2014. That is, even with the introduction of active safety into our vehicles, side impact fatalities remain unchanged and is becoming a larger part of the fatality problem. The reasons for this anomaly are discussed in this chapter.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • J. Augenstein, E. Perdeck, J. Bowen, J. Stratton, M. Singer, T. Horton, A. Rao, K. Digges, A. Malliaris, J. Steps, Injuries in near-side collisions. 43rd Annual Proceedings/Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine, Barcelona, Sitges, 1999

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Cavanaugh, T. Walilko, A. Malhotra, Y. Zhu, A. King, Biomechanical response and injury tolerance of the pelvis in twelve sled side impacts. in 34th Stapp Car Crash Conference. SAE Paper No. 902305, Orlando, Florida, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Cavanaugh, Y.J. Zhu, Y. Huang, A.I. King, Performance and mechanical properties of various padding materials used in cadaveric side impact sled tests SAE Paper #920354. Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc., Warrendale, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  • J.M. Cavanaugh, Y. Huang, Y. Zhu, A.I. King, Regional tolerance of the shoulder, thorax, abdomen and pelvis to padding in side impact SAE Paper #930435. Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc., Warrendale, 1993

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Cavanaugh, T. Walilko, J. Chung, A. King, Abdominal injury and response in side impact. in 40th Stapp Car Crash Conference, SAE Paper No. 962410, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  • Y.C. Deng, Design considerations for occupant protection in side impact: a modeling approach, in 32nd Stapp Car Crash Conference, SAE Paper No. 881713, 1988

    Google Scholar 

  • R. Eppinger, On the development of a deformation measurement system and its application toward developing mechanically based injury indices. in 33rd Stapp Car Crash Conference, SAE paper No. 892426, Washington, DC, 1989

    Google Scholar 

  • Y. Huang, A. King, J. Cavanaugh, A MADYMO model of near-side human occupants in side impacts. J. Biomech. Eng. 116(2), 228–235 (1994a)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Y. Huang, A. King, J. Cavanaugh, Finite element modeling of gross motion of human cadavers in side impact. in 38th Stapp Car Crash Conference. SAE Paper No. 942207, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, 1994b

    Google Scholar 

  • Y. Huang, Automotive side impact protection—biomechanical issues. Ph.D. Dissertation, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  • A.L. Irwin, A.I. King, Y. Zhu, J.M. Cavanaugh, T.J. Walilko, Displacement responses of the shoulder and thorax in lateral sled impacts. in 37th Stapp Car Crash Conference, San Antonio, Texas, 1993

    Google Scholar 

  • C.J. Kahane, An evaluation of side impact protection. FMVSS 214 TTI(d) improvements and side air bags NHTSA Report No. DOT HS 810 748. Washington DC: Department of Transportation. National Highway Traffic Safety Adminstration, 2007

    Google Scholar 

  • D. Kallieris, R. Mattern, G. Schmidt, R.H. Eppinger, Quantification of side imnpact responses and injuries. in 25th Stapp Car Crash Conference, SAE paper #811009, San Francisco, California, 1981

    Google Scholar 

  • G. Klaus, R. Sinnhuber, G. Hoffman, D. Kallieris, R. Mattern, Side impact—a comparison between dummies and cadavers, correlations between cadaver loads and injury severity. in 28th Stapp Car Crash Conference, SAE Paper #841655, Chicago, Illinois, 1984

    Google Scholar 

  • J.H. Marcus, G. Schmidt, R. Mattern, D. Kallieris, R.H. Eppinger, R.M. Morgan, Human response to and injury from lateral impact. in 27th Stapp Car Crash Conference, San Diego, California, 1983

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Melvin, D. Robbins, R. Stalnaker, Side impact response and injury. in 6th International Tech Conference on Experimental Safety Vehicles (ESV), Washington, DC, 1976

    Google Scholar 

  • NHTSA, FMVSS No. 214—Amending side impact dynamic test, adding oblique pole test. Washington DC: Department of Transportation. National Highway Traffic Safety Adminstration, 2007

    Google Scholar 

  • C.C. Perry, H.R. Lissner, The strain gage primer (McGraw-Hill Company, New York, 1955)

    Google Scholar 

  • F.A. Pintar, N. Yoganandan, A. Sances, R.H. Eppinger, Instrumentation of human surrogates for side impact. in 40th Stapp Car Crash Conference, SAE Paper No. 962412, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  • C.E. Strother, G.C. Smith, M.B. James, C.Y. Warner, Injury and intrusion in side impacts and rollovers. SAE Paper No. 840403, 1984

    Google Scholar 

  • D. Viano, Biomechanical responses and injuries in blunt lateral impact. in 33rd Stapp Car Crash Conference. SAE Paper No. 892432, Washington, DC, 1989

    Google Scholar 

  • D.C. Viano, I.V. Lau, C. Asbury, A.I. King, P. Begeman, Biomechanics of the human chest, abdomen, and pelvis in lateral impact. Accid. Anal. Prev. 21(6), 553–574 (1989)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D.C. Viano, C.C. Culver, L. Evans, M. Frick, R. Scott, Involvement of older drivers in multivehicle side-impact crashes. Accid. Anal. Prev. 22(2), 177–188 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • J. Zhu, J. Cavanaugh, A. King, Pelvic biomechanical response and padding benefits in side impact based on a cadaveric test series. in 37th Stapp Car Crash Conference. SAE Paper No. 933128, San Antonio, Texas, 1993

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA

    Albert I. King

Authors
  1. Albert I. King
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Appendices

Questions for Chapter 16

  1. 16.1.

    In side impact, the following statement is valid:

    1. [] (i)

      Neck injuries are rather frequent

    2. [] (ii)

      The EUROSID dummy is very human-like

    3. [] (iii)

      The thorax is not sensitive to the stiffness of side door airbags and padding

    4. [] (iv)

      Aortic ruptures can occur

    5. [] (v)

      Rib fractures do not occur on the non-impacted side of the thorax

  2. 16.2.

    In side impact, the most frequently injured body region is

    1. [] (i)

      The head

    2. [] (ii)

      The neck

    3. [] (iii)

      The chest

    4. [] (iv)

      The abdomen

    5. [] (v)

      The upper extremities

  3. 16.3.

    Protection of elderly occupants in a side impact is important because

    1. [] (i)

      Elderly drivers run into people all the time

    2. [] (ii)

      Elderly drivers are more frequently involved in intersection type crashes than younger drivers

    3. [] (iii)

      Elderly occupants tend to not recover as well as younger occupants after they are injured

    4. [] (iv)

      (ii) and (iii)

    5. [] (v)

      (i) and (iii)

  4. 16.4.

    Single vehicle side impacts are frequently due to

    1. [] (i)

      Reckless driving on the part of young drivers

    2. [] (ii)

      Poor handling on the part of elderly drivers

    3. [] (iii)

      Skidding into telephone poles that should not have been there

    4. [] (iv)

      The weather only

    5. [] (v)

      All of the above

  5. 16.5.

    Side impacts occurring in intersections are frequently due to

    1. [] (i)

      Drivers running red lights

    2. [] (ii)

      Elderly drivers with reduced capacity to judge the speed of on-coming vehicles

    3. [] (iii)

      Skidding of cars into an intersection

    4. [] (iv)

      (i) and (iii)

    5. [] (v)

      (i) and (ii)

  6. 16.6.

    Several injury criteria for the chest have been proposed for side impact. Select the incorrect answer:

    1. [] (i)

      Thoracic Trauma Index (TTI)

    2. [] (ii)

      Viscous Criterion (V*C)

    3. [] (iii)

      Average Spine Acceleration (ASA)

    4. [] (iv)

      Chest Injury Criterion (CIC)

    5. [] (v)

      Chest Compression (C)

  7. 16.7.

    Results from tests conducted by Viano (1989) show that for side impact to the abdomen:

    1. [] (i)

      The value of T12 spinal acceleration for a 25% probability of an AIS 4+ injury is about 80 g

    2. [] (ii)

      The value of V*C for a 25% probability of an AIS 4+ injury is about 1.0 m/s

    3. [] (iii)

      The value of C for a 25% probability of an AIS 4+ injury is about 44%

    4. [] (iv)

      The value of peak impact force for a probability of an AIS 4+ injury is about 4 kN

    5. [] (v)

      (i) and (iii)

  8. 16.8.

    Dr. Cavanaugh conducted 17 cadaveric side impact experiments, using the Heidelberg type sled. He wanted to:

    1. [] (i)

      Determine the mechanical response of the thorax to a side impact

    2. [] (ii)

      Determine the tolerance of the thorax to a side impact

    3. [] (iii)

      Determine the optimal stiffness of padding for side door structures

    4. [] (iv)

      (ii) and (iii)

    5. [] (v)

      (i) and (iii)

  9. 16.9.

    Cavanaugh et al. (1990) found that padding can reduce injury severity due to a side impact. Select the incorrect statement:

    1. [] (i)

      Four-inch thick paper honeycomb with a crush strength of 8 psi had the best results—MAIS averaged 2.3

    2. [] (ii)

      Offset unpadded impacts in which the pelvis was stopped 6 in. before the rest of the torso was effective in reducing MAIS

    3. [] (iii)

      Unpadded impacts produced high values of AIS consistently

    4. [] (iv)

      Paper honeycomb padding stiffer than 8 psi was not able to prevent severe thoracic injuries

    5. [] (v)

      Arsan, a padding which yielded low values of TTI for the Side Impact Dummy (SID) caused severe injuries in the cadaver

  10. 16.10.

    The following findings refer to the side impact test results reported by Cavanaugh et al. (1990). Select the incorrect answer:

    1. [] (i)

      Aortic ruptures occurred in cadavers in unpadded as well as padded impacts

    2. [] (ii)

      The Heidelberg test impact duration is much longer than that of pendulum impacts conducted by Viano (1989)

    3. [] (iii)

      When soft (8-psi) padding was used, the maximum value for V*C was about 1.0 m/s

    4. [] (iv)

      When stiff (19 psi) padding was used, the maximum value for chest compression (C) was in excess of 50%

    5. [] (v)

      For rigid wall impacts, the peak upper sternal acceleration in the antero-posterior direction was in the range of 50–80 g

  11. 16.11.

    The chest band invented by Eppinger (1989) has the following characteristics. Select the correct answer:

    1. [] (i)

      It consists of a thin strip of steel with lots of strain gages attached to it

    2. [] (ii)

      It is based on the principle that strain is inversely proportional to the radius of curvature

    3. [] (iii)

      It needs to be calibrated twice, once while it is flat and once while it is wrapped around the chest

    4. [] (iv)

      The curvature data are adjusted using the strain data from the first and last strain gage of the band

    5. [] (v)

      All of the above

  12. 16.12.

    Based on the 17 cadaver tests done at WSU by Dr. Cavanaugh, which of the following parameters is the best predictor for side impact injury?

    1. [] (i)

      Thoracic trauma index (TTI)

    2. [] (ii)

      Viscous Criterion (VCmax)

    3. [] (iii)

      Average Spine Acceleration (ASA10, corrected for age)

    4. [] (iv)

      Compression (Cmax)

    5. [] (v)

      Lateral Spine Acceleration (T12y)

  13. 16.13.

    In evaluating the results of a Logistic analysis , the parameters of significance are χ 2, p, and r 2. Which of the following statements is true?

    1. [] (i)

      χ 2 should be as low as possible

    2. [] (ii)

      p should be as close to unity as possible

    3. [] (iii)

      r 2 should be as close to zero as possible

    4. [] (iv)

      All of the above

    5. [] (v)

      None of the above

  14. 16.14.

    When comparing the proposed injury criteria for side impact, using data published by Viano (1989) and by Dr. Cavanaugh, we find that:

    1. [] (i)

      The recommended criterion for V*C is the same, namely 1.0 m/s

    2. [] (ii)

      The recommended criterion for chest compression is the same, namely 31%

    3. [] (iii)

      The recommended criterion for TTI is the same, namely 140 g

    4. [] (iv)

      The recommended criterion for V*C is different

    5. [] (v)

      The recommended criterion for TTI is different

  15. 16.15.

    The Wayne State Side Impact MADYMO Model was:

    1. [] (i)

      Never validated against any cadaver data

    2. [] (ii)

      Was validated against volunteer data

    3. [] (iii)

      Was not validated against pendulum impact data obtained by Viano et al. (1989)

    4. [] (iv)

      Was validated against cadaver data obtained by Cavanaugh et al. (1990)

    5. [] (v)

      Was validated against field accident data

  16. 16.16.

    Validation of the Wayne State Side Impact MADYMO Model was done by:

    1. [] (i)

      Comparing model predictions with measured thoracic impact force

    2. [] (ii)

      Comparing model predictions with measured abdominal impact force

    3. [] (iii)

      Comparing model predictions with measured pelvic compression

    4. [] (iv)

      Comparing model predictions with measured sternum acceleration

    5. [] (v)

      Comparing model predictions with measured parameters for rigid impacts only

  17. 16.17.

    The Wayne State Side Impact MADYMO Model was exercised to study the effects of adding padding or air space between the occupant and the side door structure. It was found that:

    1. [] (i)

      Padding is not helpful, even if its stiffness is low

    2. [] (ii)

      Arsan padding preferred by the SID is also very beneficial to the human

    3. [] (iii)

      The effect of adding air space does not dependent on the shape of the door velocity pulse

    4. [] (iv)

      If stiff padding is used, it is the same as using no padding at all

    5. [] (v)

      None of the above

  18. 16.18.

    The Wayne State Side Impact MADYMO Model was exercised to study the effects of strengthening the side door structure and of engaging the shoulder during a side impact. It was found that:

    1. [] (i)

      The stiffer the door the better it is able to provide protection to the near-side occupant

    2. [] (ii)

      Peak values of TTI are dependent on the speed of the struck vehicle (second peak)

    3. [] (iii)

      Without shoulder engagement, peak thoracic force and compression tend to increase for a rigid side door

    4. [] (iv)

      In padded impacts, shoulder engagement does not play a large role in decreasing peak thoracic force and compression

    5. [] (v)

      Without shoulder engagement it is only necessary to use soft padding for the thorax and abdomen

  19. 16.19.

    In the side impact pendulum test series conducted by Viano et al. (1989) on the thorax

    1. [] (i)

      The impacts were purely lateral impacts

    2. [] (ii)

      The impactor mass was 14 kg

    3. [] (iii)

      The impactor diameter was 152 mm

    4. [] (iv)

      Chest deflection was measured by a string potentiometer

    5. [] (v)

      None of the above

  20. 16.20.

    The chest band developed by Eppinger is

    1. [] (i)

      Useful in side impact

    2. [] (ii)

      Very difficult to use and calibrate

    3. [] (iii)

      Measures chest deformation at a single level of the chest

    4. [] (iv)

      Assumes that the thoracic spine does not deform

    5. [] (v)

      All of the above

Answers to Problems by Chapter

Prob

Ans

1

(iv)

2

(i)

3

(iv)

4

(i)

5

(v)

6

(iv)

7

(iii)

8

(iv)

9

(ii)

10

(ii)

11

(v)

12

(iii)

13

(v)

14

(iv)

15

(iv)

16

(i)

17

(iv)

18

(iii)

19

(iii)

20

(v)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

King, A.I. (2018). Side Impact. In: The Biomechanics of Impact Injury. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49792-1_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49792-1_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-49790-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-49792-1

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation