controlled impact investigations head-on ...obtained from the filtered, unbonded strain gauge...

ROAD RESEARCH LABORATORY

Min is t r y o f Transpor t RRL REPORT LR 132

CONTROLLED IMPACT INVESTIGATIONS HEAD-ON IMPACTS OF FOUR SIMILAR CARS

-F•ROM DIFFERENT SPEEDS A G A I N S T A RIGID BARRIER

by 1. D. Nei lson, R. N.. Kemp,

J. G. Wal l , J. Harr is

• ROAD RESEARCH LABORATORY CROWTHORNE BERKSHIRE

1 968

Ownership of the Transport Research Laboratory was transferred from the Department of Transport to a subsidiary of the Transport Research Foundation on 1 st April 1996.

This report has been reproduced by permission of the Controller of HMSO. Extracts from the text may be reproduced, except for commercial purposes, provided the source is acknowledged.

CONTENTS

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Vehicles used in tests

3. Description Of tests

4. Decelerations of the cars

4.1 Fore and aft decelerations

4.2 Vertical accelerations

5. Damage to cars

5.1 Anglia A at 18.1 mile/h

5.2 Anglia D at 25.6 mile/h

5.3 Anglia B at 36.1 mile/h

5.4 Anglia C at 48.1 mile/h

5.5 Steering columns

5.6 Glass

5.7 Doors

5.8 Seats

5.9

.

Other passenger compartment damage

The Performance of the Seat belt assemblies and behaviour of dummy occupants

6.1 Anglia A

6.1.1 The behaviour of the dummy driver

6.1.2 The behaviour of the dummy passenger

6.1.3 Discussion

6.2 Anglia B



6.2..3 Discussion

6.3 Anglia C 6.3.1 The behaviour of the dummy driver


6.3.3 Discussion

6.4 Anglia D



6.4.3 Discussion

7. Discussion and conclusions

7.1 Car impact patterns

7.2 Safety belts and occupants

8. Acknowledgements

9. References 10. Appendix 1 The interpretation of thedeceleration-time curves

10.1 Event markers

10.2 Cine films taken underneath cars

10.3 Mathematical representation of head-on impacts

11. Appendix 2 Frontal accidents to Angl~as

P a g e

1

1

2

2

2

2

3

3

4

4

4

4

4

4

5

5

5

5

5

5

6

6

6

6

7

7

7

7

7

8

8

8

8

9

9

9

10

11

11

12

12

12

12

14

~ CROP~IV COPYRIGHT 196.8

Extracts from the text ma F be reproduced provided

the source is acknowledged

CONTROLLED IMPACT INVESTIGATIONS HEAD ON IMPACTS OF .FOUR SIMILAR CARS

FROM DIFFERENT SPEEDS A G A I N S T A RIGID BARRIER

ABSTRACT

In impacts of four Ford Anglias (model 105E) with a concrete block, at speeds of 18, 26, 35, 48 mile/h, (energies approximately 1 : 2 : 4 : 8)~ the deformation of the car, the motion of the passenger compartment and'dummies, and the forces on seat belts and anchorages were observed. Variations in impact patterns at

various speeds were also compared with theory..

The longitudinal'decelerations were similar to those for cars of similar design, impact duration ranging from 0.085 secs (18 mi le /h) to 0'.13 secs (48 mile/h) and peak decelerations from 24 g to 73 g. Vertical accelerations ranged from 4 g up and 2 g down (25 mile/h) to 15 g up and 10 g down at 48; mile/h. The latter are unlikely to affect the dummies because of the resi l ience of the upholstery. At 18 mile/h the welded joints in the toe-board gave way and the steering column moved, both by ½ inch. At 26 mile/h these movements were 6 inches. At the higher speeds the front bulkhead crushed into the passenger compartment, shortened the foot-space, moved the steering column at leas t 9 inches, displaced the transmission and bent the back axle, propeller shaft and the body sills. The floors, seats and mountings were badly distorted but did not

separate.

Safety belts functioned well, non-automatic pillar-fitting (lap and diagonal) being best. Spare webbing of the automatic ones tightened on the reel after locking, drawing 2-3½ inches off the reel, so the webbing length should be shortened consistent with comfort. The reel should be mounted near to the pillar anchorage point to limit the loaded length. All drivers struck the steering wheel; frequantly the knees of passengers and drivers (in one case the head of a passenger) struck the facia, which should therefore be of energy absorbing material. Sitting closer to such parts would also lessen impacts.

Agreement was fair between actual and predicted deceleration-time curves but was better with relative velocity. Tests at 38 mile/h (usual impact speed at R.R.L.) can be used to predict crushing at lower speeds and the relative

velocity curves for occupants.

1. INTRODUCTION

In previous tests at the Laboratory of controlled crashing of cars into a rigid barrier, the speeds of the cars at impact were between 35 mile/h and 40 mile/h. The mathematical representation of these head-on impacts suggested that the deceleration and occupant velocity curves could be computed for a Similar vehicle hitting the barrier at any lower speed. This note describes tests

with three saloon cars and a van version of the same make and model, from four different speeds between i '81mile/h and 50 mile/h to provide information on the forces, damage and movements of dummy occupants , in impacts from different speeds and to enable computed data to be compared with that derived from actual impacts.

2. VEHICLES USED IN THE TESTS

Par t icu lars of the vehic les used in the tes t s ere given in Table 1. The front part of the van up to and including the driving compartment was identical with that of the cars and was used for the lowest impact where damage would be expected to be confined to the front. Apart from a sl ightly larger capac i ty engine and minor s ty l ing differences in car C, and an experimental rear suspens ion and laminated ins tead of toughened glass windscreen in car D, the three cars were very similar. There was some evidence however that car D had previously suffered impact damage on the nears ide front corner. The vis ible s igns of damage were a twisted gearbox support member and s l ight ly twis ted body. This car was used for the tes t at the second s lowest speed (26~ mile/h). The weight of the three cars was equalised and provided with the same front to rear weight distribution as the van, by a t taching between 50lb. and 100lb. of lead sheet to the spare wheel carried in i ts normal posi t ion in the boot.

3. DESCRIPTION OF TESTS

The veh ic les were driven under their own power head-on into a rigid barrier. Each vehicle was instrumented with decelerometers to record the horizontal and vertical accelerat ions of the pas senge r compartment, event markers to determine the time interval"at which ce r ta in components moved (deta i ls and loca t ions of these are given in Table 2) and a l inkage driven potentiometer to s ignal movement of the s teer ing column. Dummy occupants restrained by different types of safety harness were carried in the front sea t s . The deceleration of the dummies and the loads imposed on the ha rnes se s were recorded. A full description of the method of carrying out these tes ts and of the preparation, instrumentat ion and recording methods used is given in Road Research Laboratory Report No. 92.

The speeds of impact aimed for were 19 mile/h with van A, 27 mile/h with car D, 38 mile/h with car B and 53 mile /h with car C. These speeds were" se lec ted to give kinetic[energy values on impact of one quarter, one hal f and twice that obtained with car B which was crashed at about the same speed as other different cars in earl ier tests . The actual speeds and kinetic energy values at impact are given in Tab le 3.

4. DECELERATIONS OF THE CARS

4.1 Fore and aft dece le ra t ions

Decelerat ion curves ob ta ined with potentiometric accelerometers which may not be suff icient ly respons ive to record the detai led frequencies and amplitude of the decelerat ions, are useful in determining the p re sence of peaks due to vibration or causes other than impact shocks in the recordings obtained with the higher frequency and amplitude strain gauge accelerometers. In these t es t s the dece le ra t ion time curves obtained from the unbonded, filtered strain gauge accelerometers and the potent iometr ic accelerometer mounted on the transmission tunnel of each car gave very similar curves as can be seen from Figs 1 to 4 although the potentiometric accelerometer t races lagged behind those of the strain gauge accelerometer by .001 to .003

seconds. The decelera t ion- t ime curves (Figs 5 and 6) given by the unfi l tered, high frequency, unbonded strain gauge acce le rometer show similar pat terns but with more peaks . For car C, the accelerometers mounted on the t ransmiss ion tunnel lagged behind the floor mounted accelerometers by .005 sec s at .03 s e c s after impact and by .009 s e c s at .075 s e c s af ter impact, due probably to the ex tens ive floor buckling tha t occurred during the impact from 48 mile/h. The s ignals from the unfi l tered unb0nded strain gauge acce le romete r mounted on the floor of car B were, at t imes, of such amplitude and frequency a s to exceed the r e sponse capab i l i t i e s of the recorder and the decelerat ion-t ime curve from this acce le rometer is therefore omitted. Data on the magnitude and duration of the dece le ra t ions of the cars are shown in

Table 3.

The interpretation and use of decelerat ion-t ime curves ob ta ined in head-on impac t s is d i s cus sed in Appendix 1. This procedure has been used on the dece lera t ion- t ime curves , obtained from the filtered, unbonded strain gauge acce le rometers , reproduced in Fig. 7 to g ive four patterns of decelera t ion in terms of the frontal deformation of the veh ic l e s (Fig. 8) and es t imates of decelerat ion-t ime curves for 40, 30, 20 and 10 mi le /h barrier impacts (Fig. 9) together with the corresponding re la t ive veloci ty-re la t ive movement curves for the dummy

occupants (Fig. 10).

4.2 Vertical Accelera t ions

When impacted agains t a rigid barrier, the initial point of impact i s at bumper height which is below the height of the centre of gravity of the car. Th i s c a u s e s the rear of the car to r ise on impact and cine films show the rear wheels leaving the ground at the higher impact speed. To obtain a measurement of the ver t ical forces in the p a s s e n g e r compartment a r i s ing from this and the subsequent rebound, a potentiometric accelerometer was mounted on the f loor of van A and on the t ransmission tunnel of the three cars . The dece lera t ion time curves ob ta ined from these accelerometers are given in Fig 11 and show a s igna ! with a frequency of approximate ly 120 cyc l e s / s ec , probably at t r ibutable to local vibrat ions of the t ransmiss ion tunnel and passenger compartment floor, superimposed on a 20 c y c l e s / s e c , waveform.

Smoothing these curves by removing the higher frequency peaks (Fig. 11) i nd i ca t e s that the maximum vertical decelera t ions of the passenger compartment s t ruc ture Were ± 5g a t 18.1 mi le /h (van A). From +4g to - 2 g at 25.6 mile/h~ from +15g to - 7 g at 36.1 mi le /h and from +15g to - 1 0 g at 48.1 mile/h pos i t ive being upward, negat ive downward. The ver t ica l movements at the point of the measurements are very small being of the order of I inch.

These accelera t ions are unlikely to have much effect on the dummies b e c a u s e they are damped by the mass of the sea t and dummy in the region of the s e a t mounting and further reduced

by the s ea t springing and upholstery.

5, DAMAGE TO CARS

Full detai ls of.the damage suffered by the cars is given in Tab le 4. Views of the exter ior of the cars before and after impact are given in P l a t e s 1-30, and the interior damage in P l a t e s 31-42. All four cars suffered major structural damage and as could be expected , the higher the speed of impact the greater the length of car Crushed and the further back in the p a s s e n g e r compartment damage occurred. F ig 12 shows the permanent crushing d i s t ance p lo t ted aga ins t

the speed at impact of the four cars.

3

5.1 Angl ia A at 18.1 mi le /h

Major s t ructural damage was confined to s l igh t crushing of the front Sub-frame forward of i t s a t t a chmen t s to the body, not however to the extend where the engine block had been in con tac t with th~ front bulkhead and al though the event markers between the wheels and arches showed con tac t had occurred, they were not in contac t on inspect ion af ter the impact. Apart • from some dis tor t ion of the of f s ide of the fac ia panel and spl i t t ing of the welded j o i n t s between the toe bo. ard and wheel arches there was no damage to the passenger compartment to the rear of the 'A * frame.

5.2 Angl ia D at 25.6 mi le /h

Damage to this car was a lso conf ined mainly to the front, although at floor level i t had ex tended further back, the propel le r s h a f t tunnel being crushed at i ts junction with the gear box. The front wheels remained in con tac t with the body s i l l s after the impact.

5.3 Angl ia B at 36.1 mi le /h

Damage to this ca r extended as far back as the rear axle. The A-frame roof, floor and side pane l s were buckled and the front whee l s were forced aga ins t the body s i l l s which were lowered. Suff ic ient force has been t ransmit ted a long the propelier~ shaf t to bend it and bow the back axle c a s ing rearwards and ro ta te i t forwards through about 40 °.

5.4 Angl ia C at 48.1 mi le /h

As can be seen from P l a t e s 17 and 23, a genera l co l lapse of the pas senge r compartment had~begun during this impact . The body s i l l s were bowed outwards and downwards t owi th in 4 inches of the ground and a la tera l fold had developed across the centre of the pas senge r compartment . Both A and B f rames were buckled, the floor had concert inered and the main c r o s s member forming the rear s e a t well was bowed forward. The roof was peaked longitudinally and folded inwards t ransverse ly . The rear axle c a s i n g was bowed rearwards and rotated forwards 90 ° , the different ia l unit shea r ing from the propel ler shaft.

5.5 Steer ing Columns

Pene t r a t ion of the s tee r ing column further into the passenger compartment was evident in all impacts . The recorded t r aces ind ica te s t ee r ing column movement of ½ inch in the impact a t 18 mi l e /h and about 6 inches a t 26 mi le /h occurring .068 sacs . and .023 sacs . after impact r e spec t ive ly . These appeared to be movements in the normal axis of the column there being no ev idence of bending as in the c a s e of cars B and C (P la tes 31 to 37). As the recording mechanism used ind ica tes movement which may take place in both the normal axis of the column and front upward bending, the records for cars B and C can only be used to indicate the time interved af ter impac t before the co lumns s t a r t moving (.016 sacs ) part icularly as in both c a s e s the mechanism was damaged by movement of the dummies .05 s ac s after impact. Measurements taken before and af ter the impac ts indicated no further penetrat ion in the 18 mi le /h impact , ½ inch at 26 mi le /h , and at l e a s t 9 inches for the higher speed impacts .

5.6 G l a s s

The toughened g l a s s windscreen in van A remained intact , those in cars B and C sha t t e r ed and d ispersed . The cine film showed this to occur in car B when i t was hit by the head of the dummy p a s s e n g e r and in car C by the rear edge of the bonnet. The laminated glass windscreen o f car D c racked ver t ica l ly near the centre, apparently without being hit by anything. The other windows in 811 the cars were of toughened g lass and remained intact apar t from t h o s e in the badly d is tor ted doors of car C.

5.7 Doors

All the veh ic l e s had 2 doors. Those of van A and car D could be opened af ter the impact without much effort but those of cars B an~ C could only be opened with the aid of a crowbar. All locks remained intact and workable excep t for those on car C which were jammed in the closed posit ion by the distortion of the doors.

5.8 Seats

The sea ts in all the cars remained a t tached to the floor al though from the high speed impacts of B and C there was some distort ion of s ea t frames and a t tachment b racke t s holding the front leg to the floor. The rear legs had s l ipped off the t ransmiss ion tunnel and the s e a t adjusters were distorted permitting the s e a t to s l ide forward. The back of the p a s s e n g e r s e a t in car D co l lapsed rearward, fa i l ing at a modification weld.

5.9 Other P a s s e n g e r Compartment Damage

Tearing of the welded joint be tween toeboard and front whee l arches occur red in al l the impacts and in those from 36 mile/h and 48 mile /h the wrapping of the board around the rear of the engine block crushed and reduced the pas senge r and dr iver ' s foo t space to an ex ten t which would probably cause injury by t rapping of the feet. The control peda l s were d i sp laced vert ically in these two tes ts .

6. THE PERFORMANCE OF THE SEAT B E L T ASSEMBLIES AND BEHAVIOUR OF DUMMY OCCUPANTS

The opportunity was taken in these t e s t s of inves t iga t ing and comparing the performance of various types of sea t belt assembly during actual head-on impacts . The anthropometr ic dummies used and the instrumentation of the dummies and sea t be l t a s s e m b l i e s are descr ibed in R,eference 1., Tension-t ime records for the webbing of the s e a t be l t s and dece le ra t ion- t ime records for the dummies are shown in F igs 13-22 and the resul ts of the t e s t s are summar ised in

Table 5.

5 . I Anglia A

The dummies in van A which was driven at a speed of 18.1 mi le /h into the concre te barrier were fi t ted with two different types of automatic sea t -be l t a ssembly . The driver was fitted with a Bri tax, lap-and-diagonal, three point, pi l lar fitting, automat ic s a f e ty be l t with an iner t ia reel designed to lock when the car was subjected to a decelera t ion grea ter than a minimum value of about 0.4 g. The passenger was restrained by a Brooks, Iap-and-diagonal , three point, pillar fitting, automatic sa fe ty belt with a reel designed to lock when the acce l e r a t i on of the

wearer relative to the vehicle exceeded 0.9 g.

5.1.1. The behaviour of the dummy driver. High speed film records of the impac t showed that the driver moved forward at the shoulders and that his head pivoted downwards, s t r ik ing the s teer ing wheel. Marks on the neck and the top of the forehead confirmed this . The impact of the head with the wheel however was not violent and the wheel was undistorted. The maximum forward movement of the dummy's shoulder relat ive to the vehic le was about 12 inches . I t was not poss ib le to measure this d is tance accura te ly because the dummy was hidden by the s ides of the van before the impact. 3.5 inches of webbing were pulled off the inert ia reel during the deceleration. This was measured using an adaptation of the piano-wire gauge descr ibed in

Reference 2.

From the webbing tension records it was es t imated that 0.037 seconds e l a p s e d from the initial impact of the van with the barrier until the tension in the shoulder loop s ta r ted to rise.

There are no d i scon t inu i t i e s in e i ther the webbing tension records or the ches t decelerat ion records ind ica t ing tha t the dummy probably did not s t r ike any part of the van interior with great force.

6.1.2. The behaviour of the dummy passenger . The p a s s e n g e r ' s motion during the impact was s imi la r to that of the driver. There was no indicat ion of contac t with the van interior apart from a s l i g h t mark on the right knee caused by s t r ik ing the lower dashboard.

The maximum forward movement of the dummy measured at the shoulder was 9½ inches. 2.2 inches of webbing were pul led off the iner t ia reel during the impact. The tension in the shoulder loop s ta r t ed to r i se 0.026 seconds af ter the init ial impact.

6.1.3 Discuss ion . The Brooks belt afforded bet ter protect ion in this t es t probably by allowing l e s s webbing to be drawn off the reel and hence l e s s forward movement of the dummy. This might be exp la ined by the fac t that there were 18 inches more webbing on the Britax reel which would require more to be drawn off before being t ight on the spindle. When fi t t ing automatic s a fe ty be l t s i t would be a d v i s a b l e to keep the length of webbing between the reel and the top anchorage point to a minimum by mounting the reel as high as is pract icable . It would a lso be a d v i s a b l e to~ ad jus t the length of webbing on the reel to the minimum needed to give the freedom of movement n e c e s s a r y to dr ive the veh ic l e safely.

6.2 Anglia B

The second impact , in which car B was crashed at 36.1 mile /h , was used to compare the res t ra in t provided by a p i l la r fi t t ing, lap and diagonal belt with that provided by a three point floor fitting, lap and d iagonal be l t of the same manufacture. (Irvin).

6.2.1 The behaviour of the dummy driver. The driver was provided with the pillar fi t t ing belt. During the impact the dummy went forward about 19 inches at the shoulder relat ive to the windscreen pi l la rs of the car. His face s t ruck the s teer ing wheel, which had been forced back and up into the p a s s e n g e r compartment. His nose scored the right spoke of the Steering wheel (P l a t e 31). The bottom rim of the wheel was bent forward about 2 inches by the ches t (P la t e 32). The sa fe ty belt , where i t p a s s e d over the ches t , had been abraded by the emery tape on the s t ee r ing wheel rim.

The ches t dece le ra t ion record showed a sharp peak at the same time as the shoulder loop tens ion fell suddenly - denot ing the impact of the upper ches t with the s teer ing wheel. The tens ion record for the lap loop was of an unusual form. There was a tear in the sea t covering near the posi t ion of the t ens ion gauge and i t is probable that the gauge was trapped between the dummy and the s e a t during the impact and produced a fa l se reading. The peak of the buckle s t rap tension record was s ign i f i can t ly lower than the shoulder loop peak. In t e s t s using this type of bel t to res t ra in a s e a t e d dummy during decelera t ions from 30 mile/h to rest in 2 ft., these peaks are of comparab le va lue (Ref.3). Th i s d iscrepancy indicated that the knees of the dummy probably s t ruck the dashboard with some force. Damage to the dashboard and knees of the dummy subs t an t i a t ed this a s sumpt ion (P l a t e 32). About 2 inches of webbing had s l ipped from the lap loop of the bel t to the shou lder loop.

The d r ive r ' s s e a t moved right forward from the rearmost posit ion on the adjustment during the impact . The bracket on the right hand side of the seat , res t ra ining the swinging adjustable leg fai led, a l lowing the s e a t to t i l t rearwards (P la te 33). The rear support of the sea t which normally r e s t s on the p rope l le r shaf t tunnel had s l ipped down bes ide the tunnel, bending the lower c ross member of the s e a t - b a c k s l ight ly forwards.

6.2.2 The behaviour of the dummy passenger . The p a s s e n g e r was equipped with a three point floor fit t ing b e l t . During impact he swung forwards about 28 inches measured at the shoulder, until his face struck the top of the dashboard caus ing a dent 6 inches by 3 inches by 2 inches deep (P la t e s 34 and 35).

From the high speed film records it appears that the windscreen sha t te red as the top of the p a s s e n g e r ' s head struck it, although the bottom left hand corner of the screen had s tar ted to come away from the car before the head made contact. Both the sharp metal edge of the windscreen demister aperture and the metal edge of the windscreen aperture would have presented hazards to a human pas senge r in this crash (P la t e 34). The t en s ion in t h e p a s s e n g e r ' s shoulder loop took a comparat ively long time to reach i ts maximum value, w h i c h was approximately half that in the dr iver ' s shoulder loop. The lap to shoulder loop of the sa fe ty bel t crumpled and jammed in the buckle after s l ipping about 2½ inches from the shoulder to the lap loop. Both the buckle strap and the lap loop tension records were s imilar and reach peak loads of about 2,0001bs 0.02 seconds before the shoulder loop tension reached i ts peak . Although the knees struck the dash-board they only c a u s e d sl ight denting ind ica t ing that the webbing tensions were suf f ic ien t to provide reasonable restraint for the lower part of the dummy.

The damage to the p a s s e n g e r ' s sea t was similar to that of the d r ive r ' s but the bracke t restraining the adjus table leg did n o t completely fail.

6.2.3 Discussion. The impact of the driver with the s tee r ing wheel and the co l l apse of his sea t made Comparison of the two types of bel ts more difficult. However, as the tens ion in the dr iver 's shoulder loop had reached a considerably highe r value before his impact with the .... s teering wheel than the maximum at ta ined in the p a s s e n g e r ' s shoulder loop, it is probable that ~ the pillar fi t t ing belt would have al lowed substant ia l ly l e s s forward movement than that al lowed

by the floor fit t ing belt.

6.3 Anglia C

This car was driven into the barrier at 48.1 mile/h. As the previous t e s t indica ted that the driver would probably str ike the s teer ing wheel if fi t ted with a convent ional s e a t belt assembly at this impact velocity, he was fitted with an a s semb ly of double s t i f fne s s to reduce his forward movement. This assembly cons is ted of two s tandard three point lap and diagonal pillar fitting bel ts , worn one over the other and a t tached to the same points on the vehicle . Because there was not enough room to attach a tension gauge to e i ther of the buckle s t raps , this measurement had to be omitted. The passenger was fit ted for comparison purposes with a standard three-point lap and diagonal pillar fitting safe ty belt .

6.3.1 The behaviour of the dummy driver. During the impact the high speed films showed the driver moving forward 16" at the shoulder relat ive to the rear of the car. Due to the crushing of the passenger compartment, this movement re la t ive to the A-post was 22". The left brow of the dummy's face struck the left hand spoke of the s t ee r ing wheel near the boss (Pla te 36). The safety belt, where it pa s sed over the chest , was frayed by the emery tape on

the s teer ing wheel rim. column which had been

Both knees struck crushing damage to the

The wheel was quite badly distorted by the impact and the s t ee r ing forced up into the passenger compartment was bent forward (P la t e 37).

and dented the lower dashboard during the impact . There was some feet, due to the distort ion of the floor.

6.3.2 The behaviour of the dummy passen_ger: The passenger*s shoulders moved forward about 17" relat ive to the rear of the car during the impact and 27" re la t ive to the A-post . The

head swung forward and down, striking the top of the padded dashboard and leaving a broad dent (Pla te 38).

The safety belt had slipped about three quarters of an inch from the lap to the shoulder loop. The left knee had just struck the dashboard and the right knee had made a dent in the dashboard approximately 2" by ½" deep (Plate 39).

The damage to the seats was similar to that in the Ford Anglia B.

6.3.3 Discussion. From the moderate belt tensions recorded, together with the high ches t decelerat ions and the positions of the dummies after the impact with their knees bent up near their chests , it would appear that a substantial proportion of the energy of the dummies was transmitted through their doubled-up legs to the dash_board. The impact of the driverPs head and chest with the steering wheel and the passenger 's head with the dashboard would also have absorbed some energy.

This was the only impact in which there was any appreciable crushing of the passenger compartment. The distortion was too great for either of the seat belt assemblies to provide complete protection although the energy absorbed by the webbing would probably have reduced the severity of the injuries received by the wearers.

Because of the severity of the damage and the presence of the steering wheel in front of the driver, it was not possible to say whether the double stiffness assembly did, in fact, provide a greater degree of protection.

6.4 Anglia D

This test , in Whic h the car was crashed at 25.6 mile/h into the barrier, was used to compare the performance of 2 similar patterns of belt, one constructed with nylon webbing and the other with terylene. Tests on these webbings have shown that the nylon webbing is slightly stiffer and has slightly lower energy absorbing characteristics (hysteresis).

6.4.1 The behaviour of the dummy driver. The driver was fitted with an Irvin 3-point, pillar fitting, lap and diagonal belt made from nylon webbing. During the impact the shoulder moved forward 13 inches relative to .the A-post. The nose and left brow struck the steering wheel boss and a spoke (Plates 40 and 41). The chest struck the lower rim of the steering wheel and the safety belt was abraded by the emery cloth on the rim. Film from a camera mounted in the ca r showed the wheel rotating through 90 ° after the impact so that the damaged spoke was directed a t the dummy's chest. Although the plastic covering of this spoke was shattered, the steering wheel was distorted very little indicating that only a comparatively small amount of the energy of the driver was absorbed by the wheel.

The right knee Of the driver struck and dented the lower dashboard. The webbing tension values recorded in the seat belt assembly were of the order expected from measurements made on the dynamic test rig at B.S.I. The chest deceleration record showed no high peaks. It is probable that the seat belt assembly provided the major restraint for the dummy and that the energy absorbed by the impacts with the dashboard and the steering wheel was relatively small.

6 .4 .2 _The behaviour of the dummy passenge_~r. The passenger was fitted with a Britax 3-point, pillar fitting, lap and diagonal belt made from terylene webbing. Because of the construction of the belt it was necessary to mount the lap loop tension gauge on a length of double webbing. To obtain the tension sca le (Fig. 19) it was assumed that the ratios of the maximum tension in the

8

lap loop to those in the shoulder and buckle strap would be the same as the corresponding ratios in the driver 's belt as the geometry of the two belts was similar.

During the impact the dummy's shoulders moved forward about 13 inches relat ive to the A-post. His head swung forwards and down but it did not appear to strike any part o f the car. As the dummy recoiled into the seat, the sea t back failed at a modified rear floor bracket and collapsed rearwards (Plate 42).

The inboard rear rests of both seats again slipped down beside the propeller shaft tunnel

but neither moved forward on its adjuster.

There was no apparent webbing slip in any part of either belt.

6.4.3 Discussion. Both belts restrained the dummies sa t is factor i ly and it was not poss ib le to detect any difference in performance due to the different materials used in their con struction.

7. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

7.1 Car Impact Patterns

One of the main reasons for test ing similar cars at four different speeds was to see whether the impact patterns were related to each other as predicted. The general resemblance in the decelerations as functions of the frontal deformation has already been d iscussed . The predicted decelerations at 30, 20 and 10 mile/h (Fig. 9) show that, when any zero error is removed there is some measure of agreement though this is not close. There is clearly a need for higher frequency accelerometers for the higher speed impacts in which everything happens more quickly. The difficulty is then to separate details of the decelerat ion from vibration of the structure to which the accelerometer is mounted. Itowever, when the relat ive veloci ty plots (Fig. 10) are considered, greater agreement is apparent, as these mostly depend on the general shape of the deceleration-time curve rather than the details. The detai led shape greatly affects the part of the curve just before the full impact velocity is reached and so d iscrepanc ies at this point are hardly surprising.

It is concluded that one test at about 38 mile/h (the speed usually chosen for impact tests at the Laboratory) is sufficient to predict the behaviour of the car for impacts at different

lower speeds with sufficient accuracy to show what parts of the car are likely to be crushed and

also what the relative velocity-curve of the occupant is likely to be.

The deceleration time curves and the relative velocity curves of the occupant (Figs. 7, 9, 10) are generally similar to those observed for several other cars in similar and medium weight ranges and so the Anglia has an average performance in this respect . A reduction in the velocity with which an occupant would strike that part of the car in ,front of him could probably be achieved at impacts above about 15 mile/h by stiffening the front bumper and support ing structure so that the car ' s deceleration was say 1Sg when its front had been crushed in about three inches and reducing the crushing st i f fness of the car structure 1 ft. 6 inches to 2 ft. from the front of the car to a corresponding degree. A large improvement would be poss ib le only if the front was extended by a foot or so and if it crushed that depth extra. It might be expected that in frontal impacts the components in the front of the car such as the bumper, wings and radiator would first be crashed between the barrier and the front of the engine block ; the passenger compartment, transmission and rear axle would then move forward loading the engine block at the rear. In the test from 18 mile/h however, although the front bumper, and radiator grill

9

meta l work were c rushed onto the radiator, c lea rance st i l l ex is ted between the radiator and the eng ine block ( the engine in fac t cont inued to run af ter the impact), the sub-frame which ex tended about 6 inches in front of the engine taking the load and crushing jus t forward of i ts a t t achmen t s to the body behind the engine block (P l a t e s 25 and 26). A sub-frame with these c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s des igned to crush in such a manner that the passenger compartment was carried o v e r the engine block would permit the p a s s e n g e r compartment to decelera te over a longer d i s t ance , diminish the fo rces on it and on the occupants and reduce the risk of the occupan t ' s f ee t be ing t rapped and injured by the crushing of the footspace around the engine block (as occur red with ca rs B and D). This in turn might permit the s teer ing box to be mounted so that the resu l tan t movement of the column was downwards. In the Anglias it was mounted forward of the point a t which the sub-frame crushed, caus ing the s teer ing column to penetrate further into the compartment and thus inc reas ing the risk of injury to the driver (P la te 36). The s t i f f n e s s and angle of the column and s t ee r ing wheel however was such that it bent when d r ive rs were thrown onto i t , thus absorb ing some of their forward energy with much less r isk of c h e s t injury than with a rigid assembly mounted at a small angle to the horizontal.

7.2 Safety be l t s and occupan t s

All the be l t s used in t he se t e s t s proved sa t i s fac tory in that no webbing slip occurred at any ad jus te r s or buckles . There was some s l ip of webbing from lap to shoulder loop. No webbing fa i lure occurred and none of the anchorage points fai led or yielded excess ive ly . In the higher speed i m p a c t s there was some distortion around the floor anchorage points. T h i s d is tor t ion would be benef ic ia l in that i t r epresen ts absorption of the energy of the wearer. Of all the different types of be l t s fitted in these t e s t s , the pil lar f i t t ing lap-and-diagonal non- au tomat ic bel t provided the maximum protect ion for the wearer.

To afford maximum restra int , the length of webbing sub jec t to loading and the consequent s t r e t ch ing during an impac t obviously should be kept t o a minimum. When fitting automatic s a fe ty bel ts , i t i s therefore adv i sab le to keep the length of webbing between the reel and the top anchorage point as short as poss ib le , by mounting the reel as high as is practicable. I t is a l so adv i sab le to ad jus t the length of webbing on the reel to the minimum needed to give the freedom of movement n e c e s s a r y to drive the vehic le safely. The more spare webbing there is on the reel the more will be drawn out as i t t ightens on the spool after this has locked.

The Anglia s ea t is a t t ached so tha t the heads of the front occupants are from 11 to 21 inches behind the windscreen. F ig . 10 s u g g e s t s that their heads are l ikely to hit the .glass or i t s frame at the full forward speed at c ra shes up to 30 mi le /h . If however, the head was initially only 11 inches behind the windscreen it might hit the g lass at only 28 mile/h in an impact from 40 mi le /h . The knees are probably usua l ly between 3 inches and 6 inches behind the facia so that, for an impact at above 10 mi le /h , some reduction in impact veloci ty below the full car speed occurs . For example , at an impact s p e e d of 20 mi le /h with 3 inches gap the knee is l ikely to s t r i ke the fac ia at about 11 mi le /h but with a 6 inch gap the knee is l ikely to str ike at about 15 mi le /h . The va lue of s e a t i n g the occupan t s c loser behind the front of the interior is readi ly apparent .

From the resu l t s of t h e s e t e s t s i t would appear that the driver was more likely to s t r ike the dashboard with his k n e e s than was the passenger . This was probably a result of the di f ferent locat ion of the d r ive r ' s legs before the impact due to the presence of the control peda l s but it may_ a l so in par t have been due to a rotational movement forwards of the lower par t of the d r ive r ' s body c a u s e d by the impac ts between the upper part of his body and the s t e e r i ng wheel. Th is could be inves t iga t ed on a Laboratory impact rig of the type in use for dynamic t e s t i ng at B.S.I. or proposed for R.R.L.

10

These t e s t s indicate that in high speed frontal impacts the passenger and the driver are likely to s tr ike the dashboard with their knees and that their heads may s t r ike the ~ p of the dashboard and the steering wheel respect ively. This is poss ib le even when wearing safety• belts, due to the crushing of the passenger compartment and the foreward movement of the occupants in their safety belts. It is thus important that, in addition to f i t t ing safe ty bel ts , the dashboard and steering wheel of a veh ic l e shou ld , as far as poss ib le , be made S0 that they are capable of absorbing some of the energy of the vehicle occupants .

8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The members of the research team who took part in this inves t iga t ion were R.D. L is te r , I.D. Neilson, R.N. Kemp, J.G. Wail, J. Harris, D. Monk, G. Brock, T. Gosling~ G. Donne and

V. Meades.

The cars used in the tes ts were provided by the FORD MOTOR COMPANY LIMITED.

The photographs of cars damaged in accidents were provided by the Labora to ry ' s Accident Investigation Unit.

.

.

.

9. REFERENCES

KEMP R.N., I.D. NEILSON, J. WALL AND J. HARRIS. Head on Impact T e s t s of three cars against a rigid barrier, Ministry of Transport, Road Research Laboratory, Laboratory Note No. LN/907/RNK, IDN, JW, JH Harmondsworth 1965 (Unpublished).

LISTER R.D. and B.N. FARR. Performance of Seat bel t a s sembl ie s in control led impact tests. Bull. Mot. Ind. Res. Ass., 1963 (Motor Industry Research Assn.)

WALL J. The deceleration pattern of the British Standards Inst i tut ion dynamic tes t rig for seat belt assemblies. Department of Scientific and Industr ial Research. Road Research Laboratory. Laboratory Note No. LN/830/JW. Harmondsworth 1965 (Unpublished).

1 1

10. APPENDIX 1

THE INTERPRETATION OF THE DECELERATION-TIME CURVES

Decelerat ion- t ime curves of car impacts are of l i t t le value in themselves. However, the information which can be derived from them is one of the reasons for carrying out impact tests .

P lo t s of decelerat ion as a function of the depth to which the front of cars have crushed can be made from the impact decelerat ion-t ime curves. These are shown in Fig. 8 for the four Anglia c rashes . They are derived from the accelerometer records shown in Fig. 7. It is to be expected that the plots as a function of frontal deformation might be similar for the four different speed impacts and this is seen to be so. There is some uncertainty as to time and posi t ion of the s tar t of the impacts. This is because of the small accelerometer lags, the low init ial dece lera t ions and perhaps small inaccurac ies in the analysis.

10.1 Event Markers

The s igni f icance of the various peaks in the deceleration patterns is partly explained by the event markers. Their t races are marked 1, 2 and 3 on Fig. 8. 1 and 2 refer to the wheels having been displaced back on to the wheel arches after the suspension had buckled and the wheel a rches were about to be loaded. It is c lear that the dips in the curves at 1.1 ft., 1.2 ft . ' and 1.35 ft. for cars C, B and D respect ive ly are equivalent and should be plotted together at- the same deformation. Car D crashing at 25.6 mile/h only just reached this point as it stopped. The event marker 3 represents the s tar t of the displacement of the engine unit which may occur a t a small load. But at greater deformations a large decelerat ing load is probably transmitted to the car through the gearbox and propel ler-shaft assembly as it is pushed back relative to t h e c a r .

10.2 Cine films taken underneath cars

The underneath cine films also i l lus t ra te the movement of the suspension and the d isp lacement of the engine assembly. Vinten films were obtained for all cars except A, and a Fas t a i r film was taken of car C. The films proved difficult to analyse but they generally confirmed the accelerometer and event marker results (Figs. 7, 8). For example in car D, ana lys i s of the film taken underneath the car showed that the passenger compartment floor dece lera ted in the same way as the complete car. This was confirmed by the undamaged s ta te of the floor after the crash. It a lso appeared from the film that the engine began to move relat ive to the rest of the car, although this movement was not confirmed by the event marker. Similarly from the film for car B it appeared that the engine was displaced earlier than the event marker indicated. These differences are probably due to errors between the respective time bases and/or to the angle from which the underneath film was taken. The time during which the engine is marked as moving begins when the engine appears to move relative to the car until the engine is almost s topped relat ive to the barrier. The car C (48 mile/h) films sugges t that the car or all that part seen from underneath stopped by 0.07 sec. and it is poss ib le that the remaining decelera t ion was a rebound. Estimates (Figs. 7, 8) of wheel and engine displacement are derived from the film, though again there is some zero error uncertainty. Both films clearly show the frame buckling behind the steering box very early in the impact (about 0.012 sec. after contact ) and so the steering column movement must start at that time.

10.3 Mathematical representat ion of head-on impacts

The mathematical representat ion of a car head-on impact is d iscussed in reference 1. A car c rash ing in an impact is not a rigid mass, but despite this the best form of the equation of

12

motion appears to be M~ = - F , where M is the mass of the undamaged portion of the ca r ; M is a function of x, the distance an undamaged part of the car has moved forward after the s tar t of the impact. F is the force between the crushed and the undamaged port ions of the car and is also a function of x. Thus the deceleration ~ is only a function of x and on this assumption the deceleration for any lower speed can be estimated from a deceleration-t ime record of a test impact. A P e g a s u s computer programme V411 has been developed which does this. I t also computes the relation between an occupan t ' s relat ive velocity V when he hi ts the front of the passenger compartment as a function of relative movement L, which is the s p a c e ahead

o f him before the impact.

A refinement of the computer programme is to consider the engine assembly separately. I t is assumed to have a l inear spring st i f fness in front of i t and another behind i t which transmits the decelerating force to the rest of the car. When each part of the structure around the engine crushes suff iciently the force is assumed to reach a peak deceleration and thereafter to crush uniformly but at a lower deceleration. The engine is thus slowed by the crushing of the structure ahead of i t and in i ts turn crushes the structure behind i t as the car runs into the

• barrier. Measurements on the four cars show that the engine assembly i sd i sp laced in this way,

but the results are not yet available.

13

11. APPENDIX 2

FRONTAL ACCIDENTS TO ANGLIAS

Four frontal impacts to Angl ias are l i s ted with their detai ls in Table 6 and the cars are shown in P l a t e s 43 to 51.

Accident 696 is cent re head-on and it seems to correspond to a barrier crash at say 22 mile /h . The internal damage differs from that of t es t A a.s the two occupants were not wearing safe ty belts as were the dummies in the test . The driverts ches t injury was probably received from hit t ing the s teer ing wheel which is sl ightly bent and the column is also slightly out of posi t ion. He may have been thrown to the left of the s teering wheel. The windscreen was shat te red though whether by the occupan t s ~ heads or by the bonnet cover is uncertain.

When a car c ra shes not exact ly head-on, the damaged side can be compared with one of those damaged in the barrier tests , but its decelerat ion and speed before impact are less than for the car tes ted aga ins t a rigid barrier which had comparable damage.

Accident 716 is rather unusual in that the driver was killed through the impact and damage was re la t ively slight. He seems to have been ejected forwards through the windscreen.

Safety bel ts were worn in acc ident 701 and 789. These two are the most severe impacts o f the four. The driver in acc ident 701 was kil led despite wearing a diagonal belt but the car suffered two separa te impacts, the one of the rear, occurring first, probably caused the driver to lose control before h is car hit a bridge abutment on a motorway. The steering column was badly displaced. Though the injuries to the occupants of the Anglia in accident 789 were c l a s s i f i ed as ser ious , the protection afforded by the belts seems to be reasonable cons ider ing the crumpling of the pas senge r compartment on the driverts side.

14

Body type

No. of doors

Where hinged

Body construction

Engine capacity c.c .

Location

Drive transmitted to

Steering type

" position

Gear shift lever posi t ion

Type of seats Front

Rear

Type of safety Windscreen

glass Side-Windows

Rear-Window

Type of safety Driver harness

Front passenger

Suspension Front

Rear

Tyre Size

Weight as Tested Ibs

on Front Axle lbs

on Rear Axle Ibs

Overall length.

width

height

Wheelbase

T r a c k - front

r e a r

TABLE 1

Detai ls of Cars Used

A :. . I C D *

VAN [ SALOON

TWO

LEADING EDGE

997

ALL S T E E L UNITARY

FRONT

REAR WHEELS

RECIRCULATING BALL

RIGHT HAND DRIVE

CENTRAL FLOOR

INDIVIDUAL TIPPING

BENCH - removed for t e s t s

TOUGHENED I LAMINATED

TOUGHENED

TOUGHENED .

P i l la r Fixin~ P d l a r , F l x m g , [ P i l l a r F ix ing [P i l l a r F ix ing -i ap oiagona,! | Lap & diagonal Floor. Fixing 1, . . . . i , . . . .

. . . . I, . . . . I~ap c~ °xag°nai IbaP c~ °lag°nax mtomatic tee, [t~ap a~ a x a g o n m /

INDEPENDANT COIL SPRINGS

5.60 x 13

2178

1083

107.4

;EMI E L L I P T I C L E A F SPRINGS

5.20 x 13

2188 2208

1083 1086

1064 1066

2191

1066

1096

12' 4" 12' 7"

4' 11" 4' 9"

5 ' 1 " 4 ' 8 "

7' 7½" 7' 6"

3' 10¾" 3' 10"

4' 0¼" 3' 10"

* Rear Compartment of CAR D was strengthened to take an exper imental rear suspension.

15

0,1

.< [.-,

o

0

0

5 E

0

0

.9

0

0 E

oo 0 ,<

c:l 0 -.n 0.,

0

0

• o !

u~ E

t:: "~

O ~

I::l .o

o...i E t::l

• ~ t::l

,.c:l ,~ r~

::n < ~ "-"

o

0 0

¢d 0 ~

L ~

L~

~ cH

0 0 0

0 ~ 0

oo

0 0 0

¢::l

0 " ~

0 0

<

0

o...=

0 ;:>

0 0

.<

o

L~

LO 04 ~ C'q

Lt3 U3

OOC'q ¢ ~ t ' ~

E .'-~ E

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

~0 O0

0 0 0 0 I.t3 0 0 0

0 0 0

u'3 ~ u3

.-o =3,-0

E .'~ E .< ~ . <

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '~"

u3 03

0 0 0'~ 0'~

0 0 0 0 t.t3 0 0 0

t - ( v-(' ~-4

r./3

u'3 .,~ 0 0 0

u3

/ u'3

I .~ o,1

oi o~ 04,.0 ¢'~ oq o") o,~

.-u = 3 . ~ • •

E ~ E" • < ~ . <

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lt3 It ')

0 0 O~ O~

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

< < < < < < < < < < < <

. < . < .< " 0 " 0

0 0 0 0

..<

.< .< .<

0 0 0 •

.<

< < <

0 0 0

o

< o

• 0

1.4

== =

0

E E ~ o .

•

"~ 0 0

0 z

16

TABLE .3

Summary of results

CAR VAN A CAR B CAR C CAR D

Total weight as crashed

Speed at impact

Kinetic energy at impact

lbs.

mile/h

• ft/ibf

2178

18.1

24,000

2188

36.1

94,000

2208

48.1

168,000

Overall longitudinal deformation ft.

Mean overall deceleration g

Duration of impact secs.

Max. Deceleration of Passenger for any 0.01sees

.62

18.2

0.085

13

1.66

26.0

0.11

25

2.79

28.6

0.13

35

Peak Deceleration of Passenger Compart. g

Passenger Dummy

Maximum Deceleration of Chest g

Duration of Deceleration secs.

Tension in Safety Harness Lap Loop lbs.

Tension in Safety Harness Shoulder Loop lbs.

Tension in Safety Harness Buckle Strap ibs.

Driver Dummy

Maximum Deceleration of Chest g

Duration of Deceleration secs.

Maximum Tension in Driver's Shoulder Loop ibs.

24

30

.08

1310

1040

1220

35

.09

820

48

54

.12

1950

1320

2240

67

.095

2500

73

97

.09

2520

1900

2120

68

.12

1880

2191

25.6

48,000

1.17

19.3

0 .09

25

45

42

.09

1200

1820

1850

46

- .09

2090

17

TABLE 4 (I)

Details of damage to cars

Overall Length Before

After

Wheel- base Before

After BODY Front and Engine

Compartment Bumper

Front Grill

Wings

Lamps

Bonnet lid

Passenger Compartment

Doors

Locks

Hinges

Handles

Windows (all toughened

glass)

Shell Side panels

Roof

A-frame

i8

CAR A B D

LHS RHS

148 ins 148 ins 141½ins 14!½ins

91½ins 91½ins 89½ins 90 ins

Flattened, mounting brackets buckled

Crushed and flattened

Crumpled and flattened

Headlamps (lens) smashed

Transverse fold

All Both jammed shut but could be opened with force. Undamaged

Intact and Operating

Intact

Intact

Intact and operating

No damage

No damage

No damage

LHS RHS

151 ins 151 ins 132 ins 131 ins

90 ins 90 ins 8S ins 72¼ins



Cmmpled and flattened

Headlamps (lens) smashed Side lights intact

Transverse fold Catch sprung

c I RHS LHS

151 ins[ 151 ins 117½ins I 137 ins

LHS

151 ins ll7½ins

90 ins 72¼ins

90 ins 90 ins 73 ins 87 ins

Flattend, mounting brackets buckled


Crumpled and flattened Headlamps (lens) smashed

Transverse fold

doors remained closed throughout impact Both jammed shut. O.S. opened with difficulty. N.S. Completely jammed.


Intact

Intact

N.S. Intact and operatin g O.S. Intact jammed open.

Vertical inwards buckling forward Of rear axle

Lateral crease on O.S. Forward of B frame.

Both jammed shut buckled & bowed outwards N.S split down front edge.


N.S. Window handle broken

Both disintegrated

Vertical inwards buckling forward of rear axle

Arched longitudinally. Both sides ~ creased inwards forward of B frame. Seams splitting at side panels. Vertical posts bent forward above waist level and creased at roof joint.

RHS

151 ins 138½ins

90 ins 87¼ins


Crashed and flattened

Flattened

Headlamps (lens) smashed

Transverse fold

No damage

No damage Slight creasing of O.S. vertical at roof joint.

No damage

Intact and operating


Intact

Intact

Both jammed shut creased along front edge.

TABLE 4 (2)

PASSENGER COMPARTMENT SHELL (cont.) B Frame

Floor

Propeller Shaft Tunnel

Body Sills

Rear Bulkhead Safety Harness Attachment Points

INTERIOR FITTINGS FRONT SEATS (Rear sea t squabs removed prior to test s )

Facia

Windscreen

CAR A B C D

No damage

Weld joint between toeboard

& front wheel arches torn.

No damage

No damage

No damage

Held firm

Frame & mountings intact & undistorted

Distortion of O.S. around s teer ing column.

Toughened g lass Intact

No damage

Considerable concert ina buckling of floor to rear of front seats . Toeboard dis tor ted & torn from front wheel arches folded round engine block.

Some distort ion & tearing round geal lever opening.

Bowed outwards ,& downwards by l e s s than 1" midway along door opening.

Torn at bottom & p u s h e d forwards Some pull ing up of floor but held finn

Distortion of s ea t & back rest frames. Bracket secur ing N.S. l eg pulled away. Others dis torted but held.

Severely buckled dent in top surface opposite N.S. passenger. Dent in bottom edge to O.S. of steering coi. Glove locker lid smashed.

Toughened glass Shattered and dispersed

N.S. ver t i ca l pos t buckled c r eased &

pa r t i a l l y torn from roof. O.S. post bowed rearwards & inwards.

Concert ina buckling a long whole length. Toeboard ex tens ive ly buckled & folded round engine touching front sea t s in centre. Split from front wheel arches .

Badly <tistorted & torn at gear lever opening by movement on to lever

Bowed outwards & downward by about 3" midway along door opening. B e n t upwards at rear wheel arch.

No damage

Some pul l ing up of floor but he ld firm

Both s ea t frames distorted. Mounting brackets d is tor ted but held Both ad jus t e r s broken a l lowing sea t s to:move fully for 'd from

.fully backward posi t ion.

Severely buckled & dis tor ted par t ia l ly torn away from verti- c a l s of A frame. Dents top & bottom opp. passenger & on bottom edge tO O.S. of steering column.

Toughened glass Shattered and dispersed

No damage

Toeboard buckled & torn at weld joint to front wheel arches.

Creased at gear box cover junction.

No damage

No damage

Held firm

N.S. collapsed at point of previous weld repair. O.S. intact.Mountings held.

Buckled on O.S. by movement of s tee r ing column. • Dent bottom edge to O.S. of column.

Laminated g lass Ver t ica l crack in cen tre

19

TABLE 4 (3)

COMPONENT

INTERIOR FITTINGS (cont . ) P AR C EL TRAY

Instruments

Control knobs

Control pedals

Steering Column

Steering Wheel

REAR COMPARTMENT

FRONT SUB ASSEMBLY

Sub-frame

A

Intact

Intact

In tact

Intact no displacement

No apparant damage

Rim bent s l ight ly downwards (I") round lower half.

No Damage

Main members creased at point of attachment to body.

CAR B C D

Distorted by steering column movement

Panel smashed Instrument face intact

Intact

Displaced upwards by about 4"

Penetrated fully into passenger compartment (Steering box in contact with underside of car) bent forwards & upwards & to O.S

Rim bent downwards round lower half

Spare wheel carrying 100 Ibs ballast moved forward tearing bottom of bulkhead.

Main members creased & tele- scoped Front & second cross members buckled & bowed rearwards.

Buckled & torn particularly near s teer ing column.

Panel Smashed Instrument face intact

Wiper control knob broken ~ff

Displaced upwards by about 5". Accelerator twisted.

Penetrated fully into passenger compartment bent forwards & upwards.

Rim bent downwards & flattened along lower half which had also split at junction with spokes.

Slight buckling of side panels.

Main members creased & tele- scoped at front & at point of attachment to body. Front cross member buckled, gear box Support member buckled & partially tom away from frame

Dislodged to O.S. of steering column

Panel smashed & displaced. Instrument face intact

Intact

Pushed about 1" further into passenger compartment.

Rim bent downwards round lower half.

No damage

Main members c reased & tele- scoped at point of attachment to -body. Gearbox support member had been buckled in a previous accident.

20

TABLE 4 (4)

COMPONENT

• FRONT SUB ASSEMBLY (cont.)

Suspension Units

Wheels

Engine & Gearbox

REAR TRANSMISSION & SUSPENSION

Propeller Shaft

Back Axle

Wheels & Springs

CAR A B C D

No apparent damage

Intact

No apparent: damage. Engine continued to run after impact

No "apparent damage

No apparent damage

No apparent damage

Displaced but Intact lower wishbones twisted

Hard up against body s i l ls but undamaged

Res t of car moved forwards relative to these units forcing them downwards towards rear

i

Creased downwards into V forward of back axle

Bowed rearwards in centre & rotated to bring diff. nose down

Considerable toe in, no apparent damage

Displaced & lower wishbones twisted

Hard up aga ins t body s i l l s , rims buckled, tyres f ia t

Res t of car moved forwards re la t ive to these uni ts , front of pas senge r compartment wrapping round engine block. F o r c e d downwards at rear.

Buckled, sheared off at rear U.J.

Bowed rearwards in centre & rotated to bring diff. nose down

Considerable toe in, spring main l eaves h a d ~1 ver t ica l upward se t 6" from front shack les .

Displaced

In l ighter contact with body s i l l s Undamaged.

Res t of car moved forwards relat ive to t h e s e units, front of passenger compartment contac ted engine block but l i t t le wrapping action~ no v i s ib le downward displacement .

No apparent damage

No ~apparent damage

No apparent damage

21

~'~

o c~

N~

g~ - ~

o

°- i .~.~ ~-~ ~ ~o E

~0~o

, ~

"N

-g e ~

~J

7~

o ~

o

Z

~=~ A

I=

o,

r ~

Z

o ~ .~ r~

~-~

0 ~

o~ ~ 0 " , ~ e U ~

~ k

~ Z

o ~ '~

~ o

~

. ~ m , . ~ ~ ® o , ~

~ ~ ~ o . ~ N ~ ,

• ~ c

~c: p. o

~'~

o - ~

o

o ~ o , * 7 o - ~

o

~ .o

2 2

~D

.< [.-,

"O

O

~.,

o

* ~

~-e *.-I ~.I

~J

o .~O

ID

o ~

o,,-I

. .~ e . , .

. ~ac~, - ~)

~ ~ ' N ~ .

• " ~ ' * ' ~ ' - - ~ ~ ~ O ¢'~ ~1. I.~ . ~ ,.el ~ . ~

° o

• , 8 ~ ~ 'Z

"~ ~ e'~ ~ . I ..-, ~: ,..,"0 .".,

f~O o° °°

oo

c ~ o

0,.~ ~ o,-~

"00~

o . 5 • o

:a r n . . - , ~ o r :

•

• ~ ,..~ ,-, 1 ~ , . ~ -~ ~

. ~ ~ ' i ~ ~ ~

2 o ~ e , . " ~ o

. . e = ~ ' . ' . ~ .~ "~: ~

r~ -'- , o c t ; - , _ , . = ~ .,-~

,'-~ ~ ~ ""~ . ~ ...4 ~ . , - , ~ ' ~ . o

~ e e ~ ~ , ~ . c~ . ,

r.~ ~ .~ 5 ~ ~ .

e .e',-, r~',.~ ~ ~ = "a .

0 . ~ . . . ~ "~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , -Q

. . ~ . . = ~ ~ ' - ' = E ~ ~ ~

> , a ~ ~Z) O u~ , ~ ~, ~ 0 1 ~ " ~ ' . ' . - ~ .,.~ ~ ~ r'~ ~,.. ~ r'~ ~ . . ~ 0

~"~ ~ . ~ 0 c~ . , ~ c~'~.~

~.~.,~ ~ o~ ~ ~ 0 ~ t'tl ~ O . O ~ ~0.~, m ~ ~ 0 ~0,., O~ ~ cn ~ ~a _ 0 ~... 0 (~ . , ~ _ 0 93

~.u . " " ~ 0 e., ~-. ~=~ < = ~ o " ~ u ~ - ~ ~ . . o " ~ c~

. ~ . ~ c~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O . ~ ~ , ' ~ .~ .

,--, o .~. 8 .~

. , .~I

o ~ ~ - ~ o

oo I-4 ~ ° °

.= ~ .~ m."

5

m

m

"O m

.,.~ "~ • ° ~ . . I

,~ . " ~ . . I~ ~

O

v

o ~

O

~J

oo~

° , - I ~

~ m

z

m ~ o . " ~

V

o ~

r ~ ,'~ ":'!. ~ ~ o - _ , o ~ o . - ~ , ~ ~ ~ o ~ ,

~- o u_ ~-o~, "~- r .~ , , , 0 ~0 L,~,-~ ~.u ~ ~ - - ~ 0

. . ~ ~ 0 ~_l ~ ~ . . ,.-, "~'-'

0 h n ~ D .

" 0 " 0

O0

23

PLATE 1 Anglia van A before impact

A f

~ i ~ • • ~ i

4 ,

PLATE 2 Anglia van A after impact

~,~!i!~!~ ~, ~::~!~i~!!'i!!~'~'~~!i~ I ~

24

PLATE 3 Anglia car B before impact

PLATE 4 Anglia car B after impact

25

P L A T E 5 Anglia car C after impact

P L A T E 6 Anglia car D after impact

26



27

~t~

J

/ PLATE 9

Anglia car C before impact

j, •

\

PLATE 10

Anglia car B after impact

m

28

PLATE 11 Anglia car C after impact

PLATE 12 Anglia car D after impact

29

I

P L A T E 13 Angl ia van A before impact

P L A T E 14 Angl ia van A after impact

30

P L A T E 15 Anglia car C before impact


~!ii! ~ ¸¸ i~i ~,~ i I~!~"

Lk

31


P L A T E 18 Anglia car D after impact

32


I


33

%

P L A T E 21

Anglia car C before impact

P L A T E 22 Anglia car B after impact

34


i

PLATE 24 Anglia car D after impact

35

P L A T E 25 Anglia van A before impact

P L A T E 26

Anglia van A after impact

36

PLATE 27 Anglia car C before impact


37


~ ~e.~ ~

t ,

..... . ~ . . ~ ~

P L A T E 30 Angl ia car D after impact

38

d "

L : : , :

r j

/

/

P L A T E 3 1 D a m a g e to s p o k e c a u s e d by d r i v e r ' s n o s e - c a r B

j ,

/

P L A T E 3 2 B o t t o m rim o f w h e e l b e n t forward by d r i v e r ' s c h e s t - c a r B

39

it ,~

PLATE 33

Failure of driver*s seat bracket - car B

; 7

J P L A T E 34

Damage to dashboard caused by passenger ' s f a c e - car B

40

P L A T E 35 Damage caused by p a s s e n g e r - car B

P L A T E 36 Damage to dr iver ' s face s truck by s t e e r i n g wheel

41

P L A T E 37

Damage to s t e e r i n g wheel and column - car C

P L A T E 38

Damage to f a s c i a board c a u s e d by p a s s e n g e r ' s head - car C

42

f

V J J J

I

P L A T E 39

Dent in f a s c i a board c a u s e d by p a s s e n g e r ' s k n e e - car C

- - F •

~:~i ~I

P L A T E 40

Damage to s t eer ing w h e e l c a u s e d by driverPs h e a d - car D

43

I %

Y~

"~

\

PLATE 41

Damage to steering wheel spoke caused by driver's head - car D

44

2"

G , :

/

l

P L A T E 42

P a s s e n g e r ' s s e a t c o l l a p s e d rearwards - car D

45

P L A T E 43 External damage to Anglia involved in accident 696

P L A T E 44 Interior damage to Anglia involved in accident 696

46

I

f ,

P L A T E 45 Exterior damage to Anglia involved in Accident 716

PLATE 46 Interior damage to Anglia involved in Accident 716

47

PLATE 47 Frontal damage to Anglia involved in accident 701

PLATE 48 Exterior damage to Anglia involved in accident 701

PLATE 49

Interior damage to Anglia involved in accident 701

48

"1"

J

j

~ ! iii/~ ̧

PLATE 50 Exterior damage to Anglia involved in accident 769

PLATE 51 Interior damage to Anglia involved in accident 769

49

I

I I I I 0 0 0 0

®o ,~=o

, - ® =o ~ a ~ c . U (/1 " - - a ~u u ~ .

o

~ 0

a ~ . , . ~ e- .

-:- o ± , , ~ 0 0 ~ " U

n ~ E

I ' I I

! .I

( u ! ) ~ u e u J e o o i d s . L p u u J n l O O 6 U ! J g g : l S

¢JD ",.,T ~ 0

I I I °

t i I

S: : IHO~V J.IH S'I:I:::IHM %.

,,) ¢',,,. ,,,..

¢ -- .E_

I - -

0

0 0

( 5 ) u0!~OJelaOe 0

,...j--

I..IJ ~E

~ , - I.&.l ~-- ._=

m

I,.&.l

I..=.I

W

O - -

L=

9=C

I,.,U,

I . U

I..L-

$1

(u!)),ueuJeOolds!p uuJnloo 6u)J~alS

t- u u c ,.*-,,, ¢,~ o 0

.- ® = - o ~ = E I ' I o E ~ - ~ = o = . ~ _ > . u --I~1 c ~ , ' - o u o I I " .

- - 0 t . . ~ = o . .~ .___. . . . t-. a . I I s -- ~ u = = = .~- I / , S 0 = " u ~ ~ " 0 I r

• ~ ~ *-* ~. ~ 3 4 - , , * - - ~ I I ~ " ~

~== ~o~ - ~o ° ~= l J ; = " ' - " - = - " ~ ' - u c %/ o E --~- =® . : . • N l i t I~. I,. L.. - -

o O " ~ O = t'; ~-" = / 2 i-..

== o • / , ' " I "='= ~ J

¢"~ L,~ Z U , J

S::IH:)NV I IH S"I'::I'::IHA~ ,, , , , . ~ ' ~ ~ u,.l

e.i

) -

I I I I I o 0 0 0 0 0 0

(5 ) uo! ~oJa l~0e 13

5 2

°°i I.. U

m e'-

c 3 o ~ '~ >,

-~.~ ® o ~ ®

~ , . - o "o L ~ u . O l"-

oo o ~ . o - i o ~ . o E....

N I- L . . - - I.. • ~-"~ ~ a~®~ O C 0 ~I '~" ~J ~

- , - o ~_~ "~. , ~

I ,': I

(u ) ) ~ u e u J e o O l d S ! p uuJnlOO 6u!JeeIs oo ~D ~

l I I I

alp

¢

0

CIJ F b--

I I I I 0 0 0 0 bD u9 ~r ~o

0

o

1 - ~ ~ . . \

0 0 o

(6) u0 H, oJe le0eQ

._J

z

z I=1.1

w

c:o ~"

w

Z w w

z

I

I ~ ' ) .

/..i-

5 3

(u!) luawaoolds)p uuJnloo 6u)JeeIs

I I I I I I , ~

i - u ~ C ) ::3 0

E ~a c ~' .

0 ~ ~- ~ ~ ~*

~ C u L n "1o L C

.~ ~ 0

3 ~ E = E . 0 ~ , 3 0 U (:7)

0 .--"-- u - - - ~ 1 0 " ~

i ! i - . .= , _ ._

I ~ i ,m

= ' - " lal.i I, al.i

" - - . - 2 - - . ' ~ "

-- O !--

- , ~ , . . _ . ~ . . . • ' I , a

_ _ , . . . . . " . . . . , . . . . . . . - - ~ .

---'~- -~-- .~_ -- . . . . . . . . . . . - ~ . . ~ - \ . -

.~.. o%o%.~0,~# ~,~ ~ = . _ ...... ~ .....

I I I I I I o

(6) uol~oJala~ao

54

(.3 0

C 0 . _ Cl "I0 LO

0 E3 0 l - . oo~ . c e ~ u >"

® -~ ~-

¢.-o ~.~

4uf')

0

C )

E ° ~

z

l ' - - - l..l.l

<~--,

W

Z e-~ l..;. l W ¸

l.l.J

Q . .

z ~ E

e-- l

I.~3'

. I

I ! I I I I o o o o o o

( 6 ) UO!~OJ,~|~::)e 0

1 O 0

,55

oo C "F-. ~,0 • ~ -o

.oo

X

0

E . ~

u 3 0

0

L

L

Z

Z W

r i . - - ;.~J

'5"

" J " W I,J.; W C f J Q._

n i , . -

UL.. , ¢ ~

Z ~

,.....;

c~

I 0

I 0

I I 0 0 0

( 6 ) u0!~,DJ~l~o~a

0 0

56

(V) "- (F)

50

40

ZO

20

10

0

.10

-2O

50

40

30

2 0 01

-~ lO .9

o

~= -10 Q

-- E n g i n e movingLF)

Mox. engine dece[

_ Wheets moving

70

60

Front floor moving

AN~LIA C 48 mite /h

I_ Possibly rebound

i ~ I_

V

ANGLIA B 36,mite/h

- . Engine

J (FiFastQ, r ,,lm record I Engine stow,rig(V) ANGL,A O 50

t0

2O

10

0 ---,-,.

-10 V ANGLIA A 18 mite/h

3°f 20

10

0 I I I z 0 0-01 0'02 0'03 0"04 0"0 5 0.06 0.07 0~08 0.09

Time (s) Fig.Z DECELERATION-TIME CURVE RECORDS FOR ANGLIAS A,B,C, ANO D SHOWING TIME AFTER IMPACT

AT WHICH DIFFERENT PARTS MOVED REARWARDS~RELATIVE TO THE REST OF THE CAR

57

-10

60 E ngine decetero.tin 1~ ( V ) ~ /r\ 50 Wheels stctrt to ~ ~toor startslV)

displace (V) |FLoor / ~ I

40 -- Engine starts to displace (F) i

30

20

1 0 - ,j 50

40 30

20 10

t - - o 0 , ~

"~ -10 U

121 ~0

30

20

10

0

-10

i ANGLIA C 48 mite/h

- . Engl'ne starts to A J -- diTtace(V' J / /

-- __ 1 ~ V

Engine starts to dis place (V)

ANGLIA B 36 mite / h

• ANGLIA D 26mite/h

.[ Event markers 1.1st wheel touches wheel arch 2.2nd.wheet touches wheel arch 3. Engine displaced

(V)Vinten camera record I (F)Fo.stair camero record J I

10

0 I 0 1-0

I~ig.8. DECELERATION CRUSHED

I 1 2.0 3.0

Deformation (feet) ,of front of vehicle

ANGLIA A 18 mite/h

AS A FUNCTION OF DEPTH TO WHICH CAR CRUSHED.SHOWING AMOUHT BEFORE CERTAIN PARTS MOVED RELATIVE TO THE REST OF THE CAR

$8

70

60

5O

4O

3d 20

10

0

--10

5 0 - -

Impact speed 40 mite /h

Co[cutated curve based on recorded curve

of Angtio C f rom /~8-1mlte/h - - - ' - o f Angtio. B f rom 36.1mite/h - - - - - o f Ang[ ia D f rom 25.6mi te/h :~ ;'. of Angt ia A f rom 18.1mite/h

s

f ~ s . ~ S s ,o- ~ / 30 - s Impact speed 30mite/h

' \ I , , - - - . . . , ,

I 10 /

o - 1 0

o -20 ~- Impact speed 20mi te /h

40

~o~ . ~ ~ , : : . . ~ , ~ . ~ / 10, • ' ~ "

- 2 0

'° f 20

0 - ~ ' - "" 0"01 0"02 0'03 0"04 0"05 0"06 0"07

. : Time (s) ~ ' "

ImpaCt speed 10 mite/h

I 0-08

i 0-09

Fig.9. DECELERATION-TIME CURVES FOR DIFFERENT SPEEDS OF iMPACT CALCULATED FROM

A RECORDED CURVE OF AN IMPACT AT AHIGHER SPEED

59

. ImpQct speed 1,0mite/h (59f t /s)

60 BQsed on Angtia . C

50

10

30

~ 20

1 0 ~ - - I ' I I I I I I I 0

ImpQct speed 30 mite / h (&&ft/s)

0 -

~0

30

10

I I I I I I I I

Impact speed 20mi te /h (29 f t / s )

3°f 10

0 I I I I I l I

Impact speed 10mite/h (15f t /s)

0 I 0 0.2 O.t,

I I I I I i 0"6 0"8 1-0 1"2 1.4 1-6 i'8

• £ ( f t ) Fig.lO. CALCULATEO VELOCITY RELATIVE TO CAR(Y) OF UNRESTRAINEO OCCUPANTS AFTER FRONTAL

IMPACT OF CAR FOR OIFFERENT DISTANCES(P) BETWEEN FRONT OF OCCUPANT ANO INTERIOR OF CAR PRIOR TO IMPACT

60

ANGLIA A Impact speed 18.1mite/h

20

0

-10

20

i°

ANGLIA O 10 I- Impact speed 25.6 miielh

[ 0 - - ' /~ P " ~ - ~ ~ " ~ ' ~ -,oL- - v - -

~ - - - . , ~ v

ANGLIA B • Impact speed 36.1mil.e/h

Measured occe[erat ions on fl.oor for angtia A and on t ransmiss ion tunne[, Ang[ iasB, C and D.

- - - - Acce le ra t i on wi th high frequency peaks removed.

- (~ +g=up m I ~ -- g = down

._u - 2 0 L

m

ANGLIA C Impact speed 48.1mite/h

2 0 -

0

- 2 0 -

m

0 0

L I I I 0.05 0-1 0.15

Time (s)

Fig.11. VERTICAL ACCELERATION OF PASSEN6ER COMPARTHENT

61

t,0

C .m v

cJ

c 30 0

¢-

or)

L,. U

~ 20

C O

E O -

10

0 0

J o

10 20 30 /40 50 Speed on impoct (mite/h)

Fig.12. glSTANCE CRUSHED AT DIFFERENT IHPACT SPEEDS WITH FOUR SIHILAR CARS

62

O

I 0

0

r/. #

f - f

%

• ' 0 v ~

0

C C ¢ - ° I o--

¢" 0 0 . - - 0 "N ~ "N ,'.,

,_~ ® 8

/ j ,

\

• / /

/

I

0

(~q[) pool 6 u j q q e M

0

0

0

o

o

• ° - Q

c.D o

6

I I

0

O

c ~ - - 0

0

0

O

Z

, , i l

Z

Z I

W

U J

Z

Z r r ~

L4=,

Z i

- = j .

Z l=IJ

~===. ° •

63

0

0

' 1

\

0

0

" f I ' J z o

/ - "T'. / o

J /

/

I a~ C~

%

0 ~ • o ° ~ - , ~

"¢_ ¢,,. ¢'~

t ~ ¢" r ' -

.o .o g u~ En -~ " C C

CO

9 0

6 ° 4 I ' - -

( . 0 o.

. <

L L

Z

I ,a . I

--r--

I J . I

Z

Z t,a,.J

m I..t,.I

a 0

I .a . I I..I.,

Z

Z

m

Z I .a. I t "

L L

I I 0 0 0 0 0 0

( : lql l pool 6u!qq~ M

w

0

64

I I

0 _o

"D

0 ~.- U~

e-

0

0

0

O. 0 0

O . _9.o C

o . o / / r

C C

• %

I

\ . ,

o

0 0 0 0 0 0

(J, q l ) pool 6 u u q q a M

0

...,I

Z ~

Z ~

~ •

" ~ "- '~ . - . I ( 3 IE~ ( s l

6 = _ ~

~0

6 .,-4~ ~, , . ,

° o. > -

L ~ L U

W

6 " - ,

• -J,.. t-.~

Z

6 5

o = BI

=o .~ "-:-.

1 ~ / / / / I °

/ ' / / I

(_ ,N

0 0 0 (:3 0 0

(lql) po01 5u!qqaM

0

Z 'CZ

Z

m

~E: ~" ' 5 " u o

c,,4

Z

Q ~

t - - .

c%-

.=.-I

I = ~

Z

. j ,

Z

1.J_

66

I 0 0 0

z

° .~

z ! < t

/ * / 0 m J --4 -=. ix:

I o c ~ is_ // ' = l ,-,,.-

S ~

• ~ - - ~

- . ~

o ~ ~, o = . - 0 ~ " 0

¢'~ u 0

, - ' - .E i .o cn . . . . 0

.o _q .o ~ ~-- in In m

C~ c ~ I A -

o .

0

I o 0 ~

( ; q l ) p o o l 6 u ! q q e M

6 7

¢-

A

o~

0

E

Q

0

C <X:

<~

0

" t ' -

C < [

J S

I f ' P ~ s

J

- t

S f

¢

J

-..1" .'T"

6

0

o

o

o

o

o

I--,...

Z

rJ~

i,.i,J .

Z

m

I . IJ

I,.I,J

° ~ I , .4 , .

0

0

0 0

I ! I 0 0 0

I t 0 0 o o

lO

o

68

c" \ ¢

a . o 0 . o 0

b..

• l o o :~ o 0 ~ " ~ U ~" a . m 0 . 0

e" e'- , ~

e" C C 0 0 0

I - e'- C

. f

/

I I

1 / -

%

C3

C3

~4 "n-,

C )

( :3

( :3

6

C ) Q

O O

O

f.O c~

M')

C ) Q

C )

O

C )

.o O

(.,,3

. . - I

Z

Z

Z

~ - ._j

Z

Z 1,4.1

I ~ . Q- .

- - -J 2 [

M , -

Z

Z

Z I.I.J I- , .-

._e,

0 C3

O 0 C ) (",4

(Jql) pool 5u!qqeM

C ) 0

O

Q

69

,m,

0 0

" I0

0 e,-

C 0 _

C 0

,_o

G~

U

. . 0

r " o ~

C 0

U't C

u)

~, r."

o . ~ ¢7) .,..,

0 . . = >

c O ~

,"- 0 ,-=E'~

f /

/ /

! t

\ • \

~ f

f S j

S s

j , J

I !

I !

/ . /

f / -

! /

/ /

, 0

' 6

¢'~I.

,--..I

Z

C) ca

c~

Z 0 "3".

c.o . ,~

N - - 6

6 ~

~, --~ U,-

6

0 C)

( Jql} pool

0 0 0

6u!qq~M

0 0

70

o °

"~ ° I t ~ .a

t - I

~[ rn (.) a ,- ,.

. ~ s 0 "~ e.s

j ° u j ¢ .~

• O ( . ~

~e

- - . O~ I.a.I

- ~ ,

i.= " "

• ~ 6 u . .

12 '

4 = : - - ' - ~ ~ ~ "

I I n I ( ~ "

¢M C~

0

0 °

0

I I I I I I I I Io O 0 O O O 0 0 O O

(5) uoI ;D.lele:)e 0

71

"7,.

/

.

j , \ - /

s

t

0

0 qD 0

t ~ • -~ f ~ 0

. 0 0 J ~

C C C

f - C C 0 0 0 , _

"- (" C

I 0 0

O~ . 0 (D

CO - O .

Q

I C ~ -

" - ' . ~ . ~ . . . .

tO 0

u') o. 0

O

I 0 0 O

O

0 C~

O. O

C)

(Jql) po01 5u!qqeM

- - . . I

Z < Z

L~

Z

Z L L J

C r J

, . -w

Z

Z W W

I....-- Q - _ _ j ~ - m

I . . - -

Z

Z

Z

° ~

? 2

controlled impact investigations head-on ...obtained from the filtered, unbonded strain gauge...

Documents