What Is The Symbol Of A Crash Test Dummy Deciduous Forest Animals

Full-scale anthropomorphic test devices that simulate human bodies in vehicle crash testing

A crash test dummy, or simply dummy, is a full-scale anthropomorphic examination device (ATD) that simulates the dimensions, weight proportions and articulation of the human trunk during a traffic collision. Dummies are used by researchers, automobile and aircraft manufacturers to predict the injuries a person might sustain in a crash.^[1] Modern dummies are usually instrumented to record data such as velocity of impact, crushing forcefulness, bending, folding, or torque of the body, and deceleration rates during a collision.^{[ citation needed ]}

Prior to the evolution of crash test dummies, auto companies tested using human cadavers, animals and live volunteers.^{[ citation needed ]} Cadavers have been used to modify different parts of a car, such as the seatbelt.^[two] This type of testing may provide more realistic test results than using a dummy,^{[ citation needed ]} simply it raises ethical dilemmas^[3] because human being cadavers and animals are not able to consent to research studies. Animal testing is not prevalent today.^[4] Computational models of the human body are increasingly beingness used in the industry and inquiry to complement the use of dummies as virtual tools.^{[5] [6]}

There is a constant need for new testing considering each new vehicle has a dissimilar design.^{[ citation needed ]}

History [edit]

On August 31, 1869, Mary Ward became the first recorded victim of an automobile accident; the machine involved was steam-powered (Karl Benz did not invent the gasoline-powered automobile until 1886). Ward, of Parsonstown, Ireland, was thrown out of a motor vehicle and killed.^[7] Xxx years afterwards, on September 13, 1899, Henry Elation became Northward America's showtime motor vehicle fatality when hit while stepping off a New York City trolley. Since then, over 20 million people worldwide take died due to motor vehicle accidents.^{[ improper synthesis? ]}

The need for a means of analyzing and mitigating the furnishings of motor vehicle accidents on humans was felt soon later on commercial production of automobiles began in the tardily 1890s, and by the 1930s, when the automobile became a common part of daily life and the number of motor vehicle deaths were rising. Decease rates had surpassed 15.six fatalities per 100 one thousand thousand vehicle-miles and were continuing to climb.^{[ citation needed ]}

In 1930 cars had dashboards of rigid metal, non-collapsible steering columns, and protruding knobs, buttons, and levers. Without seat belts, passengers in a frontal collision could be hurled confronting the interior of the automobile or through the windshield. The vehicle body itself was rigid, and touch on forces were transmitted directly to the vehicle occupants. As belatedly as the 1950s, car manufacturers were on public record as proverb that vehicle accidents simply could not be made survivable because the forces in a crash were as well great.^{[ citation needed ]}

Cadaver testing [edit]

Cadaver used during a frontal impact test.

Detroit's Wayne State University was the first to begin serious work on collecting data on the effects of high-speed collisions on the man body. In the tardily 1930s there was no reliable data on how the homo body responds to the sudden, violent forces interim on it in an motorcar accident. Furthermore, no effective tools existed to measure such responses. Biomechanics was a field barely in its infancy. It was therefore necessary to utilize two types of examination subjects in lodge to develop initial data sets.

The get-go test subjects were man cadavers. They were used to obtain fundamental information well-nigh the human body'south ability to withstand the crushing and tearing forces typically experienced in a loftier-speed blow. To such an finish, steel brawl bearings were dropped on skulls, and bodies were dumped down unused elevator shafts onto steel plates. Cadavers fitted with rough accelerometers were strapped into automobiles and subjected to head-on collisions and vehicle rollovers.

Albert Male monarch'due south 1995 Journal of Trauma commodity, "Humanitarian Benefits of Cadaver Research on Injury Prevention", conspicuously states the value in human lives saved equally a outcome of cadaver research. King's calculations indicate that every bit a result of pattern changes implemented upward to 1987, cadaver research since saved eight,500 lives annually.^[viii] He notes that for every cadaver used, each twelvemonth 61 people survive due to wearing seat belts, 147 live due to air bags, and 68 survive windshield touch on.

Nonetheless, work with cadavers presented almost as many problems every bit information technology resolved. Non only were there the moral and ethical bug related to working with the dead, but there were also inquiry concerns. The majority of cadavers available were older adults males who had died non-tearing deaths; they did non represent a demographic cross-department of accident victims. Deceased blow victims could non be employed because any information that might exist nerveless from such experimental subjects would be compromised by the cadaver's previous injuries. Since no two cadavers are the aforementioned, and since any specific part of a cadaver could merely be used in one case, it was extremely difficult to accomplish reliable comparing data. In add-on, child cadavers were not only difficult to obtain, but both legal and public opinion made them effectively unusable. Moreover, as crash testing became more than routine, suitable cadavers became increasingly scarce. As a result, biometric information were express in extent and skewed toward the older males.

Very piffling attention has been paid to obesity and car crash studies, and information technology is hard to obtain an obese dummy for the experiment. Instead, man cadavers were used. Body weight is a vital factor when it comes to automobile accidents, and body mass is distributed differently in an obese person versus a non-obese person.^[9] At the University of Michigan, obese cadavers were tested and compared to non-obese cadavers, and they found that the obese cadavers had more injuries in their lower extremities. The researchers also suggested that an obese person could exist protected past their fat almost causing a "cushioning effect."^[9]

The employ of NDTs or Neutral Density Targets were implemented inside cadavers' brains to focus on the bear upon and separation of the encephalon and skull. NDTs provided detailed observations and allowed researchers to expect at a specific area of the brain after the crash stimulation. It too helped to found and develop the Iron model. To measure neck injuries for 3-year-olds, the model FE was created. A real child'due south neck was interpreted and incorporated into the FE model. At that place are just a few Atomic number 26 models and they were mostly utilized through sled tests.^[2]

Volunteer testing [edit]

Some researchers took it upon themselves to serve as crash test dummies. In 1954, USAF Colonel John Paul Stapp was propelled to over grand km/h on a rocket sled and stopped in i.4 seconds.^[10] Lawrence Patrick, then a professor at Wayne State University, endured some 400 rides on a rocket sled in order to test the effects of rapid deceleration on the man body. He and his students allowed themselves to be hit in the chest with heavy metal pendulums, impacted in the confront by pneumatically driven rotary hammers, and sprayed with shattered glass to simulate window implosion.^[11] While admitting that it made him "a lilliputian sore", Patrick has said that the research he and his students conducted was seminal in developing mathematical models confronting which farther research could be compared. While information from alive testing was valuable, man subjects could non withstand tests that exceeded a certain degree of physical injury. To assemble information about the causes and prevention of injuries and fatalities would require a different kind of examination field of study.

Creature testing [edit]

By the mid-1950s, the bulk of the information cadaver testing could provide had been collected. It was too necessary to collect data on accident survivability, research for which cadavers were woefully inadequate. In concert with the shortage of cadavers, this need forced researchers to seek other models. A description by Mary Roach of the Eighth Stapp Car Crash and Field Sit-in Briefing shows the direction in which enquiry had begun to motility. "We saw chimpanzees riding rocket sleds, a carry on an impact swing...We observed a sus scrofa, anesthetized and placed in a sitting position on the swing in the harness, crashed into a deep-dish steering wheel at almost x mph."^[12]

1 important research objective that could non be achieved with either cadavers or live humans was a means of reducing the injuries caused by impalement on the steering column. By 1964, over a million fatalities resulting from steering wheel touch on had been recorded, a meaning percentage of all fatalities; the introduction by Full general Motors in the early 1960s of the collapsible steering column reduced the run a risk of steering-wheel death by l pct. The most commonly used animal subjects in cabin-collision studies were pigs, primarily because their internal structure is like to a man's. Pigs can too exist placed in a vehicle in a skillful approximation of a seated human.

Pigs were used for steering bicycle impacts because they take an internal structure similar to humans, and can be easily placed correctly via sitting upright in the vehicle.^[13] The ability to sit upright was an important requirement for test animals so that another common fatal injury among human being victims, decapitation, could exist studied. Additionally, information technology was of import for researchers to exist able to determine to what extent motel design needed to exist modified to ensure optimal survival circumstances. For case, a dashboard with also little padding or padding that was too stiff or too soft would not significantly reduce head injury over a dash with no padding at all. While knobs, levers, and buttons are essential in the performance of a vehicle, it was essential to decide which design modifications would best ensure that these elements did non tear or puncture victims in a crash. Rear-view mirror bear on is a significant occurrence in a frontal collision: How should a mirror be built so that it is rigid enough to perform its task, still of low injury take a chance if struck?

While work with cadavers had aroused some opposition, primarily from religious institutions, it was grudgingly accustomed considering the dead, existence expressionless, felt no pain, and the indignity of their situations was directly related to easing the pain of the living. Beast research, on the other hand, angry much greater passion. Beast rights groups such as the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) were vehement in their protest, and while researchers such equally Patrick supported animal testing because of its power to produce reliable, applicable data, there was still a strong ethical unease about this procedure. Researchers at the University of Virginia have to call the cadaver's family and tell them what they are using their loved one for, after getting consent from the family. This seems to lessen ethical dilemmas in contrast to animate being testing, because there is no sufficient way to go consent to use an animal.^[iii]

Although animal examination information were still more easily obtained than cadaver data, the anatomical differences betwixt animals and people and the difficulty of employing adequate internal instrumentation limited their usefulness. Beast testing is no longer good past whatever of the major machine makers; General Motors discontinued live testing in 1993 and other manufacturers followed adapt shortly thereafter.

In 1980, animals such as bears and pigs were tested in car crash stimulations. This led to moral dilemmas and was not the first time that animals were used in car crashes. In 1978, The University of Michigan Highway Safety Research Institute used baboons every bit a substitute for human examination subjects in car crashes. Although there was the objection of creature cruelty that arose, there was also the controversy of how they are like to humans and can be used as a sufficient testing commutation for us.^[14] The researchers did not end up stopping the use of baboons because of moral objections, but instead stopped considering they had collected sufficient information. The moral inputs from other people and organizations were inconsistent, which caused implications when deciding to ban good for you animals from research testing. The animals were put under anesthesia, so there was no pain put upon them, but the aftereffects cannot justify this.^[14] General Motors used animals for testing, and besides suggested that they put the animals under anesthesia and then would kill the animals after completing the testing.^[four]

Although the Academy of Michigan Highway Safety Research Institute did get bad publicity, it was suggested that this is not the reason why they stopped using baboons. The University of Michigan'south mission was to create safer cars for man apply. In order to reach this goal, research and testing is inevitable. The cruelty and the moral dilemmas of fauna testing did not trump researchers withal using them as subjects. They reasoned that biomechanics data are needed for an experiment similar this, which volition lead to safer cars.^[14] Years afterwards, fauna testing ceased and instead an instrumented dummy was created every bit a replacement. In 1978, animals were their only subjects that could be a reliable substitution for the human being. The disadvantage, though, to using an instrumented dummy or a human cadaver, is that the tissue is not alive and will not elicit the aforementioned response as a live fauna.^[14] By 1991, the use of animals in vehicle collision tests was in pass up because of advances in computers and applied science.^[4] Information technology is difficult to apply cadavers instead of animals because of man rights, and it is difficult to obtain permission from the families of the deceased. Consent for a research and testing can occur only if the person responsible for giving consent is mentally competent and comprehends the research and testing procedures fully.^[15]

Dummy evolution [edit]

There are a growing number of specialized dummies used to gather data to amend safety for women, children, the elderly, the obese, rib impacts, and spinal impacts. THOR is a very advanced dummy because it uses sensors and has a humanlike spine, pelvis, and tin capture neck data in 6DOF (six degrees of freedom) motion.^[16] Special classes of dummies chosen Hybrid IIIs are designed to research the effects of frontal impacts, and are less useful in assessing the effects of other types of impact, such as side impacts, rear impacts, or rollovers. Hybrid IIIs use dummies that directed towards a specific age, for example, a typical ten-year-former, six-year-old, three-year-old, and a grown homo.^[17]

Sierra Sam and VIP-50 [edit]

The information gleaned from cadaver research and animate being studies had already been put to some utilise in the structure of human simulacra every bit early every bit 1949, when "Sierra Sam"^[18] was created past Samuel W. Alderson at his Alderson Research Labs (ARL) and Sierra Engineering Co. to test aircraft ejection seats, aviation helmets^[19] and airplane pilot restraint harnesses. This testing involved the use of high acceleration to 1000 km/h (600 mph) rocket sleds, across the capability of man volunteers to tolerate. In the early 1950s, Alderson and Grumman produced a dummy which was used to acquit crash tests in both motor vehicles and aircraft. The original "Sierra Sam" was a 95th percentile male dummy (heavier and taller than 95% of homo males).

Alderson went on to produce what it chosen the VIP-fifty serial, built specifically for General Motors and Ford, but which was also adopted by the National Bureau of Standards. Sierra followed up with a competitor dummy, a model it chosen "Sierra Stan".

Hybrid I and II [edit]

Two uninstrumented Hybrid 2 50th percentile male dummies used as ballast in a depression speed collision exam.

General Motors, who had taken over the impetus in developing a reliable and durable dummy, institute neither Sierra model satisfied its needs. GM engineers decided to combine the best features of the VIP series and Sierra Stan, and and then in 1971 Hybrid I was built-in. Hybrid I was what is known as a "50th percentile male" dummy. That is to say, it modeled an average male in elevation, mass, and proportion. In cooperation with the Lodge of Automotive Engineers (SAE), GM shared this design, and a subsequent 50th percentile female dummy, with its competitors.

Since then, considerable work has gone into creating more and more sophisticated dummies. Hybrid II was introduced in 1972, with improved shoulder, spine, and knee responses, and more than rigorous documentation. Hybrid Ii became the get-go dummy to comply with the American Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) for testing of automotive lap and shoulder belts. In 1973, a 50th percentile male dummy was released, and the National Highway Traffic Condom Administration (NHTSA)^[20] undertook an understanding with General Motors to produce a model exceeding Hybrid 2's performance in a number of specific areas.^[21]

Though a cracking comeback over cadavers for standardized testing purposes, Hybrid I and Hybrid II were still very crude, and their apply was limited to developing and testing seat belt designs. A dummy was needed which would permit researchers to explore injury-reduction strategies. It was this need that pushed GM researchers to develop the current Hybrid line, the Hybrid 3 family unit of crash test dummies.

Hybrid III family [edit]

The original 50th percentile male Hybrid 3's family expanded to include a 95th percentile male person, 50th percentile female, and 10, six, and three-yr-old kid dummies.

Hybrid III, the 50th percentile male person dummy which made its first appearance in 1976, is the familiar crash test dummy, and he is now a family human. If he could stand up upright, he would be 175 cm (v'9") tall and would have a mass of 77 kg (170 lb). He occupies the driver's seat in all the Insurance Found for Highway Rubber (IIHS)^[22] 65 km/h (40 mph) offset frontal crash tests. He is joined by a "big brother", the 95th percentile Hybrid III, at 188 cm (6 ft 2 in) and 100 kg (223 lb). Ms. Hybrid Iii is a fifth percentile female dummy, at a diminutive 152 cm (5 ft) tall and 50 kg (110 lb).^[23] The three Hybrid Iii child dummies represent a ten-year-old, 21 kg (47 lb) six-yr-old, and a xv kg (33 lb) three-year-sometime. The kid models are very contempo additions to the crash test dummy family; because so little hard data are available on the effects of accidents on children and such data are very difficult to obtain, these models are based in big role on estimates and approximations. The primary benefit provided by the Hybrid Three is improved neck response in forward flexion and head rotation that amend simulates the homo.^[24]

The Hybrid Iii dummy for three-, 6- and 10-twelvemonth-olds has its limitations, and does not provide the same physical outcome a human would see with a frontal crash. It was plant that when testing the three-year-onetime Hybrid III dummy, it showed that frontal crashes would most likely cause cervical spine injuries. When using data from the real globe, the results did not match up to the Hybrid Three stimulation injuries. To become around this, THUMS was created which stands for Total Human Model of Prophylactic.^[17] The model tin can be hands relatable to the human torso anatomically especially focusing on the homo spine upon impact. Clinical testing and experiments are more than accurate than a dummy and more reliable case studies tin can be implemented with this model. The model is based on a male person only, and mimics human being tissues and organs. This model is accurate for males in the 50th percentile, and information technology tin can not easily relate to iii-yr-olds when dealing with neck and caput injuries, which are responsible for 57 percent of auto crash fatalities.^[17] Instead, the FE model can be accordingly implemented for this criteria.^[2]

There are certain testing procedures for Hybrid IIIs to ensure that they obtain a correct humanlike neck flexure, and to ensure that they would react to a crash in a similar way that human bodies would.^{[ citation needed ]}

Test device for Human Occupant Restraint (THOR) [edit]

THOR-50M mid-size male [edit]

THOR is an advanced crash examination dummy designed to aggrandize the Hybrid-Three test dummy capabilities in assessing frontal impacts. THOR-50M, the mid-size male, was created to improve human-like anthropometry and increase the instrumentation for mitigating injury.^[25]

Although development started in the 1990s, with the latest design update past the National Highway Traffic Safety Assistants (NHTSA) in contract with Humanetics, the first new prototypes were delivered in 2013.^[26] Since and then, Europe's New Machine Assessment Program became the starting time bureau to adopt THOR into testing protocols, replacing the Hybrid III mid-sized male in the driver's seat.^[27]

THOR-5F modest female [edit]

THOR-50M & THOR-5F Crash Test Dummies

The small female person version of THOR is based on the engineering of the male version, but has more female person-like anthropometry to represent females in frontal bear upon testing.^[25]

The female THOR and the lack of female person examination dummies has received new involvement as gender equity issues accept emerged citing the lack of female person crash test dummies and availability of new applied science in regulation testing.^[28] A Center for Applied Biomechanics, University of Virginia, paper published in 2019 citing the increased risk of injury in female automobile occupants which started a fresh test into female person impact testing and protection.^[29]

The THOR dummies can accommodate 150+ channels of information collection throughout their bodies.^[30]

Warrior Injury Assessment Manikin (WIAMan) [edit]

U.S. Ground forces Warrior Injury Cess Manikin (WIAMan)

WIAMan is a blast test dummy designed to assess potential skeletal injuries of soldiers exposed to under-body nail (UBB). Designed jointly by the U.S. Army and Diversified Technical Systems (DTS), the project includes an anthropomorphic test device and in-dummy data acquisition and sensor solution.^[31] Since the project started in Feb 2015, 2 generations of WIAMan prototypes have undergone a serial of lab tests and nail events in the field.^[32]

With the prototype's delivery in 2018, WIAMan evaluates the effects of under-body blasts involving vehicles, and appraise the hazard to soldiers in footing vehicle systems. The goal of the WIAMan project is to acquire data that will improve the design of military vehicles and personal protective equipment. WIAMan and the platform created to simulate an IED explosion are undergoing connected testing.^[31]

Test dummies of the past were intended for the auto manufacture and lacked the same response a human would take to explosions.^[33] A claiming for the Army has been to develop a crash test dummy that moves enough like a human torso to get an accurate event. The Army is working to make the mannequin "biofedelic," meaning it tin can match man movement. At 5-feet-11-inches tall and 185 lbs., WIAMan is based on the size and movement of an boilerplate soldier.^[31]

U.South. Ground forces Enquiry Laboratory and its partners at Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab completed biofidelity testing in 2017. The purpose of the testing was to develop a dummy capable of predicting specific injury risk to occupants in a vehicle during live-burn tests, based on human being response information.^[31]

The manikin supports up to 156 channels of data conquering, measuring unlike variables a soldier may feel in a vehicle smash. WIAMan includes self-independent internal ability and the world's smallest data acquisition system called SLICE6, based on SLICE NANO architecture, eliminating the huge mass of sensor cables normally exiting dummies. The data measured within WIAMan includes forces, moments, accelerations and angular velocity.^[34]The DEVCOM Analysis Center (DAC) processes WIAMan data via a software analysis tool called the Assay of Manikin Data, or AMANDA. On Feb. 2, 2022, AMANDA was accredited past the U.S. Army Examination and Evaluation Control for use in alive burn test and evaluation.^[35]

Testing procedure [edit]

Hybrid 3 undergoing calibration

Every Hybrid 3 undergoes calibration prior to a crash examination. Its head is removed and then dropped from 40 centimetres (16 in) to calibrate the head instrumentation. So the head and neck are reattached, prepare in motion, and stopped abruptly to check for proper neck flexure. Hybrids wear chamois leather skin; the knees are struck with a metal probe to bank check for proper puncture. Finally, the caput and cervix are fastened to the body, which is attached to a exam platform and struck violently in the chest past a heavy pendulum to ensure that the ribs bend and flex as they should.

When the dummy has been determined to be ready for testing, calibration marks are attached to the side of the caput to aid researchers when tedious-movement films are reviewed later. The dummy is and so placed inside the test vehicle, set to seating position so marked on the caput and knees. Up to 50-8 data channels located in all parts of the Hybrid Iii, from the head to the talocrural joint, record betwixt 30,000 and 35,000 data items in a typical 100–150 millisecond crash. These data are recorded in a temporary data repository in the dummy'due south chest and and then downloaded to a computer once the test is complete.

Because the Hybrid is a standardized information collection device, any function of a particular Hybrid blazon is interchangeable with whatever other. Not just tin can 1 dummy be tested several times, but if a part should fail, it can be replaced with a new part. A fully instrumented dummy is worth most €150,000.^[36]

Positioning and restraints [edit]

x-year-old Hybrid Iii dummy in a booster seat afterward a frontal crash test.

Children in the three-year-old age grouping are more than likely to take a fatality considering it is the age where positioning is crucial. In some countries, children transition from facing the rear of the car to facing the front at this age. A study was done on restraints and positioning of three-year-olds. It was ended that beingness restrained and in the front seat has a lower fatality rate than children positioned in the back seat merely not restrained.^[17] The rubber results indicated that children should be placed in the back seat and restrained. It also suggests that restraints accept a bigger impact on safety than seating positions.^[17] A lap belt used on children will not provide as much safe as it would for an developed, due to the flexibility of children. An developed seatbelt could exercise more harm to a child than skillful, which is why children should properly be utilizing the Child Restraint System instead. This system includes a booster seat and a proper belt that fits the child's criteria including age, weight and summit.^[17]

Specialized dummies [edit]

Hybrid IIIs are designed to research the furnishings of frontal impacts, and are less useful in assessing the effects of other types of bear upon, such as side impacts, rear impacts, or rollovers. After head-on collisions, the well-nigh common severe injury accident is the side impact.

WorldSID is an advanced side touch ATD, used for EuroNCAP side bear on test modes.

• The SID (Side Impact Dummy) family unit of exam dummies is designed to measure rib, spine, and internal organ furnishings in side collisions. It also assesses spine and rib deceleration and compression of the chest cavity. SID is the United states authorities testing standard, EuroSID is used in Europe to ensure compliance with safety standards, and SID II(s) represents a 5th-percentile female. BioSID is a more sophisticated version of SID and EuroSID,^{[ citation needed ]} but is not used in a regulatory capacity. The WorldSID is a project to develop a new generation of dummy nether the International System for Standardization.^[37]
• BioRID is a dummy designed to assess the effects of a rear impact. Its principal purpose is to inquiry whiplash, and to assistance designers in developing effective caput and neck restraints. BioRID is more sophisticated in its spinal construction than Hybrid; 24 vertebra simulators permit BioRID to presume a much more natural seating posture, and to demonstrate the neck move and configuration seen in rear-end collisions.

12-month-old CRABI dummy in a kid safety restraint seat.

• CRABI is a kid dummy used to evaluate the effectiveness of child restraint devices, including seat belts and air bags. There are three models of the CRABI, representing 18-calendar month, 12-month, and half-dozen-month-old children.
• FGOA is a first generation obese anthropometric test device which can be used to report the automotive safe challenges for obese occupants, who are believed to have higher risk of mortality in auto collisions comparison to non-obese occupants.

THOR offers sophisticated instrumentation for assessing frontal-impacts

• THOR is currently the virtually avant-garde dummy on the market.^[16] The successor of Hybrid III, THOR has a more human-like spine and pelvis, and its face contains a number of sensors which let assay of facial impacts to an accuracy currently unobtainable with other dummies. THOR'south range of sensors is also greater in quantity and sensitivity than those of Hybrid III. THOR's original manufacturer, GESAC Inc., ceased product later the slowdown of the motorcar manufacture in the late 2000s. THOR was existence further adult, and ii other companies were working on similar dummies; NHTSA'south ultimate goal for this government-funded project was the evolution of a single THOR dummy, merely THOR dummy development stopped. FTSS, bought past Humanetics, and DentonATD both continued to produce the THOR 60 and THOR FLX.^{[ citation needed ]}
• Animal models have been used to test the condom of dog harnesses and crates in crash conditions.^[38]

Regulation [edit]

For the purpose of U.S. regulation and Global Technical Regulations and for clear communication in condom and seating design,^[39] dummies carry specifically designated reference points, such as the H-betoken; these are also used, for example, in automotive design.

Pop culture [edit]

• In 1986, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), a partitioning of the United States Department of Transportation, launched a series of public service announcements in magazines and on television set featuring ii talking crash dummies named Vince (voiced by Jack Burns) (played by Tony Reitano) and Larry (voiced by Lorenzo Music) (played by Tom Harrison, later replaced past Whitney Rydbeck) who modelled seat belt safety practices through their slapstick antics, with the slogan "You lot Could Acquire a Lot from a Dummy". By the time the entrada was retired in 1999, it was credited for raising seat chugalug usage from 21% to 67%.^[twoscore] Since and so crash dummy characters have continued to exist used in seat belt safety campaigns, especially those aimed at children.
• In the early on 1990s, Tyco Toys created a line of action figures chosen The Incredible Crash Dummies based on the characters from the NHTSA television receiver advertisements. They were intended to fall autonomously at the affect of a button on their abdomens. Vehicles that could be crashed into walls and cleaved were also produced. Dummies and vehicles were easily reassembled. They prompted a one-half-hr television special, The Adventures of the Incredible Crash Dummies. Unique for its fourth dimension, the drawing was produced entirely using 3D estimator animation techniques. A comic book serial and a video game for the Super Nintendo Amusement System and Game Male child were produced.
• In 2004, a series of "Crash Dummies" animated shorts were commissioned for the Pull a fast one on network. Related toys from Mattel's Hot Wheels brand were produced.
• The television series MythBusters employed a Hybrid II model crash test dummy, "Buster", for dangerous experiments.
• In Discovery Kids children's educational serial Crash Test Danny the title grapheme is a living crash test dummy, played by Ben Langley, who gets crushed, blown up, and pulled apart in the name of science.
• In 2020, actor Aamir Khan played a crash test dummy in a series of advertisements for Indian tire manufacturer CEAT Tyres.^[41]

See also [edit]

• Car accident
• Craven gun, impact simulator to mensurate damages on the vehicle side.
• Crash test
• Crashworthiness
• Euro NCAP
• Safety auto
• Mannequin
• Crash simulation
• Secchi deejay, the characteristic examination-dummy fiducial marker symbol.

Footnotes [edit]

1. ^ Nick Kurczewski (2011-01-20). "Smart Crash Test Dummies – The Latest Car Safety Tech – RoadandTrack.com". Road & Track . Retrieved 2 June 2015.
2. ^ ^{a b c} Warren N., Hardy (2007). "A Study of the Response of the Human Cadaver Head to Impact". Stapp Car Crash. 51: 17–eighty. PMC2474809. PMID 18278591.
3. ^ ^{a b} Marshall, Tyler (25 November 1993). "Machine Rubber Crash Testing Ignites Furor : Frg: The program uses human bodies. U.South. tests using cadavers at 3 universities are disclosed". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved 15 February 2016.
4. ^ ^{a b c} "Animals Killed in Automotive Crash Tests". The New York Times. September 28, 1991. Retrieved 26 March 2016.
5. ^ CORPORATION, TOYOTA MOTOR. "Toyota Updates its THUMS Virtual Crash Dummy Software | Corporate | Global Newsroom". Toyota Motor Corporation Official Global Website . Retrieved 2020-04-02 .
6. ^ "Dwelling". GHBMC . Retrieved 2020-04-02 .
7. ^ "Mary Ward 1827–1869". Famous Offaly People. Offaly Historical & Archaeological Social club. Archived from the original on September 27, 2007. Retrieved Apr 25, 2006.
8. ^ King, A.I., Viano, D.C., Mizeres, N., & States, J. D. (1995). Humanitarian benefits of cadaver research on injury prevention. Journal of Trauma-Injury Infection & Critical Care, 38(4) 564-569. Retrieved from https://journals.lww.com/jtrauma/toc/1995/04000
9. ^ ^{a b} Kent, Richard (2010). "Is There Actually a "Cushion Outcome"?: A Biomechanical Investigation of Crash Injury Mechanisms in the Obese". Obesity. 18 (four): 749–753. doi:10.1038/oby.2009.315. PMID 19798067. S2CID 20464616.
10. ^ 'Fastest Homo on Earth,' Col. John Paul Stapp, Dies at 89 ^{[ dead link ]} (March one, 2000). Retrieved April 18, 2006.
11. ^ Roach, Mary (November 19, 1999). I was a human crash-test dummy Archived March 28, 2006, at the Wayback Motorcar. Salon.com. Retrieved November 29, 2007.
12. ^ I was a homo crash-test dummy Archived November 25, 2005, at the Wayback Machine (November 19, 1999).
13. ^ Heneson, Nancy (1980). "Alive Animals in Car Crash Studies". International Periodical for the Study of Animal Problems: 214–217. Retrieved 26 March 2016.
14. ^ ^{a b c d} Heneson, Nancy (1980). "Live Animals in Car Crash Studies". International Periodical for the Study of Animal Problems: 214–217. Retrieved 26 March 2016.
15. ^ Chung, Christine S.; Lehmann, Lisa Soleymani (August 2002). "Informed Consent and the Procedure of Cadaver Donation". Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine. 126 (8): 964–968. doi:10.5858/2002-126-0964-ICATPO. PMID 12171497. Retrieved 24 April 2016.
16. ^ ^{a b} "How Crash Examination Dummies Evolved to Cost $1 One thousand thousand - YouTube". YouTube.
17. ^ ^{a b c d e f} Wencheng, Zhang (2008). "Incorporation of Biomechanical Kid Cadaver Cervix Behaviour in a Child Model and Injury Prediction in Vehicle Frontal Crash". Heritage Branch. Retrieved 18 April 2016.
18. ^ "Collection – History – Roswell". Archived from the original on 29 May 2015. Retrieved 2 June 2015.
19. ^ Evaluation of Sierra Engineering Co. Lightweight Helmet
20. ^ "NHTSA". 2019-03-thirteen.
21. ^ NHTSA 49 CFR 572.31 Subpart E—Hybrid Three Exam Dummy
22. ^ "New HLDI study: Texting laws don't reduce crashes". iihs.org. September 28, 2010. Retrieved 21 October 2010.
23. ^ Mello, Tara Baukus (December 5, 2000).The Female Dummy: No Brains, Only A Existent Lifesaver Archived February 20, 2006, at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved April 18, 2006.
24. ^ Hybrid II and Hybrid III Dummy Neck Backdrop for Computer Modeling (February 1992)
25. ^ ^{a b} "THOR | NHTSA". www.nhtsa.gov . Retrieved 2022-05-18 .
26. ^ https://one.nhtsa.gov/DOT/NHTSA/NVS/Biomechanics%xx&%20Trauma/NHTSA_THOR_update_2013-09-thirty.pdf^{[ bare URL PDF ]}
27. ^ https://cdn.euroncap.com/media/61124/tb-026-thor-specification-and-certification-v12.pdf^{[ bare URL PDF ]}
28. ^ "Autonomous lawmakers push U.Southward. Transportation Secretary for faster changes to crash test dummy standards". InvestigateTV . Retrieved 2022-05-18 .
29. ^ Forman, Jason; Poplin, Gerald S.; Shaw, C. Greg; McMurry, Timothy L.; Schmidt, Kristin; Ash, Joseph; Sunnevang, Cecilia (2019-08-18). "Auto injury trends in the contemporary fleet: Belted occupants in frontal collisions". Traffic Injury Prevention. 20 (half dozen): 607–612. doi:10.1080/15389588.2019.1630825. ISSN 1538-9588. PMID 31283362. S2CID 195844967.
30. ^ "THOR-5F". humanetics.humaneticsgroup.com . Retrieved 2022-05-xviii .
31. ^ ^{a b c d} Kalinyak, Rachael (2017-08-07). "Regular army creates crash test dummy to improve vehicle safety for soldiers". Army Times . Retrieved 2018-08-28 .
32. ^ Group, Techbriefs Media. "WIAMan – Tech Briefs :: Aerospace & Defence Technology". www.aerodefensetech.com . Retrieved 2018-08-28 .
33. ^ "WIAMan plan celebrates milestone | U.S. Army Research Laboratory". www.arl.ground forces.mil . Retrieved 2018-08-28 .
34. ^ "Data Conquering Systems & Sensors for Product Testing – Diversified Technical Systems, Inc". dtsweb.com . Retrieved 2018-08-28 .
35. ^ "Army Injury Assessment Tool Receives Stamp of Accreditation - Soldier Systems Daily".
36. ^ How the Examination are done (xix March 2003). Retrieved Apr 18, 2006.
37. ^ S. Moss. "SciTech Connect: Anthropometry for WorldSID, a Globe-Harmonized Midsize Male person Side Impact Crash Dummy". YouTube. Archived from the original on 25 May 2020. Retrieved 2 June 2015.
38. ^ Donchey, Sarah (25 November 2015). "New crash tests assist keep dogs safe in cars". Click 2 Houston. Retrieved seven July 2016.
39. ^ "NHTSA's Activities under the Un for Europe 1998 Global Agreement: Caput Restraints, Docket NHTSA-2008-001600001". NHTSA.
40. ^ Taylor, Heather. "How the Crash Exam Dummies Revolutionized Seat Chugalug Safety". AW360. Advert Week. Retrieved 24 Apr 2021.
41. ^ "Aamir Khan: Ceat Tyres' new crash test dummy | Team-BHP".

References [edit]

These audio files were created from a revision of this commodity dated 15 January 2006 (2006-01-15), and do non reflect subsequent edits.

As of 15:xvi, 16 May 2022 (UTC), this article is derived in whole or in part from Humanetics. The copyright holder has licensed the content in a manner that permits reuse nether CC Past-SA 3.0 and GFDL. All relevant terms must be followed. The text and its release have been received by the Wikimedia Volunteer Response Squad; for more data, see the talk page.

• "Anatomy of a Crash-Test Dummy", IEEE Spectrum, October 2007
• History of Crash Dummies
• How the dead accept helped the living
• I was a homo crash test dummy
• The Female Crash Examination Dummy She May Not Accept a Brain, but She Could Relieve Your Life
• The "Sierra Sam" Story
• Run into 50th Percentile Hybrid Three
• Biomechanics and the Cyberhuman
• Information technology's Smart to be a Dummy Archived 2005-08-31 at the Wayback Motorcar
• Pregnant crash test dummy
• Roach, Mary (2003). Strong: The Curious Lives of Human Cadavers. New York: W.W. Norton & Co. ISBN978-0-393-05093-6.
• Joodaki, H. (2015). "Comparison of Kinematic Behaviour of a Outset Generation Obese Dummy and Obese PMHS in Frontal Sled Tests". Proceedings of IRCOBI: 454–466.

External links [edit]

• Research of the Relationship of Pedestrian Injury to Collision Speed, Car-type, Impact Location and Pedestrian Sizes using Human Iron model (THUMS Version four)
• Crash Exam Dummy

 This article incorporates public domain material from websites or documents of the United States Section of Transportation.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crash_test_dummy

Posted by: trudeauthersece.blogspot.com

Share this post