“JOULE OPED 4goL FuUURqrEH EE Hee 2 Sr ee ree

dex3s a[Zu1s B UWIIOJ 0} Yoo oy} puTyeq peuIof spue saddn puv uoyJoassezUT 7¥ES OY} AvOU [oq Av] 0} UMS SPUS TOMO] YIM dvajs ysoyo oqnoq “PL TUN
i

"98S GOI 40
*$Q1 OSS

(40as puiyaq doys 1091420)
"99S E21 40
‘S97 006

Ne 1 40
$47 OS

4indsaK S9,
(Aopuim ayo.q)
29S GOI 40
1043307 6 Oo9

“29S SOI 40
1091449Q 6 Gy

18


“uO]wAOTAVeP PIVAIOJ ‘JeaS OU}
PUTYEq oaNJon.ys JOO 0} YORI PUL You oy} PUTYEq euO 0} OF1aAuOD sdesys yseyD e[qnoq “jUeMdInba juyRAyseX asvaer-yorNb ope! syloed *g TAADTT

NR 295 501" 10
"sq ose

“29S O1 40
“$97 OSO'! "

2

"99S OF 40
“sq 00S

“99S ZO 4D
1091322 6 GZ



‘goedery apis JUST ‘JJeq Jas OU ‘avIyS JsaYyo [YUYoLLY GpoULr

\Pes S6I" 4D
1049307 68g

TT
r\ ‘29S ozo /

1091348 6 GZ
98S Sel wn \

‘99S GEl 40
*sq7 OOI'!

22


forces against yielding glass is sufficient to pro-
duce skull fracture.

b. As shown in Figure 10, the Jap belt is an
absolute necessity in this type of impact to pre-
vent ejection, Use of the single shoulder strap
without a seat belt in Figure 10 allowed the
buttocks to be ejected out the door, and per-
mitted the strap to catch under the chin, putting
an 800-pound load on the webbing. In such
situations, the body slides down the strap and a
knife-action is produced on the neck which has
been reported to decapitate the occupant.?”

c. In Figures 14 and 15 (double shoulder
straps), it will be noted that the strap forces are
considerably higher, especially on the strap over
the left shoulder. A double shoulder strap sys-
tem running ¢hrough a strong integrated seat
could offer considerable protection against left
side impacts.

20-g Right Side Impact: In the unrestrained
test, the dummy (Figure 17) slid across the seat
in a sitting position in less than 0.8 seconds and
the right side of its head impacted on the right
“B” post with a force of 150 g’s. Body impact
caused the door to open and the dummy was
ejected.

In all instances of single strap restraint over
the left shoulder, the upper torso slipped side-
ways out of the shoulder strap and the body
folded to the right, over the seat belt, with the
head striking the seat cushion (Figures 18, 19,
20 and 21). These lateral head impacts with the
seat cushion, varying between 20 and 50 g’s, are
insignificant; however, lap belt loads between
1675 and 2550 pounds cutting into the side of the
abdomen would probably cause some internal
injuries,

Double strap shoulder restraint over the seat
back in conjunction with a seat belt allowed some
lateral motion of the trunk, but held it almost
upright (Figures 22, 23 and 24). In these tests
the side of the head hit the top of the seat back
with insignificant forces varying from 49 to 73
z's and abdominal loads from seat belts were
significantly reduced (975 to 1925 Ibs.).

{V. Discussion.

Caution should be used when the results of the
sinematics of the body along with head impact
‘orces presented in this study are applied to gen-

eral aviation aircraft because of the difference of
internal measurements of the occupant spaces.
The front seat of an automobile is approxi-
mately 5 feet wide, while that of popular general
aviation aircraft varies from 8 to 4 feet, with a
large majority of seats only about 3.5 feet wide.
A previous study’ has shown a side displace-
ment of the head from the centerline of the body
(in the sitting position, with seat belt restraint)
in excess of 36 inches during application of a
one-g force. Since the centerline of the body is
approximately 12 inches from the left side of the
aircraft, only 2 to 214 feet of clearance are avail-
able to the right side for prevention of head im-*
pact with side structures. Hence, the kinematic
motions allowed to the right side (without head
impact) with the types of restraint equipment
shown in Figures 18 through 21 would be ex-
pected to allow head impact with the right side
of the cabin in most general aviation aircraft.
Only the double shoulder strap designs shown in
Figures 22 through 24 sufficiently restrained side
motions of the body to protect the head in small
aircraft.

In the forward deceleration tests, the maxi-
mum motion of the head was approximately 14
inches in the horizontal plane and 14 inches in
the vertical plane. This compares favorably
with Chandler’s study * of human subjects in
which he reports a forward horizontal motion
of the head of 1.03 feet during a 12-g decelera-
tion. Young? has reported 22 to 24 inches of
horizontal displacement of a dummy’s head with
a vertical drop of 16 to 18 inches, while the
dummy was restrained by a single strap shoulder
harness during decelerations from velocities be-
tween 40.6 and 41.3 feet/second. In the same
report * he showed that double shoulder strap
harnesses restrict the forward motion of the head
to a range of 10 to 18 inches and the vertical
motion to 16 to 20 inches. It is probable, there-
fore, that forward head motions in the tests pre-
sented in this report were limited by impact
with the steering assembly and that, when these
measurements are corrected and applied to gen-
eral aviation aircraft, occupants of the front seat
can be expected to experience head impact with
the upper instrument panel and control wheel,
even while wearing shoulder harness restraint,
if they are exposed to decelerations of the magni-
tude tested in these studies.



“PRAM opIs Io] ‘sueuIYONIIe rooy ayerEdes 0} Surpus}xe PUL 3wOs PUTYE Passos ‘WJaq Jes 07 UAOS sdegs yseyo eyqnoq ‘ey aanory

(4088 pulyeq sdowys jD9141aA)

"99S E140 “29S Leryo

"998 221 40 “s
S fet te a1 SL sq 00

2s SOI" 40
‘sq 0S]

yinow hig G9,
(MOpuIM ayolq)
‘29S €1° 40
1043407 6 pp

"99S [1° 40
1D91,49A B coe

19



“peduy opis Iys[C Gvas oy7 PUTTEG Loo OY 0} PoLOYOUR puL YORI ywes JeAO BuIOS dexys yoyo WA uresds Juyerjser yuIod-sery, “Tz TANT

(408s puiyaq dosjs 109!ysaa)
"99S Eb2°> 40

*sq7 009 \

|22s S12" 40
~ , i 5 02

TU 205 siz 1 H

\oen Bs¢

\\

laa

I

99S 22° my
"sq ose'l

"99S 22° 40
*$d7 002'1

25



“oRduy opis YS ‘pouresyserun Aug “ZT aUAoT

"988 92° yo
149407 B Og)

28S 22° 40

IDDtidaA Ans

d

c

Payoalg
Awwng

21



queues SEH ae eee

«Gy OU} 0} poyoez7B pus roddn pu jeq J¥as 94} JO Jey-ouo 0} poyowrB pUS JOMOT YIIA dvajs ysoyo [VUOTVIP) woISAS JUyBI}SeA yuJOd-seIy, “gt TANT

99S ZEl" 4D
“sq oss‘2

~we_**S G2 40
"sq O12
"29S eI 40
"sq 002

42}04Aa49 19,

(MOpulm 3401q)
"28S Gil’ 40 .
9a .
10484079 6 OO] ‘say cue
"98S 21° 40

IDd1y4aA BOS

16


«A, 0%} 0} payee pue seddn pue oq yes oy} Jo F[VY-ou0 0} poyoRe pus JOMO[ WA dvazs ysoyo Yeuoserp) woysds yuyeaysar yuyod-somyY, “pf sAAOLT

“uoTJBra]IVep PaAvAIOS ‘(7800

|

» ~~
"995 GOr 40

10914430 6 Ob

7
WS fos 0:
7 (29S et 40

pspms0o4 609

"99S G6O° 40
"sq 0S2'I

"98S 60°40
“sq7 008

89011 ON

——



PUTYeq ainjonsys IOOY 0} Youye puk YoU ey} PUTYaq euO 0} eF1aAU0D sderys JsayD e[qnoq “Jwomdmnbe yoyerysex asvofer-yoINd agyueg ogea ‘FZ BEAD
(4Das pulyaq doajs |D91 420A)

"29S Epil yo
sq OSb

(doays yo3019)
Sil 40
"sq7q Gl

28

"99S OF 40
"sq 0Ob

rc,

= 38S OF
~\ g\ 1022101 6 v9

“98S Gbl 40

XW “een 6 ge

‘29S Ol yO
*sq1G2S‘I

21936


‘uoyyes9]900p PIeALIOy ‘pouyeAysaruN AMUN “T sANDT

Nee
"99S G2i 40 "99S SI’ 4D

lod!1y4an 6 OZ p40mso4 6 Og



V. Conclusions and Recommendations.

As demonstrated by the test dummy, restraint
of the human body by the use of belts during
crash decelerations is difficult. In the small cock-
pit area of general aviation aircraft, a single
diagonal chest strap used in conjunction with a
lap belt may reduce, but will not prevent, head
impacts during forward and side decelerations.
A double shoulder strap-lap belt design of re-
straint equipment can further reduce crash in-
juries, especially in crashes involving decelera-

tion forces which will throw the pilot to the
right side of the cockpit, provided that it is
designed as an integral part of a strong seat or
fastened to a strong aircraft structure near the
seat. The findings given in this report indicate
that even with the upper torso and lap belt re-
straints, front seat occupants will suffer injuries
from forward and side crash impact forces under
the acceleration conditions of the test; therefore,
eers should stress design of structures in
the cockpit area to minimize injuries from head
impact.

REFERENCES

a

. Snyder, R. G., J. W. Young, and C. C. Snow: “Ex-

perimental Impact Protection With Advanced Auto-

motive Restraint Systems: Preliminary Primate

Tests With Air Bag and Inertia Reel/Inverted-Yoke

Torso Harness.” Proceedings of Eleventh Stapp Car

Crash Conference, New York, SAF, 1967.

Lewis, 8, T. and J. P. Stapp: “Human Tolerances of

Aircraft Seat Belt Restraint.” Journal of Aviation

Medicine Vol. 29(1958), pp. 177-198.

3. Ewing, C. L., D. J. Thomas, G. W. Beeler, L. M.
Patrick, and D. B. Gillis: “Dynamic Response of the
Head and Neck of the Living Human to —Gx Im-
pact Acceleration.” Proceedings of Twelfth Stapp
Car Crash Conference, New York, SAE, 1968.

. Provost, E. L. and D. J. Schrum: “Dynamic Research
of Upper Torso Restraints.” Proceedings of Ninth
Stapp Car Crash Conference, University of Minne-
sota, Printing Department, 1966, pp. 88-92.

. Bohlin, I.: “Studies of Three-Point Restraint
Harness Systems in Full-Scale Barrier Crashes and
Sled Runs.” Proceedings of the Eighth Stapp Car
Crash and Field Demonstration Conference, Wayne
State University Press, Detroit, 1966, pp. 258-319.

. Aldman, Bertil: “A Protective Seat for Children—
Experiments with a Safety Seat for Children be-
tween One and Six.” Proceedings of the Fighth
Stapp Car Crash and Field Demonstration Confer-
ence, Wayne State University Press, Detroit, 1966,
Pp. 320-328,

NV

»

2

e

7. Provost, Emile L. and John 0. Moore: “Dynamic Re-
search of Human Restraining Devices.” Proceed-
ings of Seventh Stapp Car Crash Conference,
Springfield, Ill, Charles C. Thomas, 1965, pp. 143-154.

8. Tourin, Boris, Bertil Aldman, Irving Michelson, and
Jeremy Mitchell: “Restraining Characteristics of
Harnesses.” Proceedings of Sixth Stapp Car Crash
and Fiel€ Demonstration Conference, Minneapolis,
Minn., University of Minnesota, 1962, pp. 138-149.

9. Haynes, A. L. and H. R. Lissner: “Experimental
Head Impact Studies.” Proceedings of Fifth Stapp
Automotive Crash and Field Demonstration Con-
ference, Minneapolis, Minn., University of Minnesota,
1962, pp. 158-170.

10. Saldeen, T.: “Fatal Neck Injuries Caused by Use of
Diagonal Safety Belts.” The Journal of Trauma,
Vol. 7(6) :856-862, June 1967.

11. Swearingen, J. J., A. H. Hasbrook, R. G, Snyder and
E. B. McFadden: “Kinematic Behavior of the
Human Body During Deceleration.” Reprinted from!
Aerospace Medicine, Vol. 88, Feb. 1962, 188-197.

12. Chandler, Richard F. and Robert A. Christian:
“Crash Testing of Humans in Automobile Seats.”
New York, SAE Reprint No. 700361, 1970.

13. Young, Joseph W.: “A Functional Comparison of
Basic Restraint Systems.” FAA Office of Aviation
Medicine Report No. 67-31, June 1967.



“pRdury aprs 339] ‘Jees oyA PUIYEq Jooy oy} 0} paloyoU pu YoU wes JaAO ZujOS dexys yseyo YIM Weysks JureIISOI qujod-serqy, “gt aaoela

"98S 11 4D
*sq7 OSI

(i0as putyag do.ys jooiysaa)
"99S OF 40

L/w "sq 0S2

NK__ 288 1 40
'sq7 G22

P404 19,
(Mopuim ayosq)

"99S €1° 40
1019407 6 22)

‘99S ZI 40

17



‘uoyera[09p PAvALJOZ ‘j[oq Jas oyerudes T puL dexys ysoyo [LuOseIp ouIg -g sunoTT

"29S GEO 40
“sq 002

foes eh yD
bi No 7 pipmioy 606 "285 G60" 10
"sq OSB

98S G2I 40
1o91449aA 6 G¢



“‘qouduy opis 3S ‘4Joq yves e}ervdes B pus desjs ysayo |BUOZeIp s[suIg ‘ET TINT

"98S €2° 40

‘99g Gzz" 40 fi {2g gi 40 J
‘sq7 osi'l \ 1091449A Bue
/! \
y!
“285 SII 40

“sq71 Sze

23



TECHNICAL REPORT STANDARD TITLE PAGE

T. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No.
FAA#AM-72-6

‘4, Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date

EFFECTIVENESS OF RESTRAINT EQUIPMENT February 1972

IN ENCLOSED AREAS

6. Performing Organization Code

7. Author! s)

D. L. Lowrey, E. D. Langston, W. Reed,

and John J. Swearingen, D.Av.T

8. Performing Organization Report No.

9, Performing Organization Name and Address

FAA Civil Aeromedical Institute
P. O. Box 25082
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73125

10. Work Unit No.

11. Contract or Grant No.

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address
Office of Aviation Medicine

Federal Aviation Administration
800 Independence Avenue, S, W.
Washington, D. C. 20590

OAM

13. Type of Report and Period Covered

14, Sponsoring Agency Code

15. Supplementary Notes

Research leading to preparation of this report was performed under Project

AM-A-71-PRS- 37,

16, Abstract

A series of 20-g decelerations of a crash sled was conducted to determine the
magnitude of head impact decelerations while wearing various types of restraint
equipment in small confined areas, Restraint webbing loads and head impact
decelerations are presented for three directions of impact (straight forward,
and 90° to left and right). Restraint webbing undoubtedly reduces head impact
velocities, especially inthe forward direction.
in most instances, head strikes may be expected even while using upper and lower
torso restraint because of the close proximity of surrounding structure in general
aviation aircraft. Introduction of upper torso restraint along with lap belts in
general aviation aircraft will not relieve the need for delethalizing surrounding

structures,

However, this study shows that,

17. Key Words
Crash injury, aircraft design, aviation

safety, body flailing during deceleration,
shoulder harness design, injury
potential

18, Distribution Statement

Availability is unlimited. Document may
be released to the National Technical
Information Service, Springfield, Virginia,

22151, for sale to the public,

19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page)

Ti. No. of Pages

Unclassified Unclassified 28

22, Price

$3.00

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-69)



‘UOTJBIE[OVOP PABALIOZ ‘WUUTYLIIe IOOY B 0} YoVq yeas oy} qeAo sossed ‘uaN} UT ‘YOU
deijs o[Zuls @ UOJ 0} You oy} puyyeq poujof spus seddn pues aooaszozU }BES Oy) ABOU 3[9q Gey 0} UMES Spud JEAOT YA Geays ysoyo efqnog “9 FANT

NS Ol 40
*sq1 0S9

"28S G60 40
sq OSO'l

"99S S60 1D
*sq7 008

of.

f -2ag sr io
bi ~ 7 punms0y 699

"99S Let 40
10914390 6 OF

10


“OBIE[OIP PABAIOF ‘JBaS OY} PUTYE LOY ey} 0} PerOYoUG puB yOUG yes J9AO ZuToS dvsys ysoyo YIM woysks JUyerISer JUJOdeIyT, “G qEADT

RS Gol 40
“sq7 0S9
28S GOI’ 40

*sq7 00¢'l

"99S Ol 4D
*$q1 006

7

w.
WS 72S Ger yo
~ = piomios 6 1G

99S SII 4D
10914384 5 OZ



“WOHBIZ[OD9P PABMAOZ ‘Jjeq JES OU ‘deajs ysoyo [BUOsEIP e[FuIs Aq Pourwaysoa AUIUING “Z BANDIT

"99S O1 4D
*sq7 0S0'l

a.
729S Gel 40
7 piomio4 6 GL

"29S O1 40
*sq7 002‘!

"99S OL 40
1091419 6 Op



JusUULL OPIS 4401 4009 CHF
PUTYAq oINJoNIYS JOY 0} YORE puL you oy} PUTYEd ou 0} eBieAu. sderjs Seyo eqnog “Juande jUTBaysat asvaTaI-yoIN ogHUe|S Oped “OT TAAONL

(4Das pulyaq dosjs 10914484)
"98S €60° 40 “98S 160° 40
*sq1 002 7 sq Sez

"99S €60° 40
"sq1 OS

I

"98S 11 40
1032407 B gst

“29S IN 40
10913180 Bee

20


“JOVUUL! BPS JYsIA JUCUAYVOssE HOY ev vy Ee Bee mr
deajs [Sus & wAoF 07 You ay} pusYyaq poujof spua seddn puv uoyoesxeyNy J¥as oY} Ivo 719d dey 0} UMAs spud FOOT TIA dus soy a[qnoq “ze sUADT

(40as pulyeq doays 409142aA)
"99S 12° 40
“sq OOb

"99S Gil}
r- “$91 OSE

"99S er yo
*$q1 0S8

ZS =< 395 6140
5 tT WwW 1012307 6 6
WU ‘22S 61 40

oa 1091442A 6 GG

26


same as number 5 with the exception that the
shoulder straps are crossed behind the neck and
pass over the seat back to separate floor attach-
ments (Figure 7), and (7) the Pacific Scientific
quick-release harness in which shoulder straps
and lap belts plug into a quick-release buckle.
In these tests, the common upper torso strap
passed over the seat back to a fixed floor attach-
ment instead of going into an inertial reel
(Figure 8).

Ill. Results.

Head impact forces with various structures
and restraint webbing loadings, as well as
vertical forces on the neck from centrifugal
forces, along with time readings of each peak
force occurrence from the time the crash sled
began deceleration, are shown diagrammatically
in Figures 1 through 24.

Forward Decelerations: Figure 1 demon-
strates, as other researchers have shown re-
peatedly, that the unrestrained human body
slides forward in an erect sitting posture until
the knees contact the lower instrument panel,
at which time the upper torso flexes forward into
the windshield and/or control column. In the
case depicted, the head penetrated the wind-
shield (1965 Plymouth) at about the same time
that the neck contacted the upper steering
wheel rim.

In studying Figures 2 through 8, the follow-
ing observations are made:

All harness configurations allowed the driver's
head to impact the steering wheel rim and/or
hub.

Deceleration impact force was proportional to
the length of shoulder strap webbing in designs
anchored to the “B” post and roof structure; i.e.,
the longer the webbing, the greater the impact
force with increase in stretch distance.

In designs where shoulder straps traversed the
top of the seat and anchored to the floor struc-
ture behind the seat, head impact force varied
with yield characteristics of the seat back
structure—the top of the seat flexed forward 6
to 8 inches.

Head impact force with steering structures
varied between 45 and 107 g’s (forward and
lateral head forces were vectored since there was
usually some degree of head rotation). These

forces could be tolerated without serious injury
on well-designed structures, but would cause
serious facial fractures and head injuries in
most current transportation vehicles.

A vertical peak force of 20 to 40 g’s was re-
corded in all forward deceleration tests and,
since this peak force occurred approximately
0.02 seconds before head impact, it may be as-
sumed that the stress resulted from centrifugal
force, producing considerable stretching of the
neck along the radius of motion.

In general, as would be expected, the fewer the
number of straps restraining the body, the higher
the webbing loads. For example, when only a
single upper torso strap was used witheut a seat
belt (Figure 2), the total strap load exceeded
2200 pounds and would have been higher, but
lack of a seat belt allowed the knees to impact
the lower dash panel, taking some of the decelera-
tion load off of the chest strap. With the body
totally restrained by using both chest strap or
straps and lap belt, total strap loading was ap-
proximately 3000 pounds. Attaching shoulder
straps to the lap belt as in Figures 4, 5, 6 and 7
substantially increases (nearly doubles) the strap
loading on that portion of the lap belt that serves
as a common attachment for both a shoulder
strap and a portion of the seat belt.

Lateral Impact—Occupants thrown to the left:
In comparing Figures 10 through 16 with that of
the unrestrained dummy in Figure 9, it is clear
that none of the seven different restraint systems
offers any appreciable protection against head
impact in this direction (as attested to by low
readings on the restraint webbing) since the oc-
cupant is seated in such close proximity to side
structures on his left. The following observa-
tions are, however, worthy of note:

a. Impact of the side of the head may occur
against the “B” post or against the door glass,
depending on slight variations in the angle of
impact. Head impact against the “B” post in
this study ranged from 110 g’s to 158 g’s; these
levels would probably be fatal since the loads
were concentrated on such a small area of the
head due to rigid, nonyielding construction of
the post. Head impact forces to break the door
glass were 100 and 122 g’s for pre-1965 laminated
glass as compared with only 44 and 60 ¢’s for
tempered glass used in 1965 and later-model ve-
hicles. According to Lissner,? none of these


“pede opts 339] ‘peuyexyserun Aug “6 auADTZ

“28S SI 4D
1019307 68g)

99S SI 40
1Dd!44aA BGG

13



“goeduly aps Wer ‘Jaq Jees oyeredes B puB dvajs Jsayo [BUuOSeIpP aFuUTg “TT sao

"99S SII 40
*8q1 OS6

“98S GOI 40
‘sq1 Sze

"99S 111" 40
‘sq OG2'I

“98S BOI 40
‘sq G2dl

‘9a Hl 40
419407 BOG)

"98S OI 40
inaiiiaa fee

15



EFFECTIVENESS OF RESTRAINT EQUIPMENT IN ENCLOSED AREAS

I. Introduction.

Numerous research scientists have investigated
the effectiveness of various restraint devices
during deceleration utilizing instrumented dum-
mies, volunteer human subjects, and various
primates.1?*+5%78 However, in all cases, tests
were conducted with a seat mounted openly on
a crash sled in such a manner as to allow freedom
for kinematic motions in all directions, limited
only by the restraint equipment being tested.
Since man, as an operator of a vehicle, spends
most of his time during transportation in a small
enclosed area sitting next to rigid structure on
his left, within 2 to 4 feet of structure on his
right, and within 18 to 20 inches from rigid
structure in front of him, this study was con-
ducted to determine head impact forces on sur-
rounding structures and body kinematics while
wearing seven different designs of restraint
equipment in an enclosed area, For economy
reasons, sections of automobile bodies instead of
aircraft fuselages were utilized in these tests.
Decelerations were measured in the forward and
in both lateral directions.

II. Test Equipment and Procedures.

Four automobile bodies (a 1961 Chevrolet, a
1961 Ford, a 1965 Mercury, and a 1965
Plymouth) sectioned just anterior to the firewall
and just aft of the back of the front seat, were
purchased from a local salvage yard and rigged
for mounting on the CAMI crash sled, Sled im-
pact velocity was programmed for approximately
29 miles/hour (42.53 ft./sec.) to produce a peak
deceleration of 20 g’s. Actual test results indi-
rated a peak terminal sled velocity of 42.341
ft./sec. and all impact tests with the exception of
‘est runs Numbers 3 (17 g’s) and 20 (23 g's)
iad peak decelerations of 20 g’s, Photographic
soverage of the event was provided to record
oth top and side views at 24, 400, and 2000
ftrames/second.

Three 250-g CEC Model 4-202-0001 strain
gage accelerometers were mounted tri-axially in
the head of an Alderson F-50 anthropometric
dummy to measure forward, lateral, and vertical
head impact decelerations. Belt load transducers
manufactured in the CAMI machine shops were
calibrated on a 5000-pound capacity Dillon
dynamometer prior to test procedures. Output
signals for the belt load transducers and ac-
celerometers were recorded on a CEC Model
5-124A oscillographic recorder in conjunction
with a Sanborn 550M signal conditioning system.

A total of 24 tests was conducted to evaluate
the effectiveness of whole body restraint systems
for head protection. Seven different types of
restraint equipment were used for these tests in
the forward and in both lateral test positions.
For comparison, one test was made in each of
the three directions with the dummy unre-
strained. These seven different designs of re-
straint equipment are shown diagrammatically in
Figures 2 through 8, 10 through 16, and 18
through 24. The restraint equipment tested con-
sisted of (1) a single diagonal chest strap with-
out seat belt (as used in some foreign cars)
(Figure 2), (2) a single diagonal chest strap
with a separate seat belt (as installed on over
10,000,000 late-model American cars) (Figure 3),
(3) the so-called three-point restraint system—
diagonal chest strap with lower end attached to
one-half of the seat belt and upper end attached
to the “B” post (Figure 4), (4) a three-point
harness identical to that described above with the
exception that the upper end of the chest strap
goes over the shoulder and seat back and is at-
tached to the floor structure behind the seat
(Figure 5), (5) a double chest strap arrange-
ment with the lower ends sewn to the lap belt,
near the seat back and pan intersection, and the
upper ends joined behind the neck to form a
single strap which, in turn, passes over the seat
back and attaches to the floor structure behind
the seat (Figure 6), (6) a restraint system the



“PRVAUIT BpIs 4YysA (youu —
«Ay 8} 0} payouyye pus zeddn puv yeq yes oy} Jo J{VY-ou0 07 poyouy7 pue TOMO, YI deays ysoyo [VUoTvIp) wlysds puresysor quIOd-saryT, “0% TUOOTT

—

Ve

I | \ 22s Siz" 40
J

~ 1019407 BSG¢

rT

T (28s sez: 10
109144390 6 62

29S SIZ 40

"$97 O€e'! ‘085 be" iN \

‘sq7v G2i‘l \ \
‘99S 21° 40
"$91 Ob2




“pedal apis WS! ‘syueuNON}We JOOy ayeredes 0} Zuypue}xe pue zwes PUyYEq pessord ‘yJoq ywas 07 Mes sdvrjs ysoyD eiqnog “gz aan

(,08s putyaq doajs |D914 490A) 295 OF 40
"998 SSI 40 "sq OSb
"$971 O1S

385 8140
_ g\ 1022107 6 eZ

os 6Sp

"29S pl 40
‘8471 S2eS



“UOHBIE[BOP PIVAIOF ‘s}USMIyIEIFE JOO ayexedes 0} Suypuojxe pus ‘WwOS PUTYEd Pessodd ‘}[9q JBES 07 UMES Sdwajs ysoyD B]QNoq *, TANT

"28S $90" 40
*sq7 0S9'l

"99S O11 40
"sq 002

4-925 gi 0
ha ~ 7 pipms04 6201

"99S EI" 40
1D91343A 6 Op

"39S S6O° 4D
“sql ose

11



‘gouduy pls IT ‘oq ywos ou ‘duxys ysoyo [wUOSeIP efFuys Aq pouyerysor AwUING ‘OT BAND

yoen Aq buny

puo pajoal3
Awwng

regor io = aL oe ip
“$a 0S8 : 29S Ol 4
1019407 6O1l

‘28S Gel 40
10914304 6 B

14

re