Opinion ID: 1795931
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Crash Testing

Text: Automotive vehicles are tested to determine how they respond to a frontal crash using an instrumented test dummy. Head-injury criteria (HIC) is a standard employed by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (the NHTSA) to evaluate the safety of vehicles. HIC scores are measured on a sliding scale where the lower numbers represent less likelihood of a serious head injury. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 208, promulgated by the NHTSA, mandates that the dummy's HIC score not be above 1000 in a 30-mph frontal fixed-barrier crash. In three FMVSS 208 30-mph tests, the HIC scores of second-generation H-cars were 690, 420, and 590well below the maximum of 1000 established by the NHTSA and also below maximum acceptable levels established internally by GM. Mundo testified that he observed that, although the HIC scores on those tests were low, the floor pan collapsed in one of those crash tests. The NHTSA also operates a New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) to evaluate the performance of new vehicles. Under the NCAP, vehicles are crashed into a fixed barrier at 35-mph. According to Mundo, the 35-mph crash test uses 33% more energy than the test conducted pursuant to FMVSS 208. The HIC score of the second-generation H-car was 829 on the NCAP test, and the NHTSA awarded the second-generation H-car 4 out of a possible 5 stars. The forces in the 35-mph crash test are comparable to the forces present in the accident in this case. In two 35-mph crash tests conducted by GM on pre-production second-generation H-cars, passenger HIC scores of 1050 and 1080 were recorded. According to GM, the pre-production test cars are chosen based on a worst-case scenario combination of weight, options, and configuration to allow a margin for error with respect to the actual NCAP tests of production cars. The average HIC scores of five comparable tests conducted by GM on first-generation cars with a C/H platform was 954; only one test result was above 1000, but it was significantly above at 1370. The average HIC scores of four second-generation H-car tests conducted by GM, including the two pre-production tests, was 1000; only one fell below 1000, and it was significantly below at 800. GM points out that no production second-generation H-car exceeded 1000 in any test. However, if the significantly aberrational number in each set of tests is discarded, the result is an average HIC score for the first-generation C/H-cars of 850 and an average HIC score for the second-generation H-cars of 1067. While this approach leaves the two pre-production cars in the group of three second-generation H-cars, the third production second-generation H-car in the group tested at 1070, a HIC score almost identical to the score of the two pre-production cars (1050 and 1080). During his testimony, Mundo was asked, What does a HIC number of 1050 mean for a passenger in this 1992[sic] Oldsmobile H-car? He replied: [A] number above 800, particularly into the thousand range is often what we refer to as a no-build condition.... We won't be able to build this car. [9] A GM engineer, Keith Knickerbocker, agreed that if a vehicle's HIC score exceeds 1000 there is a likelihood of serious head injury in a crash, and that if the HIC score is under 1000 it is more likely than not that there will be no serious head injury. [10] GM notes that one of Jernigan's expert witnesses, Dr. Joseph Burton, agreed that GM is a world leader in crash test development design and actual implementation. GM says that it runs 500 to 600 crash tests per year and that it has published more vehicle-safety research than all other automobile manufacturers combined. GM maintains internal standards that exceed government standards, including a below-800 HIC score for the 30-mph frontal crash test. [11] In the early 1980s, GM implemented a vehicle-safety improvement program (VSIP) under which GM worked to make cars better than their predecessors. According to the testimony of Robert Sinke, one of GM's expert witnesses, one of the main objectives of the VSIP was to achieve a 25 percent reduction in the overall societal harm resulting from accidents. Design engineers responsible for the second-generation H-car were required to report to management their safety objectives and compliance with the VSIP. GM says that, pursuant to the VSIP, it equipped the 1992 H-car with a structural enhancement package designed to increase crashworthiness and with body structure improvement to reduce the amount of crush to the vehicle in a frontal impact crash. Several areas in the front of the car, including the rocker beam and A-pillar, were reinforced, and the thickness of the lower rails was increased. GM says these reinforcements participate in a frontal accident in managing the energy. The second-generation H-car also added crush initiators to the lower rails for more efficient energy absorption in frontal collisions. However, Jernigan points out that the emphasis of the structural enhancement program was smoothness and quietness of ride and that any improvement in the area of crashworthiness was characterized as other gains. Jernigan contends that none of the crashworthiness improvements provided additional protection to the occupants in a frontal collision. [12] GM reports that it ran more than 120 developmental and compliance crash tests on the second-generation H-car, including frontal, side, rear, angle, fixed-barrier, moving-barrier, and car-to-car crashes. Test reports recorded results, and the tests were used to improve the design of the H-car and to correct problems. In its brief to this Court, GM maintains that the second-generation H-car surpassed all GM driver and passenger goals, which were all above federal standards, for chest g's, chest deformation, and right and left femur loads in all three crash tests (with 1 exception out of 24 measures). In a 30-mph, 30-degree, right-handed angle, fixed-barrier test GM says most closely approximates the forces involved in this accident, the second-generation H-car recorded a passenger HIC score of 360. Based upon those tests, GM concluded that, compared to the first-generation H-car, We have better crash numbers. We have better occupant injury numbers ... and we have better occupant kinematics.