Opinion ID: 2529268
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: The Severy Research

Text: ¶ 15 Arndt maintained that Ford had long been aware of the dangers associated with aft-of-axle fuel tanks, including the danger of objects in the trunk puncturing the fuel tank in a rear-end collision. In support of this opinion, Arndt relied upon research done by Derwyn Severy, a researcher at UCLA, who conducted a series of automobile crash tests, partly funded by Ford. The Severy research was published as an article in 1968 in a publication of the Society of Automotive Engineers, a peer-reviewed journal. The article was introduced into evidence at trial. With respect to fuel tank integrity and suggested design revisions, the article provided that: Several factors operate to determine the degree of attention given to an automobile safety oriented design problem. Prominent among these are the frequency with which the problem manifests itself, the degree of seriousness of the consequence when such problems arise, and the complexity or cost of solution of the problem. ¶ 16 After evaluating crash tests of vehicles with fuel tanks located under the trunk inches from the rear bumper, the article provided the following conclusions: 1.    Initial findings indicate that much progress can be made in reducing the possibility of crash fires by incorporation of relatively inexpensive design considerations relating to fuel tanks and related fuel systems. 2. Design revisions that provide for better containment of fuel    which position the tank in locations least likely to sustain significant structural collapse, and which reduce the likelihood of fuel tank rupture, even when moderately crushed, typify improvements that would greatly curtail crash-released fuel. 3. Fuel tanks should not be located directly adjacent to the rear bumper or behind the rear wheels directly adjacent to the fender sheet-metal as this location exposes them to rupture at very low speeds of impact   . 4. Preliminary studies suggest that the area cradled by the rear wheels, above the rear axle and below the rear window represents an improved location for the fuel tank   . The article further explained as follows: This location is least often compromised from collisions of all types. The rear wheels, axle, and suspension provide an excellent structure to resist collapse; it is sufficiently remote from the rear end to be relatively free from rear-end collapse forces and can be protected from the passenger compartment by a fire wall, which has already been shown to be required behind the rear seat back for other reasons. In conclusion, the article indicated that [c]ollision studies to date tend to support relocation of fuel tanks to the [over-the-axle] area, but further research is needed before this location can be recommended. ¶ 17 None of the vehicles tested in the Severy research had a tank located vertical-behind-the-axle and none involved testing for trunk contents puncturing the fuel tank. With respect to the under-the-trunk tanks Severy had researched, Arndt explained that if the tank is under the trunk, given that the force is usually moving forward, very, very unlikely that you're going to get an object in the trunk puncturing [the tank]. ¶ 18 In 1969, Ford's engineers investigated the proposed new over-the-axle tank location in relation to the under-the-trunk location. Roger Daniel, a Ford safety engineer, drafted a handwritten memo to his superiors at Ford regarding Future Gas Tank Location. In the memo, he stated his understanding that the future direction with respect to fuel tank location was to hang the tank under the trunk. ¶ 19 Although he indicated that there were advantages and disadvantages to this location, he stated that the under-the-trunk location was vulnerable to rear-end impacts. He recommended that for all vehicles except wagons and convertibles, the best tank location by far appears to be [over] the axle. The advantage of this design, according to Daniel, was that it would be [a]lmost impossible to crush the tank from the rear. ¶ 20 Thereafter, in 1970, the engineering staff at Ford prepared a typewritten memo which provided the following analysis: We have examined possible fuel tank locations and determined that the safest place for a fuel tank is [over] the rear axle and below the package tray. In rear[-]end accidents, the tank is above and forward of vehicle components likely to crush during the collision or deform it, while in lateral accidents, the tires, axle, and wheel-house structure provide extensive protection against rupture or even excessive deformation. The memo indicated that in the proposed over-the-axle tank location, the tank would be high enough in the trunk to essentially preclude rupture from in-trunk articles during an accident. However, should such an unlikely rupture occur, the gasoline would be confined to the trunk. ¶ 21 The concern about rupture from in-trunk articles did not refer to the vertical-behind-the-axle tank location later chosen by Ford. ¶ 22 Thereafter, in a Cost Engineering Report to determine the potential cost of moving the fuel tank to the over-the-axle location, Ford's engineers concluded that the cost of that design change would have been $9.95 per vehicle. Ford chose not to incorporate that design change into the 1979 Panther platform vehicle.