Background: Most traffic safety research projects require accurate real world data which is collected in different databases around the world. This is especially important since the results of these projects form the basis for new crash test procedures and standards. In many of these databases the involvement of the frontal structures of the car in frontal crashes is coded by using the SAE J224 practice (Society of Automobile Engineers). There were indications that by using this practice the database would contain an overestimate of the car frontal structure involvement in real world crashes. One purpose of this thesis is therefore to develop a new method for real world crash investigations to better address this issue. One purpose was also to adopt this method in a data collection of fatal crashes in Sweden and examine injury causation mechanisms. Studies shows that the commonly used Hybrid III dummy is not fully reproducing the kinematical behavior observed in frontal sled test with belted PMHS (Post Mortem Human Subject). A human FE-model (Finite Element) might be able to reproduce the behavior evidenced with the PMHS in order to study upper body kinematics in certain types of frontal collision events. Method: A new data collection method was developed with the purpose to examine actual load paths active in the car front during a frontal crash. An important purpose was to examine if there was a relation between these load paths and injury producing mechanisms. This was done in an examination and analysis of 61 fatally injured occupants in 53 car frontal crashes in a sample area covering 40 % of the population of Sweden. Sample period was one year (1st October 2000 to 30th September 2001). An existing human FE-model was developed and validated with respect to upper body kinematics by using existing frontal belted PMHS tests. This was done by building a FE-model of the seat and seat belt used in the PMHS tests. Results: A generic car structure was developed which was used in the data collection methodology. By adopting this new method, Small Overlap (SO) crashes emerged as the most common crash configuration (48 %) among belted frontal fatalities. The injury producing mechanism in SO crashes is characterized by occupant upper body impacts in the side structure (door, a-pillar) of the car. This upper body kinematics is induced by both the crash pulse and the asymmetrical three point belt system. Current crash test procedures are not designed to fully estimate the performance of neither car structures nor restraints in SO crashes. In order to develop a better tool for reproducing this kinematical behavior a FE-model of a human body was refined and validated for belted conditions. This validation was performed with satisfying result. Conclusions: This study showed that by adopting new methods of data collecting new areas of traffic safety could be considered. In this study SO (48 %) crashes emerged as the most common crash configuration for belted frontal fatalities. Approximately ¼ of the fatalities occurred in a crash configuration comparable to current barrier crash test procedures. The body kinematics of PMHS in the SO crashes can be replicated and studied by using a FE-model of a human body in the collision load case model. With this tool possible collision counter measures could be evaluated for the SO crash configuration.

During the last couple of years several studies have been conducted to investigate how children move and position during car rides. This in order to map when, and for how long children sit in positions that are not safe as well as to identify the reason for these movements. One of the conclusions is that children do not always sit comfortable in today’s belt-positioning boosters and thereby they chose positions that are unwanted for safety reasons. The aim for the master thesis has thereby been to improve seating comfort for children while traveling safely in the rear seat of a car. The target group has been children in ages 5-11 years old with body height 110-145 cm, a Swedish population 50 percentile has been used for the extreme dimensions. The master thesis process is divided in three phases; Discovery, Development and Testing and Evaluation. In the Discovery phase information in the areas child safety, child methodology and comfort was gathered through literature study, interviews with experts, benchmarking and a focus group with parents. As a final step customer needs were formulated. In the Development phase a workshop with children was initially performed to complement the customer needs with inputs from the users. The customer needs were afterwards reformulated into a specification of requirements and five comfort hypotheses. Finally a prototype was developed, designed from the requirements with the purpose to validate the comfort hypotheses, using an anthropometric design method (Osvalder, et al., 2010). In the final phase, Testing and Evaluation, the prototype and reference belt-positioning boosters were evaluated by children in two user studies; one static study and one on road study, to evaluate comfort features and try out different seating comfort evaluation methods. The result is divided into child seating comfort characteristics and child seating comfort methodology guidelines. To assist future development of belt-positioning boosters, seven comfort features are defined to help children ride comfortable in a safe position in the car. Furthermore, 13 child methodology guidelines are formulated to help further seating comfort evaluation with children. Conclusively to make children sit comfortable and safe positioned in the car they should be seated in a belt-positioning booster with headrest, backrest, seat cushion and foot support, the supporting parts need to be perceived as soft around head, back and under the buttock and all parts need to be dimensioned for all children in the target group. The size of the belt-positioning booster and the combination of foam thickness, foam hardness and shape are the main factors for affecting the perceived seating comfort. Furthermore, children shall be included as both design partners and testers during the development of belt-positioning boosters. During the prototype development static comfort evaluation with children should be done repeatedly to verify measurements, shape and foam hardness. To evaluate comfort both static evaluation and on road evaluation should be performed since comfort varies over time. Data should be collected subjectively from children through quantitative methods, such as rating scales, and qualitative methods, such as general questions regarding comfort/discomfort experience. Video observations can identify children’s position during car rides. Different positions can be timed and together with subjective data reasons for repositioning can be identified.