■许多身体残疾的儿童在坐着时需要额外的姿势支撑,并且在标准批准的儿童约束装置上使用了补充填充物,以在机动车辆中行驶时实现这一目标。然而,此填充对儿童的碰撞保护的影响是未知的。这项研究旨在研究在前向儿童约束装置中,额外的姿势支撑填充对儿童乘员碰撞保护的影响。
■在49km/h下进行了40次正面滑车测试,以比较Q1人体测量测试装置(ATD)在前向约束下的响应,在增加约束斜倚的位置有和没有额外的衬垫,和/或支撑头部,躯干和骨盆.测试了三种衬垫材料:布毛巾,软泡沫,和发泡聚苯乙烯(EPS)。衬垫对头部偏移的影响,峰值3ms头部加速度,分析HIC15、峰值3ms胸部加速度和胸部偏转。
■填充的影响根据使用的位置而变化。在约束下使用衬垫增加斜倚角度增加了头部受伤指标。在包括头部后面的多个位置使用毛巾增加了头部偏移和胸部损伤指标。使用额外的衬垫支撑头部侧面或骨盆位置对伤害风险措施的影响最小。硬质EPS泡沫,根据澳大利亚标准和指南的建议,在约束系统内使用时,对伤害指标的影响最小,就像在儿童身体周围的单个位置将紧紧地滚动或折叠的毛巾固定在约束装置上一样。
■本研究不支持使用姿势支撑填充物来增加头部后方的前向约束或填充物的斜倚。已发布的标准和指南中关于不使用海绵状泡沫的建议,柔软或容易压缩,优先考虑安全牢固的泡沫或短期使用紧密卷起或折叠的毛巾,在儿童约束罩下得到支持。这项研究还强调了在使用额外的衬垫时考虑儿童乘员保护的整个背景的重要性,特别是在儿童坐姿的变化时,增加衬垫相对于约束的标准安全特征。
UNASSIGNED: Many children with physical disabilities need additional postural support when sitting and supplementary
padding is used on standards approved child restraints to achieve this when traveling in a motor vehicle. However, the effect of this
padding on crash protection for a child is unknown. This study aimed to investigate the effect of additional padding for postural support on crash protection for child occupants in forward facing child restraints.
UNASSIGNED: Forty frontal sled tests at 49 km/h were conducted to compare Q1 anthropometric test device (ATD) responses in a forward-facing restraint, with and without additional padding in locations to increase recline of the restraint, and/or support the head, trunk and pelvis. Three padding materials were tested: cloth toweling, soft foam, and expanded polystyrene (EPS). The influence of padding on head excursion, peak 3 ms head acceleration, HIC15, peak 3 ms chest acceleration and chest deflection were analyzed.
UNASSIGNED: The influence of
padding varied depending on the location of use.
Padding used under the restraint to increase the recline angle increased head injury metrics. Toweling in multiple locations which included behind the head increased head excursion and chest injury metrics. There was minimal effect on injury risk measures with additional padding to support the sides of the head or the pelvis position. Rigid EPS foam, as recommended in Australian standards and guidelines, had minimal effect on injury metrics when used inside the restraint, as did tightly rolled or folded toweling secured to the restraint at single locations around the body of the child.
UNASSIGNED: This study does not support the use of postural support padding to increase recline of a forward-facing restraint or
padding behind the head. Recommendations in published standards and guidelines to not use foam that is spongy, soft or easily compressed, with preference for secured firm foam or short-term use of tightly rolled or folded toweling under the child restraint cover is supported. This study also highlights the importance of considering the whole context of child occupant protection when using additional padding, particularly the change in the child\'s seated position when adding padding in relation to the standard safety features of the restraint.