Crash testing is always unnerving: Will it work — successfully preventing underride and Passenger Compartment Intrusion (PCI)? Or will it fail — providing some useful information but sending the enthusiastic engineer back to the drawing board?
Either way, the adrenaline of anticipation followed by the jarring crash invariably leave me unsettled.
After seeing the latest segment of the WUSA9 Underride Investigative Series by Eric Flack, Teresa Woodard at WFAA in Dallas interviewed Rebekah Karth Chojnacki on January 22, 2020. Here’s the result of that interview:
Well said!
WUSA9 Underride Investigative Series, January 21, 2020 segment, Truckers say they’re open to strengthening underride standards – with a catch:
WUSA9 interviewed OOIDA (Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association) about the STOP Underrides Bill. Watch the latest segment of their truck underride investigative series in which OOIDA publicly committed themselves to supporting strengthening rear underride guard standards.
That’s great news. They’ve apparently seen the value of making truck crashes more survivable when cars rear-end trucks. However, it is puzzling to hear them, at the same time, oppose side guard technology which can also prevent people from dying under trucks — in this case, at the sides.
OOIDA said all the research – and crash tests like the one staged last year, just blocks from Capitol Hill, to draw attention to the fight for new underride safety requirements – doesn’t convince their organization side guards will be worth the investment.
“My last semi-trailer was $42,000 just with that trailer,” Pugh said. “So now we’re looking at upping the price another $2,000 to $3,000. That’s hard for a little guy to eat. That’s hard for a big guy to eat. There’s not that much profit in this business and if you want me to buy this technology and buy into this technology, you’re going to need to show me it works.” Lewie Pugh, executive vice president of the Owner-Operated Independent Truck Driver Association or OOIDA, which represents more than 160,000 members nationwide.
Pugh wants more government (read that taxpayer) funded side guard research:
Pugh says that means real-world testing. Prototypes, paid for by the government, studied by a federal agency like the Department of Transportation for effectiveness.
Perhaps he’s unaware of the side guard study conducted by Texas A&M on a contract from NHTSA (with taxpayer money) published in April 2018.
Is he aware of the untold number of hours put in by researchers and engineers to study and solve the underride problem over the past five decades? Here it is in a nutshell: History of Underride Research & Reports: 1896 to 2019
Maybe he doesn’t realize that the AngelWing side guard — successfully tested by the IIHS at 35 and 40 mph and by its inventor at 47.2 mph — has been installed on multiple trucks for several years and traveled thousands of miles without operational issues.
What exactly would convince him that underride protection on the sides of large trucks — promised by DOT on March 19, 1969 — can truly mean the difference between life and death? Or that they are not “too costly”?
There are major developments in the fight to require lifesaving equipment on big rigs driving next to you on the road. Safety advocates say it could help prevent devastating crashes known as underride accidents.
One of the nation’s largest trucking groups now says it is open to some of the proposed requirements. But the question remains if the industry’s concessions will go far enough for the families of accident victims.
Read more of the story here: https://bit.ly/3awIaxU #Underrides#BigRigs#TruckUnderrides#TruckCrash#TruckDrivers
Engineers have long recognized the problem of truck underride (passenger vehicles going under trucks). They have also spent a considerable amount of time trying to figure out engineering solutions to this deadly problem.
This post will attempt to record many of the patents issued in connection with these noble efforts. It will likely not be exhaustive, so I would welcome information on patents which I might have missed.
1896 This patent for a side underride protective device for street cars was issued on July 14 1896 and cited by numerous more recent underride patents: http://www.google.com.pg/patents/US564027.
1913 A patent was issued in 1913 for a “Safety Device for Motor Vehicles” to provide underride protection for the sides of large trucks. https://www.google.com/patents/US1127241
1935 H.H. Robinson was granted a patent for a Guard System for Tractor Trailer Combinations.
Since that time, numerous patents have been published which refer to this 1913 patent (with the patent information organized in these columns: Citing Patent, Filing date, Publication date, Applicant, Title):
| US4688824 * | Mar 4, 1986 | Aug 25, 1987 | Herring John D | Safety device for vehicles |
| CN100572144C | May 27, 2005 | Dec 23, 2009 | 沃尔沃拉斯特瓦格纳公司 | Device for a vehicle side anticollision box, and a vehicle comprising such a side anticollision box |
| US7407204 * | Nov 27, 2006 | Aug 5, 2008 | Volvo Lastvagnar Ab | Arrangement for a vehicle side fairing, and a vehicle comprising such a side fairing |
| US20070085355 * | Nov 27, 2006 | Apr 19, 2007 | Volvo Lastvagnar Ab | Arrangement for a vehicle side fairing, and a vehicle comprising such a side fairing |
| US7780224 | Jun 9, 2008 | Aug 24, 2010 | Vanguard National Trailer Corporation | Crash attenuating underride guard |
| US20080303311 * | Jun 9, 2008 | Dec 11, 2008 | Vanguard National Trailer Corporation | Crash attenuating underride guard |
| US7887120 | Jan 26, 2009 | Feb 15, 2011 | Transtex Composite Inc. | Aerodynamic trailer skirts |
| US7942467 | Dec 24, 2009 | May 17, 2011 | Transtex Composite Inc. | Aerodynamic skirt support member |
| US7942468 | Dec 24, 2009 | May 17, 2011 | Transtex Composite Inc. | Aerodynamic skirt securing mechanism |
| US7942469 | Dec 24, 2009 | May 17, 2011 | Transtex Composite Inc. | Aerodynamic skirt panel |
| US7942470 | Dec 24, 2009 | May 17, 2011 | Transtex Composite Inc. | Aerodynamic skirt opening |
| US7942471 | Dec 24, 2009 | May 17, 2011 | Trnastex Composite Inc. | Aerodynamic skirt shape |
| US20090189414 * | Jan 26, 2009 | Jul 30, 2009 | Mathieu Boivin | Aerodynamic trailer skirts |
| US20100096880 * | Dec 24, 2009 | Apr 22, 2010 | Mathieu Boivin | Aerodynamic skirt panel |
| US20100096882 * | Dec 24, 2009 | Apr 22, 2010 | Mathieu Boivin | Aerodynamic skirt opening |
| US20100096883 * | Dec 24, 2009 | Apr 22, 2010 | Mathieu Boivin | Aerodynamic skirt shape |
| US20100187856 * | Dec 24, 2009 | Jul 29, 2010 | Mathieu Boivin | Aerodynamic skirt support member |
| US20100187856 * | Dec 24, 2009 | Jul 29, 2010 | Mathieu Boivin | Aerodynamic skirt support member |
| US20100264691 * | Apr 15, 2010 | Oct 21, 2010 | Giromini Richard J | Side underride cable system for a trailer |
| US8292351 | Apr 3, 2011 | Oct 23, 2012 | Transtex Composite Inc. | Resilient strut for aerodynamic skirt |
| US9004575 | Aug 3, 2011 | Apr 14, 2015 | Gary Alan Grandominico | Aerodynamic skirt assembly |
| US20110175396 * | Apr 3, 2011 | Jul 21, 2011 | Mathieu Boivin | Aerodynamic skirt |
| US8398150 | Apr 17, 2012 | Mar 19, 2013 | Wabash National, L.P. | Side skirt system for a trailer |
| US8449017 | Sep 11, 2012 | May 28, 2013 | Transtex Composites Inc. | Aerodynamic skirt resilient member |
| US20120169086 * | Mar 7, 2012 | Jul 5, 2012 | Giromini Richard J | Side underride cable system for a trailer |
| US8579359 | Jan 15, 2013 | Nov 12, 2013 | Wabash National, L.P. | Side skirt system for a trailer |
| US8678474 * | May 17, 2013 | Mar 25, 2014 | Transtex Composite Inc. | Self-repositioning aerodynamic skirt |
| US8783758 | Mar 19, 2013 | Jul 22, 2014 | Wabash National, L.P. | Folding side skirt system for a trailer |
| US8801078 | Oct 9, 2013 | Aug 12, 2014 | Wabash National, L.P. | Side skirt system for a trailer |
| US9199676 | Jul 2, 2014 | Dec 1, 2015 | Wabash National, L. P. | Side skirt system for a trailer |
| US9409610 | Mar 11, 2015 | Aug 9, 2016 | Wabash National, L.P. | Side skirt system for a trailer |
| US9573636 | Mar 12, 2015 | Feb 21, 2017 | Ridge Corporation | Aerodynamic skirt assembly |
| US9688320 | Oct 27, 2015 | Jun 27, 2017 | Wabash National, L.P. | Side skirt system for a trailer |
1977 Page Patent guard rail for side protection on large wheel vehicles, 1977 US Side Guard Patent US4060268 William Page.pdf
1996 Volvo began manufacturing trucks with Front Underrun Protection in 1996 in Europe. This is a patent filed in 2007 for an “Underrun protector and method of providing underrun protection.” http://www.google.sr/patents/WO2008002242A1?cl=en Other relevant information on front underrun protection can be found here: https://annaleahmary.com/tag/front-underrun-protection/
2009 Patent filed for a “Side impact guard device for industrial vehicles, particularly trailers or semi-trailers”
| US7967349 | Apr 7, 2009 | Jun 28, 2011 | C.R.F. Societa Consortile Per Azioni | Side impact guard device for industrial vehicles, particularly trailers or semi-trailers |
2012 Sapa Extrusions (inventor/engineer Malcolm Deighton) filed for a patent in 2012 for a “Semi trailer under-run protection device” which they later developed into a rear underride guard which was successfully crash tested on a trailer in April 2017. https://www.google.com/patents/USD703106
2015 Aaron Kiefer, crash reconstructionist and forensic engineer, was issued a patent for an innovative combination side & rear trailer underride protection system: https://www.google.com/patents/US9463759 Please see the numerous underride patents referred to in this patent.
2015 This patent for a Trailer rear impact guard cites numerous other underride protection patents: https://www.google.com/patents/USD790407
2016 Stephen Batzer and Patrick Rogers granted a patent for an Adjustable side under-ride guard for sliding axle trailer, May 31, 2016.
2016 Aaron Kiefer granted TrailerGuard system underride protection patent, October 11, 2016.
2016 Stephen Batzer and Patrick Rogers granted a patent for a Telescoping side under-ride guard for sliding axle trailer, November 8, 2016.
2017 Seven Hills Engineering, Perry Ponder inventor of AngelWing side guard Underride Protection successfully crash tested at 35 MPH by IIHS on 3/30/2017 and 40 MPH on 8/29/2017. Patent Pending http://www.7he.us and http://airflowdeflector.com/airflow-2/
2017 IIHS TOUGHGuard Award Announced for improved rear underride guard design by trailer manufacturers, March 1, 2017
2017 SAPA (Hydro Extrusions) publishes results of 40 mph crash test of a Rear Impact (Underride) Guard: Sapa 40-30 RIG Test Engineering Report Version 1.3
2017 Wabash Trailers announced a prototype side guard, September 29, 2017.
2018 Aaron Kiefer granted patent for an underride collision device for large trucks: pat9908493 Kiefer
2019 Vanguard Trailers granted application for strap side guard patent, June 20, 2019.
Vanguard Strap Underride Patent Vanguard Side Guard Patent Application 2019
2019 Fortier Side protection device for a vehicle, related kit and vehicle provided with the same, Patent No.: US 10,343, 636 B2. Canada.
2020 Wabash Side Underride Guard Patent Wabash 2020 SUG patent
2021 Patent for an Underride Guard Assembly for Trailers from Great Dane Trailers was published on October 7, 2021.
2022 SIDE UNDERRIDE GUARD ASSEMBLY FOR A TRAILER, Fontaine Commercial Trailer, Inc. patent for a side underride guard on flatbed trailers.
2023 Utility Trailer Manufacturing, side guard patent, July 4, 2023
2023 Great Dane Trailers, side guard patent, August 29, 2023
For additional information on Underride Research, Reports, and Recommendations, see this post: https://annaleahmary.com/2017/09/history-of-underride-research-reports-1896-to-2017/
The current underride rulemaking was issued as a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on December 16, 2015. Over four years ago. It’s time to take care of business. People continue to die horrific, violent, unimaginable underride deaths.
Is it time to move forward with negotiated rulemaking to hammer out practical, effective solutions for the deadly underride problem? Is it doable? Would this process enable us to overcome the stalemate between industry and safety advocates — to get the current underride rulemaking out of limbo?
NOTES ON NEGOTIATED RULEMAKING:
Declares that any agency may consult with the Administrative Conference of the United States and other individuals and organizations for information and assistance in forming a negotiated rulemaking committee and conducting negotiations.
Authorizes the Chairman of the Conference to pay, upon request of an agency head, all or part of the expenses of convening and conducting a negotiated rulemaking proceeding.
{NOTE: Apparently, this ability was later taken away from the ACUS and they are no longer able to assist in this way with negotiated rulemaking. Oh, well. Back to SQUARE ONE!}
Read more here: Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1990
The negotiated rulemaking process is unique in several ways from both listening sessions and advisory committees. . . a negotiated rulemaking committee’s goal is to make binding, enduring decisions that will resolve the underlying issues and, if present, disputes.
Compared to participation in hearings/meetings and advisory committees, the role of non-Agency participants in interacting with the Agency through the negotiated rulemaking process is often far more robust, expansive, and issue-focused.
Read more here: https://cms8.fmcsa.dot.gov/registration/commercial-drivers-license/eldt/nprm-faqs
NOTE: And this could legitimately be done to update the NPRM on rear guards (which is in limbo) into a SUPPLEMENTAL RULEMAKING.
An SNPRM may be issued if a proposed rule has been substantially changed from the original notice of proposed rulemaking. The supplemental notice advises the public of the revised proposal and provides an opportunity for additional comment. To give the public a reasonable opportunity to become reacquainted with a rulemaking, a supplemental notice may also be issued if considerable time has elapsed since publication of a notice of proposed rulemaking. An SNPRM contains the same type of information generally included in an NPRM. § 1.05-40 Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM).
What are we waiting for?
The AnnaLeah & Mary Stand Up For Truck Safety Petition was delivered to DOT on May 5, 2014 — one year after our crash. It called for comprehensive underride rulemaking. We’ve uncovered a lot more information since then; we’re well-equipped to participate in this process. Let’s get on with it.
Super single tires (in place of the more common dual tire set-up) on semi-trailers could actually save weight, cost, and — when combined with side guards — lives! Sounds like a Win/Win scenario to me! But don’t take my word for it, read about the potential benefits in this truck driver blogpost:
Essentially, instead of having eighteen tires to support the trailer and truck, only ten will be needed because of the improved design of the tire itself. The super single truck tires can withstand the weight of the trailer and vehicle over the same time period as their dual counterparts. A study performed by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory showed that trucks could save an average of almost 3% on gas or diesel fuel. While 3% may not sound like much, over 125,000 miles and averaging five miles per gallon that results in a savings of 728 gallons per year.
In addition, the new tires actually offer more stability with a wider truck frame. However, the most interesting advantages are that these tires can hold up for about 200,000 miles as opposed to the standard 160,000 miles for the conventional tires. This means that money is saved on replacement as well since the fewer number of super singles which actually last 40,000 miles longer.
However, the main advantage that super singles offer is that they are stronger, yet lighter in weight than their standard counterparts by roughly 1,000 pounds in total. While this weight savings may translate to better fuel mileage, trucking companies see this as being able to add 1,000 more pounds to the cargo. This means that more can be hauled on a single trip which can earn the company even more money than before.
Read more here: http://truck-driver-blog.blogspot.com/2014/10/advantages-of-super-single-truck-tires.html?m=1
Possible Drawback (as mentioned in the video below) is what could happen when there is a tire blow-out.
Additional Citations To Check Out:
Motor carriers consider many factors — and come to different conclusions — as they evaluate wide-base tires versus standard duals for their tractors and trailers Fleets Weigh Benefits, Drawbacks of Wide-Base Tires Versus Duals Transport Topics, April 13, 2020
www.eurekalert.org › pub_releases › drnl-stf080117
Story tips from the Department of Energy’s Oak Ridge National …Aug 1, 2017 – Credit: Oak Ridge National Laboratory/Dept. of Energy … derived from old rubber tires, an Oak Ridge National Laboratory-led research team … Scientists found that single gallium cations are the key to increasing production of …Missing: super | Must include: super
www.greencarcongress.com › 2006/06 › single_widebase
ORNL: Single Wide-Base Truck Tires Improve Fuel Economy …Jun 30, 2006 – Replacing the standard two thinner tires per wheel with a single wide-base tire improves the fuel … Interstate tests by ORNL’s National Transportation Research Center show… … We drive a new truck with super singles.books.google.com › books
Review of the 21st Century Truck Partnership, Second ReportNational Research Council, Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems – 2012 – Technology & EngineeringNational Research Council, Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences, Board on Energy and … ORNL. 2009. Effect of Wide-Based Single Tire on Class-8 Combination Fuel Efficiency. … High Efficiency Clean Combustion for Super Truck.
www.greencarcongress.com › 2006/10 › ornl_launches_n
ORNL Launches Nationwide Heavy-Duty Truck Efficiency Test …Oct 23, 2006 – Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) has launched a nationwide test of … Heavy-Duty Truck Efficiency Test; Single Wide Tires a Prime Focus … Earlier interstate tests by ORNL’s National Transportation Research Center … I have seen a few of these trucks pass me, recently, with the super single wheels.
True Stories Well Told recently published this all too true tale of AnnaLeah. . .
AnnaLeah was a particularly avid reader with a colorful imagination. She had a myriad ideas written down on random pieces of paper tucked into drawers, filling notebooks, or emailed to herself. She had, in fact, already created in her own mind numerous literary worlds peopled by characters with names and personalities. . .
Read more here: https://truestorieswelltold.com/2019/12/18/annaleahs-too-true-story/
I’m sure that I don’t get alerted to every underride crash in this nation. But I see enough of them to frequently re-kindle my frustration with the lack of significant action on this issue. Apparently, no one person feels the burden resting squarely on their shoulders. Hence, we are left with a disturbing absence of a sense of urgency to solve the problem.
You can catch a dismal glimpse of the daily Underride Death Toll (certainly not an exact count) on my Twitter Profile.
When supporters of the STOP Underrides! Act of 2019 first hear the news about DOT’s new “rule on rules,” they might moan and sigh and scramble to figure out what next. On December 5, Transportation Secretary solidified the Trump administration’s approach to rulemaking:
When it comes to investigating suspected wrongdoing and enforcing its regulations, the new rules also require the department “where feasible, foster greater private-sector cooperation in enforcement.”
“This effort enhances the Department’s regulatory process by providing greater transparency and strengthening due process in enforcement actions,” Chao said in a statement. Transportation Department cements Trump administration’s deregulatory policies with a ‘rule on rules’
On the one hand, there are hints of good things there in calling for rules that are not out of date, cooperation from the private sector, and greater transparency. But those who have been around the block in safety advocacy are right to be skeptical and devoid of hope for future traffic safety rulemaking.
Yet I remain hopeful knowing that the STOP Underrides Act fits the bill by calling for a Committee On Underride Protection (COUP), whose role is to gather a diverse group of stakeholders to collaboratively keep DOT truly transparent and progressing in underride rulemaking. Will the COUP be included in the upcoming FAST Act language? I’m doing everything that I can to make it a reality.
Now, understandably, it could cause concern that, “The new Transportation Department action formalized a Trump administration requirement that for each regulatory step a department takes, it has to undertake two deregulatory moves.” However, I’m not worried because I know that it would be procedurally acceptable for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to remove the existing 1996 rear underride rules, (two of them — FMVSS 223 & 224), which would satisfy that requirement.
Then, NHTSA could issue a Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SNPRM) as a revision of the December 2015 NPRM underride rulemaking, which was intended to update the 1996 rear underride guard rule. In fact, SNPRMs are a valid means of improving a NPRM — based on Public Comments and new information received subsequent to the initially issued proposed rule.
No one can argue that there has not been plenty of new information on underride which has come to the surface in the last seven years. In fact, the STOP Underrides! Act nicely packages straightforward rules, based on performance standards, to address every form of deadly underride and can easily lead to an Underride SNPRM — all with the help of the Committee On Underride Protection to mold it into the best possible underride protection.
So, in this season of expectant hope, let us eagerly continue a national conversation on the elimination of preventable underride tragedies. Let our goal be to change the face of the trucking industry by making truck crashes more survivable, thus promising a better chance that more people will be home for the holidays.
Members of Congress, Secretary Chao, trucking industry, eager engineers, and families of underride victims, let’s do this together.
(p.s. Let’s also appoint a National Traffic Safety Ombudsman so that motorists and vulnerable road users — victims of every form of traffic violence — can count on a strong voice to authoritatively advocate on their behalf.)
People have died under trucks since passenger vehicles and trucks have shared the road. What changes have we seen in underride protection? Here is a Timeline put together by the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety for the first Underride Roundtable on May 5, 2016.
What’s next? What will the future hold for underride rulemaking? More of the same or significant progress in preventing underride tragedies?
