Tag Archives: front underride protection

21st Century Truck Partnership Third Report mentions front override but not front override protection.

Just found a 21st Century Truck Partnership Third Report in which SAFETY is mentioned. Front override is also mentioned! I have not yet read every single word, but I see little mention of Front Underride/Override Protection (only crash avoidance technologies).
Here is Chapter 7 from that report. It is entitled, “Safety” (21st Century Truck Partnership — Third Report, 2015).
Please read it with the STOP Underrides Bill in mind (in which Front Underride Protection would be mandated by Congress).
(Note: How is it that I brought up the 21st Century Truck Partnership with NHTSA officials in 2017 but they did not once mention this report!)
p.s. Some quotes:
The review of LTCC cases produced evidence that front override and side underride are significant problems in serious crashes between heavy trucks and light vehicles. Front override and side underride were found in most of the crashes examined. Preliminary estimates from this review are that override occurs in almost three-quarters of crashes involving the front of the truck and in over half of the crashes when the sides of the trucks were struck (Blower and Woodrooffe, 2012).
 
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Finding 7-1. Many safety technologies could be effectively evaluated and demonstrated in a safety-focused program— for example, a Safety SuperTruck similar to the DOE fuel consumption reduction SuperTruck program. 
 
Recommendation 7-1. DOT should consider implementing a Safety SuperTruck program to develop, integrate, and evaluate safety technologies such as cab structural integrity, side curtain airbags, advanced forward warning and collision mitigating systems to help industry attain a more integrated and complete safety package with a view to generating greater purchaser acceptance of safety technology not mandated by law.
 
My posts last year on this:

Every 15 min. in US a large truck rear-ends a car; Near Misses Indicate Need for Front Underride Protection

Fred Andersky, director, customer solutions, controls with Bendix, said at the North American Commercial Vehicle show that every 15 minutes in the U.S., a large truck rear-ends a passenger car.   https://www.trucknews.com/equipment/bendix-developing-next-gen-safety-systems/1003081127/

That means there are either fatal front override crashes or “near misses” 96 times/day, 672 times/week, 2,912 times/month, and 34,944 times/year!

In May 2017, Jerry and I were invited to the National Safety Council’s annual Green Cross Safety Banquet in San Diego. During the banquet, I sat next to a safety manager from United Airlines. She said that it is United’s policy to count and study “near misses” and consider what is learned from them when developing safety strategies.

In fact, these truck/car rear-end collisions should be considered “Underride Near Misses” and included in the cost/benefit analysis formula for underride regulatory analysis. How might that change the outcome of the rulemaking and therefore the outcome of these kinds of collisions in the future?

Tell me why we would not want to have both Collision Avoidance Technologies and Front Underride Protection (FUP) on trucks in this country to decrease the risk of preventable underride injuries and deaths!!! Yet there is resistance and opposition to a FUP mandate in the U.S. — despite the fact that the NTSB has strongly recommended that NHTSA issue such a mandate and Europe has had a FUP regulatory standard since 1994.

By the way, I would still like to see the detailed formula which NHTSA has used to do underride rulemaking cost/benefit analysis. I’d like to make sure that it is relevant and accurate.

 

National Transportation Safety Board Recommends Front Underride Protection on Trucks

A 2010 report from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) recommended that front underride protection be installed on large trucks. This recommendation was based on their investigation of a 2009 crash in Miami, Oklahoma, in which a Volvo truck rode over three vehicles in succession. Ten people died.

NTSB Truck Underride Safety Recommendations to NHTSA

Here it is, ten years later, and NHTSA has not yet issued rulemaking for Front Underride Protection.

The European division of Volvo Trucks actually has manufactured Front Underride Protection (FUP) for years because there is a European FUP standard. Europe has recognized that front underride (or override) is an engineering problem and engineers love to solve problems:

After becoming enlightened about these FUP facts, we posed a question to a representative of the U.S. division of Volvo Trucks, who was on a Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Panel at a Road to Zero Coalition meeting on March 20, 2017, in D.C. We asked him whether Volvo would put FUP on U.S. trucks voluntarily or whether it would take a mandate. He said that it would take a mandate.

People die from underride collisions with the front of trucks, but a blind eye is being turned to the problem. What’s wrong with this picture?

Actually, the NTSB has made other underride recommendations as well to NHTSA, including:

  • stronger rear underride guards on tractor-trailers
  • side guards
  • underride protection on single unit trucks (straight trucks) which are currently exempt for rear underride standards.

In other words, NTSB investigations have confirmed the importance of the comprehensive nature of the STOP Underrides! Bill because people are continuing to die from underride collisions with almost every part of trucks (and this includes pedestrians, cyclists, and motorcyclists).

Previous posts on FUP

Update, Just found this out: Fred Andersky, director, customer solutions, controls with Bendix, said at the North American Commercial Vehicle show that every 15 minutes in the U.S., a large truck rear-ends a passenger car.   https://www.trucknews.com/equipment/bendix-developing-next-gen-safety-systems/1003081127/

That’s 96 times/day, 672 times/week, 2,912 times/month, and 34,944 times/year!

So, tell me why we would not want to have Front Underride Protection (FUP) on trucks in this country!!!

Understanding Underride I to VIII: A Source of Helpful Information on Truck Underride

In order to gain a basic understanding of the deadly but preventable truck underride problem, a compilation of helpful resources is provided below.

A complete list of posts on Understanding Underride can be found here:

WUSA9 recently began an extensive investigation into truck underride. The segments which have already aired are listed here. They plan to shed light on the problem until it is adequately addressed in this country.  See all of the videos here: WUSA9 Underride Series Sheds Light on Deadly Truck Underride Tragedies & Solutions

The STOP Underrides! Act of 2017 has been drafted by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. She is working with Congressman Steve Cohen, who will be drafting a House Companion Measure.  They are both seeking Republican co-leads for this long-overdue, life-saving legislation.

On October 12, 2017, staff from Congressional Offices gathered to hear presentations from five experts on the topic of truck underride to better understand the need for the STOP Underrides! bill. The presentations were followed by a question & answer period as legislative staff sought to understand the problem and solutions of deadly but preventable underride crashes.

The presentations can be found here: Underride Briefing on The Hill; Video Excerpts of Panel Discussion on October 12

Another series of posts on underride is titled Underride 101:

Truck Underride 101: Discussion Topics

I. When Will We Tackle Truck Underride?

Truck Underride 101: I. When Will We Tackle Truck Underride?

II. Why Comprehensive Underride Protection? 

Truck Underride 101: II. Why Comprehensive Underride Protection?

III. Cost Benefit Analysis, Underride Rulemaking, and Vision Zero

 Truck Underride 101: Part III. Cost Benefit Analysis, Underride Rulemaking, and Vision Zero

IV. Win/Win

Truck Underride 101: Part IV Win/Win

V. Bipartisan Discussion of Legislative Strategy

Truck Underride 101: Part V. Bipartisan Discussion of Legislative Strategy

 

Understanding Underride V: Front Underride

Update, December 22, 2018: Front Underride Protection Brochure 6

Posts on Front Underride Protection

A panel of experts discuss underride at a Briefing on The Hill, October 12, 2017, to bring greater understanding of the problem and solutions of deadly but preventable truck underride. Keith Friedman, Friedman Research Corporation, discusses Front Underride Protection.

For more information on the STOP Underrides! Act of 2017, go to https://annaleahmary.com/ and/or https://stopunderrides.org/

Note: On November 14, 2018, I found a 2015 21st Century Truck Partnership report which mentions SAFETY and the huge problem of FRONT OVERRIDE: 21st Century Truck Partnership Report

Previous Posts on Front Underride Protection (FUP):

  1. People die, on a regular basis, when their car goes under the front of a large truck. Europe has a Front Underride Protection standard for large trucks. Here is some research on this topic to help inform U.S. lawmakers, regulators, and industry leaders on how we can bring this added level of protection to our roads.  .  . Read more here: Front Underride Protection Research; Why don’t we have FUP in the U.S.?
  2. How Far Have We Come In The 50 Years Since Jayne Mansfield’s Death By Truck Underride?
  3. “Crash Analysis of Front UnderRun Protection Device using Finite Element Analysis” research from India
  4. Powerful & Informative Case Made for Underride Guard Improvement by Trucker/Attorney
  5. Why Front Underride or Front Underrun is Important (Deadly yet preventable?)
  6. FRONT Underrun Protection Systems (FUPS) Research; So why does Europe require this & US does not?

Underride Briefing on The Hill; Video Excerpts of Panel Discussion on October 12

On October 12, 2017, staff from Congressional Offices gathered to hear presentations from five experts on the topic of truck underride. The presentations were followed by a question & answer period as legislative staff sought to understand the problem and solutions of deadly but preventable underride crashes.

The STOP Underrides! Act of 2017 has been drafted by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. She is working with Congressman Steve Cohen, who will be drafting a House Companion Measure.  They are both seeking Republican co-leads for this long-overdue, life-saving legislation.

The videos below cover the individual presentations but, unfortunately, the question period was not recorded. Questions about any of the topics covered can be directed to marianne@annaleahmary.com, for follow-up with these and other experts nationally and internationally.

This video includes all five presentations:

Malcolm Deighton, engineer with Hydro (formerly Sapa), discusses their aluminum rear underride guard — successfully crash tested at 40 mph:

Jason Levine, Director of the Center for Auto Safety, discusses the flaws in the cost/benefit analysis of truck underride protection:

Robert Lane, VP of Product Engineering at Wabash National — a trailer manufacturer, discusses their commitment to development of rear and side underride protective devices for the prevention of underride deaths and debilitating injuries:

Matt Brumbelow, a research engineer at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), discusses the problem of truck underride and the research which IIHS has done to study rear and side underride protection:

Keith Friedman, Friedman Research Corporation, discusses Front Underride Protection:

Further information on truck underride can be found at:

Hosted by Lois Durso (https://stopunderrides.org/) and Marianne Karth (https://annaleahmary.com) who are working to STOP Underrides! in memory of their daughters — Roya Sadigh and sisters AnnaLeah & Mary Karth.

Front Underride Protection Research; Why don’t we have FUP in the U.S.?

People die, on a regular basis, when their car goes under the front of a large truck. Europe has a Front Underride Protection standard for large trucks. Here is some research on this topic to help inform U.S. lawmakers, regulators, and industry leaders on how we can bring this added level of protection to our roads.

  1. Heavy Truck Front Underride Protection Devices Design Principles, International Journal of Vehicle Systems Modelling & Testing, Vol. 6, No. 2, 2011
  2. Heavy truck front-end deployable system opportunities for crash compatibility with passenger vehicles, Keith Friedman, D. Mihora, & J. Hutchinson, Pages 1-12 | Received 07 Aug 2015, Accepted 31 Jan 2017, Published online: 22 Feb 2017,  ABSTRACT
    By 2030, substantial increases in the number of heavy trucks are expected to be on roadways throughout the United States. Currently, 3000 to 5000 occupant fatalities occur in the vehicles impacted by heavy trucks. A significant portion of these engage with the front end of the heavy truck. The use of radar systems has been shown to significantly mitigate many of these rear-end crashes. In this study, the use of deployable front-end airbags is evaluated in terms of the potential effects on passenger vehicles when they are struck in the front or rear by the front of a heavy truck. A virtual testing methodology for the evaluation of various designs under impact conditions is described. The study reports on the potential effects of radar-activated, heavy-truck, front-end airbag systems on crash mitigation in front- and rear-end impacts.
  3.  Rear underride crashes are easier to address than front or side ones, IIHS Status Report, Status Report, Vol. 48, No. 2 | March 14, 2013, Front underride guards, which are required in the EU to protect vehicle occupants in crashes with combined speeds of about 35 mph, also might prevent some deaths. An earlier Institute study of fatal truck crashes in Indiana found that 9 out of 44 front underride crashes might have been survivable in the absence of underride (see “FARS undercounts fatal large truck-car underride crashes,” Feb. 15, 1997).
  4. SuperTruck project for fuel efficiency might also provide better front underrun protection with tractor design. In trucking today, it seems nothing is off the table when it comes to enhancing vehicle fuel efficiencies. Old technologies are being reexamined, while new ones are studied and tested. A new era of ultra-clean, ultra-efficient trucks is just around the corner, likely putting old-style, long-nosed, slab-grilled rigs out to pasture once and for all. See SuperTruck tractor photos here: Fuel Smarts The Future of Fuel Economy, Truckinginfo.com, by Jack Roberts, June 2016
  5.   Design of a Tractor for Optimised Safety and Fuel Consumption 3.4 Future Design Concept Trucks
    The EC funded integrated project Advanced PROtection SYStems “APROSYS” is one of the most important projects for this study because it is intended to start this project based on these results. In the APROSYS project a safety concept for commercial vehicles which is able to deflect a vulnerable road user (VRU: pedestrians and cyclists) sideways in case of an accident by using the impact impulse was developed. The achieved deflection reduces the risk of a run over. A tapered truck front has been designed and analysed that allows additional deformation space for frontal collisions. Such a front shape can be realised by an add-on structure mountable to the front or by a fully integrated concept as shown in Fig. 3-13. In this project the integrated concept will be scaled to a 40 t-HGV truck.                                                                                                             During the development phase of the new front structure in APROSYS a large number of design versions were generated and assessed. The resulting final principal shape was compared to the basic truck in various numerical simulations with different accident scenarios, pedestrian models and parameter settings. Due to the deflection principle, which is used in the rounded front design for the weakest traffic participants, the structure underneath can be designed mainly for protecting the heavy vehicle’s occupants and integrating partner protection relating to passenger vehicles (improved compatibility). The deflection is not only a solution for the protection of pedestrians, but also reduces the impact energy introduced into the heavy vehicle and the passenger car in a HGV-to-car-accident.
    Such a convex truck front can significantly reduce the risk of a run over for VRU and also deflect passenger cars. In addition, it provides a crush zone for energy absorption. The enhanced passive safety could be shown in avoiding serious rollover accidents by 87.5 % of the simulated cases in APROSYS [FAS08].
    Another concept truck shown in Fig. 3-14 was presented at the IAA Commercial Vehicles
    2002 in Hannover. The Aero Safety Truck is a semi-trailer tractor for long-distance transport.
  6.  NHTSA – THE HEAVY GOODS VEHICLE AGGRESSIVITY INDEX

    http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/esv/esv21/09-0323.pdf  Currently the structural AI is addressing the primary
    contact only (the contact with the truck front).
    However, numerical studies and experiments [14]
    have shown the severity of the secondary impact
    makes it a highly relevant aspect for future
    consideration. Studies of the “nose cone” [6]
    indicated not only a reduced likelihood for run-over,
    but also a reduced severity of the secondary impact
    (prevent forward-projection of pedestrian).
    Existing test methods for passenger cars are
    continually under development, such as the research
    into rotational acceleration as an assessment method
    The concept was developed in the innovation and design centre of the vehicle manufacturer Hymer. The improved aerodynamics lead to a reduction in fuel consumption of up to 3 l/100 km. An improvement of safety is realised by an extremely stiff safety cage [LAS03, HYM02]                                                                                                              The DAF Xtreme Future Concept (XFC), which can be seen in Fig. 3-15, was presented at the IAA Commercial Vehicles in 2002. The improved aerodynamic concept reduces fuel consumption and the danger of overrunning other road users by a deflecting frontend. The cabin is designed to be based on an aluminium space frame [EAA02].                                                                                                                                                    The Scania Concept illustrated in Fig. 3-16, was also presented on the IAA Commercial
    Vehicles in 2002 as a bonnet truck concept for the future. The targets are to identify the market interest for this concept and to optimise aerodynamics. In 2003 an additional concept was presented with the Scania Crash Zone Concept. It has an added structure of 600 mm at the front that absorbs more energy than that of a conventional truck. Therefore the survivable collision speed rises from 56 to 90 km/h. It has potential to reduce the number of fatalities in car to truck collisions. The extra weight for nose concept amounts to 250 kg [SCA02, HAH03].                                                                                         In 2008 MAN presented the Bionic Truck with the body form of a dolphin shown in Fig. 3-19. The design of the truck leads to a reduction of fuel consumption up to 25 % according to the manufacturer’s declaration. Therefore the cabin needs to be lengthened by 70 cm and the trailer by about 50 cm. So over all, the truck is 1.2 m longer than a conventional truck.
    Furthermore comprehensive design changes are carried out at the tractor and at the trailer. The trailer has a much rounder front shape. The trailer has a tear drop shape with a tapered rear part and its wheels are covered. For these reasons the truck has a cD value of 0.29 [SCH08].

  7.  Investigating the extent to which UNECE Regulation 93 constrains the ability of Europe to permit longer trucks to improve environmental and safety benefits By Iain Knight
  8. Piercing the Passenger Compartment — Voluntary Efforts to Stop the Horrors of Underride Truck Crashes by Andy Young

Other posts on Front Underride Protection: