Secondary collisions revisited: real-world crash data and relationship to crash test criteria

Objectives: Previous research conducted in the late 1980s suggested that vehicle impacts following an initial barrier collision increase severe occupant injury risk. Now over 25years old, the data are no longer representative of the currently installed barriers or the present US vehicle fleet. The purpose of this study is to provide a present-day assessment of secondary collisions and to determine if current full-scale barrier crash testing criteria provide an indication of secondary collision risk for real-world barrier crashes. Methods: To characterize secondary collisions, 1,363 (596,331 weighted) real-world barrier midsection impacts selected from 13years (1997-2009) of in-depth crash data available through the National Automotive Sampling System (NASS) / Crashworthiness Data System (CDS) were analyzed. Scene diagram and available scene photographs were used to determine roadside and barrier specific variables unavailable in NASS/CDS. Binary logistic regression models were developed for second event occurrence and resulting driver injury. To investigate current secondary collision crash test criteria, 24 full-scale crash test reports were obtained for common non-proprietary US barriers, and the risk of secondary collisions was determined using recommended evaluation criteria from National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 350. Results: Secondary collisions were found to occur in approximately two thirds of crashes where a barrier is the first object struck. Barrier lateral stiffness, post-impact vehicle trajectory, vehicle type, and pre-impact tracking conditions were found to be statistically significant contributors to secondary event occurrence. The presence of a second event was found to increase the likelihood of a serious driver injury by a factor of 7 compared to cases with no second event present. The NCHRP Report 350 exit angle criterion was found to underestimate the risk of secondary collisions in real-world barrier crashes. Conclusions: Consistent with previous research, collisions following a barrier impact are not an infrequent event and substantially increase driver injury risk. The results suggest that using exit-angle based crash test criteria alone to assess secondary collision risk is not sufficient to predict second collision occurrence for real-world barrier crashes.

Secondary Collisions Revisited: Real-World Crash Characteristics and Relationship to Crash Test Criteria

Previous research conducted in the late 1980’s suggested that vehicle impacts following an initial barrier collision increase severe occupant injury risk. Now over twenty-five years old, the data used in the previous research is no longer representative of the currently installed barriers or US vehicle fleet. The purpose of this study is to provide a present-day assessment of secondary collisions and to determine if full-scale barrier crash testing criteria provide an indication of secondary collision risk for real-world barrier crashes. The analysis included 1,383 (596,331 weighted) real-world barrier midsection impacts selected from thirteen years (1997-2009) of in-depth crash data available through the National Automotive Sampling System (NASS) / Crashworthiness Data System (CDS). For each suitable case, the scene diagram and available scene photographs were used to determine roadside and barrier specific variables not available in NASS/CDS. Binary logistic regression models were developed for second event occurrence and resulting driver injury. Barrier lateral stiffness, post-impact vehicle trajectory, vehicle type, and pre-impact tracking conditions were found to be statistically significant contributors toward secondary event occurrence. The presence of a second event was found to increase the likelihood of a serious driver injury by a factor of seven compared to cases with no second event present. Twenty-four full-scale crash test reports were obtained for common non-proprietary US barriers, and the risk of secondary collisions was determined using recommended evaluation criteria from NCHRP Report 350. It was found that the NCHRP Report 350 exit angle criterion alone was not sufficient to predict second collision occurrence for real-world barrier crashes.

A Test of Absolute Numerousness Judgments in Lion-Tailed Macaques (Macaca Silenus)

Numerous studies have shown that animals have a sense of quantity and can distinguish between relative amounts. The concepts of relative numerousness, estimation, and subitizing are well established in species as diverse as chimpanzees and salamanders. Mobile animals have practical use for an understanding of number in common situations such as predation, mating, and competition. However, the ability to identify discrete quantities has only been firmly established in humans. The purpose of this study was to test for such “absolute numerousness” judgments in three lion-tailed macaques (Macaca silenus), a non-human primate. The three macaques tested had previously been trained on a computerized matchto- sample (MTS) task using geometric shapes. In this study, they were introduced to a MTS task containing a numerical cue, which required the monkeys to match stimuli containing either one or two items for rewards. If monkeys were successful at the initial matching task, they were tested with stimuli in which the position of the items and then the surface area of the items was controlled. If the monkeys could match successfully without using these non-numerical cues, they would demonstrate the capability to make absolute numerousness judgments. None of the monkeys matched successfully using the numerical cue, so no evidence of absolute numerosity was found. Each macaque progressed through the experiment in an individualized manner, attempting a variety of strategies to obtain rewards. These included side preferences and an alternating-side strategy that were unrelated to the numerical cues in the stimuli. When it became clear that the monkeys were not matching based on a stimulus-based cue, they were tested again on matching geometric shapes. All three macaques stopped using their alternate strategies and were able to match shapes successfully, demonstrating that they were still capable of completing the matching task. The data suggest that the monkeys could not transfer this ability to the numerical stimuli. This indicates that the macaques lack a sense of exact quantity, or that they could not recognize the numerical cues in the stimuli as being relevant to the task.