Side crash test
`
`IIHS and HLDI
`
` logos
`
`RATINGS
`
`NEWS
`
`TOPICS
`
`VIDEO
`
`STATUS REPORT
`
`Highway safety research
`& communications
`
`Home » Ratings » Side crash test
`
`About our tests
`IIHS evaluates a vehicle's crashworthiness with the help of five tests: moderate overlap front, small overlap front, side, roof strength and head
`restraints & seats. For front crash prevention ratings, the Institute conducts low- and moderate-speed track tests of vehicles with automatic braking
`systems. IIHS also conducts evaluations of headlight systems and of the child seat attachment hardware known as LATCH. The descriptions below
`explain how each test is conducted and how the results translate into ratings.
`
`Frontal crash tests
`
`Side crash test
`
`Test verification
`
`Roof strength test
`
`Head restraints & seats test
`
`Front crash prevention tests
`
`Headlight evaluation
`
`LATCH evaluation
`
`Side crashes account for about a quarter of passenger vehicle occupant deaths in the United States.
`Protecting people in side crashes is challenging because the sides of vehicles have relatively little space to
`absorb energy and shield occupants, unlike the fronts and rears, which have substantial crumple zones.
`Automakers have made big strides in side protection in recent years by installing side airbags and
`strengthening the structures of vehicles. The Institute's testing program has played a key role in bringing about
`these improvements.
`
`Side airbags, which today are standard on most new passenger vehicles, are designed to keep people from
`colliding with the inside of the vehicle and with objects outside the vehicle in a side crash. They also help by
`spreading impact forces over a larger area of an occupant's body. However, side airbags by themselves are
`not enough. Strong structures that work well with the airbags also are crucial.
`
`Need for side testing
`IIHS began its side test program in 2003. At that point, the federal government was already performing side
`tests on new passenger vehicles as part of the New Car Assessment Program. But the Institute was concerned
`that the government's test didn't completely capture the types of crashes likely to occur in the real world.
`
`That's because the moving barrier used in the
`government's test was developed in the early
`1980s, when most of the vehicles on the road
`were cars, before SUVs and pickups became as
`prevalent as they are today. The height of the
`barrier's front end is below the heads of the
`crash test dummies. As a result, the federal test
`doesn't assess the much greater risk of head
`injury from impacts with taller vehicles. To fill
`this gap, IIHS initiated its own test with a
`different barrier — one with the height and
`shape of the front end of a typical SUV or
`pickup.
`
`How the test works
`In the Institute's test, a 3,300-pound SUV-like
`barrier hits the driver side of the vehicle at 31
`mph. Two SID-IIs dummies representing small
`(5th percentile) women or 12-year-old children
`are positioned in the driver seat and the rear
`seat behind the driver.
`
`NHTSA barrier shown in yellow, superimposed
`over the taller IIHS barrier
`
`IIHS was the first in the United States to use
`this smaller dummy in a test for consumer information. It was chosen because women are more likely than
`men to suffer serious head injuries in real-world side impacts. Shorter drivers have a greater chance of having
`their heads come into contact with the front end of the striking vehicle in a left-side crash.
`
`The Institute's side test is severe. It's unlikely that people in comparable real-world crashes would emerge
`uninjured. With good side protection, however, people should be able to survive a crash of this severity without
`serious injuries.
`IPR 2016-01790
`American Vehicular Sciences
`Exhibit 2028
`
`http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/ratings-info/side-test[5/6/2017 10:05:13 PM]
`
`

`

`Side crash test
`
`Side test
`
`Ratings criteria
`Engineers look at three factors to determine side ratings: driver and passenger injury measures, head
`protection and structural performance.
`
`Injury measures: Injury measures from the two dummies are used to determine the likelihood
`that occupants would sustain significant injuries in a real-world crash. Measures are recorded
`from the head, neck, chest, abdomen, pelvis and femur. These injury measures, especially the
`ones from the head and upper body, are major components of each vehicle's overall side rating.
`
`A technician applies greasepaint before a crash
`test.
`
`Smeared greasepaint shows where the driver
`dummy's head hit the side curtain airbag.
`
`Head protection: To supplement head injury measures, technicians put greasepaint on the
`dummies' heads before each crash test. After the test, the paint shows what parts of the vehicle
`or the barrier came into contact with the heads. If the vehicle has airbags and they perform
`correctly, the paint should end up on them.
`
`In cases when the barrier hits a dummy's head during impact, the dummy usually records very
`high injury measures. That might not be true, however, with a "near miss" or a grazing contact.
`The paint, along with footage of the test recorded on high-speed film, helps identify such cases,
`which is important because small differences in occupants' heights or seating positions compared
`with those of the test dummies could result in a hard contact and high risk of serious head injury.
`
`Structure/safety cage: Engineers assess the vehicle's structural performance by measuring the
`amount of intrusion into the occupant compartment around the B-pillar (between the doors).
`Some intrusion into the occupant compartment is inevitable in serious side impacts, but it
`shouldn't seriously compromise the driver and passenger space. As with head protection, this is
`another assessment that helps evaluate the injury risk of occupants who aren't exactly the same
`size or sitting in exactly the same positions as the dummies.
`
`Understanding the ratings:
`How much better are vehicles that earn good ratings?
`In the real world, a driver of a vehicle rated good is 70 percent less likely to die in a left-side crash, compared
`with a driver of a vehicle rated poor. A driver of a vehicle rated acceptable is 64 percent less likely to die, and
`
`http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/ratings-info/side-test[5/6/2017 10:05:13 PM]
`
`

`

`Side crash test
`
`a driver of a vehicle rated marginal is 49 percent less likely to die.
`
`Those numbers come from an analysis of a decade's worth of crash data on Institute-rated vehicles. Only
`vehicles with standard side airbags were included, and the results demonstrate that just having airbags doesn't
`guarantee good protection. The Institute's tests show how airbags and a vehicle's structure work together in an
`actual crash. If the occupant space remains largely intact, then the safety belts and side airbags have time to
`control the motion of the crash test dummies and keep injury measures low. That's less likely to happen if the
`side of the vehicle is significantly crushed.
`
`Unlike frontal crash test ratings, side ratings can be compared across vehicle type and weight categories. This
`is because the kinetic energy involved in the side test depends on the weight and speed of the moving barrier,
`which are the same in every test. In contrast, the kinetic energy involved in the frontal crash test depends on
`the speed and weight of the test vehicle.
`
`When side airbags are optional, the Institute tests the vehicle without the option. A second test is conducted
`with the optional airbags if the manufacturer requests it and reimburses the Institute for the cost of the vehicle.
`Both results are published on the website.
`
`For information about how ratings are kept up-to-date from one model year to the next, see our test verification
`information.
`
`Tests drive progress
`When IIHS began side testing in
`2003, only about 1 of 5 vehicles
`tested earned good ratings. Nearly
`all of the others were rated poor.
`
`Since then, airbags have become
`standard equipment in the vast
`majority of passenger vehicles, and
`occupant compartments have
`become much stronger. These
`changes are in large part a direct
`result of the Institute's testing
`program. Manufacturers know
`consumers consult the ratings before
`buying, so they design vehicles with
`our tests in mind. As a result, most
`current vehicle designs earn good
`ratings.
`
`GOOD: 2008 Mitsubishi Lancer with side airbags (top)
`POOR: 2005 Mitsubishi Lancer without side airbags (bottom)
`
`Press room
`Broadcast-standard
`video and info for
`the media
`
`About us
`Contact us
`FAQ
`
`Our Vehicle
`Research Center
`
`Recent IIHS & HLDI
`presentations
`
`Member groups
`& funding associations
`
`Consumer safety
`brochures
`
`Help page
`
`Privacy policy
`
`Vehicle testing &
`highway safety links
`
`Subscribe to news updates
`
`Watch our channel
`
`Follow us
`
`Mobile ratings & news
`
`©1996-2017, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Highway Loss Data Institute, 501(c)(3) organizations | Copyright information
`
`http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/ratings-info/side-test[5/6/2017 10:05:13 PM]
`
`