参数扰动下基于制动控制的人地碰撞损伤防护风险

doi:10.19562/j.chinasae.qcgc.2023.02.016

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为了解首次松开制动时刻（t₁）扰动下基于制动控制的人地碰撞损伤防护方法的使用风险，基于一个包括3种速度、4种行人尺寸和2个行人步态的虚拟仿真系统，设计并用MADYMO开展1 920次仿真。对比分析后发现：车辆制动控制方法在无参数扰动时能有效降低人地碰撞损伤且不增大车辆所致损伤；t₁扰动下，WIC降低、车辆所致HIC₁₅不变、地面所致HIC₁₅降低、落地姿态不变的案例占比分别为86.1%、98.61%、90.16%和90.97%，表明车辆制动控制方法具有很强的抗扰能力；t₁越早越可能增大车辆所致损伤，而t₁越晚越可能降低头地碰撞损伤防护效果。进一步分析发现，t₁扰动下人地碰撞损伤增加的主要原因有人车长时间不分离、人体从车体边缘掉落、落地姿态改变、完全制动组中伤害已经极低等；而保险杠长度、发动机罩盖倾斜角等参数显著影响制动控制方法的抗扰能力，其中保险杠长度越小、发动机罩盖倾斜角越大，制动控制方法的抗扰动能力越强。

关键词: 人地碰撞损伤, 车辆制动控制, 首次松开制动时间, 扰动, 风险

Abstract:

In order to understand the application risk of the pedestrian ground collision injury protection method based on braking control under the disturbance of the first time for releasing the braking （t₁）， 1 920 simulation tests are designed and conducted by MADYMO based on a virtual simulation system with 3 velocities， 4 pedestrian sizes and 2 pedestrian gaits. After comparison analysis， it is found that the pedestrian-ground collision injury can be effectively reduced without increasing the vehicle induced injury by employing the vehicle braking control method when there is no parameter disturbance. Under the disturbance of the first time for the vehicle to release its braking （t₁）， the proportion of cases in which the WIC is reduced， the vehicle related HIC₁₅ is not changed， the ground related HIC₁₅ is reduced and the pedestrian landing posture is not changed is 86.1%、98.61%、90.16% and 90.97% respectively. This means that the vehicle braking control method has a strong anti-disturbance ability. The earlier of t₁， the more likely it is to increase the vehicle induced injury； the later of t₁， the more likely it is to reduce the protective effect of head ground collision injury. Further analysis shows that main reasons for the increase of the pedestrian-ground collision injury under t₁ disturbance are long time no leaving of the pedestrian from the vehicle， the pedestrian falling to the ground from the edge of the vehicle， change of the pedestrian landing posture and already extremely low injury in the complete braking group， etc. Parameters such as bumper length and hood inclination angle significantly affect the anti-disturbance ability of the vehicle braking control method. The smaller the bumper length and the larger the inclination angle of the hood， the stronger the anti-disturbance ability of the method.

Key words: pedestrian-ground collision injury, vehicle braking control, the first time for releasing the braking, disturbance, risk

邹铁方,周靖. 参数扰动下基于制动控制的人地碰撞损伤防护风险[J]. 汽车工程, 2023, 45(2): 313-323.

Tiefang Zou,Jing Zhou. The Protection Risk of Pedestrian-Ground Collision Injury Based on Braking Control Under Parameter Disturbance[J]. Automotive Engineering, 2023, 45(2): 313-323.

图/表 25

图1

图2

图3

图4

图5

图6

图7

图8

图9

表1

图10

图11

图12

图13

图14

图15

图16

图17

图18

图19

图20

图21

图22

图23

表2

参考文献 23

1	OTTE D， POHLEMANN T. Analysis and load assessment of secondary impact to adult pedestrians after car collisions on roads ［C］. Proceedings of the International Research Council on Biomechanics of Injury （IRCOBI） Conference， Isle of Man， UK 2001.
2	KENDALL R， MEISSNER M， CRANDALL J. The causes of head injury in vehicle-pedestrian impacts： comparing the relative danger of vehicle and road surface ［C］. SAE Paper 2006-01-0462.
3	BADEA-ROMERO A， LENARD J. Source of head injury for pedestrians and pedal cyclists： striking vehicle or road？［J］. Accident Analysis and Prevention， 2013， 50： 1140-1150.
4	邹铁方，肖璟，胡林，等. 轿车-行人事故中人体损伤来源与相关性分析［J］. 汽车工程， 2017， 39（7）： 748-753，747.
	ZOU T F， XIAO J， HU L， et al. Human-body injury sources and correlation analysis on car-pedestrian accidents ［J］. Automotive Engineering， 2017， 39（7）： 748-753，747.
5	TAMURA A， DUMA S. A study on the potential risk of traumatic brain injury due to ground impact in a vehicle-pedestrian collision using full-scale finite element models ［J］. Int. J. Vehicle Safety， 2011， 5（2）， 117-136.
6	冯建成，王富平，徐臣，等. 基于车人碰撞事故重建的行人头部动力学响应［J］. 医用生物医学， 2013， 28（2）： 164-170.
	FENG J C， WANG F P， XU C， et al. Head dynamic response based on reconstruction of vehicle-pedestrian accidents with the video ［J］. Journal of Medical Biomechanics， 2013， 28（2）： 164-170.
7	LI G， YANG J， SIMMS C. Safer passenger car front shapes for pedestrians： a computational approach to re⁃ duce overall pedestrian injury risk in realistic impact scenarios ［J］. Accident Analysis & Prevention， 2017， 100： 97-110.
8	SHANG S， OTTE D， LI G， et al. Detailed assessment of pedestrian ground contact injuries observed from in-depth accident data ［J］. Accident Analysis and Prevention， 2018， 110： 9-17.
9	SHANG S， MASSON C， TEELING D， et al. Kinematics and dynamics of pedestrian head ground contact： a cadaver study ［J］. Safety Science， 2020， 127： 104684.
10	KHAYKIN A， LARNER D L. Adhesive vehicle front end for mitigation of secondary pedestrian impact： United States， US9340178B1 ［P］. 2016-03-17.
11	ZOU T， SHANG S， SIMMS C. Potential benefits of controlled vehicle baking to reduce pedestrian ground contact injuries ［J］. Accident Analysis and Prevention， 2019， 129： 94-107.
12	ZOU T， LIU Z， ZHOU J， et al. Potential maximum benefits of controlled vehicle braking in reducing pedestrian ground contact injury ［C］. Proceedings of the International Research Council on Biomechanics of Injury（IRCOBI）Conference， Beijing， China， 2021.
13	ZOU T， LIU Q， ZHA A， et al. New observations from real-world vehicle-pedestrian collisions in reducing ground related injury by controlling vehicle braking ［J］. International Journal of Crashworthiness， 2022， 27（2）： 614-631.
14	邹铁方，刘期，刘朱紫，等. 真实事故中通过制动控制降低人地碰撞损伤的潜在效益及时空约束［J］. 机械工程学报， 2021， 57（22）： 266-276.
	ZOU T F， LIU Q， LIU Z Z， et al. Potential benefits and constraints of reducing ground related injury by controlling vehicle braking in real world vehicle-pedestrian accidents ［J］. Journal of Mechanical Engineering， 2021， 57（22）： 266-276.
15	邹铁方，刘朱紫，肖璟，等. 一种降低人-地撞击损伤的车辆制动控制方法［J］. 汽车工程， 2021， 43（1）： 105-112.
	ZOU T F， LIU Z Z， XIAO J， et al. A vehicle braking control method for reducing pedestrian-ground impact injury ［J］. Automotive Engineering， 2021， 43（1）： 105-112.
16	水广伟，阳俊，谭俊杰，等. 柴油机ECU电源电路的设计与仿真［J］. 拖拉机与农用运输车， 2019， 46（6）： 28-30，35.
	SHUI G W， YANG J， TAN J J， et al. Design and simulation of power supply circuit of diesel engine ECU ［J］. Tractor & Transporter， 2019， 46（6）： 28-30，35.
17	邹铁方，李艳春，刘朱紫，等. 基于车辆运动控制的人地碰撞损伤防护新技术接受度研究［J/OL］. 铁道科学与工程学报， 2022， 1-12.
	ZOU T F， LI Y C， LIU Z Z， et al. Study on the acceptance of new technology for protecting pedestrian-ground contact injury based on vehicle motion control［J/OL］. Journal of Railway Science and Engineering， 2022， 1-12.
18	LI G， YANG J， SIMMS C. A virtual test system representing the distribution of pedestrian impact configurations for future vehicle front-end optimization ［J］. Traffic Injury Prevention， 2016， 17（5）： 515-523.
19	ZOU T， LIU Z， WANG D， et al. Methods， upper limit and reason for reducing pedestrian ground contact injury by controlling vehicle braking ［J］. International Journal of Crashworthiness， 2022， 27（4）.
20	SIMMS C， WOOD D. Pedestrian and cyclist impact ［M］. Berlin： Springer Netherlands， Solid Mechanics and Its Application， 2009-8-5， 248.
21	LI G. Optimization of vehicle front shape for pedestrian protection ［D］. Trinity College Dublin， 2017.
22	李华，李岳林，邹铁方，等. 车人碰撞事故中车头参数敏感性分析［J］. 汽车安全与节能学报， 2017， 8（4）： 367-373.
	LI H， LI Y L， ZOU T F， et al. Parameter sensitivity analysis of vehicle head shape for vehiclepedestrian accidents［J］. Journal of Automotive Safety and Energy， 2017， 8（4）： 367-373.
23	CROCETTA G， PIANTINI S， PIERINI M， et al. The influence of vehicle front-end design on pedestrian ground impact ［J］. Accident Analysis and Prevention， 2015， 79： 56- 69.

t₁/s	大轿车	大型SUV	小轿车	小型SUV	总和
-0.08	8 500	7 882	14 094	-12 628	17 848
-0.07	-5 155	12 730	11 773	-12 266	7 082
-0.06	3 993	9 415	12 017	-7 059	18 366
-0.05	6 889	11 748	14 343	3 591	36 571
-0.04	2 213	11 203	17 758	6 716	37 890
-0.03	2 344	9 699	16 793	6 456	35 292
-0.02	6 893	9 291	13 485	5 485	35 154
-0.01	8 808	2 108	16 088	6 313	33 317
0.01	6 180	4 924	13 328	5 802	30 234
0.02	4 245	10 300	14 210	1 330	30 085
0.03	5 815	8 779	14 818	3 747	33 159
0.04	7 042	9 740	16 228	1 270	34 280
0.05	4 327	9 843	17 679	-1 486	30 363
0.06	774	8 595	17 182	-12 190	14 361
0.07	1 166	6 796	16 755	-1 784	22 933
0.08	4 846	7 907	16 199	-1 622	27 330
0.09	5 668	7 419	16 737	-1 209	28 615
0.10	1 175	6 424	15 793	-3 069	20 323
总和	75 723	154 803	275 280	-12 603	493 203
平均	4 207	8 600	15 293	-700	27 400
完全制动	54 679	40 390	63 093	55 827	213 989
降幅	7.69%	21.29%	24.24%	-1.25%	12.80%

车头参数	H₁	H₂	H₃	H₄	a	b	r₁
相关系数	0.39	-0.39	-0.294	-0.39	-0.768	-0.294	0.483
显著性（双尾）	0	0	0.01	0	0	0.01	0

[1]	邓斌, 李维汉, 吴迪, 张冰战, 赵韩. 基于KFESO的四轮主动转向积分滑模控制[J]. 汽车工程, 2024, 46(1): 100-108.
[2]	马艳丽, 秦钦, 董方琦, 娄艺苧. 基于风险场的不同认知次任务下接管风险评估模型[J]. 汽车工程, 2024, 46(1): 9-17.
[3]	左政,王云鹏,麻斌,邹博松,曹耀光,杨世春. 基于AFC-TARA的车载网络组件风险率量化评估分析[J]. 汽车工程, 2023, 45(9): 1553-1562.
[4]	史昕,朱健,赵祥模,惠飞,马峻岩. 基于多车状态变化特征的网联车跟驰模型[J]. 汽车工程, 2023, 45(8): 1309-1319.
[5]	王明,唐小林,杨凯,李国法,胡晓松. 考虑预测风险的自动驾驶车辆运动规划方法[J]. 汽车工程, 2023, 45(8): 1362-1372.
[6]	李达,邓钧君,张照生,刘鹏,王震坡. 电动车辆动力电池安全预警策略研究综述[J]. 汽车工程, 2023, 45(8): 1392-1407.
[7]	胡林,李根,王方,林淼,巫宁. 基于CIDAS事故数据的路口乘用车-两轮车测试场景研究[J]. 汽车工程, 2023, 45(8): 1417-1427.
[8]	邹铁方,刘前程,魏亮. 加装传统AEB后的未避免事故典型碰撞场景与事故特征[J]. 汽车工程, 2023, 45(6): 1062-1072.
[9]	高翔,陈龙,王歆叶,熊晓夏,李祎承,陈月霞. 基于轨迹预测的智能汽车行驶风险评估方法[J]. 汽车工程, 2023, 45(4): 588-597.
[10]	贺林,徐子昂,黄春荣,龚超,李书华,石琴. 线控转向系统转角预测滑模控制算法研究[J]. 汽车工程, 2023, 45(12): 2200-2208.
[11]	邵文博,李骏,张玉新,王红. 智能汽车预期功能安全保障关键技术[J]. 汽车工程, 2022, 44(9): 1289-1304.
[12]	段顺昌,白先旭,石琴,李维汉,何冠男. 汽车自动紧急制动系统控制策略的预期功能安全设计[J]. 汽车工程, 2022, 44(9): 1305-1317.
[13]	郭子彬,陈慧,夏韬锴,冉巍,西村要介,王建镇. 弯道工况下驾驶员主观风险感知的量化研究[J]. 汽车工程, 2022, 44(9): 1447-1455.
[14]	张哲雨,吕超,李景行,熊光明,吴绍斌,龚建伟. 基于车辆视角数据的行人轨迹预测与风险等级评定[J]. 汽车工程, 2022, 44(5): 675-683.
[15]	韩勇,林丽雅,何勇,潘迪,蔡鸿瑜,彭倩,冯浩. 电动两轮车骑车人紧急避让姿态对损伤风险的影响研究[J]. 汽车工程, 2022, 44(5): 764-770.