Hi Gaffa,
Rollover tests (and films) exist, too.
The initial rollover test was done with a Ford Explorer, and accomplished by NHTSA in 1996. I have seen it during a Simula presentation, and it is equally compelling to what you have recently seen vis-a-vis side impact.
Unfortunately, there is no internet site of which I am aware that will enable you to see the video. Perhaps, given its significance, it will eventually end up on a television show.
Simula, just like the first-tier and auto companies, realize that the *next* major issue they will have to deal with is rollover. Interestingly, though this dovetails nicely with the company's ITS marketing, it also has impact on the ITTR potential.
That product will absolutely *shine* if the Federal Government changes testing procedures to allow for *belted* testing of auto dummies during crash tests. Up until now, NHTSA has felt that any auto interior protection device should be passive, that is, functional in the event that the auto passenger did not employ his/her seatbelt. This is different than the system employed for testing in Europe, as the European government agencies apparently have more confidence in their populace following normal safety procedures. In fact, Simula has been arguing for some time that *belted* testing makes more sense, and it recently held demonstrations in front of Senator McCain's committee to that effect.
The benefits of the ITTR are massive. For example, in frontal crash tests (my best memory was that they were done at 25 MPH) the ordinary head motion measured with standard seatbelts was approximately 23 inches. With ITTR? About 5 inches. That is a profound difference.
And, interestingly enough, the design of ITTR (which operates in the same was as ITS) causes it to "pre-tension" a seat occupant pulling him/her back to the seat during the initial car to car contact. And, it does this less expensively than a standard seatbelt with a pyrotechnic pretensioner.
Eventually, there is a reasonable chance that the government may decide to change testing procedures. If they do, the Simula designed belts will *totally* eliminate the issue of out-of-position occupants, as well as substantially mitigate the risk to children of being injured (or worse) by a pro-active airbag. In my mind, it is something that *has* to come, given the existing airbag problems.
In the meantime, however, the ITTR should attract interest from auto companies that are trying to design rear-seat protection, as there is no airbag currently designed for that use.
Obviously, the same problem exists for marketing ITTR as ITS...namely, from the first tier companies: "Not invented here." Nevertheless, the advantage and safety is compelling, and I would be extremely surprised it Simula's ITTR based products doesn't develop some interesting market share numbers, most significantly with Breed Technologies (whose President, Fred Musone, sits on SMU's Board), which is the largest domestic producer of seat belts. Certainly, that company would benefit from being *first* with a new technology (that is patent protected!) that would set it apart from some of its competition.
I hope this addresses your questions (and then some!).
Have a good afternoon. |
