Sentences with phrase «impact dummy»

A side impact dummy representing an average male is put in the driver's seat and child dummies are placed in child restraint systems in the rear.

Not exact matches

A dummy variable for year captured the impact from the change in milk options and a monthly control was also included in the analysis to account for seasonal variation.

While sucking does indeed help babies relax and it's your choice whether to offer a dummy, please note, this may impact on feeding if given before breastfeeding is established and it could affect sleep at a later stage as the dummy slips out of baby's mouth and needs to be replaced through the night.

Does dummy use have any impact on the breastfeeding relationship?

The new Q dummy family is able to reflect these types of injuries, due to their biofidelity characteristics and performance and they can also measure the impact in terms of these sections of the body.

After the numerous studies carried out by the European Vehicle - Safety Committee it was decided to introduce the use of these new dummies that are more biomechanical with greater biofidelity and to introduce new criteria for assessing injuries in the case of frontal and side impacts.

They properly installed the car seats and then conducted 12 rear impact crash tests of moderate the severity with dummies strapped into the car seats, measuring how each crash would affect each body part.

Has dummy use had any negative or positive impact on your breastfeeding relationship?

With the exception of the dummy / sled tackling drill, the most common location of impact was the front of the football helmet.

The researchers used a crash test dummy head and neck to simulate impact.

As this study has shown in a randomized, double - blind, double - dummy, placebo - controlled manner, exogenous testosterone therapy with Androgel can clearly decrease sperm production and potentially impact fertility,» said Dr. Kim.

Though the crash shown here looks dramatic, Mercedes says that the dummies reported forces that were within «biomechanical limits» — in other words, a human could have survived this impact.

Dummy movements during the impact were well controlled with its head hitting the front airbag and staying there long enough to allow the side curtain airbag to fully deploy and provide enough coverage from objects outside of the car and side structures.

Marring those results is a safety concern stemming from the side - impact crash - test results: During the test, the cabin door panel hit the torso of the dummy in the rear seat, increasing the chance of injury.

NHTSA cited mediocre results with female crash dummies, including just two stars for backseat protection in a side impact and three stars for side impacts with all dummies overall.

In the frontal impact, forward movement of the 3 year dummy, sat in a forward facing restraint, was not excessive.

In the side impact, both dummies were properly contained within the protective shells of their restraints, minimising the likelihood of dangerous head contacts.

Action shot taken during the side impact crash test showing the driver dummy's head leaning well outward and approaching the window sill.

Likewise, in the side barrier test, the head of the dummy representing a 10 - year - old child, seated behind the driver, struck the roof frame in the Mercedes - Benz C - Class Cabriolet as the side airbag did not fully cover the impact area.

Very high injury measures were recorded on the dummy's head during this impact.

Very high head injury measures typically are recorded when the moving deformable barrier hits a dummy's head during impact.

Analysis of the movement and contact points of the dummies» heads during the side impact crash test is used to assess this aspect of protection.

Ratings reflect injury measures recorded on two instrumented SID - IIs dummies, assessment of head protection, and the vehicle's structural performance during the impact.

The dummy in the rear seat also recorded relatively low measures, although its head did hit the pillar behind the back door — an area required by federal standard to limit head impact forces.

Another difference between Institute and federal side impact tests involves the choice of test dummies.

In the side impact test for both models, measures taken from both the driver dummy and the passenger dummy seated in the rear seat indicated low risk of significant injuries in a real - world crash like this one.

However, it's not yet clear which dummy ultimately will be selected for use in the new side impact tests.

In the side impact, both dummies were properly contained within the protective shells of their restraints, minimising the likelihood of head impact with the car interior.

This is why the Institute and others are considering more advanced alternative dummies including EuroSID2 and SID - IIs (see Status Report special issue: side impact, Sept. 28, 1996.

Action shot taken during the side impact crash test showing the driver dummy's head hitting the window sill.

Measures recorded on the dummy's head, neck, and chest indicate low risk of serious injury in these areas of the body, but the poorly controlled movement of the dummy during the impact may have contributed to high forces on its right leg.

The vehicle seat — with the dummy in it — is placed on a sled, which is moved to simulate a rear impact.

The driver dummy's head contact didn't produce high forces, but the fact that the contact occurred means the head barely escaped severe impact.

The Institute's dynamic ratings of good, acceptable, marginal, or poor are derived from two seat design parameters (peak acceleration of the dummy's torso and time from impact initiation to head restraint contact with the dummy's head) plus neck tension and shear forces recorded on BioRID during the test.

Smeared greasepaint shows where the rear passenger dummy's head was hit by the window trim, which was dislodged during the crash (dummy removed from van to show the impact point).

Ratings reflect injury measures recorded on 2 instrumented SID - IIs dummies representing a 5th percentile woman, assessment of head protection countermeasures, and the vehicle's structural performance during the impact.

In the frontal impact, forward movement of the head of the 3 year dummy, sat in a forward - facing restraint, was not excessive and chest and neck loads were well controlled.

In the side impact, both dummies were properly contained within the protective shells of their restraints, minimising the likelihood of head contact with parts of the vehicle interior.

Restraints In the frontal impact, despite modest rearward and upward movement of the steering wheel, the dummy's head made contact with the centre of the steering wheel.

In the frontal offset and side barrier tests, both dummies were properly restrained throughout the impacts.

In the side impact, the head of the dummy was exposed outside the structure of the vehicle, increasing the risk of dangerous head contact in real - world accidents, and the score was penalised.

Restraints In the frontal impact, the dummy's head made contact with the centre of the steering wheel as it moved backwards and upwards.

The seat base hinged forwards in the impact and this, combined with the intruding instrument panel, led to the tops of the dummy's tibias striking the facia, leading to very high displacements in the knees.

In the frontal impact, both the 6 and the 10 year dummies were properly restrained and forward movement was not excessive.

In the dynamic impact tests, the L200 provided good protection to the child dummies in all areas except the chest, with both dummies showing marginally elevated chest decelerations.

In the side impact, both dummies were properly contained by the protective shells of their restraints, minimising he likelihood of contact with parts of the car's interior.

In the full scale impact tests, both the 1 1/2 year dummy and the 3 year dummy were sat in rearward - facing restraints.

In the frontal impact, forward movement of the 3 year dummy, sat in a forward - facing restraint, was not excessive and, in the side impact, both dummies were properly contained within the protective shells of the their restraints, minimising the likelihood of head contact with parts of the vehicle interior.

In the side impact, there was insufficient pressure in the side curtain airbag to prevent the head of the 10 year dummy striking the interior of the car, around the C - pillar.

Action shot taken during the side impact crash test showing the driver dummy's head was protected from being hit by hard structures by the side airbag.