Education, Science, Technology, Innovation and Life
Open Access
Sign In

Effects of Seat Rotation Angle on Occupant Head–Neck Injury Responses in Rear Impact

Download as PDF

DOI: 10.23977/jemm.2026.110205 | Downloads: 0 | Views: 36

Author(s)

Tingwei Feng 1, Shihai Cui 1

Affiliation(s)

1 School of Mechanical Engineering, Tianjin University of Science and Technology, Tianjin, China

Corresponding Author

Shihai Cui

ABSTRACT

To address the novel occupant posture safety issues associated with rotating seats in intelligent driving scenarios, rear-impact simulations were conducted using the THUMS AM50 human model under four seat angles (0°, 45°, 90° and 135°). By evaluating neck injury criteria (Nkm and NIC), brain injury criterion (BrIC), cervical spine segmental loads, and brain tissue strain responses, the influence of seat rotation on head–neck injury mechanisms was thoroughly investigated. The results indicate that the segmental Nkm response remains relatively low under the standard 0° upright posture. In contrast, rotated seating postures induce relative motion between the head and neck, leading to generally elevated levels of segmental Nkm, NIC, BrIC, and brain strain compared to the baseline condition. Notably, a prominent local rotational risk appears at the C7–T1 segment in the 135° case. This study reveals the potential head–neck injury risks of rotating seats in rear impacts and provides quantitative data to support safety assessments of intelligent vehicle.

KEYWORDS

Rear Impact, Seat Rotation Angle, Biomechanical Human Body Model, Neck Injury, Head Injury

CITE THIS PAPER

Tingwei Feng, Shihai Cui. Effects of Seat Rotation Angle on Occupant Head–Neck Injury Responses in Rear Impact. Journal of Engineering Mechanics and Machinery (2026). Vol. 11, No. 2, 46-53. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.23977/jemm.2026.110205.

REFERENCES

[1] SAE International. Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles: SAE J3016_202104[S]. Warrendale: SAE International, 2021.
[2] Jorlöv S, Bohman K, Larsson A. Seating positions and activities in highly automated cars: a qualitative study of future automated driving scenarios[C]//Proceedings of the IRCOBI Conference. Antwerp: IRCOBI, 2017: 13-22.
[3] Koppel S, Jimenez Octavio J, Bohman K, Logan D, Raphael W, Quintana Jimenez L, Lopez-Valdes F. Seating configuration and position preferences in fully automated vehicles[J]. Traffic Injury Prevention, 2019, 20(sup2): S103-S109.
[4] Östling M, Lubbe N, Jeppsson H, Puthan P. Passenger safety in future cars: a review of current human body models and injury criteria for seated occupants[J]. Traffic Injury Prevention, 2019, 20(sup2): S1-S7.
[5] Jakobsson L, Norin H, Svensson M Y. Parameters influencing AIS 1 neck injury outcome in vehicle rear impacts[J]. Traffic Injury Prevention, 2004, 5(2): 156-163.
[6] Boström O, Svensson M Y, Aldman B, et al. A new neck injury criterion candidate based on injury findings in the cervical spinal ganglia after experimental neck extension trauma[C]//Proceedings of the IRCOBI Conference. Dublin: IRCOBI, 1996: 123-136.
[7] Toyota Motor Corporation. Total Human Model for Safety: THUMS user manual[M]. Toyota: Toyota Motor Corporation, 2019.
[8] Schmitt K U, Muser M H, Niederer P, Walz F. Trauma biomechanics: an introduction to injury biomechanics[M]. Berlin: Springer, 2010.
[9] Panjabi M M, Ito S, Ivancic P C, Rubin W. Evaluation of the intervertebral neck injury criterion using simulated rear impacts[J]. Journal of Biomechanics, 2005, 38(8): 1694-1701.
[10] Takhounts E G, Craig M J, Moorhouse K, McFadden J, Hasija V. Development of brain injury criteria (BrIC)[J]. Stapp Car Crash Journal, 2013, 57: 243-266.
[11] Kleiven S. Predictors for traumatic brain injuries evaluated through accident reconstructions[J]. Stapp Car Crash Journal, 2007, 51: 81-114.

All published work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright © 2016 - 2031 Clausius Scientific Press Inc. All Rights Reserved.