Crashworthiness

[butter]

Hi guys,

I just finished reading an article about a police chase near where I live that ended up killing one innocent driver and injured five others.
****************
From the Associated Press, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
March 8, 2008
A Los Angeles police chase has ended with one person dead and five injured.

Police say they stopped a Nissan for a traffic violation in South Los Angeles just after 10 p.m. Friday but the car took off, leading to a three-mile chase. The driver reached speeds of 100 mph as the car sped into neighboring Gardena, where it smashed into two other vehicles.

The crash killed the driver of one struck car, 20-year-old Kierra Kevon Bolton, and injured two passengers. Three people in the other struck car were also taken to hospitals with injuries.
**************

And a question popped into my head after reading this sad piece of news: if this innocent woman had happened to be driving an Aptera, would her chances of surviving have been even a tiny bit better?

Of course, I realize I am asking for people to speculate based on almost no hard details of the Aptera, and of course no one can ever legally promise you that you won't die in one of their cars, no matter how well it's made.

But having put forth that disclaimer, would any of you hazard a guess as to whether an Aptera's body would somehow be a little more crashworthy than, say, a current "normal" car (and assuming it's a compact, not a Landrover or whatever)?

Just asking out of idle curiosity, not looking to get crashed into anytime soon,

Thanks,
Amy

[MegaAutoBit]

Hi Amy,

There is no way to really answer this question. To properly evaluate the collision one would need an analysis of the conditions of the collision. Who was moving in which direction, at what speed, at what angle did the vehicles impact, and where did the impact occur on each vehicle. The only proper way to analyze the safe worthiness of a vehicle is in a controlled experiment. This is why we have government and Highway Safety Institute Ratings. In addition, the comment about the SUV is irrelevant; the mass of a vehicle in a collision is a very small factor. The Smart is much safer car, and would fare better in a collision than many recent SUV’s. The only reassurance I can provide, according to the information available, I believe Aptera has attempted the make the vehicle as safe as possible. Only a true controlled experiment test would verify its performance. Hope that helps.

[butter]

Hi MegaAutoBit (I feel like I'm writing to a Transformers character),

Thanks for your response; it's sort of along the lines of what I'd expected, though not what I'd fantastically hoped, heh.

The other point you make, though, about the negligible difference between an SUV and a Smart car in the context of a collision -- do you actually mean this is the case if either car is the sitting target of a 100 mph Nissan? Sorry if this non-physics-way-of-questioning is really lame and dumb.. but that's what many of you out there are good for!! To debunk common, uninformed, gut-instinct misconceptions.

Thanks,
Amy

[MegaAutoBit]

Hi Amy,

LOL, I never thought of my screen name in that fashion before, that’s funny. It actually is suppost to represent a very excited computer, and automotive enthusiast.

-Mega= 1.0x10^9
-Bit=Computer Bit represented as either a “1” or “0”
-Auto, that one is obvious.

Sorry for the tangent. To answer your question, yes I believe the Smart could outperform many, not all, SUV’s placed in a similar position. Thants not to say that the occupants would survive, just the vehicle overall would perform better. People often assume SUV’s would perform better in a collision due simply to their size.

Chris

[KarenRei]

I haven't compared statistics on the Smart specifically; however according to physics, *assuming properly built crumple zones in both vehicles* and *no rollover*, the SUV will fare better for two reasons. One, the Smart has a short crumple zone, which inherently means the G forces must be spread over a shorter time period than the SUV driver experiences. Two, the Smart will get kicked back while the SUV will maintain some of its forward momentum -- more total deceleraton for the Smart driver.

As for overall crash statistics, SUVs as a whole have a slight safety edge over smaller cars on average. Very small cars have poor safety, and very large SUVs have horrible safety. Small to midsized SUVs average the safest vehicles, followed by large and midsized cars. However, it is critical to note that there's a lot more variation *within a group* than *between groups*. I.e., some small cars are far safer than many midsized SUVs.

As for the Aptera, safety-wise, I'm not worried in the least. They've been doing computer crash tests for months, they're doing very good real-world crash tests, it has a very long frontal crumple zone, a nice deflection structure made more effective by how high the Aptera rides up, very long side crumple zones, a nice roll cage, and so forth. Looks like a *very* safe car.

[butter]

Thanks, KarenRei, for elaborating!

[MegaAutoBit]

Let me first apologize if I can’t elaborate thoroughly, I am in the middle of writing my term paper on Nuclear Physics. KarenRei, is correct, physics alone dictate the SUV will win the battle over a Smart. But one must look at the engineering behind the vehicle to present an accurate hypothesis. Note, the key word I used before was “many,” not all SUV, when I wrote this I was specifically referring to the larger SUV’s since the item in question was mass. I was not really considering the “smaller” SUV’s because they are commonly referred to as Crossovers, and commonly use car chases for their frames. The Smart does have a very small crumple zone, but what is commonly unknown the Smart is engineered to activate and use the crumple zone of the other vehicle. My point of my extreme example, it's bad to assume an SUV would perform better in a collision than a small car on mass alone, automotive collisions are very complex, and many factors play in their results.

[butter]

Very interesting... thank you MegaAutoBit!

[butter]

Not to be macabre... okay, admittedly I am macabre and can never wrap my mind around certain car crashes I'll read about in the news that seem particularly unlucky or tragic or whatever (just emotionally speaking).

I apologize ahead of time if this is just me talking about more of the same as earlier and you guys are sick of thinking about stuff that can't really be pinned down except on a case by case situation.

But anyway, here I obsess: I read about ANOTHER crash this week near where I live about a high school senior -- who was not drinking or doing any drugs -- but who *was* speeding down a major surface street. He apparently lost control of his dad's Corvette and crashed into not one but two cars.

******
Police said Andrew was heading north on Crenshaw Boulevard toward Skypark Drive at 8:25 p.m. when he lost control of the Corvette and traveled onto the wrong side of the road. He crashed first into a 1995 Mercedes-Benz and then into a 1992 Jeep Cherokee.

Andrew, who was pulled from his mangled car by his best friend, Nicholas La Monica, later died in surgery at County Harbor-UCLA Medical Center near Torrance.
************

Before I saw that article, I had read on another site about some factors to take into account when crashing cars, including the weight -- specifically that when we're talking about a particularly light car, we have to think about the fact that, after being hit initially, it can get moved into another lane, where it could quite conceivably be hit AGAIN by another car (and even again after that).

And it's sometimes this type of multiple-hit situation that does you in, not necessarily the initial collision.

Would that be something to "worry" about with the Aptera? And please note that I'm honestly not trying to scaremonger anybody, because I'm as big a fan as anyone else on these boards -- plus, I take pride in the utmost care with which I drive, so as to avoid as many possible crash situations as humanly possible, so the light weight of the Aptera is ABSOLUTELY NOT a real-world worry of mine (in fact, I will admit that I'm stilllllll obsessing over the big wheelbase width more than anything else, heh).

I'm just kind of you know... doing what I always do.. babble and wonder out loud.

[aptera1213]

in the scenario above you would be much safer in an Aptera as the nissan driver would think you are a low flying airplane and would have swerved to avoid you
;)

sample conversation would be:

"holy crap, an airplane..." swerve
"holy crap, George Jetson's car..." swerve


g

[MegaAutoBit]

Butter,

The reason you were given this information, about a second collision being more deadly than the first even if it was less severe, is primarily due to the vehicles structure. After a collision, no matter what you drive, the frame and safety equipment have been compromised, and can no longer absorb the same loads. It would be very difficult to predict the outcome of a second collision on a vehicle that is compromised. Once the frame is damaged, the vehicle safety cage has been significantly damaged; the Aptera would behave in the same manner.

MegaAutoBit

[MegaAutoBit]

Butter,

Below I have provided a link to a video I found with a quick search. As you watch the video notice the difference in damage amongst the vehicles; on the Kia the roof bubbles, but the Volvo almost perfectly maintains its roof line. Image being in one of these vehicles during a front end collision after being T-boned, the weakened frame will not be able to provide its originally designed support. Notice the difference between the old BMW and the new BMW 5 series. I hope this provides some insight into our discussion.

MegaAutoBit

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4635817292486987084&q=Highways+Safety+Institute&total=323&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=4

[MegaAutoBit]

Another good example to my point.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCIBOYxzqko

[Dubito]

Butter,

Below I have provided a link to a video I found with a quick search. As you watch the video notice the difference in damage amongst the vehicles; on the Kia the roof bubbles, but the Volvo almost perfectly maintains its roof line. Image being in one of these vehicles during a front end collision after being T-boned, the weakened frame will not be able to provide its originally designed support. Notice the difference between the old BMW and the new BMW 5 series. I hope this provides some insight into our discussion.

MegaAutoBit

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4635817292486987084&q=Highways+Safety+Institute&total=323&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=4

Ouch. I know the aptera will have airbag-in-seatbelt technology, and a good crumple zone up front. But those side impacts are brutal.

[butter]

Those vids are brutal. Yikes.

The original point I unintentionally obscured, though, was that the website I was browsing talked about whether or not a vehicle's weight mattered in a collision, and someone simply made a point that lighter vehicles risk being pushed into another lane of traffic after an initial crash, thereby subjecting it to possible further hits, whereas a heavier vehicle may have less of a chance of being pushed into more traffic, thereby reducing its chances of additional hits.

And that was just one more consideration for lightweight vehicles and their safety.

Again, I'm all for smaller cars, so this isn't about advocating big or heavy cars at all -- and if anything, seeing those side-impact crash videos reinforce my already defensive driving.

[compasteedee]

I haven't compared statistics on the Smart specifically; however according to physics, *assuming properly built crumple zones in both vehicles* and *no rollover*, the SUV will fare better for two reasons. One, the Smart has a short crumple zone, which inherently means the G forces must be spread over a shorter time period than the SUV driver experiences.

Ahh, but there is the rub. a smart car actually outperforms a Mercedes S-class in crash worthiness. Here in Canada we have had smarts for a number of years, and Mercedes-Benz has been quick to show us how safe these cars actually are, as well as independent tests that have proven the same. They are incredibly safe cars because they have what is called a "Tridon Safety Cell". which is the most advanced crumple-zone on any car. While it has much less area, it still absorbs the crash more effectively. This video is an independent test by a British television show.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju6t-yyoU8s


So what relevance does all this have? Well the point is that it is more a question of design (accidental or purposeful) than the actual weight, angle of impact, velocity etc. Now you can't change physics, but with the technology available you can bend the rules.

It sounds to me that Aptera has done more than it's fair share to try to reduce the risk in a crash situation.