The Incredible Engineering That Helps You Survive Car Crashes
Vložit
- čas přidán 18. 05. 2024
- Crashing a car is usually not a good idea. But sometimes, it can save lives.
↓↓↓ More info and sources below ↓↓↓
No one ever wants to get in a car crash. But if you ever do, be very thankful for the engineers who crash test cars. You may have seen crash test simulations on TikTok using physics engines like BeamNG but I promise you they are nothing compared to the real thing! Join us for this DEEP dive into the physics of car crashes and the ways that engineers hack Newton's laws to keep you safe.
Filmed on location at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety www.iihs.org/
IIHS on CZcams: / @iihs-hldi
IIHS resources for teachers: classroom.iihs.org/
Crash test sensor car by PocketLab: www.thepocketlab.com/
References: sites.google.com/view/be-smar...
Join our Patreon community: / itsokaytobesmart
SUBSCRIBE so you don’t miss a video! ►► bit.ly/iotbs_sub
0:00 Intro - Deep dive into crash testing
1:37 Welcome to crash test HQ
2:25 She crashes cars for a living
3:42 A visit with Isaac Newton
5:41 Why Newton's 2nd law rules all
11:21 New problems, new crash tests
14:37 Very finely-tuned violence
17:58 How engineers prepare a crash test (lots of duct tape)
20:42 Who you callin' dummy, dummy?
25:02 Car go BOOM (and the aftermath)
31:00 In the future, will cars be smart enough not to crash?
36:24 Conclusion and extras
-----------
High fives to all our Brain Trust Patrons:
Charles Horton, Jr
Holly, Brett, and Ashe Bullion
Jaap Westera
Millennial Glacier
Mehdi Damou
Barbora Bei
Burt Humburg
dani bowman
David Johnston
Baerbel Winkler
Robert Young
Eric Meer
Karen Haskell
Join us on Patreon!
/ itsokaytobesmart
Twitter
/ drjoehanson
/ okaytobesmart
Instagram
/ drjoehanson
/ okaytobesmart
Merch
store.dftba.com/collections/i...
Facebook
/ itsokaytobesmartpbs
![[Vowel]물고기는 물에서 살아야 해🐟🤣Fish have to live in the water #funny](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3G9MH063Cx4/mqdefault.jpg)
It was great having you, Joe! Come back and visit anytime!
Can't wait!
good
This was really fascinating!
@iihs-hldi this is the best video I’ve seen explaining your process. And I love how you guys are now producing more deep dive videos.
An important crash test you dont do is what happens when different car types colide. You really dont penalize car manufacturers for making cars too big when that seriously endangers the safety of everyone who doesnt participate in the car size arms race.
These people, or their European counterparts, are directly responsible for my Mum still being here. A van hit the front of her car... totally wrecked the front of the vehicle, the airbag punched her in the face and the seatbelt bruised her but she walked away from a crash that 20 years earlier would have killed or seriously maimed her.
Thank you to these people for all their work.
I agree ❤
Yup. A lot of us practically owe these people our lives. I was in a crash this year, where I somehow escaped without a single scratch. Just a bit of soreness from the seatbelt tensioner. I drove in to the back of a truck that was stopped at a red light at 80 kmh (50 mph). Unsurprisingly, trucks are quite firm... So yeah, thank you researchers.
I don't know how quickly I'd rush to thank the IIHS. They didn't spend this money and do this research to save lives. They did it to lower the amount of money insurance companies have to pay out for injury claims. If they didn't save millions of dollars by doing this, they probably wouldn't care. Don't fool yourself in to thinking big corporations care about our safety. Unless it saves them money, they do not care.
being a crash test engineer sounds like every 5 year old's dream
Lod me when I crash my Lego and see where all the parts when flying lol
And being a crash test dummy sounds like 90s Canadian alternative rock.
It does, until you see the results with your own eyes...
In all reality it's a lot of setup, documentation, and analysis. Still cool and extremely interesting, but maybe a bit less fun than it seems initially.
@@B-rad1 "sounds like" a 5 year old's dream lol, just like being an astronaut, seems cool until you actually do it
Cool. I see the end product of crashes every day. I work in an automotive recycling center. I've seen some serious damage that people walked away from.
I saw two cars that got into a head on collision with a combined speed of about 120mph. looked like they fell from space, they were obliterated, blood still covering Evey inch of what's left of the interior
@@Mr.beansholiday You can't just combine individual speeds. Two cars impacting at 60 mph each is (almost) the same as each car hitting an immovable wall at 60 mph.
Some guys crashed into my dad once. Our impreza was totalled (looked completely done to me) and he only had one bone broken in his hand. The two guys ended up in hospital. Also the transmission was intact and it might be driving in some other car to this day :)
@@ElfRulerr Can you explain why? Doesn't really make sense to me
I work in a major automotive manufacturer. I build the entire Motor compartment, front sidemembers, aprons dash cowl, radiator and front floor.
I have a sticking point about the Ft=mv. Engineers, of all people, have the ability to change the mass of vehicles. They do not need to be at large as they are. They are literally massive. We do not need these multi tonne SUVs on the road.
You missed the point: the F in the equation is the force exerted at the point of contact between the car and the obstacle. Reducing this force alone does not translate into reducing the force experienced by the driver.
Indeed when considering the driver's safety what's important is the acceleration/forces experienced by THE DRIVER (or rather each of its vital organs). Hence THE DRIVER's mass (its vital organs) is the thing to consider here. Yet the vehicle manufacturer has no control over the driver's (vital organs) mass.
Note that this is a very short and oversimplified explanation to you shared reasoning flaws.
Indeed, and avoiding spilling here the detailed lengthy explanation, truth is that generally speaking the higher the vehicle's mass in proportion to the driver's mass, the less uncertain (more predictible) becomes the driver's deceleration rate, the "easier" it is to "engineer its safety".
@@RaoulEvilDexcept that the higher the vehicle'e mass, the higher the energy of the crash and therefore the more energy you need to dissipate to avoid reaching the passengers. OP's totally right that cars nowadays, specially SUVs are built way too heavy to protect the passengers at the expense of everyone else involved, like passer-bys, cyclists or even people on smaller, more normal sized cars - NotJustBikes has a great video on how these types of cars are a threat to everyone.
@@hcxpl1 Don't get me wrong, I agree that vehicle mass inflation trend is bad on many aspects, especially for the environment and the safety of by-passers and lighter vehicles. I am myself against this trend. But the truth don't care about our feelings: higher mass generally mean, all things considered, better safety for the occupants of the heavy vehicle. Let's avoid strawmaning others for the sake of ones ego 😉, no offence. I am convinced that this world would run even better if everyone was seeking THE truth rather than THEIR truth.
Tell that to someone with kids, or a job that requires they transport many or large items, or need to tow something. What you meant to say is "I don't need a large SUV."
@@toddhollen You'd benefit from watching NotJustBikes' video on the subject - there he is very clear how, even for those cases, SUVs are far from being the best solution; they actually kinda suck at hauling things and are really fuel inefficient.
I calibrate airbag deployment behavior at Bosch in Germany. This video was very well made and simple to understand! Great work not overcomplicating it and yet still showing the importance attached to crash testing!
I eat meat. I like to eat meat. But still moral conjecture of not eating meat. So what now
Then I suggest to wait for a crash where people die and then asking the ME if you can take home an arm or a leg
@@xavthedrummer and there’s the urge of sleeping. So maybe earth is getting hot. Global warming bad.
thank you for all your hard work! airbags deploying correctly have saved my life 3 times 👍
@@kingmorgan5047 holy crap, man! I'm happy airbags saved you but I hope you won't have the need for them anymore! It's not a pleasant experience...
Ayyy! I work here! I saw him walking around filming this back in August! So cool to see the final video!
Long form suits you Joe. Brilliant video… reminiscent of SEDs rocket factory video. I approve this content 👍.
Much appreciated!
Crazy how much engineered and tested is used for the safety of vehicle occupants. Hopefully we can get just as much testing for pedestrians as well.
Plenty of pedestrian safety tech is built into vehicles now. Collapsible guards, explosive bonnet hinges to throw rear of the bonnet up to catch and soften impact. Plenty other smaller things being built in now too
They actually cover that later in the video, looking at collision avoidance systems including pedestrians
@ReverendRaff not really. The engineer is still explaining how cameras can detect other car, bu not really a pedestrian.
Besides the mannequin they use has a gps connected to the car
@reddcube I totally agree and was thing the same!
Nowadays cars are more deaadly to pedestrians than ever
Just to be clear I referring to deadly collisions. In 1975, there was 7,516 deaths. This statistic was trending down, with 4,109 deaths in 2009. But trend had reversed. There is now an alarming increase in pedestrian deaths, in 2021 it's back up to 7,388 deaths.
Remember kidos, the best way to minimize car crashes is to MAKE CARS IRRELEVANT and support other, safer, modes of mass transportation... or you know, ride your bike and support city planning that fosters save and effective bike (or skateboard, or roller skating) transportation.
yeah bc i my ujiversity 18km away that takes 1hr in car can be a ride i can do in a bike🤡
@@lorenapacora1526Public transportation was like their 2nd point... please read
Skateboards do not work, roller skates don't really work all too well, simply walking is the best mode of transportation, surprise, surprise. Bicycles, trams, busses, trains etc are what we need to focus on.
@@Anonymoose66G None of those would be of any use around here. Perhaps you are a city dweller without tools to carry or multiple places to be, but most people outside the big cities need better transportation.
@@cheapbastard990 or maybe the fact that the car exists as a convenient mean of transport, has shaped human settlements in a way that we bought the idea that living in sub urban areas is really something good. While we all pay the externalities of co2 emissions as climate change, aka heat waves, floods, droughts,etc.
My favorite fact in the topic is that the most violent looking motorsport crashes where the car rolls like 300 times are the safest because it has a long time to absorb the energy. As long as the rollcage remains intact you are most likely good.
I would like to note that motorsport has the best crash safety and a lot of stuff used in passenger cars is specifically banned in racing due to safety reasons. But good luck getting a soccer mom to agree to a 5 point harness and a HANS device taking her kids to the game, so passenger cars accept slightly less safe solutions for the sake of usability.
@@reaganharder1480 Well yes. In racing the safety standards are obviously higher since the speed and the chance of accident is also significantly higher. There is always a compromise. Also they ban stuff because some equipments are incompatible with each other or at least have no point using them together. There is no point using airbags if you have 5 point harness and HANS because they mostly serve the same purpose as an airbag. They keep you in place ans prevent whiplash. Also escaping the car in case of fire would be harder if you have 2 tons of airbag around you :D
@@acourierslife-egyfutarelet8856 also airbags are actively dangerous devices, they are just less dangerous than smashing your face into the steering wheel etc.
@@reaganharder1480 you could say this about a lot of things, even seatbelts.
@@reaganharder1480 I'm fairly sure that was true for the first generation of airbags but, as you can see in this video, modern ones are designed to deflate after the collision is over, making it safer and not suffocating the driver or passenger if they pass out
The last time I read about this they were talking about how the dummies were modeled after average healthy adult males and that people outside of the range of healthy adult males were suffering more injuries in part because they weren't being looked at. In the videos you showed, the only time smaller dummies were used were as passengers. I was sad to see that it doesn't seem to have changed. There might be a small woman in charge, but has she ever seen a dummy representative of her in the driver's seat.
This!! It's scary to be a smaller sized person
As a short and wide man, I approve this message.
I work in a crash test center and we do use smaller sized dummies as drivers :)
@@NahNnii that's really good to know, I'm glad it's being looked into by some places at least.
Why don't they crash light trucks and SUV agaisnt cars? That's what happens often on the roads. Where are lifted trucks in these tests? What about cyclists and pedestrians collision test with the front of the vehicule so high off the ground. Is there visibility and dead zones tests too ? Protect people inside the 2 ton steel chassis to the detriment to everyone outside of them... :(
Why not say this and that and eat just meat. Than comes vegetables. Not all but certain vegetables taste too good though. Earth is surely crazy place to live in
It is being tested as well, not sure if in this particular institute though. Anyway, making the cars' fronts softer and increasing the time of deceleration helps usually both sides of the collision
@@qj0n No matter how soft it is, if the driver can't see the people in front of them and if they hit the pedestrians in their head or chest instead of their legs it's nowhere near safer as regular cars. Decreasing the time of deceleration means having lighter vehicules which is the opposite of what's happening in the industry. If they would care about pedestrians safety they wouldn't make their vehicules like they are doing more and more.
@@qj0n or even if drink water. That say then. Chicken is best friend or not. Debate still. Look at now no more soup. Good sometimes
@@philippemiller4740I don’t think there’s much the engineers can do about that, when you want to get multiple people to places efficiently and fast and protect them there a limit to how light it can be so the safety of the people outside the car is ultimately the driver’s responsibility.
Really appreciate all the crash testing and engineering improvements over the years. I walked away practically unscathed from 2 really bad crashes. Eternally grateful to the engineers who crash tested and designed cars that protected my life and well being.
No matter how safe they may claim cars are, they still account for millions of injuries and thousands of deaths every year. We MUST reduce our dependence on cars because even after a century of innovation we still can't stop the carnage. There are just so many better and safer alternatives, we just have to collectively decide to use them.
Or just drive safer
@@jefferyjeff7132that's a wish, not a practicable solution.
@@jefferyjeff7132also have less suv on the roads but i think it better if people use public transit instead of cars more often
what boggle me with car manufacturer's excuse of making their cars heavier by each passing year is 'safety' which doesnt really work when most cars in the roads now weighs just shy of a small mountain, are we bound to drive Maus on the road soon? (what do i mean we? my public country's transportation works... sort of)
@@USSAnimeNCC- nahhhhh the statement "just drive safer" is so fool proof your argument cant hold a candle to that. the graveyard isnt filled of people that "had the right of way" written on their stone /s
FIrst off, overall a great video about the physics of crashes. However, I have a bit of a problem with what you said at 6:05 - 6:15 about there not being much to work with and "The car's mass is whatever it is."
I'd argue that the engineers have a lot of say in what the mass of the entire car is. They design the whole thing! Every year cars keep getting larger and larger and heavier as a result. It affects braking distances, crash forces and it seems to have become an arms race between manufacturers to make bigger cars so that people "feel safe" driving. And once you get these massive cars on roads everywhere, one can feel unsafe in a smaller car and ends up getting a larger car to compensate. So I would have liked to hear more about how the mass affects crash outcomes. if you have a 1000kg car and a 2000kg car collide head on, what's going to happen to either car?
In addition, based on this video it seems like the tests are only testing the safety of the occupants inside a car. Does the testing suite have any pedestrian safety tests? And with cars getting taller and more square on the front, I feel like pedestrian safety should really be emphasized a lot more as people who get hit by a modern car, are more likely to get hit in the torso as opposed to the legs if a older, lower car hit them.
Pedestrian traffic death statistics really paint an ugly picture about the direction in the US right now, so I'd hope to see more on how that is being addressed.
I've been in many car accidents and their work is the reason I'm still alive with all my limbs intact! Thank you, to all the engineers and professionals within the Insurance Institute for all the advancements in car safety!!! Great video, Joe!!
Did you work as a race driver?
Man, hope you don't figure in another one.
@shaider1982 My last accident was in 2010, so I'm doing pretty good... knocking on wood!
@@thetechnoking many of them happened due to wet, dark roads, not speeding
@@julioperez1850 Just because you aren't speeding, doesn't mean that you aren't going too fast for the conditions
Be nice if they also engineer some safety features for the pedestrian when these giant trucks inevitably hits a pedestrian they can't see due to their increasing ride height.
nice idea, but cushioning an impact of 10 tons of steel going at normal speeds will be kind of difficult.
I think we should limit the size of car especially suv their gettto big for everyone safety also get a station wagon or minivan if you want a family car not a dam suv which is worst for the environment because they burn more fuel or use more battery and your pay too much for a car in when you could've gotten a awd saloon or wagon don't own a suv when wagon can give you more trunk space and minivan more room inside even saloon have more room inside for passengers
@@USSAnimeNCC-the SUV was created to pull a trailer and also have your whole family with your belongings all fitting inside, its not that SUVs need to go away, the right ppl just are not buying them and there becoming so expensive the people they are made for can't afford it
what a bubble boy
@@raphaelefranco1123 You'd think that, but it is surprisingly possible. The highest priority is to prevent the head from bumping into hard places. The car can for example raise the hood a few inches just before impact to provide a small amount of space cushioning the impact.
If the bumper of the car is at the right height the pedestrian will pivot around the waist and the whole torso will be able to absorb some of the crash energy before the head impacts the hood of the car. Conversely, if the bumper is high, like on one of the big truck models, there is nothing to pivot around as the body if hit from the side. The head will therefore impact the car with much more force and in a less favorable angle.
I wish that they would rate cars for how safe they are for pedestrians as part of their standards rather than just the people in the vehicle :(
The problem is that even a small car can weigh 1-2 tons. The safety of a car for pedestrians if they ever come in contact is always going to be non-existent. You can't hit a human with something that heavy safely.
What you can do is avoid collisions, and that is mostly down to better visibility (both of the pedestrian and from within the car), social engineering and training of both pedestrians and drivers, and limiting the amount they are on the same surface and making it obvious when they will be. Same goes for bikes.
@@samarnadraYou're completely wrong. There are some factors that make it more dangerous, like blind spots, or being lifted to high. And a curved front is safer than being flat like on a pickup truck.
And I wish people would use station wagon, minivan, or saloon instead of suv
- suv are worst for the environment ad they use more fuel or electricity if an ev and use more material as their heavy
- save on money by not only suv since suv use more fuel or electricity because of their weight
- Station guve you trunk space and can be awd mean you have some off road capability
- Saloon and Minivan have more passengers space
Btw saloon is a stretch sedan and coupe are 2 door and sedan are 4 doors tho a 4 door hatchback can make a good sedan
They do. Look up the break down of any crash test rating, they test how the bumper impacts pedestrian's legs and how the hood and windshield deal with pedestrian's head.
elon to the rescue! so with his neural-link, whenever it detects two humans about to collide, your jacket explodes and inflates into a giant bubble. now get that implant! in the name of safety!!!!
I think car crash safety regulations should aim to minimize the damage made to people outside the vehicle, whether they are inside another car, on a bicycle or simply walking. This would lead to safer streets unlike the current arms race where vehicles keep getting heavier, taller, blunter and ultimately deadlier.
While car safety like this is important the ideal solution is the removal of cars completely and good public transit. Since that's obviously not entirely possible, the next best thing is to separate pedestrians and cars as much as possible. Unfortunately car manufacturers have billions to spend in lobbying money and stupid regulations on oversized heavy vehicles having more lax restrictions has helped lead us to stupidly big vehicles.
@@scopie49 I was looking at some local statistics recently and they showed that poor driving is the cause of 75% of pedestrian fatalities -- so this narrative about being visible and looking both ways is largely misplaced. And you are right, these collisions primarily occur at crossings while the pedestrian has the right of way. And since crossings are essentially impossible to eliminate, we must do the second best thing to reduce fatalities, which is reducing the weight of cars and drastically reducing their speed at pedestrian crossings by raising them to the level of the sidewalk, effectively turning every pedestrian crossing into a speed bump.
@@Frostbiker We will never fix stupid drivers. I don't think eliminating crossings is impossible. Of course it won't be 100% but most interaction points between cars and pedestrians can and should be eliminated. The best biking paths in the world have zero crossings over roads.
Reducing the weight and size of cars I 100% agree with. I hate people in oversized vehicles. Saw a good term calling trucks a "manivan." The big F150s used by soccermoms to haul groceries.
And I agree about the raised crossings. Good public infrastructure will include traffic calming and pedestrian prioritization at locations where you absolutely can't separate people from cars.
It takes a combination of good practices to create good walkable cities. No single solution gets us there.
@@scopie49 Never heard of "manivans"... I'm stealing it! Thanks for your insights 🙏
Incredible work that helps to save oh so many lives!
But... There are even more things we can engineer to save even more lives:
* Road side barriers are often the things that are hit by cars and other motor vehicles and they both pose a danger and an opportunity to prevent other dangers; you don't want a car turning over, scaling over the barrier or bounce back into on-coming traffic. the barriers can also be designed with their own crumple zones to extend the crash times and the barrier can of course work to shield other traffic from the out of control vehicle like on-coming traffic or cyclists and pedestrians in separated guarded lanes. Best practice is to always separate different kinds of traffic and vehicles to keep the places of conflict to a minimum.
* Mass and velocity DO matter and CAN be engineered; As American Cars have gotten larger and heavier because of regulation-skirting practices by car manufacturers and extensive PR campaigns that say everyone needs a semi-truck or whatnot, the mass involved in crashes have increased to make every impact more dangerous and even worse so for those in smaller vehicles or outside of a car entirely. That is to say 'BiG CAr loOks sAFe, bUT WiTh bIG Car aROunD oTHeRs ARe unSaFe'.
* As for velocity (speed), we should set the limits around what is safe for the road, not around what gets the traffic flowing as is practice right now in the U.S. We also need to use traffic calming practices that make drivers feel uncomfortable to go at too high speeds; fewer and tighter lanes, raised pedestrian crossings, speed bumps, separating stroads into aptly desgined higher speed, transportation-oriented roads and lower speed, destination-oriented streets, less straight streets and more roundabouts.
* More and more air pollution and greenhouse gases lead to lost years of health than crash events with vehicles so improving on the pollution front of cars is still an overlooked area of possible improvements: Electric Vehicles (aside from when the batteries combust) are cleaner in this way especially so if the electricity was generated through renewable sources or through nuclear energy. Biofuels are hydrocarbon fuels that aren't fossil fuels but made from agroculture, forestry and waste by-products that are somewhat cleaner but don't typically contribute to greenhouse gas emissions as long as there's sufficient replanting done with each harvesting. More effcient motors, aerodynamic shapes, again smaller sizes and less polluting production methods and cleaner materials lead to better fuel efficency or otherwise mitigating the pollution associated with cars.
* Fewer cars and less miles travelled in them help everyone. By prioritizing pedestrian, cycling and Mass-transit infrastructure everyone will be safer and have happier, healthier lives. By designing our cities and other developed land in cleverer ways we can make many personal errands unneccessary by either clumping destinations together or providing services that do errands for people or provide services online. Higher density also lead to shorter distances travelled by car and DOES NOT have to be skyscarpers. The benefits of density exists on many levels and in the U.S. you are missing out on the middle density and mixed purpose zoning.
Great video and all that but there are so many more things we can do to make the deaths due to cars come close to zero.
I have been to the IIHS crash facility myself and it’s quite exciting watching them test vehicles. Great video.
Nice! How did you manage that? I would love to visit the facility and watch a crash test in person.
Highly appreciated both the video style (factual yet engaging) as well as the topic.
Question: how far along is the development of female shaped crash test dummies? Especially in regards to placement of sensors to represent the effects of impacts on a pregnant woman's lower torso and internal organs as well as the foetus? Iirc until recently these have pretty much been neglected in crash tests. Only recently the companies producing these mannequins have begun development of such dummies. That's why I was interested in how far that development has progressed.
Fat guys are also ignored. So are dwarfs. So are guys in drag. So are people in wheel chairs. And etc.... The fact of the matter they can't test for everything ans every individual. That would be insanely complex and pointless. They can only test for averages and build accordingly. Detroit cannot customize every car's design. They cannot and will not offer a car specifically engineered for the safety of a 4 foot tall left handed pregnant trans-gender male in a wheel chair.
Its eye opening
I always thought companies cheaped out on material.
This is why knowledge is necessary.
If you don't know then you don't know
15 minutes in, the first (edit: and only) mention of pedestrians ... portrayed as an annoyance to a car.
I would have liked to see crash compatibility mentioned as well.
my wife and I were in a head on collision 9 months ago. We were hit by a drunkdriver going the wrong way on the freeway. I was going 85 and he was going 80. Our Yukon Denali had a collision avoidance feature. My car turned and hit the brakes which minimized the impact to my drivers headlight area. The collision sent us spinning 8 times. We were released from the emergency room 7 hrs later with no life threatening injuries. Even though I am still in pain and recovering from my injuries. I have NO doubt that our car saved my life.
I was in a pretty bad accident (rear ended in standstill traffic at about 30-40 mph and was pushed into the car in front of me), so learning why I survived is pretty cool :)
There are SOOO many details visible in that crash! Probably my favorite is just how clearly you can see and hear when the much more solid front of the cabin strikes the barrier. What is interesting to think about is that moment is probably the most dangerous part of the collision, for all the same reasons the stiffer cars were more dangerous than those built to crumple. However, it is intentionally left that solid because having the cabin itself crumple is so much worse than an acceleration spike mid collision, especially with all the other features in the cabin.
I was surprised to see that IIHS allowed you to be in the same room as the crash. I worked at Ford, for a supplier, and we had to be in a booth, high above the floor that was also sound deadened.
A few things:
While the seat belt retraction late in the crash is fairly new, the same effect has been in all vehicles sold in the US, Europe and some other parts of the world since the 1970s. The technology was that a section of seat belt was folded over on itself, right near the buckle, so it was independent of how much belt was fed out. This was stitched together with special threads that would tear away under pressure. There was even a special pattern to the stitching so that it did not all tear at once, providing a slow (compared to crash speed) lengthening of the belt. This predated air bags.
While we witnessed the test, even the preparations, most of the crash study was films. We had 2 video speeds back in 2001 and 2002, they were 1000 frames per second and 1500 frames per second. I can see from the films used in your video that the technology has moved on and they are much closer to 10,000 frames per second. At 1500 frames per second, the main airbag was fully inflated in just 2 or 3 frames.
You also stated that offset crashes was new. It was not, even the manufacturers, who meet all US federal safety requirements, and then do some additional testing, usually on prototype vehicles to test new technology and new systems. But do significantly fewer tests that IIHS. But we still did offset tests. 2 in fact, a rigid barrier and the soft barrier - which is used instead of another vehicle so that it simulated an average other vehicle. We even did different heights of the barrier, especially when it was the barrier striking the vehicle, such as in a side impact test. The different heights simulated another passenger car or an SUV. While the SUV and truck boom were well under way, sedans and coupes were still standard cars at that time.
The side impact testing for some vehicles was repeated quite a bit, so that changes could be made to get a passing grade when a passing grade was not every time. An example was the Ford Explorer. I did NOT work on that platform, but engineers talk, especially at facilities where all platforms meet. There is a breadboard, which is a wiring mock up, for every vehicle Ford makes at the prototype facility in Allen Park. This is one of the places where I met my counter parts on other platforms. The Explorer was having trouble with side impact intrusion. Until they ran a trim model that included running boards as standard equipment. With additional testing to confirm, as well as all the types of running boards they were using at that time, running boards became standard equipment on all Explorers. The design was new, but the test standard was newer, and they could not accelerate the next version of the Explorer in order to pass the test. Usually the government gave a long term heads up that they were working on a new standard, so that vehicles could be designed to meet the new standard. In this case, a new standard came out very fast. Since them Ford has corrected this, but then found that running boards were now expected by customers. One of the few times that government testing standards led to customer expectations. Yes, customers expect safer vehicles, but many still try to not wear seat belts. Part of why while they test with seat belts, if the seat belt is not worn, the airbag comes out a bit faster. This is front seat only, where there is a passenger detector. My personal car tells me I have a front seat passenger when I have a bag of books on the seat. Which the bag is often there, but only sometimes alerts the sensor. Rear seat passengers were unbelted in more than a few test films you used, as you see the rear of the front seats is the cushion for them. Not an ideal situation but most humans are too stupid for their own good.
I now have a new appreciation for my car getting totalled in two accidents in the same year (not my fault). Sure it's super annoying that I had to wait months for my car to get fixed the first time and that I had to buy a new one after the second accident, but the important thing is that I walked away from both and these people are the reason why.
That is the best in depth explanation of the crash test I've seen. I learned so much more than I knew before!
I'm very interested in seeing maybe more of the newest technology on crash avoidance. I know my Toyota Camry has some of this but not to this level. My hat is off to those automotive companies who make safety paramount!!
Best explanation of car crash testing I've seen, good work guys.
Your example of a 10s stop from 40m/s (thats 144 kph, 90mph) reminded me of an example physics question I did a deep dive on. If one is interested, I can try to find the question itself but in a nutshell it had to do with trying to drop an object into the bed of a truck travelling at a very high rate of speed. But the textbook had an absurd m/s value (probably by accident) so the teacher corrected it for something more realistic -- but I wanted to see what it took. My deep dive then took into account how far you could see the truck from (so youre on a watchtower), the bed length of an F-150, and how fast the object had to be travelling to land in the bed without killing the driver or damaging the cab.
Long story short the object basically had to be fired from a civil war cannon (because earths gravity couldnt accelerate the object fast enough once you could see the truck at the given height) aimed straight down (because the object was "dropped") the instant you saw the truck speeding over the horizon 😅
That was one of your best episodes.
Love the painting.
🚙
I went to school for and work in the Collison Repair industy, and the engineering behind crumple zones is fascinating.
Relevant insight: MPU6050, a common accelerometer used in hobbyist industry has a limit of ±16G, which is far too less for logging sudden retardation like in a crash. That might be the reason why we see a max retardation of ±16G at 10:06; actual retardation might be in the range of ~20-25Gs.
I once heard of someone getting in to a car crash! Crazy!!
If every vehicle was lighter rather than "up armored" that would go a very long way to reduce the forces involved in crashes to begin with. Would help with emissions, cause smaller engines, and higher fuel economy. I could go on but think about it.
01:52 nope. car manufacturers are building safer cars because waaaay back in the late 1950s and 60s,
the government passed legislation that *required* them to.
the car manufacturers are perfectly happy with the carnage on the roads,
as long as it doesn’t affect their profits.
(you will note that it is the Insurance Institute that conducts the testing,
*not* the auto manufacturers)
The auto manufacturers are required to pass all FMVSS (or CMVSS in Canada) test before selling a car. NHTSA and Transport Canada are then doing compliance testing and making sure cars are safe. If not, recalls are made and I’m assuring you that the manufacturer don’t want to deal with recalls.
@@NahNnii "as long as it doesn't affect their profits" is the caveat I offered.
the regulations you speak of were *not* put in place by the auto manufacturers.
they were only instituted after the public outrage that manifested itself in the wake of Ralph Nader's exposition of the callous disregard for safety in the late 1950s and 60s. even then, the auto manufacturers only grudgingly complied.
I love this! You should do a follow up to this vehicle for collision repair. I run a few dealership collision centers restoring the crash worthiness of vehicles. Would love to share what we do as an industry!
An important crash test they dont do is what happens when different car types colide. They really dont penalize car manufacturers for making cars too big when that seriously endangers the safety of everyone who doesnt participate in the car size arms race.
Very cool.. My one quibble: Not all motorcycle license plates are the same size, or even in the same location.... Motorcycle safety (both from the car's perspective and from the motorcyclists' perspective) might also be a very cool video.
They need to do more testing on people outside of their standard test dummy size. My mom is 4'10" and she'd likely die or be extremely injured if she was in an accident where her airbag deployed.
Yeah that's what I always wonder. I'm 5'4" and I have the seat almost all the way forward to be able to reach the wheel and pedals. I have no idea if the air bag would deploy in time for me to not hit the steering wheel because they usually test on 6' "male" dummies
@@nosneb99 I think that the bigger issue is that you're too close to the air bag and it would hit you with too much force. The airbag is supposed to inflate, then you hit it. With you being so close, you'd likely get hit by the airbag instead of you hitting it. You'd be better off if the airbag doesn't deploy.
There is testing on smaller sized dummies in driver seat. And also on dummies really close to the steering wheel. And there’s also testing on worst case scenario where a dummy would have their head directly on the wheel when the airbag deployed. Airbags are a lot less scary then they were 15+ years ago
@@NahNnii Do you have any links to that info? I'd love to read it. Everything that I've found says that people should still sit at least 10" away from the air bag.
@@AndrewMalkin read FMVSS or CMVSS 208. Use of hybrid III 50th male and hybrid III 5th female. You can also look 208 low risk deployment.
🏎 I wish you had included 2 more things
1. what happens between the car crashing in the facility and you being allowed to go up to it (saw some kind of grit on the floor);
2. from what I've read more deadly crashes in the US are happening bc more SUVs are impacting children and small people, are they testing specifically for that scenario?
There’s absorbant added (the grit you saw) so all the fluids that are left (transmission oil, break oil, coolant) are easier to clean and safer to walk around. In the facility where I work, there’s also people reconnecting all the cable for power and data communication to the car that is battery power for the crash. We usually photograph all that is needed before letting anyone touch the vehicle and especially the airbags.
My four year old just sat and watched this straight through with me. Given that you are not animated, that is astounding. Good job, Joe.
Great informative video Joe! You have come a long way and this one was very engaging too
Having an accident lawyer ad right before this is insane
Cars:"using newton's laws airbags all of these tests maths physisics"
Motorcycles:"hold on (optional) "
I did a very short audition to be a crash test dummy a few years ago, the car won unfortunately, however I managed to remove the front wheel, headlight and wing with my knee. Not sure where my knee is, never found it. Great video.
Awesome video, guys! Thanks for this exciting and educational look at how physics literally impacts our daily lives.
21:17 i lost it laughing at the dummy flying through the air, and for whatever reason in my head played "AND IIII" from Whitney Houstons - i will always love you 🤣
Been waiting for this since you mentioned it was coming on Lateral!
This is what I imagined after watching a Crash Test dummy episode would look like...very much geeking out now❤
So that's why you nailed that question on Lateral!
I swear by the eye sight in my Subaru. I had an ataxia episode while driving in traffic and it stopped me when I wasn't able to break at a stop light. Everyone was okay, the cars were okay and I was able to pull over and call someone to come get me
Very very cool tech and I'm glad I have it even if it does sometimes misidentify snowbanks and yell at me
as amazing as these technologies are & the related pursuit of science is; having a train system like a lot of the rest of the world would drastically reduce the need for such tech to begin with.
Phenomenal work Dr Joe. Thank you for all this!
I had to watch this. Because of these people not only am I able to walk around still, but I am alive today. I went through a tree at 133mph, WAY beyond the scope of their tests, and still survived, because I lost everything from the front of the firewall to the front bumper. Only the hood stayed attached by literal threads it looks like. No engine bay, no fenders, no wheel hubs, or front wheels period. But I broke both femurs and had to wait 3.5hrs for rescue or someone to find me, but I can do everything that I did before the accident, but the best part is I lived through something that I thought 100% was going to kill me.
Neat tricks to lessen the risk of dying by car. (no sarcasm)
1. prioritize people (in building cities)
2. first trick will result in less cars (less crashes)
3. ban suvs (less deadly crashes)
4. ???
5. profit
I think the coolest part is when they put paint on dummy's to see exactly how they are impacted by the air bag, the fact that everything safety wise comes down to the way your face hits the airbag.
It’s also the worst part for the tech 😂 it stains so bad haha
Great video. But as always, never seen a real life speed test, like at 70 m/h
I can’t count how many times I’ve avoided a crash, no matter how serious it might have been, by having my car warn me about being too close or needing to break harder. In fact, the first and only crash I’ve been in was with my 1996 Toyota. I was only going about 20mph but I hit a parked car with a reinforced bumper at just the right angle to make my vehicle roll. Thankfully, the older and more sturdy top of my car kept me from getting crushed.
Thanks for bringing up this amazing video
It's amazing how engineers design cars for safety. I used to worked at an auto manufacturer and currently own a bodyshop and drive a wrecker. Some accidents that I see, you wonder how a person was able to survive, let alone walk away without a scratch.
Fun fact (at least as far as I know it is), the scene from Midnight Cowboy with Dustin Hoffman slamming the car bonnet, was not scripted. People behave different behind the wheel; thankful we have such brilliant engineers looking out for us. Great video!
I don't have a favourite car emoji, but hot dang, I have a favourite crash great video now! Superb work, fascinating video! Scary to see the effects of a crash. I hope I never experience it first hand. It pairs well with a tidbit from a recent Mental Floss video, where storm chasers say that it's not the tornado that they worry about, it's the other drivers on the road.
Man this was great. Learned a lot as always
Great video as always! Thank you so much for all the hard work you put into each and every video!! 🚙
**has to pause after the first 28 seconds for a breath** The one I was in was not that violent, but there's nothing that sounds like a vehicle collision. That brought back some feels right there.
I see what you did here. Destin inspired you to take a deeper dive. Nice job.
The IIHS and NTSB are the true unsung heroes of the transportation world! Lots of people are still alive to this day because of the work that they do! My heart goes out to the men and women that devote their careers to making transportation safer!! Love you guys!
🚗awesome deep dive, and it did break the egg!
I'd seen details about car crash test dummies somewhere else, but this had more physics and behind the scenes and explanations.
Very cool, thank you for sharing!
one of your best yet!!!!
Amazing video ! So full of information while still very easy to digest, you did a wondeful job on a very important issue !
This is very reassuring for a new driver such as myself.🚗
🚙 I work on the rail road and modern trains have a huge deformation zone in the front. It's also designed to lift the cabin and go on top of whatever you hit with the train to keep the people inside safe.
In Taichi you learn about force redirection. Curve the path of a punch and you can use a little force to defeat a larger force.
Yay the episode I've been waiting for since the episode with Tom Scott ^^
19:25 dammit man, safety rule #1: do NOT shave your head, if you work in a crash test facility!
Great video. Possibly the best I've ever seen on this channel.
"Hacking physics" is literally just physics
The physics of spitting phlegm
it’s very interesting because I got my first car 8 years ago and the very reason I chose it (Subaru Forester) was because at the time it was one of the only vehicles with a good rating for a partial head on collision.
I have a suggestion for a follow-up video, safety gadgets for example, airbag jackets for motocycle riders, technology in modern helmets etc.
This is a win-win situation. The drivers survive and the car manufacturers can sell another car. So I definitely see the motivation for the car manufacturers to spend money on this. Of course they dont want people to die, but if the drivers take as little damage as possible, then there is a big chance that they will buy another car
On the other hand, neither the driver nor the car manufacturer really give a crap about mowing down pedestrians or cyclists. That's why we need better laws to discourage drivers from driving huge vehicles at high speeds in densely populated areas. I'm talking of narrower winding streets, raised crossings, better transit, etc.
YES! Finally, I’m not the only one who uses the iPad Pro as a camera. The large screen is just so useful!
Phenomenal. Thanks again Joe
Becky really does have an awesome job!! Mahalo for this video. I actually learned quite a lot.
If i had this job I'd die of anxiety before any car crash! Just watching this is making me nervous! 😢
Kudos to people who do this and keep people safe!
One of the best videos to date!
This was fascinating and really entertaining. Although in these longer form videos where you have more time, it would be nice to go into a bit more detail on things like how they grade cars and a bit more on the mechanical engineering involved.
By far the most effective way of avoiding death and injury by cars is reducing car dependency, building sustainable cities(where you don’t need a car to get around), and having robust public transit infrastructure. But none of that has been touched upon in a video about safety. I wonder why that is. Probably because that goes against the material interests of car companies.
it's not necessarily the case for safer cars, but for fewer cars in general. good urbanism prevents crashes by eliminating car dependency in the first place.
This not only saves lives, but also increases profit for the manufacturers. I work in auto body and we joke how they are making cars more fragile to sell more parts. It blows my mind that almost every model uses unique part designs with no apparent standardization.
Also I once worked on a car where a lady in the back seat left a perfect makeup faceprint on the back of the front seat. I hope she didn't get hurt but it was kinda hilarious to see
Bruh all this is amazing, happy y’all doing all this to ensure people survive what would be fatal crashes but damn!!!!!! If everything can easily crumble like that, wouldn’t it also just increase cost of maintenance and replacement as parts are basically brittle now. If driving requirements were more stringent and people actually drove like a lot of good drivers I see out here, we wouldn’t need all of this😭 how hard is it to just drive defensively? But then again there are some very questionable road designs out there esp when it’s raining or slick ice accumulates. Either way happy way I’ll continue defensively driving and hope I never have to experience how amazing my rav4 is at saving my life.
Two head on collisions here (one an idiot and the other stoned & drunk). The cars were wrecked but I'm still here so yeah, this stuff works
While I appreciate the increase in safety, the safest cars for the occupants are typically the largest. Unfortunately that means that pedestrians, and cyclists are at an increased risk of injury or death at a higher rate than being hit by small vehicles.
Nothing beats the odds of not having to drive (or be in a car) on daily basis and living/working in areas where vehicles are banned / drastically limited. Imagine how many more lives (not to mention cost) will be saved (also less air/sound pollution) if city planners design, build our cities to have as little cars as possible while having maximum mobility.
However this effort is definitely good for those who drive (or need to be in a car) for a living.
As always great job!🚙
Yeah and car dealers don't give full airbag coverage unless you get the full option...
Not much of the process is news to me, but it’s still fascinating to see all of the details. 🚙