首页 / 财富中文网 / 正文

汽车安全测试同尺寸假人已沿用47年,已经和现实脱节

财富中文网 2025-06-26 22:00:40

玛丽亚·韦斯顿·库恩(Maria Weston Kuhn)始终对那场令她在爱尔兰度假期间不得不接受紧急手术的车祸心存疑惑:为何她和母亲身受重伤,而坐在前排的父亲和哥哥却安然无恙?

“那是一起正面碰撞事故,他们距离碰撞点最近。”现年25岁的库恩说道。在2019年的那场事故中,她的安全带从臀部滑脱,致使肠道被挤压在脊柱上而破裂,她不得不休学一学期康复。“这早已暗示事故背后另有隐情。”

当库恩回到缅因州的家中时,她发现祖母从《消费者报告》上剪下的一篇文章放在她的床上。她了解到,女性在正面碰撞中受伤的概率比男性高出73%,然而美国国家公路交通安全管理局(National Highway Traffic Safety Administration)在车辆测试中采用的假人模型可追溯至20世纪70年代,且几乎完全以男性身体为原型。

幸存者成为活动家

今年秋季,库恩即将踏入纽约大学法学院深造,她采取行动并创立了非营利组织“Drive US Forward”。该组织致力于提升公众意识,并最终推动国会议员联署一项法案,要求美国国家公路交通安全管理局在测试中采用更为先进的女性假人。

该机构对车辆是否下架拥有最终决定权,而安全测试中假人类型的选用,可能影响车型获得备受瞩目的五星评级。

“解决方案似乎很简单:采用既能反映普通男性,也能反映普通女性的碰撞测试假人。”内布拉斯加州共和党参议员黛比·菲希尔(Deb Fischer)告诉美联社。她在过去两届国会中均提出了相关立法。

两党参议员均已联署菲希尔提出的《她驾驶法案》(She Drives Act),过去两届总统政府任内的交通部长均表态支持更新相关规定。

然而,受多重因素掣肘,推动新安全标准的进程进展缓慢,这一情况在美国尤为明显,该国是相关研究的主要开展地,且每年约有4万人死于车祸。

碰撞测试假人的演变

目前美国国家公路交通安全管理局五星评级测试中使用的碰撞测试假人名为Hybrid III,该模型于1978年研发,以身高5英尺9英寸(约合175厘米)、体重171磅(约合77.56公斤)的男性为原型(相当于20世纪70年代的平均体型,但比当前平均体重轻约29磅(约合13公斤))。所谓的女性假人本质上是男性模型的缩小版,再套上一件橡胶外套来模拟乳房。尽管大多数持证驾驶员是女性,但该假人通常仅用于副驾驶或后排座椅测试,很少用于驾驶座测试。

“他们并未设计出一款在女性易受伤部位均配备传感器的碰撞测试假人。”密歇根州法明顿希尔斯Humanetics集团总裁兼首席执行官克里斯托弗·奥康纳(Christopher O’Connor)说道,该集团已耗费十多年时间来研发和完善此类假人。

Humanetics集团生产的配备所有可用传感器的女性假人成本约为100万美元,是目前使用的Hybrid假人成本的两倍。

不过,奥康纳指出,这款价格更高的假人能更精准地体现两性解剖结构差异——涵盖颈部、锁骨、骨盆以及腿部形状差异。美国国家公路交通安全管理局的一项研究显示,这些差异致使女性在车祸中受伤的概率比男性高出约80%。

奥康纳表示,此类物理假人始终是车辆安全测试及验证虚拟测试准确性的必要工具。

2019年库恩在爱尔兰遭遇车祸后不久,欧洲便将Humanetics工程师研发的更先进男性假人THOR 50M(以第50百分位男性为基准)纳入测试流程,包括中国和日本在内的其他几个国家也已采用该模型。

然而,该模型及其用于对照的女性版本THOR 5F(以第5百分位女性为基准)却遭到部分美国汽车制造商的质疑。这些制造商认为,更为复杂的设备或许会夸大受伤风险,进而削弱安全带和安全气囊等安全功能的价值。

“更多传感器是否意味着更安全”引发争议

19岁的布里奇特·沃尔切斯基(Bridget Walchesky)2022年在威斯康星州希博伊根市家附近遭遇车祸受伤,随后被空运至医院,一个月内接受了八次手术,而事故中驾车的朋友不幸身亡。尽管沃尔切斯基承认安全带很可能救了自己一命,但她表示,部分伤势——包括锁骨骨折——是由于安全带勒得过紧,她认为这正是针对女性的安全测试亟待完善之处。

“安全带实际上并非依据女性身体特征设计,”沃尔切斯基说,“由于撞击力的作用方式,我的部分伤势或许因此加重了。”

行业贸易组织汽车创新联盟(Alliance for Automotive Innovation)在给美联社的声明中表示,确保安全(该联盟称安全是其首要任务)的更好方式是升级现有的Hybrid假人,而非强制要求使用新假人。

“相较于要求美国国家公路交通安全管理局采用尚未得到验证的碰撞测试假人技术,这种方式能在更短时间内实现安全改进。”该联盟称。

Humanetics公司的THOR假人在车辆安全机构的早期测试中获得高分。美国国家公路交通安全管理局通过将测试结果与实际车祸中的尸体数据进行对比,发现THOR假人在预测几乎所有类型的损伤(包括头部、颈部、肩部、腹部和腿部伤情)方面均优于现有Hybrid假人。

然而,由汽车保险公司资助的研究机构美国公路安全保险协会(IIHS)开展的独立评估则对该假人预测正面碰撞胸部损伤的能力持更为批判的态度。该协会测试发现,尽管传感器数量大幅增加,男性THOR假人的预测准确性仍低于目前的Hybrid假人(后者也存在局限性)。

“数量多并不等同于质量优,”美国公路安全保险协会车辆研究高级副总裁杰西卡·杰尔马基安(Jessica Jermakian)表示,“你还必须确保数据能精准呈现真人在该碰撞场景下的实际情况。”

规则变更的缓慢进程

美国国家公路交通安全管理局在预算计划中承诺开发女性版THOR 5F假人,最终目标是将其纳入测试范畴。但考虑到其他国家采用的THOR男性版本在美国仍待最终批准,这一进程或许需要耗费较长时间。

2023年,为国会开展研究的政府问责局(GAO)发布的一份报告指出,美国国家公路交通安全管理局在推进各类碰撞测试假人升级(包括THOR模型)过程中存在诸多“未能达成的里程碑”。

库恩承认,试图推动这些规定改变的进程缓慢,这令她深感沮丧。她表示,如果汽车制造商担心被迫进行大规模设计变更,以更多地考虑女性安全问题,那么她能理解他们的顾虑所在。

“幸运的是,他们拥有技术精湛的工程师,定能找到应对之策。”她说。(*)

译者:中慧言-王芳

玛丽亚·韦斯顿·库恩(Maria Weston Kuhn)始终对那场令她在爱尔兰度假期间不得不接受紧急手术的车祸心存疑惑:为何她和母亲身受重伤,而坐在前排的父亲和哥哥却安然无恙?

“那是一起正面碰撞事故,他们距离碰撞点最近。”现年25岁的库恩说道。在2019年的那场事故中,她的安全带从臀部滑脱,致使肠道被挤压在脊柱上而破裂,她不得不休学一学期康复。“这早已暗示事故背后另有隐情。”

当库恩回到缅因州的家中时,她发现祖母从《消费者报告》上剪下的一篇文章放在她的床上。她了解到,女性在正面碰撞中受伤的概率比男性高出73%,然而美国国家公路交通安全管理局(National Highway Traffic Safety Administration)在车辆测试中采用的假人模型可追溯至20世纪70年代,且几乎完全以男性身体为原型。

幸存者成为活动家

今年秋季,库恩即将踏入纽约大学法学院深造,她采取行动并创立了非营利组织“Drive US Forward”。该组织致力于提升公众意识,并最终推动国会议员联署一项法案,要求美国国家公路交通安全管理局在测试中采用更为先进的女性假人。

该机构对车辆是否下架拥有最终决定权,而安全测试中假人类型的选用,可能影响车型获得备受瞩目的五星评级。

“解决方案似乎很简单:采用既能反映普通男性,也能反映普通女性的碰撞测试假人。”内布拉斯加州共和党参议员黛比·菲希尔(Deb Fischer)告诉美联社。她在过去两届国会中均提出了相关立法。

两党参议员均已联署菲希尔提出的《她驾驶法案》(She Drives Act),过去两届总统政府任内的交通部长均表态支持更新相关规定。

然而,受多重因素掣肘,推动新安全标准的进程进展缓慢,这一情况在美国尤为明显,该国是相关研究的主要开展地,且每年约有4万人死于车祸。

碰撞测试假人的演变

目前美国国家公路交通安全管理局五星评级测试中使用的碰撞测试假人名为Hybrid III,该模型于1978年研发,以身高5英尺9英寸(约合175厘米)、体重171磅(约合77.56公斤)的男性为原型(相当于20世纪70年代的平均体型,但比当前平均体重轻约29磅(约合13公斤))。所谓的女性假人本质上是男性模型的缩小版,再套上一件橡胶外套来模拟乳房。尽管大多数持证驾驶员是女性,但该假人通常仅用于副驾驶或后排座椅测试,很少用于驾驶座测试。

“他们并未设计出一款在女性易受伤部位均配备传感器的碰撞测试假人。”密歇根州法明顿希尔斯Humanetics集团总裁兼首席执行官克里斯托弗·奥康纳(Christopher O’Connor)说道,该集团已耗费十多年时间来研发和完善此类假人。

Humanetics集团生产的配备所有可用传感器的女性假人成本约为100万美元,是目前使用的Hybrid假人成本的两倍。

不过,奥康纳指出,这款价格更高的假人能更精准地体现两性解剖结构差异——涵盖颈部、锁骨、骨盆以及腿部形状差异。美国国家公路交通安全管理局的一项研究显示,这些差异致使女性在车祸中受伤的概率比男性高出约80%。

奥康纳表示,此类物理假人始终是车辆安全测试及验证虚拟测试准确性的必要工具。

2019年库恩在爱尔兰遭遇车祸后不久,欧洲便将Humanetics工程师研发的更先进男性假人THOR 50M(以第50百分位男性为基准)纳入测试流程,包括中国和日本在内的其他几个国家也已采用该模型。

然而,该模型及其用于对照的女性版本THOR 5F(以第5百分位女性为基准)却遭到部分美国汽车制造商的质疑。这些制造商认为,更为复杂的设备或许会夸大受伤风险,进而削弱安全带和安全气囊等安全功能的价值。

“更多传感器是否意味着更安全”引发争议

19岁的布里奇特·沃尔切斯基(Bridget Walchesky)2022年在威斯康星州希博伊根市家附近遭遇车祸受伤,随后被空运至医院,一个月内接受了八次手术,而事故中驾车的朋友不幸身亡。尽管沃尔切斯基承认安全带很可能救了自己一命,但她表示,部分伤势——包括锁骨骨折——是由于安全带勒得过紧,她认为这正是针对女性的安全测试亟待完善之处。

“安全带实际上并非依据女性身体特征设计,”沃尔切斯基说,“由于撞击力的作用方式,我的部分伤势或许因此加重了。”

行业贸易组织汽车创新联盟(Alliance for Automotive Innovation)在给美联社的声明中表示,确保安全(该联盟称安全是其首要任务)的更好方式是升级现有的Hybrid假人,而非强制要求使用新假人。

“相较于要求美国国家公路交通安全管理局采用尚未得到验证的碰撞测试假人技术,这种方式能在更短时间内实现安全改进。”该联盟称。

Humanetics公司的THOR假人在车辆安全机构的早期测试中获得高分。美国国家公路交通安全管理局通过将测试结果与实际车祸中的尸体数据进行对比,发现THOR假人在预测几乎所有类型的损伤(包括头部、颈部、肩部、腹部和腿部伤情)方面均优于现有Hybrid假人。

然而,由汽车保险公司资助的研究机构美国公路安全保险协会(IIHS)开展的独立评估则对该假人预测正面碰撞胸部损伤的能力持更为批判的态度。该协会测试发现,尽管传感器数量大幅增加,男性THOR假人的预测准确性仍低于目前的Hybrid假人(后者也存在局限性)。

“数量多并不等同于质量优,”美国公路安全保险协会车辆研究高级副总裁杰西卡·杰尔马基安(Jessica Jermakian)表示,“你还必须确保数据能精准呈现真人在该碰撞场景下的实际情况。”

规则变更的缓慢进程

美国国家公路交通安全管理局在预算计划中承诺开发女性版THOR 5F假人,最终目标是将其纳入测试范畴。但考虑到其他国家采用的THOR男性版本在美国仍待最终批准,这一进程或许需要耗费较长时间。

2023年,为国会开展研究的政府问责局(GAO)发布的一份报告指出,美国国家公路交通安全管理局在推进各类碰撞测试假人升级(包括THOR模型)过程中存在诸多“未能达成的里程碑”。

库恩承认,试图推动这些规定改变的进程缓慢,这令她深感沮丧。她表示,如果汽车制造商担心被迫进行大规模设计变更,以更多地考虑女性安全问题,那么她能理解他们的顾虑所在。

“幸运的是,他们拥有技术精湛的工程师,定能找到应对之策。”她说。(*)

译者:中慧言-王芳

Maria Weston Kuhn had one lingering question about the car crash that forced her to have emergency surgery during a vacation in Ireland: Why did she and her mother sustain serious injuries while her father and brother, who sat in the front, emerge unscathed?

“It was a head-on crash and they were closest to the point of contact,” said Kuhn, now 25, who missed a semester of college to recover from the 2019 collision that caused her seat belt to slide off her hips and rupture her intestines by pinning them against her spine. “That was an early clue that something else was going on.”

When Kuhn returned home to Maine, she found an article her grandma had clipped from Consumer Reports and left on her bed. Women are 73% more likely to be injured in a frontal crash, she learned, yet the dummy used in vehicle tests by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration dates back to the 1970s and is still modeled almost entirely off the body of a man.

A survivor becomes an activist

Kuhn, who is starting law school at New York University this fall, took action and founded the nonprofit Drive US Forward. Its aim was to raise public awareness and eventually encourage members of Congress to sign onto a bill that would require NHTSA to incorporate a more advanced female dummy into its testing.

The agency has the final word on whether cars get pulled from the market, and the kind of dummy used in its safety tests could impact which ones receive coveted five-star ratings.

“It seems like we have an easy solution here where we can have crash test dummies that reflect an average woman as well as a man,” Sen. Deb Fischer, a Nebraska Republican who has introduced the legislation the past two sessions, told The Associated Press.

Senators from both parties have signed onto Fischer’s “She Drives Act,” and the transportation secretaries from the past two presidential administrations have expressed support for updating the rules.

But for various reasons, the push for new safety requirements has been moving at a sluggish pace. That’s particularly true in the U.S., where much of the research is happening and where around 40,000 people are killed each year in car crashes.

Evolution of a crash test dummy

The crash test dummy currently used in NHTSA five-star testing is called the Hybrid III, which was developed in 1978 and modeled after a 5-foot-9, 171-pound man (the average size in the 1970s but about 29 pounds lighter than today’s average). What’s known as the female dummy is essentially a much smaller version of the male model with a rubber jacket to represent breasts. It’s routinely tested in the passenger seat or the back seat but seldom in the driver’s seat, even though the majority of licensed drivers are women.

“What they didn’t do is design a crash test dummy that has all the sensors in the areas where a woman would be injured differently than a man,” said Christopher O’Connor, president and CEO of the Farmington Hills, Michigan-based Humanetics Group, which has spent more than a decade developing and refining one.

A female dummy from Humanetics equipped with all of the available sensors costs around $1 million, about twice the cost of the Hybrid used now.

But, O’Connor says, the more expensive dummy far more accurately reflects the anatomical differences between the sexes — including in the shape of the neck, collarbone, pelvis, and legs, which one NHTSA study found account for about 80% more injuries by women in a car crash compared to men.

Such physical dummies will always be needed for vehicle safety tests, and to verify the accuracy of virtual tests, O’Connor said.

Europe incorporated the more advanced male dummy developed by Humanetics’ engineers, the THOR 50M (based on a 50th percentile man), into its testing procedures soon after Kuhn’s 2019 crash in Ireland. Several other countries, including China and Japan, have adopted it as well.

But that model and the female version the company uses for comparison, the THOR 5F (based on a 5th percentile woman), have been met with skepticism from some American automakers who argue the more sophisticated devices may exaggerate injury risks and undercut the value of some safety features such as seat belts and airbags.

A debate over whether more sensors mean more safety

Bridget Walchesky, 19, had to be flown to a hospital, where she required eight surgeries over a month, after a 2022 crash near her home in Sheboygan, Wisconsin, that killed her friend, who was driving. While acknowledging the seat belt likely saved her life, Walchesky said some of the injuries — including her broken collarbone — were the result of it pinning her too tightly, which she views as something better safety testing focused on women could improve.

“Seat belts aren’t really built for bodies on females,” Walchesky said. “Some of my injuries, the way the force hit me, they were probably worsened.”

The Alliance for Automotive Innovation, an industry trade group, said in a statement to the AP that the better way to ensure safety — which it called its top priority — is through upgrades to the existing Hybrid dummy rather than mandating a new one.

“This can happen on a faster timeline and lead to quicker safety improvements than requiring NHTSA to adopt unproven crash test dummy technology,” the alliance said.

Humanetics’ THOR dummies received high marks in the vehicle safety agency’s early tests. Using cadavers from actual crashes to compare the results, NHTSA found they outperformed the existing Hybrid in predicting almost all injuries — including to the head, neck, shoulders, abdomen and legs.

A separate review by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a research arm funded by auto insurers, was far more critical of the dummy’s ability to predict chest injuries in a frontal crash. Despite the vast expansion in the number of sensors, the insurance institute’s testing found, the male THOR dummy was less accurate than the current Hybrid dummies, which also had limitations.

“More isn’t necessarily better,” said Jessica Jermakian, senior vice president for vehicle research at IIHS. “You also have to be confident that the data is telling you the right things about how a real person would fare in that crash.”

The slow pace of changing the rules

NHTSA’s budget plan commits to developing the female THOR 5F version with the ultimate goal of incorporating it into the testing. But there could be a long wait considering the THOR’s male version adopted by other countries is still awaiting final approval in the U.S.

A 2023 report by the Government Accountability Office, which conducts research for Congress, cited numerous “missed milestones” in NHTSA’s development of various crash dummy enhancements — including in the THOR models.

Kuhn acknowledges being frustrated by the slow process of trying to change the regulations. She says she understands why there’s reluctance from auto companies if they fear being forced to make widespread design changes with more consideration for women’s safety.

“Fortunately, they have very skilled engineers and they’ll figure it out,” she said.

*