I'm sorry, the latest evaluation of the China Insurance Research Institute should look at it this way!
Recently, the China Insurance Research Institute Automotive Technology Research and Testing Center (Beijing) Co., Ltd. announced the crash test results of nine models. The test was conducted in accordance with the 2020 version of the China Insurance Vehicle Safety Index (C-IASI).
It can be seen that the results released this time involve a total of 9 models, including Beijing Benz C-class, Dongfeng Honda CR-V, BYD Seal, Hezhong Nezha S, Great Wall Shanhai Cannon, Changan Auchan Z6, Beijing Hyundai Musa, Changan Mazda CX-50, and Dongfeng Lantu Chasing Light, including 4 SUVs, 4 sedans and 1 pickup.
Among them, BYD Seal, Hezhong Nezha S and Dongfeng Lantu Chasing Light are three new energy vehicles.
According to the results of this test, the evaluation results showed that 1 model received a good (A), 5 models received an average (M), and 3 models received a poor (P) rating in the sub-indices of crashworthiness and maintenance economy. There were 2 models with excellent structural crashworthiness scores, and both models were evaluated with zero defects (Beijing Benz C-Class and Changan Mazda CX-50), 1 model received good reviews in maintainability scores (Changan Mazda CX-50), 1 model received excellent reviews in maintenance economy scores (Great Wall Shanhai Cannon), and 2 models received excellent reviews in collision compatibility (Dongfeng Honda CR-V, Dongfeng VOYAH Chasing Light). In addition, one model had its airbag detonated in a frontal low-speed crash test.
In the in-vehicle occupant safety sub-index, the evaluation results of 9 models are all excellent (G), and in the driver's side frontal 25% offset collision condition, there are 8 models with excellent evaluation, of which 6 models are evaluated with 0 defects (Beijing Benz C-Class, BYD Seal, Hezhong Nezha S, Beijing Hyundai Musa, Changan Mazda CX-50, Dongfeng Lantu Chasing Light); Hezhong Nezha S, Great Wall Shanhai Cannon, Changan Auchan Z6, Changan Mazda CX-50, Dongfeng Lantu Chasing Light), the proportion of models with excellent ratings under top pressure conditions is 100%, and the proportion of models with excellent ratings under whiplash conditions is 100%. In addition, one model (Changan Mazda CX-50) voluntarily applied for a 25% frontal offset collision on the occupant side in this evaluation, and received an excellent evaluation with a defective value of 0.
In the Pedestrian Safety Sub-index, the evaluation results of all 9 models are excellent (G).
In the vehicle assistance safety sub-index, all 9 models received excellent (G) evaluations, of which 6 models were equipped with AEB function as standard, with a staffing rate of 66.7%, and 7 models were equipped with emergency rescue service (E-call) function, with a staffing rate of 77.8%.
Of course, our focus today is on these three new energy vehicles.
BYD Seal, Nezha S and Lantu Chasing Light.
First of all, let's take a look at the first test crashworthiness and maintenance economy sub-index, which refers to the ability of the vehicle itself to resist collision deformation at low speed (15km/h) and the maintenance cost after the vehicle structure is deformed.
To sum it up in a simple sentence, how expensive can this car be to repair?
Therefore, this review is very relevant, and from the perspective of historical evaluation, few car companies can get a G (excellent) rating.
And in this test, it will also be more subdivided.
As part of the test, the front end of the vehicle is tested for structural crash tests at a speed of 15 km/h, and the rear end of the vehicle is also tested for structural crash tests at a speed of 15 km/h. In addition, the results of the full-width dynamic test of the front bumper of the vehicle, the full-width dynamic test of the rear bumper of the vehicle, and the static test results of the front/rear impact cross-member of the vehicle are also carried out. Finally, the vehicle was rated from multiple dimensions such as structural crashworthiness, vehicle maintainability, vehicle maintenance economy and crash compatibility.
Judging from the test results, the BYD Seal and Nezha S are rated M, while the Lantu Chasing Light is rated P.
Although it has received a (P) rating in crashworthiness and maintenance economy scores, the structural safety of the vehicle itself has not been greatly affected from the details, but the cost of follow-up maintenance is relatively high. This is mainly due to the fact that the model adopts a visually striking through-type headlight design at the front end, and once the front face collides, the entire through-type headlights need to be replaced, which is an unavoidable situation.
After that, the test item came to the safety of the ride in the car.
This test, as its name suggests, focuses on the safety and survival probability of the occupants of the vehicle in the event of a collision. The test is based on the China Insurance Auto Safety Index and targets specific crash situations where the risk of insurance payouts is prominent, including frontal 25% offset collisions, side impacts, side rolls (top pressure) and rear-end collisions (whiplash) that can easily lead to occupant space intrusion. The test comprehensively tests and evaluates the occupant safety protection performance of the vehicle from multiple dimensions such as dummy injury, vehicle structure, restraint system and dummy movement. As a result, most automakers will do a lot of design optimization for these aspects.
The first test vehicle will experience a 25% frontal offset crash.
According to the international mainstream vehicle frontal collision test conditions, according to the area covered by the vehicle and collision avoidance, it is divided into four types: frontal 100%, 50%, 40%, and 25% offset collision. Among them, a frontal 25% offset collision is when the vehicle strikes a fixed rigid barrier head-on at a speed of 64.4 km/h ± 1 km/h with an overlap rate of 25% ±1% (driver's side). The test content includes personnel injury, movement state, and deformation of the vehicle body structure in this state of motion.
In this test, in terms of the driver's side frontal 25% offset crash test, these models have received excellent G ratings, indicating that different car companies and products have guaranteed safety this time.
After a frontal 25% offset impact, the next test item is the side impact of the vehicle.
As we all know, intersections are the most common areas for traffic accidents, and many of these accidents are frontal and side-to-side collisions. The side of the car is the weakest part of the vehicle, and there are very few parts that can disperse the impact force, so in the event of a collision, it will pose a great threat to the life safety of passengers.
In the areas of side impact, seat/headrest testing, and roof strength, all three models demonstrated excellent performance. Specifically, they performed particularly well in side impacts, with the distance between the B-pillar and the driver's centerline of more than 20 centimeters in all three models.
The details are as follows:
Seals: The distance between the B-pillar and the driver's centerline is 22 cm.
2. Nezha S: The distance between the B-pillar and the driver's centerline is 20 cm.
3. VOYAH chasing light: The distance between the B-pillar and the driver's centerline is 20.5 cm.
These data show that even after a vehicle collision, these three models can still provide passengers with plenty of living space, so as to better protect the safety of passengers.
After that, it came to the side roll (top pressure) test.
The rollover top pressure test is mainly for the test of the compressive strength of the roof, which is one of the important factors to evaluate the perceived safety of the vehicle, and is closely related to the driving safety of the vehicle. The experiment mainly simulates whether the roof of the vehicle can effectively withstand the huge pressure formed in an instant after a rollover accident and provide adequate protection for the occupants of the vehicle. In the event of a rolling accident, the compressive capacity of the roof is directly related to the living space of the occupants in the vehicle.
The test results mainly focus on the two key data of peak load and load-to-mass ratio. Peak load is the maximum pressure that the roof can withstand when it reaches a specified deformation. In this test, the peak load of VOYAH Chasing Light was the highest at 107,054N, followed by the BYD Seal with 97,729N, and the Nezha S with 78,299N.
Secondly, according to the relevant regulations, taking into account the uncertainty of the acceleration value, the test results are only taken as the ratio of the maximum pressure bearing value of the roof to the weight of the vehicle itself. The higher the ratio, the safer the vehicle is in the event of a rollover accident. According to the test standard, a roof load-to-mass ratio of 4 or more is considered excellent. Specifically, the curb weight of the seal is 1929kg, and the load-to-mass ratio is 5.17, the curb weight of the VOYAH chasing light is 2283kg, and the load-to-mass ratio is 4.78, and the curb weight of the Nezha S is 1978kg, and the load-to-mass ratio is 4.04.
Coming to the rear-end (whiplash) test, which refers to the possibility that the driver and occupants of the vehicle being hit in a rear-end collision accident may be injured by whiplash, which is due to the combined effect of collision acceleration and the inertial force of the head, resulting in a whiplash-like action in the neck. Although the injury is not fatal, the injured person may experience varying degrees of discomfort in the neck, and the healing process can be very complex, lengthy, and may even leave an incurable permanent injury.
According to the relevant rules, if the head clearance of the headrest is less than or equal to 7 cm and the height of the headrest is less than or equal to 6 cm in the measurement results of the static geometry of the headrest, it can get an excellent evaluation of G. Judging from the final test standards, these three models have received excellent G-level evaluations, which also reflects that domestic car companies attach enough importance to this aspect.
After looking at the safety of people in the car, let's take a look at the pedestrian safety index outside the car.
This test is to evaluate the degree of injury caused by the car to pedestrians when it collides with pedestrians, and is one of the passive safety items of automobiles. The test is mainly divided into head impact test and leg impact test. In the head impact test, a child's or adult's head is used to impact the front structure of the vehicle at a speed of 11.1 m/s ± 0.2 m/s to measure the head injury index. In the new version of C-IASI, a method for dealing with correction factors not between 0.75 and 1.25 has been added, and an active hood test has been added. In the leg impact test, according to the ground clearance of the bumper, the upper leg type or flexible leg type is selected to impact the front bumper of the vehicle at a speed of 11.1m/s ±0.2m/s, and the leg injury value is measured.
For the head impact test area, if the manufacturer provides prediction data, the grid point method is used for evaluation, and if the manufacturer does not provide prediction data, the equalization area method is used. For the leg impact test area, the TRL upper leg type or Flex-PLI flexible leg type was selected according to the ground clearance of the lower base line of the bumper, and the grid point method was used for evaluation. In the test area of the upper leg impact WAD775, the TRL upper leg impact envelope 775mm was evaluated by the grid point method.
According to the regulations, the full score of the head type test area is 24 points, the full score of the leg type test area is 6 points, the full score of the upper leg type impact WAD775 test area is 6 points, and the maximum score in the pedestrian protection test is 36 points. An overall score rate of ≥65% will receive an excellent (G) rating.
Taken together, all three models received an excellent (G) rating. Among them, BYD scored 14.629 points in the head shape test, 9.000 points in the leg shape test, and 3.000 points in the upper leg type test, and the final total score of pedestrian safety was 26.692 points. The Nezha S head test scored 14.630 points, the leg shape test scored 9.000 points, and the upper leg type test scored 3.000 points, and the final total pedestrian safety score was 26.630 points. In the end, the VOYAH chased the bald head type test with a score of 17.826 points, the highest among the three cars, and the leg type test scored 9.000 points, and the upper leg type test scored 2.200 points, which was lower than the previous two, and the final total pedestrian safety score was 29.026 points.
Finally, we'll look at the Vehicle Assistance Safety Index. Although this project has only emerged in the last decade, it is not directly related to the autonomous driving technology we are familiar with. The index evaluates the safety performance of vehicle assistance systems by evaluating various indicators such as automatic emergency braking systems for vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists, lane assist systems, and vehicle headlights, combined with additional items.
First of all, regarding the automatic emergency braking system, its tests include FCW functional test and AEB functional test. The FCW functional test covers the test conditions of 72 km/h ± 1.6 km/h against stationary target vehicle, low-speed target vehicle and deceleration target vehicle. The AEB functional test includes 20 km/h± 1 km/h and 40 km/h ±1 km/h test conditions for stationary target vehicles. A comprehensive evaluation was carried out by collecting data such as the speed of the target vehicle, the speed of the main vehicle, the lateral distance between the two vehicles, the longitudinal distance between the two vehicles, the yaw angle velocity, and the FCW alarm time. The maximum score of this sub-item is 22 points, which is relatively small compared to the three items of crashworthiness and maintenance economy, occupant safety, and pedestrian safety outside the vehicle.
Secondly, the Lane Assist System test is mainly evaluated for the LDW function (Lane Departure Warning System) and the LDP function (Lane Departure Suppression System). The evaluation index is mainly the degree of deviation of the overall system from the lane marking, and the full score of this sub-item is 14 points.
Finally, there is the vehicle headlamp/plus test. The project included an evaluation of low beams, high beams, and advanced headlamp functionality. Low beam evaluation indicators mainly include visibility and glare, while high beam evaluation indicators are limited to visibility. The evaluation of advanced headlamp features includes adaptive high beams, automatic high and low beam switching, and automatic headlamp leveling system. The maximum score for this section is 22 points.
In terms of bonus points, additional points are provided for vehicles equipped with the emergency service system (E-call) function, which are worth 2 points, of which 1 point is awarded for automatic triggering and 1 point for manual triggering.
In this test, VOYAH performed the best in light chasing, with a high score of 112.75 out of 114. Among them, the vehicle headlamp scored 18.75 points, and all other items achieved full scores. Secondly, the BYD Seal also performed well in auxiliary safety, scoring 104.13 points. The car scored 21 points for car-to-car emergency braking and 48 points for pedestrian and cyclist emergency braking. The headlamp score of 19.13 was the highest among the three cars. Finally, the Nezha S scored 101.04 points in auxiliary security. The car scored 20 points for car-to-vehicle emergency braking and 52 points for pedestrian and cyclist emergency braking. However, the headlights of the whole vehicle only scored 13.04 points.
Write at the end
Overall, although some models performed slightly in individual test categories, the overall automakers showed a fairly high level of vehicle safety. It is worth noting that the current competition in China's auto market is extremely fierce and has entered the era of "involution". Therefore, whether it is vehicle design, manufacturing process, or intelligent configuration, it should be based on safety. Of course, we need to realize that no matter how perfect the structure of the car is, it cannot be 100% safe. Therefore, it is up to us as drivers to act and be aware of what really makes our vehicles safe. Are you right?