1. April 9, 2004 – 9:00 am NB Interstate 5 Kings County, California Crash Reconstruction Occupant Dynamics Injury Biomechanics Mauro v. Ford Motor Company

2. Accident Location Interstate 5 – Kings County, California N

3. N Accident Location 3 miles north of the Kings/Kern County line Interstate 5

4. Mauro v. Ford Motor Company Case Questions  What were Mr. Mauro’s occupant dynamics during the rollover crash of April 9, 2004?  Would Mr. Mauro have sustained severe/fatal head/neck injuries if he had been restrained in the front-right seat position and not ejected?

5. 1.Crash Reconstruction - Performed by Stan Andrews 2.Occupant Dynamics - Occupant Motion - Occupant Loading 3.Injury Biomechanics - Injury Patterns - Injury Mechanisms Science-Based Approach

6. 1993 Ford E350 15 passenger van Mauro Vehicle Rollover damage exhibited over most body panels. Extensive roof crush over front-right passenger seat.

7. N Crash Reconstruction Rollover Crash Analysis performed by Stan Andrews Vehicle Speed:  Location of Tire Tread: 69 ± 7 mph  Start of Tire Mark: 66 ± 7 mph  Initiation of Rollover: 48 ± 3 mph

8. Crash Reconstruction Rollover Phase (Stan Andrews) N 3 Rollover Angular Speed:  Roll 1: 244 ± 15 deg/sec  Roll 2: 321 ± 20 deg/sec  Roll 3: 372 ± 23 deg/sec  Roll 4: 172 ± 11 deg/sec Rollover:  Distance: 192 ft  Number of Roll Revolutions: 4  Duration: 5.1 to 5.8 seconds

9. The occupant move[s] upward Occupant Dynamics Initial Phase of Rollover (Parenteau et al., 2001) r

10. Occupant Dynamics Centripetal Force Slingshot Amusement Park Ride Children's Play Rapid Rotation Forces Objects Outward

11. Occupant Dynamics Severe Roof Crush at First Inverted Ground Impact

12. N Occupant Dynamics Timing of portal availability and Mauro ejection

13. Injury Diagram Robert A. Mauro, 5’10”, 185 lbs, BMI: 26.5 large abrasion on L pectoral area abrasion bilateral anterior closed rib fxs multiple abrasions of the lower chest + upper abdomen Autopsy report: “significant negative findings: No evidence of the use of a vehicle safety restraint system(s)” L hemothorax

14. Far-Side Rollover “Diving” Injury Mechanism

15. Dr. Piziali: “[T]he injury patterns observed in both diving and rollover accidents are similar.” “[A] kinematics analysis of an offside occupant in a rollover shows that the body orientation relative to the ground and the velocity vector at impact can be similar to those for a diving impact.” (Piziali et al., 1998) Diving Injury Rollover Injury Far-Side Rollover

16. Injury Biomechanics Head Impact Speed Roll Velocity (1 st roll):  243 ± 15 deg/sec Radial Offset (r):  3 to 4 feet Impact Speed:  12.0 to 18.1 ft/sec Neck Force:  1,277 to 1,915 pounds r ≈ 4’

17. Injury Biomechanics Comparison with Experimental Research  Neck fracture occurred in majority of tests with head impact speeds of 10.5 to 11.5 ft/sec. Nightingale et al., 1996  Neck fracture occurred in majority of tests with head impact speeds of 15.1 to 18.4 ft/sec. Nusholtz et al., 1981  Mr. Mauro Head to Roof/Ground Impact Speed: 12 to 18 ft/sec Severe Injury/Fatality Likely for Mr. Mauro

18. Injury Biomechanics Injury/Fatality Risk for Head/Neck Severe Injury/Fatality Likely for Mr. Mauro Neck Force (Pounds) Tolerance: 504 ± 124 lbs (McElhaney et al., 1995; Nightingale et al., 1997) 1,277 to 1,915 lbs Neck Force: 1,277 to 1,915 pounds Factor of Risk (Φ) = 2.2 to 3.8

19. 1.Crash Reconstruction - Performed by Stan Andrews 2.Occupant Dynamics - Occupant Motion - Occupant Loading 3.Injury Biomechanics - Injury Patterns - Injury Mechanisms Science-Based Approach

20. Opinions Rollover: 4 RevolutionsOccupant Head Impact and Neck Loading Severe Injury/Fatality Likely Regardless of Seatbelt Use Nightingale et al., 1996

21. Ejection Timing - Throw Distance Piziali assumes longest throw possible Ejection near 1 revolution and 1 3/8 revolution agree with Mauro’s rest position

22. Occupant Dynamics Vertical inverted impact Piziali asserts driver’s side of roof contact ground first Downward roof crush indicates vertical impact. r

23. Blood Evidence Front-Right Passenger Seat Head Restraint Blood deposited as roof crushed head restraint.

24. “Head and spine injuries comprise a large proportion of the injuries sustained by rollover occupants (Moore et al., 2005; Parenteau et al., 2001; Parenteau et al., 2000)” “In rollovers where the occupant is not ejected, the source of these injuries is the vehicle roof in most rollovers (James et al., 1997; Parenteauet al., 2001)” Injury Biomechanics Head and neck injuries are common in rollover crashes

25. Injury Biomechanics Most common known source of head injury is the roof

26. Occupant Dynamics Seat Belts may Spool-Out in Rollover Crashes “Research of occupant movements during rollover events has shown that a restrained occupant will load and unload the seat belt several times during the rollover sequence.” “If the occupant loads the seat belt system during the same period of time that the inertial sensor is in a neutral position, the potential for webbing spool- out exists.” Studies have validated rollover cases in which the restrained occupant has been ejected”