4 ms·

Yeah! Also the study video is a head on collision with a wood-post steel guardrail, and that is not at all a common angle to hit those at. The F-150 or most an

Yeah! Also the study video is a head on collision with a wood-post steel guardrail, and that is not at all a common angle to hit those at. The F-150 or most any modern truck even a midsize with a couple passengers is over 5000. Who funded the University of Nebraska to specifically test EVs in an improbable perpendicular collision with a guardrail? Why’s it promoted as news?

bluGill 3y ago
Guardrails are typically installed such that a head on is almost impossible - they are designed for more of a glancing blow that redirects you back to the road. In that application I've seen them keep a fully loaded semi from crossing a medium into oncoming traffic. To get a head on at speed you would need to going across the road - maybe in the desert it is flat enough to get your car up to speed when going perpendicular to the road, but I'm not sure why you would try that. The other option is hit the start of the guard rail - while this can happen, the start of guardrails are generally angled so this is still a redirecting blow not head on. Where they cannot be the start is covered by rubber dumpers to slow you down before you hit it.
- beerandt 3y ago
  This is true, but they are also designed with a maximum deflection for a worst case head-on crash. Typical one-rail guard rails should not deflect more than 2-4ft, while the cable style you see in interstate medians are designed for something like 5-12 ft. For those comparing this (EVs) to trucks, the difference is center of gravity. Even if a rail is only designed for a given weight, much effort went into containing trucks and other high center of gravity vehicles. The rail catches the vehicle and holds it down, redirecting excess energy into the ground. (Its why cable-styled rails have a gap below the top cable. Others have similar features.) But what they are not designed for is excess weight with a low center of gravity, where the excess energy just blows through the rail and can't easily be redirected in a more safe direction.
helsinkiandrew 3y ago
> Who funded the University of Nebraska to specifically test EVs in an improbable perpendicular collision with a guardrail? The US Army - who use the same barriers at road blocks. It looks like the research was really about heavier vehicles. The focus on EVs does ignore the general trend to larger vehicles as you say. https://engineering.unl.edu/news/240131/mwrsf_evs_safety/ https://engineering.unl.edu/news/240131/mwrsf_evs_safety/
- harimau777 3y ago
  That might explain the angle as well. It seems to me that someone ramming a barricade would likely do so at a perpendicular angle.
bensecure 3y ago
Is it a head on collision? The first angle in the video makes it look like it is, but the second angle makes it clearer that its actually hitting from an angle. It seems to be close to a 45 degree angle, which is slightly closer to a real world scenario.

bluGill 3y ago

Guardrails are typically installed such that a head on is almost impossible - they are designed for more of a glancing blow that redirects you back to the road. In that application I've seen them keep a fully loaded semi from crossing a medium into oncoming traffic. To get a head on at speed you would need to going across the road - maybe in the desert it is flat enough to get your car up to speed when going perpendicular to the road, but I'm not sure why you would try that. The other option is hit the start of the guard rail - while this can happen, the start of guardrails are generally angled so this is still a redirecting blow not head on. Where they cannot be the start is covered by rubber dumpers to slow you down before you hit it.

beerandt 3y ago
This is true, but they are also designed with a maximum deflection for a worst case head-on crash. Typical one-rail guard rails should not deflect more than 2-4ft, while the cable style you see in interstate medians are designed for something like 5-12 ft. For those comparing this (EVs) to trucks, the difference is center of gravity. Even if a rail is only designed for a given weight, much effort went into containing trucks and other high center of gravity vehicles. The rail catches the vehicle and holds it down, redirecting excess energy into the ground. (Its why cable-styled rails have a gap below the top cable. Others have similar features.) But what they are not designed for is excess weight with a low center of gravity, where the excess energy just blows through the rail and can't easily be redirected in a more safe direction.

helsinkiandrew 3y ago

> Who funded the University of Nebraska to specifically test EVs in an improbable perpendicular collision with a guardrail? The US Army - who use the same barriers at road blocks. It looks like the research was really about heavier vehicles. The focus on EVs does ignore the general trend to larger vehicles as you say. https://engineering.unl.edu/news/240131/mwrsf_evs_safety/ https://engineering.unl.edu/news/240131/mwrsf_evs_safety/

harimau777 3y ago
That might explain the angle as well. It seems to me that someone ramming a barricade would likely do so at a perpendicular angle.

bensecure 3y ago

Is it a head on collision? The first angle in the video makes it look like it is, but the second angle makes it clearer that its actually hitting from an angle. It seems to be close to a 45 degree angle, which is slightly closer to a real world scenario.