noisedestroyers/dts-2026Presentation

Fork 0

Files

noisedestroyers 1cb4ea07eb first commit

2026-02-15 10:03:46 -05:00

45 KiB

Raw Blame History

The Data That Saves Lives

How Crash Testing Went from Guesswork to Science

DTS Internal Presentation - Ben (Application Engineer)

Duration: 45 minutes

CENTRAL THESIS

"A crashed car is gone forever. The data is what remains."

Every safety innovation in automotive history - from seatbelts to airbags to autonomous braking - exists because someone captured the right data at the right moment. Before data, we had opinions. After data, we had proof. And proof saves lives.

This presentation follows the story of data:

HISTORY - The desperate quest for data when we had none
INFLUENCES - Who uses data today and how it shapes the industry
TEST METHODS - How we capture the data that saves lives

The throughline: DTS is part of an unbroken chain from John Stapp's rocket sled to tomorrow's autonomous vehicles. We are the keepers of the data.

PRESENTATION STRUCTURE

Section	Time	Slides	Theme
Opening	3 min	1-2	The power of data
SECTION 1: HISTORY	15 min	3-10	The quest for data
SECTION 2: INFLUENCES	12 min	11-16	Who uses data today
SECTION 3: TEST METHODS	12 min	17-22	How we capture data
Closing	3 min	23-24	Our role in the chain
Q&A	5+ min	25	Discussion

OPENING

SLIDE 1: Title Slide

Title: "The Data That Saves Lives" Subtitle: The Story of Crash Testing - From Guesswork to Science Presenter: Ben, Application Engineer Company: Diversified Technical Systems

Visual: Split image - vintage crash test (black & white) vs. modern instrumented test

SLIDE 2: The Power of One Number

Content:

The number that changed everything:

77%

That's the reduction in traffic fatality rate since 1970.

1970: 4.74 deaths per 100 million miles
Today: 1.10 deaths per 100 million miles
We drive 3x more miles, yet the death RATE dropped 77%

If we still had 1970 fatality rates today: → 153,000 deaths per year instead of 36,000 → 117,000 lives saved annually

Speaker Notes:

"Let me start with a single number: 77%. That's how much safer driving has become since 1970. Back then, for every 100 million miles driven, nearly 5 people died. Today, it's just over 1. And we drive three times as many miles now. If we still had 1970 fatality rates with today's driving, we'd lose 153,000 people every year - instead of 36,000. That's 117,000 lives saved annually. This didn't happen by accident. It happened because of data. And that's what this presentation is about."

SECTION 1: HISTORY

"The Quest for Data"

When we had opinions instead of proof

SLIDE 3: The Dark Age - Before Data

Visual:

!assets/1957_buick_dashboard.jpg 1957 Buick dashboard - chrome, steel, and zero data on what it did to humans

Content:

Before 1950, we knew almost nothing about crashes.

What we "knew" (wrongly):

"Humans can't survive more than 18g" ❌
"Crashes are unsurvivable - why bother designing for them?" ❌
"The problem is bad drivers, not bad cars" ❌
"Seatbelts might trap you in a burning car" ❌

Why we were wrong: → We had no data. → We had opinions, assumptions, and fear.

The result:

Rigid steering columns that impaled drivers
Solid steel dashboards that crushed skulls
No restraints to keep occupants in place
1+ million steering column deaths alone

Speaker Notes:

"Before the 1950s, crash safety was based on assumptions, not evidence. The prevailing belief was that crashes were simply unsurvivable - so why engineer for them? The focus was entirely on preventing crashes through better roads, better training, better enforcement. But once a crash happened? You were on your own. And the data we did have was terrifying - over a million people were killed by steering columns alone before anyone thought to make them collapsible. We didn't know what we didn't know. And without data, we couldn't learn."

SLIDE 4: The First Data Pioneer - Hugh DeHaven

Content:

Hugh DeHaven (1895-1980) "The Father of Crashworthiness"

The Origin Story:

1917: Mid-air collision during WWI pilot training
Aircraft fell 500 feet
Other pilot and his observer: killed
DeHaven: walked away with minor injuries

The Question That Changed Everything:

"Why did I survive?"

What He Did:

Spent decades studying survivable crashes
Analyzed people who fell from buildings and survived
Founded Cornell Crash Injury Research Project (1942)
Discovered the "second collision" - you hit the car interior AFTER the car stops

The Data Insight: DeHaven measured survivors. He quantified forces. He proved that crash survival wasn't luck - it was physics. And physics could be engineered.

Speaker Notes:

"The data revolution started with one man asking one question. Hugh DeHaven survived a crash that killed everyone else. Instead of thanking God and moving on, he spent the rest of his life asking 'Why?' He studied falls, crashes, any situation where humans experienced extreme forces. And he discovered something crucial: it's not the crash that kills you - it's hitting the inside of your own car afterward. He called it the 'second collision.' This was data. This was measurable. And if it was measurable, it could be designed for."

SLIDE 5: The Human Guinea Pig - John Stapp

Visual:

!assets/john_stapp_rocket_sled.jpg Col. John Stapp on the Sonic Wind rocket sled, moments before 46.2g

!assets/john_stapp_portrait.jpg Stapp in uniform - the man who proved humans could survive

Content:

Col. John Paul Stapp (1910-1999) "The Fastest Man on Earth"

The Data Problem:

Military needed to know: Can pilots survive ejection?
Existing belief: Humans die above 18g
No one had ever measured it properly

Stapp's Solution: Become the Data

Rode rocket sleds 29 times
December 10, 1954: The big one
- Accelerated to 632 mph (faster than a bullet)
- Stopped in 1.4 seconds
- Peak deceleration: 46.2g
- Duration: ~1 second

His Injuries:

Broken ribs, broken wrists
Burst blood vessels in eyes (temporary blindness)
Lost dental fillings
Full recovery within weeks

The Data Revolution: Stapp didn't just survive - he was instrumented. He captured the data that proved the 18g limit was wrong.

Speaker Notes:

"John Stapp took data collection to its logical extreme - he became the test subject. The military needed to know if pilots could survive high-speed ejection, and the textbooks said 18g was fatal. Stapp didn't believe it. So he strapped himself to a rocket sled and found out. On his final ride, he hit 46.2g - more than double what was 'supposed' to kill him. He broke bones, temporarily lost his vision, and proved that with proper restraint, humans could survive forces nobody imagined. But here's the key: he was instrumented. He captured the data. Opinion said 18g was the limit. Data said otherwise. Data won."

SLIDE 6: What Stapp's Data Proved

Content:

Before Stapp (Opinion):

Belief	Source
18g is fatal	"Common knowledge"
Ejection seats can't work	Engineering assumption
Restraints don't matter	Untested

After Stapp (Data):

Finding	Evidence
46.2g is survivable	Measured, documented, reproduced
Restraint design is critical	Stapp's harness innovations
Force distribution matters	Instrumented measurements
Duration affects survivability	Time-history data

The Ripple Effects:

Fighter pilot ejection seats became viable
Seatbelt advocacy had scientific backing
"Crashworthiness" became an engineering discipline
Data replaced opinion as the basis for design

Fun Fact: Murphy's Law originated on Stapp's project. An engineer named Murphy wired sensors backward, leading Stapp to quip about what can go wrong, will go wrong.

Speaker Notes:

"Stapp's data didn't just prove one thing - it changed the entire framework. Before: opinion. After: evidence. His work made ejection seats possible, gave seatbelt advocates scientific ammunition, and established crashworthiness as a real engineering discipline. Oh, and Murphy's Law? That came from Stapp's project too. An engineer wired the sensors backward, and Stapp told the press about it. But the bigger point is this: Stapp was instrumented. He captured time-history data on the forces his body experienced. That data - not just his survival - is what changed everything."

SLIDE 7: The Cadaver Data

Visual:

!assets/cadaver_crash_test.jpg Early crash test using human cadaver - the data that built injury thresholds

Content:

The Uncomfortable Truth: The dead taught us how to save the living.

Wayne State University (1930s-1960s):

Dropped steel balls on skulls to measure fracture threshold
Sent bodies down elevator shafts
Crashed instrumented cadavers into barriers
Professor Lawrence Patrick tested impacts on himself 400+ times

What This Data Gave Us:

Body Part	Injury Threshold	Source
Skull fracture	~75g (contact)	Ball drop tests
Chest compression	63mm max	Cadaver impacts
Femur fracture	10 kN	Sled tests
Neck tension	3.3 kN	Controlled loading

Albert King's Calculation (1995): For every cadaver used in crash research:

61 people survive annually (seatbelt improvements)
147 people survive annually (airbag design)
68 people survive annually (windshield impacts)

Total: ~8,500 lives saved per year from cadaver-derived data

Speaker Notes:

"This slide is uncomfortable, but it's essential. Before we had crash test dummies, researchers used human cadavers - and sometimes their own bodies. Wayne State University dropped ball bearings on skulls, sent bodies down elevator shafts, and measured what it took to break human bones. Professor Lawrence Patrick subjected himself to impacts 400+ times. This data gave us the injury thresholds that every crash test dummy is calibrated against. Albert King calculated that cadaver research saves about 8,500 lives per year. For every single cadaver used, 276 people survive annually. The dead taught us how to save the living. We owe them accuracy in how we use that data."

SLIDE 8: The Regulatory Data Revolution

Visual:

!assets/unsafe_at_any_speed_cover.jpg The book that forced the industry to face the data

!assets/ralph_nader_1975.jpg Ralph Nader - turned data into political power

Content:

1965: Ralph Nader publishes "Unsafe at Any Speed"

Nader's Data-Driven Argument:

Exposed Corvair's dangerous handling characteristics
Documented industry's refusal to adopt known safety features
Calculated: $700/car on annual styling changes vs. $0.23 on safety

GM's Response:

Hired investigators to dig up dirt on Nader
Surveillance, harassment, attempted entrapment
Got caught → Congressional hearings → GM apologizes publicly

The Legislative Result:

Year	Action	Data Requirement
1966	National Traffic & Motor Vehicle Safety Act	Manufacturers must report defects
1966	DOT created	Centralized data collection
1970	NHTSA established	Federal crash testing begins
1979	NCAP program	Public crash test ratings

The Shift: Before: Industry self-regulated with minimal data After: Government demanded data, made it public, let consumers decide

Speaker Notes:

"Ralph Nader understood that data is power. His book 'Unsafe at Any Speed' didn't just make accusations - it documented them. He showed that manufacturers spent $700 per car on annual styling changes but only 23 cents on safety. GM tried to destroy him personally, got caught, and ended up apologizing before Congress. The result was the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, the creation of DOT, and eventually NHTSA. For the first time, the government would collect crash data, conduct tests, and publish results. Data went from proprietary to public. That changed everything."

SLIDE 9: The Data Surrogate - Birth of the Crash Test Dummy

Visual:

!assets/sierra_sam.jpg Sierra Sam (1949) - the first crash test dummy

!assets/hybrid_iii_family.jpg The Hybrid III family - standardized data collection

Content:

The Problem with Cadavers:

Ethical concerns
No two bodies are identical (no reproducibility)
Can't repeat tests
Limited supply

The Solution: Mechanical Surrogates

Year	Dummy	Data Advance
1949	Sierra Sam	First repeatable surrogate (ejection seats)
1971	Hybrid I	First automotive-specific dummy
1972	Hybrid II	First FMVSS-compliant dummy
1976	Hybrid III	Gold standard - still used today
2023	THOR-5F	First true female dummy

What Made Hybrid III Revolutionary:

Biofidelic response (mimics human tissue behavior)
Standardized construction (every lab uses identical dummies)
Instrumentation capacity - designed to hold sensors
Reproducible results - test the same dummy 50+ times

The Key Insight: A dummy without instrumentation is just an expensive mannequin. The dummy is the BODY. The instrumentation is the NERVOUS SYSTEM. DTS provides the nervous system.

Speaker Notes:

"Cadavers gave us the injury thresholds, but we couldn't keep using them for every test. We needed a surrogate that could be crashed repeatedly, produce consistent results, and capture data. That's the crash test dummy. Sierra Sam was first in 1949, but the real breakthrough was Hybrid III in 1976. It's still the global standard today - nearly 50 years later. But here's what matters for us: a dummy without sensors is just a mannequin. The dummy provides the mechanical response. The instrumentation captures the data. DTS provides that instrumentation - we are literally the nervous system of the crash test dummy."

SLIDE 10: Section 1 Summary - The History of Data

Content:

The Data Journey:

Era	Data Source	Limitation	Lives Saved
Pre-1940s	Opinions, assumptions	No scientific basis	Unknown
1940s-50s	Human volunteers (Stapp)	Not scalable	Foundation laid
1940s-60s	Cadaver research	Ethical, reproducibility	8,500/year
1970s+	ATDs (dummies)	Standardized, repeatable	Millions

The Throughline:

Opinions → led to million+ deaths
Human experiments → proved survival was possible
Cadaver data → established injury thresholds
Dummy testing → made safety engineering scalable

Key Quote:

"Before data, we had opinions. After data, we had proof. And proof saves lives."

Speaker Notes:

"Let's recap the history. We went from opinions - which killed millions - through human experimentation, cadaver research, and finally to standardized dummy testing. Each step gave us better data. Better data gave us better designs. Better designs saved more lives. The pioneers gathered data through sacrifice - their own bodies, the bodies of the dead. Our job today is to honor that legacy by capturing data with precision and reliability. That's the foundation for everything in sections 2 and 3."

SECTION 2: CURRENT INFLUENCES

"Who Uses the Data"

The ecosystem that turns data into saved lives

SLIDE 11: The Modern Data Ecosystem

Content:

Data flows through a system. Everyone in the system uses DTS equipment.

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                      DATA ECOSYSTEM                         │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                                                             │
│   RESEARCH            REGULATION           CONSUMER        │
│   (Universities)  →   (NHTSA/FMVSS)   →   (IIHS/NCAP)     │
│        ↓                   ↓                   ↓           │
│   Injury thresholds   Minimum standards   Market pressure  │
│        ↓                   ↓                   ↓           │
│   ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────    │
│                           ↓                                │
│                    MANUFACTURERS                           │
│              (OEMs + Tier 1 Suppliers)                     │
│                           ↓                                │
│                    SAFER VEHICLES                          │
│                           ↓                                │
│                    LIVES SAVED                             │
│                                                             │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Every node in this system needs data. DTS equipment captures that data.

Speaker Notes:

"This is the ecosystem our customers operate in. Research universities establish injury thresholds and biomechanics. Regulators like NHTSA set minimum standards based on that research. Consumer testing organizations like IIHS create market pressure by publishing ratings. Manufacturers respond by designing safer vehicles. The result: lives saved. Data flows through every connection in this system. Every node needs accurate, reliable data capture. That's what we provide."

SLIDE 12: The Regulators - Setting the Floor

Content:

NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration)

What They Do:

Set Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS)
Test vehicles for compliance
Investigate defects
Publish 5-star safety ratings (NCAP)

Key FMVSS Standards:

Standard	Requirement	Data Captured
FMVSS 208	Occupant crash protection	Head, chest, femur loads
FMVSS 214	Side impact protection	Pelvis, thorax, head
FMVSS 216	Roof crush resistance	Force vs. displacement
FMVSS 301	Fuel system integrity	Leakage measurement

The Data Requirement: NHTSA doesn't just want pass/fail. They want:

Time-history data (what happened when)
Peak values with timing
Injury criteria calculations (HIC, Nij, etc.)
Full documentation for every test

DTS Connection: NHTSA's Vehicle Research & Test Center (East Liberty, OH) uses DTS equipment to generate the data that becomes regulation.

Speaker Notes:

"NHTSA sets the floor - the minimum safety level every vehicle must meet. Their Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards cover everything from seatbelt anchorages to fuel tank integrity. But here's what's important: compliance isn't just pass/fail. NHTSA requires detailed data - time histories, peak values, calculated injury metrics. This data must be precise, documented, and defensible. The Vehicle Research and Test Center, where NHTSA develops and validates standards, uses DTS equipment. Our data literally becomes regulation."

SLIDE 13: The Influencers - Raising the Bar

Visual:

!assets/iihs_crash_hall.jpg IIHS crash test facility - where ratings drive the market

!assets/iihs_frontal_crash_test.jpg IIHS moderate overlap frontal test

Content:

IIHS (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety)

What Makes IIHS Different:

Funded by insurance companies (they pay crash claims)
NOT government - purely consumer information
Tests often MORE demanding than FMVSS
Ratings directly affect buying decisions

The Data Power Play:

Year	IIHS Test Introduction	Industry Response
1995	Moderate overlap frontal	Redesigned structures
2003	Side impact	Added side airbags
2012	Small overlap frontal	Massive failures → rapid fixes
2021	Updated side impact	Heavier, faster barrier

The Small Overlap Story (2012):

First tests: Luxury cars failed miserably
BMW, Mercedes, Audi: "Poor" or "Marginal"
Public embarrassment → immediate engineering response
By 2017: Most vehicles earned "Good"

The Data Demand: IIHS publishes detailed results, force plots, video. Manufacturers need matching data to diagnose problems and verify fixes.

Speaker Notes:

"If NHTSA sets the floor, IIHS raises the bar. They're funded by insurance companies who pay out when people get hurt - so they're highly motivated to reduce injuries. Their tests are often tougher than federal requirements. And their ratings affect sales. When IIHS introduced the small overlap test in 2012, most vehicles failed - including luxury brands. The public embarrassment drove immediate engineering responses. Within five years, most vehicles earned 'Good' ratings. This is data creating market pressure. IIHS publishes detailed force plots and video. Manufacturers need equally detailed data to diagnose problems. That's where we come in."

SLIDE 14: The Researchers - Expanding Knowledge

Content:

University Research Centers

Institution	Focus	Data Need
Wayne State University	Biomechanics, injury thresholds	Cadaver instrumentation
Ohio State University	Injury Biomechanics Research Center	ATD validation
University of Virginia	Center for Applied Biomechanics	Human body modeling
Wake Forest University	Injury prevention	Pediatric biomechanics

What Researchers Do:

Establish new injury criteria
Validate and improve ATD designs
Develop computational human models
Study populations not well-represented (elderly, children, females)

The Female Dummy Problem:

Most testing uses 50th percentile male (5'9", 175 lbs)
Women are 17% more likely to die in equivalent crashes
Researchers identified the gap
THOR-5F (2023) - first true female dummy - emerged from this research

The Data Chain: Research data → ATD design → Test standards → Safer vehicles

DTS Connection: Research requires the highest precision. Novel instrumentation. Unusual test setups. We support the cutting edge.

Speaker Notes:

"Universities are where new knowledge is created. Wayne State pioneered cadaver research. Ohio State validates crash test dummies. UVA builds computational human models. These researchers establish injury criteria that eventually become test standards. They also identify gaps - like the female dummy problem. Women are 17% more likely to die in equivalent crashes, partly because testing optimized for male anatomy. Research identified this. Now we have THOR-5F, the first true female dummy. Research data becomes ATD design becomes test standards becomes safer vehicles. We support researchers at the cutting edge."

SLIDE 15: The Manufacturers - Applying Data

Content:

OEMs (Original Equipment Manufacturers)

Every Major Automaker Has:

Dedicated crash test facilities
Full-vehicle test capability
Sled testing for component development
Pre-production validation programs

The Development Data Loop:

Design concept → Simulation (CAE) → Sled test → Full vehicle test
      ↑                                              ↓
      ←──────────────── Iterate until pass ←────────┘

What Manufacturers Need from Data:

Speed: Results fast enough to meet program timing
Accuracy: Must correlate to real-world outcomes
Detail: Time histories, not just peak values
Reproducibility: Run same test twice, get same data

Tier 1 Suppliers:

Autoliv, ZF, Joyson (restraint systems)
Need component-level data
Sled testing, out-of-position testing
Supply data to OEM customers as validation

DTS Connection: We're in virtually every major OEM and Tier 1 crash lab worldwide. Our equipment captures the data that validates designs before production.

Speaker Notes:

"Manufacturers are where data becomes product. Every major automaker has crash test facilities. They run simulations, sled tests, and full vehicle tests throughout development. The data loop is: design, simulate, test, iterate until it passes. What they need from data acquisition is speed, accuracy, detail, and reproducibility. One bad data point can mean a $100,000+ retest. Tier 1 suppliers like Autoliv and ZF also need component-level data - they supply airbags and seatbelts and must prove their products work. DTS equipment is in virtually every major crash lab. Our data validates designs before they reach production."

SLIDE 16: Section 2 Summary - The Data Users

Content:

Everyone Needs Data. We Provide It.

User	Purpose	Data Requirement	DTS Role
NHTSA	Set minimum standards	Compliance documentation	Certification testing
IIHS/NCAP	Consumer ratings	Detailed comparative data	Rating tests
Universities	Create new knowledge	Novel instrumentation	Research support
OEMs	Design safe vehicles	Development data loops	Lab instrumentation
Tier 1	Component validation	Sub-system testing	Sled test systems

The Common Thread: Every organization in the safety ecosystem:

Runs crash tests
Needs precise data capture
Can't afford bad data
Uses DTS equipment

Key Quote:

"The data that flows through this ecosystem eventually becomes the car you drive home tonight."

Speaker Notes:

"Let's summarize section 2. Regulators, consumer testers, researchers, OEMs, suppliers - they all need data. They all need it fast, accurate, detailed, and reproducible. They all use DTS equipment. The data that flows through this ecosystem eventually becomes the vehicles we all drive. When someone survives a crash because the airbag deployed correctly, because the seatbelt pretensioned at the right moment, because the structure absorbed energy as designed - that's data turned into engineering turned into saved lives."

SECTION 3: CURRENT TEST METHODS

"How We Capture Data"

The tests that generate the data that saves lives

SLIDE 17: The Test Hierarchy

Content:

From Component to Complete Vehicle

Level	Test Type	Purpose	Data Complexity
1	Material testing	Properties of steel, plastic, foam	Low - force/displacement
2	Component testing	Individual part behavior	Medium - multiple channels
3	Subsystem testing	Integrated assemblies (seat, restraint)	Medium-High
4	Sled testing	Occupant response without vehicle	High - full ATD
5	Full vehicle crash	Complete system validation	Very High - vehicle + ATD

Why This Matters:

Full vehicle tests cost $50K-$500K+ each
Can't afford to fail at full vehicle stage
Lower-level testing validates components first
Data from each level feeds the next

The Economic Reality:

Component	Approximate Cost
Full vehicle test	$50,000 - $500,000+
Test vehicle (destroyed)	$30,000 - $80,000
Hybrid III 50th male ATD	$200,000 - $400,000
THOR-50M	$500,000 - $800,000
DTS data acquisition	[Small fraction]

The Insight: A crashed car is gone forever. The data is what justifies the cost. Bad data = wasted test = repeat expense.

Speaker Notes:

"Let's talk about how tests are structured. You don't start with a full vehicle crash - that's too expensive to get wrong. You start with material testing, then components, then subsystems, then sled tests, then finally full vehicle. Data from each level validates the next. A full vehicle test can cost half a million dollars. The vehicle is destroyed. The dummy costs $200,000 to $800,000. If the data is bad, you've wasted everything. The data acquisition system is a tiny fraction of the total cost - but it captures ALL the value."

SLIDE 18: Full Vehicle Crash Tests

Visual:

!assets/small_overlap_test.jpg IIHS small overlap test - 25% of vehicle width at 40 mph

!assets/roof_strength_test.jpg Roof strength test - critical for rollover protection

Content:

Frontal Impact Tests:

Test	Configuration	Speed	What It Measures
NHTSA Full Frontal	100% overlap, rigid barrier	35 mph	Full structure + restraints
IIHS Moderate Overlap	40% offset, deformable barrier	40 mph	Structure + occupant compartment
IIHS Small Overlap	25% offset, rigid barrier	40 mph	Structural engagement
Oblique	Angled impact	Varies	Real-world crash modes

Side Impact Tests:

Test	Configuration	What It Measures
NHTSA Side	Moving deformable barrier, 90°	Side structure + curtain airbags
IIHS Side	Heavier/faster barrier (2021+)	Updated injury criteria
Pole	Sliding into narrow object	Head protection, door intrusion

Other Tests:

Roof crush (rollover protection)
Rear impact (head restraint, whiplash)
Pedestrian protection
Fuel system integrity

Data Captured Per Test: A typical full vehicle test captures 50-100+ channels of data:

Head, chest, pelvis acceleration (ATD)
Neck, femur, tibia loads (ATD)
Chest deflection (ATD)
Vehicle acceleration
Barrier loads
High-speed video (multiple angles)

Speaker Notes:

"Full vehicle tests are the ultimate validation. Frontal tests range from full overlap into rigid barriers to small overlap - just 25% of the width. Side tests simulate T-bone crashes and pole impacts. Roof crush tests rollover protection. Each test captures 50 to 100+ channels of data. The ATD alone might have 30-40 sensors measuring head acceleration, neck loads, chest compression, pelvis acceleration, femur loads. We capture all of it, time-synchronized, at sample rates up to 10,000 or even 100,000 samples per second. The data tells the story of what happened in that fraction of a second."

SLIDE 19: Sled Testing - The Workhorse

Content:

What Is Sled Testing?

Simulates crash pulse without destroying a vehicle
Occupant compartment (buck) mounted on acceleration sled
Sled accelerates/decelerates to match target crash pulse
Repeatable, controllable, economical

Advantages Over Full Vehicle:

Factor	Full Vehicle	Sled Test
Cost per test	$50K-500K	$5K-50K
Vehicle consumed	Yes	No
Repeatability	Moderate	High
Parameter control	Limited	Excellent
Setup time	Days	Hours

What Sled Tests Are Used For:

Restraint system development (airbags, belts)
Seat design validation
Out-of-position (OoP) testing
Child restraint testing
ATD development and validation

The Data Demands: Sled tests often require MORE precision than full vehicle:

Exact crash pulse reproduction
Sub-millisecond timing
Correlation to full vehicle results

DTS Role: Sled testing is where products are developed. The data must be precise enough to diagnose problems and verify fixes.

Speaker Notes:

"Sled testing is the workhorse of crash safety development. Instead of destroying a car, you mount a test buck - a section of the occupant compartment - on a sled and reproduce the crash pulse. It's cheaper, faster, and more repeatable. This is where restraint systems are developed. Where out-of-position scenarios are tested. Where child seats are validated. The data demands are actually higher than full vehicle tests because you need precision to diagnose subtle problems. If the airbag is deploying 5 milliseconds late, you need data that can show that."

SLIDE 20: The ATD - Capturing Human Response

Visual:

!assets/hybrid_iii_family.jpg Hybrid III family - 95th male to child sizes

!assets/thor_dummy.jpg THOR-50M - the next generation

Content:

The Hybrid III (1976 - Still Standard)

Measurement Location	Sensor Type	What It Tells Us
Head	Triaxial accelerometer	Head Injury Criterion (HIC)
Neck	6-axis load cell	Neck tension, compression, bending
Chest	Accelerometer + potentiometer	Chest acceleration, deflection
Lumbar	6-axis load cell	Spinal loading
Pelvis	Triaxial accelerometer	Pelvis acceleration
Femur	Load cells	Femur compression force

The THOR-50M (Next Generation)

150+ data channels (vs. ~40 for Hybrid III)
Multi-point chest deflection
Abdomen instrumentation
More biofidelic response
Required for some Euro NCAP tests

DTS Instrumentation:

Accelerometers
Load cells (force measurement)
Potentiometers (displacement)
Angular rate sensors
On-board data acquisition (survives the crash)

The Key Insight: The dummy provides the mechanical response. The instrumentation captures the data. Without instrumentation, a crash test is just an expensive car destruction.

Speaker Notes:

"The crash test dummy is a sophisticated mechanical surrogate, but it can't tell us anything without instrumentation. A Hybrid III has about 40 sensors measuring head acceleration, neck loads, chest compression, pelvis movement, femur loads. THOR has over 150 channels. These sensors must survive the crash - which can exceed 40g - and continue recording. They must be accurate to calculate injury criteria. DTS provides this instrumentation. We put the nervous system into the dummy. Without us, you just have an expensive mannequin being destroyed."

SLIDE 21: Active Safety Testing - The New Frontier

Content:

The Shift from Passive to Active:

Passive Safety	Active Safety
Protects DURING crash	Prevents crash entirely
Seatbelts, airbags, structure	AEB, ESC, LDW
Testing: crash dummies	Testing: track, targets, scenarios

AEB Testing (Autonomous Emergency Braking):

Vehicle approaches pedestrian/vehicle targets at set speeds
System must detect and brake automatically
Data captured: vehicle dynamics, system response time, stopping distance

IIHS AEB Ratings:

Speed	Requirement
12 mph	Avoid collision OR reduce impact speed
25 mph	Reduce impact speed

Euro NCAP Requirements:

AEB for vehicles
AEB for pedestrians
AEB for cyclists
Lane support systems

The Data Challenge: Active safety testing needs different data:

Vehicle position and velocity
Target detection timing
System activation point
Braking force application

DTS Opportunity: As active safety grows, data needs expand. New sensor types, new test protocols, new customers.

Speaker Notes:

"There's a revolution happening in safety testing. Passive safety - seatbelts, airbags, crumple zones - protects you during a crash. Active safety - AEB, ESC, lane keeping - tries to prevent the crash entirely. Testing active safety is different. Instead of crashing into barriers, you're testing whether the car stops before hitting a target. IIHS now requires AEB for top safety ratings. Euro NCAP tests pedestrian and cyclist detection. This creates new data needs: vehicle dynamics, system response timing, target detection. The market for data acquisition is expanding, not shrinking."

SLIDE 22: Section 3 Summary - The Data We Capture

Content:

Test Methods Create Data. Data Creates Safety.

Test Type	Data Volume	Precision Required	DTS Role
Full vehicle crash	50-100+ channels	Very high	All ATD, vehicle sensors
Sled testing	30-50 channels	Extremely high	ATD + buck instrumentation
Component testing	5-20 channels	High	Targeted measurement
Active safety	Various	High	Expanding market

What Makes Data Valuable:

Accuracy - Must represent reality
Precision - Must be repeatable
Completeness - Can't have gaps or dropouts
Timing - Sub-millisecond synchronization
Survivability - Equipment must survive the crash

The DTS Value Proposition: We don't make cars safer directly. We capture the data that lets engineers make cars safer. One bad data point can invalidate a $500,000 test.

Key Quote:

"Trust in data is everything. When lives depend on the analysis, the data must be unquestionable."

Speaker Notes:

"Let's summarize section 3. From full vehicle crashes to sled tests to component testing, every test generates data. That data must be accurate, precise, complete, properly timed, and the equipment must survive crash conditions. DTS provides that capability. We don't make vehicles safer directly - we capture the data that enables engineers to make them safer. When a test costs $500,000 and the data fails, you've wasted half a million dollars. When the data is good, you've created knowledge that protects people. Trust in data is everything."

CLOSING

SLIDE 23: The Chain We're Part Of

Content:

The Unbroken Chain from Stapp to Tomorrow:

1954: Stapp's rocket sled data proves survival is possible
              ↓
1960s: Cadaver research establishes injury thresholds
              ↓
1970s: Hybrid III enables standardized testing
              ↓
1980s-90s: NHTSA/IIHS create market pressure with data
              ↓
2000s-10s: Airbags, ESC, AEB become standard
              ↓
2020s: Active safety, female dummies, EV testing
              ↓
Future: Autonomous vehicles, new injury criteria
              ↓
         EVERY STEP REQUIRES DATA
              ↓
         DTS CAPTURES THAT DATA

Our Place: We didn't invent the seatbelt. We didn't design the airbag. We didn't create the crash test dummy. But NONE of those innovations would exist without the data that proved they work. DTS is part of the chain. We capture the data that saves lives.

Speaker Notes:

"Let me show you where we fit. Stapp's rocket sled proved humans could survive. Cadaver research gave us injury thresholds. The Hybrid III made standardized testing possible. NHTSA and IIHS created market pressure with public data. Airbags, ESC, AEB became standard because data proved they worked. Every step in this chain required data. We capture that data. We didn't invent the seatbelt or design the airbag - but without accurate data, none of those innovations could have been validated. DTS is part of an unbroken chain from Stapp to whatever comes next. We're the keepers of the data that saves lives."

SLIDE 24: The Bottom Line

Content:

Remember This:

Then	Now	Data Made the Difference
1970: 4.74 deaths/100M VMT	2019: 1.10 deaths/100M VMT	77% reduction
Opinion: "18g is fatal"	Data: Stapp survived 46.2g	Changed engineering limits
Belief: "Crashes are unsurvivable"	Reality: Crashworthiness works	Millions of lives saved

117,000 people are alive this year who would have died under 1970 conditions.

Every one of them was saved by a chain of decisions:

Research that established injury thresholds
Regulations that required minimum standards
Testing that validated designs before production
Data that made it all possible

We don't make cars safer directly. We capture the data that lets engineers make cars safer. The data saves lives.

Speaker Notes:

"Here's the bottom line. 117,000 people will survive this year who would have died under 1970 conditions. Every one of them was saved by a chain of decisions rooted in data. Research established injury thresholds. Regulations required minimum standards. Testing validated designs before production. Data made it all possible. We don't make cars safer directly. We capture the data that lets engineers make cars safer. That data saves lives. Every sensor, every channel, every data point we capture is part of that chain. That's why we're here. That's why this work matters."

SLIDE 25: Q&A

Content:

Questions?

Contact: Ben, Application Engineer [Email/Phone]

Key Takeaways:

Data replaced opinion as the basis for safety engineering
Every organization in the safety ecosystem needs precise data
DTS captures the data that flows through the entire system
That data saves approximately 117,000 lives per year

"A crashed car is gone forever. The data is what remains."

APPENDIX

Quick Reference: Key Statistics

Metric	Value	Source
Fatality rate reduction since 1970	77%	NHTSA FARS
Lives saved annually (vs. 1970 rates)	~117,000	Calculated
Seatbelt lives saved/year	~15,000	NHTSA
Airbag lives saved/year	~2,790	NHTSA
ESC lives saved/year	~2,200	NHTSA
Hybrid III cost	$200-400K	Industry estimate
THOR cost	$500-800K	Industry estimate
Full vehicle test cost	$50-500K	Industry estimate
Stapp's peak deceleration	46.2g	Historical record
Lives saved per cadaver (annual)	276	Albert King, 1995

Quick Reference: Key People

Pioneer	Contribution	Data Innovation
Hugh DeHaven	Crashworthiness concept	Quantified survival forces
John Stapp	Human tolerance limits	Instrumented self-experimentation
Lawrence Patrick	Injury thresholds	Cadaver + self-testing
Nils Bohlin	3-point seatbelt	Volvo shared data freely
Ralph Nader	Regulatory pressure	Made industry data public
William Haddon	NHTSA, IIHS	Systematized data collection
Samuel Alderson	Crash test dummy	Created repeatable surrogate

Quick Reference: Key Organizations

Organization	Role	Data Function
NHTSA	US regulator	Sets standards, tests compliance
IIHS	Consumer testing	Publishes ratings, drives market
Euro NCAP	European ratings	Harmonized global standards
Universities	Research	Creates new knowledge
OEMs	Manufacturers	Applies data to design
Tier 1 Suppliers	Components	Validates subsystems
DTS	Instrumentation	Captures the data

Video Resources

Presentation Tips for Ben

Timing Guide:

Section	Target Time	Key Points
Opening	3 min	Hook with 77%, establish thesis
History	15 min	Stories of pioneers - emotional connection
Influences	12 min	Ecosystem overview - where we fit
Test Methods	12 min	Technical but accessible
Closing	3 min	Return to thesis, emotional close
Q&A	5+ min	Prepared answers below

Anticipated Questions:

Q: "What specific DTS products do customers use?" A: SLICE series (NANO, MICRO, SLICE6) for on-board data acquisition. Designed to survive crash conditions and capture high-sample-rate data from all ATD sensors.

Q: "How is testing changing with EVs?" A: New considerations - battery safety, heavier vehicles (battery weight), different mass distribution. But same fundamental data needs. New opportunities for instrumentation.

Q: "What about autonomous vehicles?" A: Even with perfect autonomy, crashes will occur (other vehicles, edge cases). Crashworthiness still matters. Plus, AV development needs extensive testing data. Market is expanding, not contracting.

Q: "Is this a growing market?" A: Yes. More test types, more global markets (China, India), more active safety testing. ADAS/AV alone has created massive new testing needs.

Engagement Techniques:

Opening hook: "77% - that's how much safer driving is today than in 1970. Anyone want to guess how many lives that saves per year?" [Wait for guesses] "117,000."

Story moments: Stapp and DeHaven are compelling stories. Don't rush them. Let the audience feel the human element.

The bridge: When transitioning to DTS's role, use: "Every piece of data that flows through this system eventually becomes the car you drive home tonight. We capture that data."

Closing: Return to the 117,000 number. "117,000 people. Every one of them saved by a chain of decisions rooted in data. We're part of that chain."

Document prepared for DTS internal presentation Theme: "The Data That Saves Lives" Last updated: February 12, 2026

45 KiB Raw Blame History

The Data That Saves Lives

How Crash Testing Went from Guesswork to Science

DTS Internal Presentation - Ben (Application Engineer)

Duration: 45 minutes

CENTRAL THESIS

PRESENTATION STRUCTURE

OPENING

SLIDE 1: Title Slide

SLIDE 2: The Power of One Number

Content:

77%

Speaker Notes:

SECTION 1: HISTORY

"The Quest for Data"

When we had opinions instead of proof

SLIDE 3: The Dark Age - Before Data

Visual:

Content:

Speaker Notes:

SLIDE 4: The First Data Pioneer - Hugh DeHaven

Content:

Speaker Notes:

SLIDE 5: The Human Guinea Pig - John Stapp

Visual:

Content:

Speaker Notes:

SLIDE 6: What Stapp's Data Proved

Content:

Speaker Notes:

SLIDE 7: The Cadaver Data

Visual:

Content:

Speaker Notes:

SLIDE 8: The Regulatory Data Revolution

Visual:

Content:

Speaker Notes:

SLIDE 9: The Data Surrogate - Birth of the Crash Test Dummy

Visual:

Content:

Speaker Notes:

SLIDE 10: Section 1 Summary - The History of Data

Content:

Speaker Notes:

SECTION 2: CURRENT INFLUENCES

"Who Uses the Data"

The ecosystem that turns data into saved lives

SLIDE 11: The Modern Data Ecosystem

Content:

Speaker Notes:

SLIDE 12: The Regulators - Setting the Floor

Content:

Speaker Notes:

SLIDE 13: The Influencers - Raising the Bar

Visual:

Content:

Speaker Notes:

SLIDE 14: The Researchers - Expanding Knowledge

Content:

Speaker Notes:

SLIDE 15: The Manufacturers - Applying Data

Content:

Speaker Notes:

SLIDE 16: Section 2 Summary - The Data Users

Content:

Speaker Notes:

SECTION 3: CURRENT TEST METHODS

"How We Capture Data"

The tests that generate the data that saves lives

SLIDE 17: The Test Hierarchy

Content:

Speaker Notes:

SLIDE 18: Full Vehicle Crash Tests

Visual:

Content:

Speaker Notes:

SLIDE 19: Sled Testing - The Workhorse

Content:

Speaker Notes:

45 KiB

Raw Blame History