A seat belt or seatbelt, also known as a safety belt, is a vehicle safety device designed to secure the driver or a passenger of a vehicle against harmful movement that may result during a collision or a sudden stop. A seat belt reduces the likelihood of death or serious injury in a traffic collision by reducing the force of secondary impacts with interior strike hazards, by keeping occupants positioned correctly for maximum effectiveness of the airbag (if equipped), and by preventing occupants being ejected from the vehicle in a crash or if the Vehicle rollover.
When in motion, the driver and passengers are traveling at the same speed as the vehicle. If the vehicle suddenly halts or crashes, the occupants continue at the same speed the vehicle was going before it stopped.
A seat belt applies an opposing force to the driver and passengers to prevent them from falling out or making contact with the interior of the car (especially preventing contact with, or going through, the windshield). Seat belts are considered primary restraint systems (PRSs), because of their vital role in occupant safety.
It has been suggested that although seat belt usage reduces the probability of death in any given accident, mandatory seat belt laws have little or no effect on the overall number of traffic fatalities because seat belt usage also disincentivizes safe driving behaviors, thereby increasing the total number of accidents. This idea, known as compensating-behavior theory, is not supported by the evidence.
In case of vehicle rollover in a U.S. passenger car or SUV, from 1994 to 2004, wearing a seat belt reduced the risk of fatalities or incapacitating injuries and increased the probability of no injury:
By 1928, all aircraft were required to have them.
Nash Motors was the first American car manufacturer to offer seat belts as a factory option, in its 1949 models. They were installed in 40,000 cars, but buyers did not want them and requested that dealers remove them. The feature was "met with insurmountable sales resistance" and Nash reported that after one year "only 1,000 had been used" by customers.
Ford offered seat belts as an option in 1955. These were not popular, with only 2% of Ford buyers choosing to pay for seat belts in 1956.
In the early 1950s C. Hunter Shelden, a neurologist working at the Huntington Memorial Hospital in Pasadena, California, studied the high number of head injuries he saw due to auto accidents. Based on his study of the early seat belts whose primitive designs were implicated in these injuries and deaths, in a 1955 paper he proposed retractable seat belts, as well as recessed , reinforced roofs, roll cage, and passive restraints such as .
Glenn W. Sheren, of Mason, Michigan, submitted a patent application on March 31, 1955, for an automotive seat belt and was awarded in 1958. This was a continuation of an earlier patent application that Sheren had filed on September 22, 1952.
The first modern three-point seat belt (the so-called CIR-Griswold restraint) commonly used in consumer vehicles was patented in 1955 by the Americans Roger W. Griswold and Hugh DeHaven.
Saab Automobile introduced seat belts as standard equipment in 1958. After the Saab GT 750 was introduced at the New York Motor Show in 1958 with safety belts fitted as standard, the practice became commonplace.
Vattenfall, the Swedish national electric utility, did a study of all fatal, on-the-job accidents among their employees. The study revealed that the majority of fatalities occurred while the employees were on the road on company business. In response, two Vattenfall safety engineers, Bengt Odelgard and Per-Olof Weman, started to develop a seat belt. Their work was presented to Swedish manufacturer Volvo in the late 1950s, and set the standard for seat belts in Swedish cars.
Subsequently, in 1966, Congress passed the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, requiring all automobiles to comply with certain safety standards.
The first compulsory seat belt law was put in place in 1970, in the state of Victoria, Australia, requiring their use by drivers and front-seat passengers. This legislation was enacted after trialing Hemco seat belts, designed by Desmond Hemphill (1926–2001), in the front seats of police vehicles, lowering the incidence of officer injury and death. Mandatory seat belt laws in the United States began to be introduced in the 1980s and faced opposition, with some consumers going to court to challenge the laws. Some cut seat belts out of their cars.
While nylon was used in some early seat belts (and is still used for lap belts), it was replaced by 100% polyester due to its better Ultraviolet resistance, lower extensibility and higher stiffness. Nylon was also prone to stretching much more than polyester, and was prone to wear and tear, with tiny abrasions drastically reducing tensile strength, causing a lack of reliability in one of the most important safety measures in a vehicle. Seat belts are commonly 46 or 48 mm wide with a 2/2 herringbone twill weaving pattern to maximize the thread density. Modern seatbelt weaves also feature snag-proof selvedges reinforced with strong polyester threads to prevent the wear and tear, while remaining flexible. The weave features about 300 warp threads for every 46mm wide webbing, leading to around 150 ends per inch of webbing.
Accident investigators often examine the webbing of a seatbelt to determine if an occupant of a vehicle was wearing their seatbelt during a collision. The material of the webbing may contain traces of the occupant's clothing. Certain materials such as nylons may become permanently affixed or melted onto the fabric as a result of heat produced by friction, whereas fiber-based clothing leaves no remains on modern webbing.
While lap belts are exceedingly rare to spot in modern cars, they are the standard in commercial airliners. The lift-lever style of Airliner buckles allows for the seatbelt to be easily clasped and unclasped, accessible quickly in case of an emergency where a passenger must evacuate, and fulfills the minimum safety requirements provided by the FAA while remaining low-cost to produce. Furthermore, in case of any collision, a passenger in economy class has only around 9 inches for their head to travel forward, meaning restraining the torso and head is relatively unnecessary as the head has little room to accelerate before collision.
University of Minnesota professor James J. (Crash) Ryan was the inventor of, and held the patent for, the automatic retractable lap safety belt. Ralph Nader cited Ryan's work in Unsafe at Any Speed and, following hearings led by Senator Abraham Ribicoff, President Lyndon Johnson signed two bills in 1966 requiring safety belts in all passenger vehicles starting in 1968.
Until the 1980s, three-point belts were commonly available only in the front outboard seats of cars; the back seats were often only fitted with lap belts. Evidence of the potential of lap belts to cause separation of the lumbar vertebrae and the sometimes-associated paralysis, or "seat belt syndrome" led to the progressive revision of passenger safety regulations in nearly all developed countries to require three-point belts, first in all outboard seating positions, and eventually in all seating positions in passenger vehicles. Since September 1, 2007, all new cars sold in the U.S. require a lap and shoulder belt in the center rear seat. In addition to regulatory changes, "seat belt syndrome" has led to a legal liability for vehicle manufacturers. One Los Angeles case resulted in a $45 million jury verdict against Ford; the resulting $30 million judgment (after deductions for another defendant who settled prior to trial) was affirmed on appeal in 2006.
Belt-in-Seat type belts have been used by automakers in convertibles and pillarless hardtops, where there is no "B" pillar to affix the upper mount of the belt. Chrysler and Cadillac are well known for using this design. Antique auto enthusiasts sometimes replace original seats in their cars with BIS-equipped front seats, providing a measure of safety not available when these cars were new. However, modern BIS systems typically use electronics that must be installed and connected with the seats and the vehicle's electrical system in order to function properly.
There are two main types of inertial seat belt locks. A webbing-sensitive lock is based on a centrifugal clutch activated by the rapid acceleration of the strap (webbing) from the reel. The belt can be pulled from the reel only slowly and gradually, as when the occupant extends the belt to fasten it. A sudden rapid pull of the belt—as in a sudden braking or collision event—causes the reel to lock, restraining the occupant in position. The first automatic locking retractor for seat belts and shoulder harnesses in the U.S. was the Irving "Dynalock" safety device. These "Auto-lock" front lap belts were optional on AMC cars with bucket seats in 1967.
A vehicle-sensitive lock is based on a pendulum swung away from its plumb position by rapid deceleration or rollover of the vehicle. In the absence of rapid deceleration or rollover, the reel is unlocked and the belt strap may be pulled from the reel against the spring tension of the reel. The vehicle occupant can move around with relative freedom while the spring tension of the reel keeps the belt taut against the occupant. When the pendulum swings away from its normal plumb position due to sudden deceleration or rollover, a pawl is engaged, the reel locks and the strap restrains the belted occupant in position. Dual-sensing locking retractors use both vehicle G-loading and webbing payout rate to initiate the locking mechanism.
Pretensioners preemptively tighten the belt to prevent the occupant from jerking forward in a crash. Mercedes-Benz first introduced pretensioners on the 1981 S-Class. In the event of a crash, a pretensioner will tighten the belt almost instantaneously. This reduces the motion of the occupant in a violent crash. Like airbags, pretensioners are triggered by sensors in the car's body, and many pretensioners have used explosively expanding gas to drive a piston that retracts the belt. Pretensioners also lower the risk of "submarining", which occurs when a passenger slides forward under a loosely fitted seat belt.
Some systems also pre-emptively tighten the belt during fast accelerations and strong decelerations, even if no crash has happened. This has the advantage that it may help prevent the driver from sliding out of position during violent evasive maneuvers, which could cause loss of control of the vehicle. These pre-emptive safety systems may prevent some collisions from happening, as well as reduce injuries in the event an actual collision occurs. Pre-emptive systems generally use electric pretensioners, which can operate repeatedly and for a sustained period, rather than pyrotechnic pretensioners, which can only operate a single time.
Webclamps stop the webbing in the event of an accident and limit the distance the webbing can spool out (caused by the unused webbing tightening on the central drum of the mechanism). These belts also often incorporate an energy management loop ("rip stitching") in which a section of the webbing is looped and stitched with special stitching. The function of this is to "rip" at a predetermined load, which reduces the maximum force transmitted through the belt to the occupant during a violent collision, reducing injuries to the occupant.
A study demonstrated that standard automotive three-point restraints fitted with pyrotechnic or electric pretensioners were not able to eliminate all interior passenger compartment head strikes in rollover test conditions. Electric pretensioners are often incorporated on vehicles equipped with ; they are designed to reduce seat belt slack in a potential collision and assist in placing the occupants in a more optimal seating position. The electric pretensioners also can operate on a repeated or sustained basis, providing better protection in the event of an extended rollover or a multiple collision accident.
Automatic seat belts received a boost in the United States in 1977 when Brock Adams, United States Secretary of Transportation in the Carter Administration, mandated that by 1983 every new car should have either airbags or automatic seat belts. There was strong lobbying against the passive restraint requirement by the auto industry. Adams was criticized by Ralph Nader, who said that the 1983 deadline was too late. The Volkswagen Rabbit also had automatic seat belts, and VW said that by early 1978, 90,000 cars had sold with them.
General Motors introduced a three-point non-motorized passive belt system in 1980 to comply with the passive restraint requirement. However, it was used as an active lap-shoulder belt because of unlatching the belt to exit the vehicle. Despite this common practice, field studies of belt use still showed an increase in wearing rates with this door-mounted system. General Motors began offering automatic seat belts on the Chevrolet Chevette. However, the company reported disappointing sales because of this feature. For the 1981 model year, the new Toyota Cressida became the first car to offer motorized automatic passive seat belts.
A study released in 1978 by the United States Department of Transportation said that cars with automatic seat belts had a fatality rate of .78 per 100 million miles, compared with 2.34 for cars with regular, manual belts.
In 1981, Drew Lewis, the first Transportation Secretary of the Reagan Administration, influenced by studies done by the auto industry, dropped the mandate; the decision was overruled in a federal appeals court the following year, and then by the Supreme Court. In 1984, the Reagan Administration reversed its course, though in the meantime the original deadline had been extended; Elizabeth Dole, then Transportation Secretary, proposed that the two passive safety restraints be phased into vehicles gradually, from vehicle model year 1987 to vehicle model year 1990, when all vehicles would be required to have either automatic seat belts or driver side air bags. Though more awkward for vehicle occupants, most manufacturers opted to use less expensive automatic belts rather than airbags during this time period.
When driver side airbags became mandatory on all passenger vehicles in model year 1995, most manufacturers stopped equipping cars with automatic seat belts. Exceptions include the 1995–96 Ford Escort/Mercury Tracer and the Eagle Summit, which had automatic safety belts along with dual airbags.
Because many automatic belt system designs compliant with the U.S. passive-restraint mandate did not meet the anchorage requirements of Canada (CMVSS 210)—which were not weakened to accommodate automatic belts—vehicle models that had been eligible for easy importation in either direction across the U.S.-Canada border when equipped with manual belts became ineligible for importation in either direction once the U.S. variants obtained automatic belts and the Canadian versions retained manual belts, although some Canadian versions also had automatic seat belts. Two particular models affected were the Dodge Spirit and Plymouth Acclaim.
Automatic belt systems also present several operational disadvantages. Motorists who would normally wear seat belts must still fasten the manual lap belt, thus rendering redundant the automation of the shoulder belt. Those who do not fasten the lap belt wind up inadequately protected only by the shoulder belt. In a crash, without a lap belt, such a vehicle occupant is likely to "submarine" (be thrown forward under the shoulder belt) and be seriously injured. Motorized or door-affixed shoulder belts hinder access to the vehicle, making it difficult to enter and exit—particularly if the occupant is carrying items such as a box or a purse. Vehicle owners tend to disconnect the motorized or door-affixed shoulder belt to relieve the nuisance when entering and exiting the vehicle, leaving only a lap belt for crash protection. Also, many automatic seat belt systems are incompatible with child safety seats, or only compatible with special modifications.
This study and others led to the Restraint Systems Evaluation Program (RSEP), started by the NHTSA in 1975 to increase the reliability and authenticity of past studies. A study as part of this program used data taken from 15,000 tow-away accidents that involved only car models made between 1973 and 1975. The study found that for injuries considered “moderate” or worse, individuals wearing a three-point safety belt had a 56.5% lower injury rate than those wearing no safety belt. The study also concluded that the effectiveness of the safety belt did not differ with the size of a car. It was determined that the variation among results of the many studies conducted in the 1960s and 70s was due to the use of different methodologies, and could not be attributed to any significant variation in the effectiveness of safety belts.
Wayne State University's Automotive Safety Research Group, as well as other researchers, are testing ways to improve seat belt effectiveness and general vehicle safety apparatuses. Wayne State's Bioengineering Center uses human cadavers in their crash test research. The center's director, Albert King, wrote in 1995 that the vehicle safety improvements made possible since 1987 by the use of cadavers in research had saved nearly 8,500 lives each year, and indicated that improvements made to three-point safety belts save an average of 61 lives every year.
The New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) was put in place by the United States National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in 1979. The NCAP is a government program that evaluates vehicle safety designs and sets standards for foreign and domestic automobile companies. The agency developed a rating system and requires access to safety test results. , manufacturers are required to place an NCAP star rating on the automobile price sticker.
In 2004, The European New Car Assessment Program (Euro NCAP), started testing seat belts and whiplash safety on all test cars at the Thatcham Research Centre with crash test dummies.
In crashes, unbelted rear passengers increase the risk of belted front seat occupants' death by nearly five times.
The UK extended compulsory seat belt wearing to child passengers under the age of 14 in 1989. It was observed that this measure was accompanied by a 10% increase in fatalities and a 12% increase in injuries among the target population. In crashes, small children who wear adult seat belts can suffer "seat-belt syndrome" injuries including severed intestines, ruptured diaphragms, and spinal damage. There is also research suggesting that children in inappropriate restraints are at significantly increased risk of head injury. One of the authors of this research said, "The early graduation of kids into adult lap and shoulder belts is a leading cause of child-occupant injuries and deaths."
As a result of such findings, many jurisdictions now advocate or require child passengers to use specially designed child restraints. Such systems include separate child-sized seats with their own restraints and booster cushions for children using adult restraints. In some jurisdictions, children below a certain size are forbidden to travel in front car seats.Road Amendment (Isabelle Broadhead Child Restraint Measures) Rules 2010. No. 46. Rule 1.
In 2005, in Sweden, 70% of all cars that were newly registered were equipped with seat belt reminders for the driver. Since November 2014, seat belt reminders are mandatory for the driver's seat on new cars sold in Europe.
Two specifications define the standard of seat belt reminder: UN Regulation 16, Section 8.4 and the Euro NCAP assessment protocol (Euro NCAP, 2013).
Amendment of UN Regulation 16Uniform provisions concerning the approval of:
This improvement applies from 1 September 2019 for new types of motor vehicles and from 1 September 2021 for all new motor vehicles.
The interlock systems used logic modules complex enough to require special diagnostic computers, and were not entirely dependable—an override button was provided under the hood of equipped cars, permitting one (but only one) "free" starting attempt each time it was pressed.
In response to the Congressional action, NHTSA once again amended FMVSS 208, requiring vehicles to come with a seat belt reminder system that gives an audible signal for 4 to 8 seconds and a warning light for at least 60 seconds after the ignition is turned on if the driver's seat belt is not fastened. This is called a seat belt reminder (SBR) system. In the mid-1990s, the Swedish insurance company Folksam worked with Saab and Ford to determine the requirements for the most efficient seat belt reminder. One characteristic of the optimal SBR, according to the research, is that the audible warning becomes increasingly penetrating the longer the seat belt remains unfastened.
In 2003, the Transportation Research Board Committee, chaired by two psychologists, reported that "Enhanced SBRs" (ESBRs) could save an additional 1,000 lives a year. Research by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found that Ford's ESBR, which provides an intermittent chime for up to five minutes if the driver is unbelted, sounding for 6 seconds then pausing for 30, increased seat belt use by 5 percentage points. Farmer and Wells found that driver fatality rates were 6% lower for vehicles with ESBR compared with otherwise-identical vehicles without.
This has led many countries to adopt mandatory seat belt wearing laws. It is generally accepted that, in comparing like-for-like accidents, a vehicle occupant not wearing a properly fitted seat belt has a significantly and substantially higher chance of death and serious injury. One large observation studying using U.S. data showed that the odds ratio of crash death is 0.46 with a three-point belt when compared with no belt. In another study that examined injuries presenting to the emergency room pre- and post-seat belt law introduction, it was found that 40% more escaped injury and 35% more escaped mild and moderate injuries.
The effects of seat belt laws are disputed by those who observe that their passage did not reduce road fatalities. There has also been concern that instead of legislating for a general protection standard for vehicle occupants, laws that required a particular technical approach would rapidly become dated as motor manufacturers would tool up for a particular standard that could not easily be changed. For example, in 1969 there were competing designs for lap and three-point seat belts, rapidly tilting seats, and airbags being developed. As countries started to mandate seat belt restraints the global auto industry invested in the tooling and standardized exclusively on seat belts, and ignored other restraint designs such as airbags for several decades
As of 2016, seat belt laws can be divided into two categories: primary and secondary. A primary seat belt law allows an officer to issue a citation for lack of seat belt use without any other citation, whereas a secondary seat belt law allows an officer to issue a seat belt citation only in the presence of a different violation. In the United States, fifteen states enforce secondary laws, while 34 states, as well as the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands enforce primary seat belt laws. New Hampshire lacks either a primary or secondary seat belt law.
In one trial subjects were asked to drive around a track under various conditions. It was found that subjects who started driving unbelted drove consistently faster when subsequently belted. Similarly, a study of habitual non-seat belt wearers driving in freeway conditions found evidence that they had adapted to use by adopting higher driving speeds and closer following distances.
A 2001 analysis of U.S. crash data aimed to establish the effects of legislation on driving fatalities and found that previous estimates of seat belt effectiveness had been significantly overstated.
According to the analysis, seat belts decreased fatalities by 1.35% for each 10% increase in seat belt use. The study controlled for endogenous motivations of seat belt use, because that creates an artificial correlation between seat belt use and fatalities, leading to the conclusion that seat belts cause fatalities. For example, drivers in high-risk areas are more likely to use seat belts and are more likely to be in accidents, creating a non-causal correlation between seat belt use and mortality. After accounting for the endogeneity of seat belt usage, Cohen and Einav found no evidence that the risk compensation effect makes seat belt-wearing drivers more dangerous, a finding at variance with other research.
Pros and cons have been debated about the use of seat belts in school buses. School buses, which are much bigger than the average vehicle, allow for the mass transportation of students from place to place. The American School Bus Council states in a brief article: "The children are protected like eggs in an egg carton—compartmentalized, and surrounded with padding and structural integrity to secure the entire container." Although school buses are considered safe for mass transit of students, this will not guarantee that the students will be injury-free if an impact were to occur. Seat belts in buses are sometimes believed to make recovering from a roll or tip harder for passengers, as they could be easily trapped in their own safety belts.
In 2015, for the first time, NHTSA endorsed seat belts on school buses.
Australia has required lap/sash seat belts in new coaches since 1994. These must comply with Australian Design Rule 68, which requires the seat belt, seat and seat anchorage to withstand 20g-force deceleration and an impact by an unrestrained occupant to the rear.
In the United States, NHTSA now requires lap-shoulder seat belts in new "over-the-road" buses (includes most coaches) starting in 2016.
In the United States, recreational railbikes are fitted with lap belts.
/ref> made seat belt reminders mandatory in
/ref>
U.S. regulation history
Efficacy
Delayed start
Regulation by country
International regulations
+international safety regulations
! Continent
! Country
! Reg 14
! Reg 16
! Reg 44
! Reg 129
Local regulations
Legislation
Risk compensation
Increased traffic
Mass transit considerations
Buses
School buses
Motor coaches
Trains
It has been shown that there is no net safety benefit for passengers who choose to wear 3-point restraints on passenger-carrying rail vehicles. Generally, passengers who choose not to wear restraints in a vehicle modified to accept 3-point restraints receive marginally more severe injuries.
Airplanes
See also
External links
|
|