FUTURE WORK FOR TASK 8 Worcester Polytechnic Institute Battelle Memorial Laboratory

1. Development of Verification and Validation Procedures for Computer Simulation use in Roadside Safety ApplicationsNCHRP 22-24 FUTURE WORK FOR TASK 8 Worcester Polytechnic Institute Battelle Memorial Laboratory Politecnicodi Milano

2. Meeting Agenda 9:00-9:30 Introductions/Instructions (Niessner, Focke) 9:30-10:30 Definitions and V&V Procedures (Ray) 10:30-11:30 ROBUST Project Summary (Anghileri) 11:30-Noon Survey Results Noon-1:00 Lunch 1:00- 2:30 V&V Metrics (Ray) 2:30-4:00 Future Work for Task 8 (Ray)

3. PROPOSED FUTURE TASKS • Task 8: Execute the plan • Task 8A: Roadside Safety Simulation Validation Program (RSSVP) • Task 8B: Develop Benchmark Cases • Task 8C: Acceptance Criteria for Quantitative Metrics • Task 8D: Roadside Safety Model Best Practices Guide • Task 8E: Develop standardized V&V report format and procedural Guidelines • Task 9 Test Cases • Task 10 Review the Guidelines • Task 11 Recommendations • Task 12 Final Report

4. Task 8: Execute the Plan Execute the approved plan and developed the Guidelines. • Task 8A: Roadside Safety Simulation Validation Program (RSSVP) • Task 8B: Develop Benchmark Cases • Task 8C: Acceptance Criteria for Quantitative Metrics • Task 8D: Roadside Safety Model Best Practices Guide • Task 8E: Develop standardized V&V report format and procedural Guidelines

5. Task 8A: Roadside Safety Simulation Validation Program (RSSVP) • Develop a computer program that: • Synchronizes the impact time from the two time histories (i.e., method of least squares). • Filters the data for both time histories (SAE J211). • Calculates the following domain-specific metrics: • ORA • OIV • THIV • PHD • ASI • 50 msec avg. • Maximum roll, pitch and yaw • Calculates the following shape comparison metrics for all six DOF (e.g., X,Y,Z accel/vel , RPY rotation rate time histories): • ANOVA • Sprauge-Geers MPC • Others? • Presents: • Comparison time history curves • Tables of result comparisons and metrics • Assessment based on acceptance criteria

6. Task 8A: Roadside Safety Simulation Validation Program (RSSVP) • Verify the calculations in the program against: • Hand/MATLAB calculated examples and • Analytical shapes. • The program should: • Be consistent with TRAP • Be easy to use (i.e., input unfiltered, unmodified time history data both from the simulation program and crash test). • Be useable for BOTH verification and validation. • Be useable for both comparisons of complete models as well as components (crash test domain-specific metrics would not be calculated for component verfication/validation).

7. Task 8B: Develop Benchmark Cases Develop two or three benchmark cases for roadside safety. • Review the literature to find several complete models that: • Use LSDYNA features and material models that are important for roadside safety simulations. • Examples: • TopCrunch

8. Task 8C: Acceptance Criteria for Quantitative Metrics • Use the RSSVP program developed in Task 8A to evaluate repeated crash test data sets and validate the program: • Brown’s six Festiva rigid pole tests. • The 12 rigid barrier ROBUST Round Robin tests. • The four deformable ROBUST Round Robin tests. • Any others we can find. • Determine reasonable acceptance criteria based on the repeated tests. • Subject Mater Expert Survey similar to Moorcroft. • Coordinate Expert opinions to quantitative criteria.

9. Task 8D: Roadside Safety Model Best Practices Guide Develop a roadside safety best practices guide. • Examples: • SAE Committee on aircraft seats is trying to develop a best practices guide • ASME PTC-10 is developing a series of best practices guides. • Such a guide would be useful for • What should be in the guide? • Mesh densities • Time step issues(i.e., mass scaling) • Modeling techniques

10. Task 8E: Develop standardized V&V report format and procedural Guidelines • Body of the report • Develop a procedures guideline consistent with the ASME V&V 10-2006 • Develop a standardized format for V&V reports. • Appendices • Provide Benchmark cases in the standardized format as examples. • Provide an example from Task 9 in the standardized format as an example.

11. Task 8E: Develop standardized V&V report format and procedural Guidelines

12. Task 9: Test Cases Apply the Guidelines to a minimum of two selected crash simulations of roadside hardware designs. Revise Guidelines as appropriate. Select an on-going project at WPI/Battelle/Milan and apply the V&V process to it. • Apply V&V process • Document in the standardized format Possible projects: • Annisquam River Bridge Railing (WPI) • Knee-Thigh-Hip model (WPI) • Tractor-Trailer (Battelle) • Single Unit Truck (Battelle) • Crash cushion project (Politecnico)

13. Task 10: Review the Guidelines Meet with the NCHRP Panel and up to five to eight additional subject-area experts to review the guidelines developed in Task 8, approximately one month after their submittal. Modified guidelines resulting from review comments and discussion at the meeting shall be included in the preliminary draft report. Distribute the draft guidelines and standardized report format to the subject-area experts several months prior to the meeting to allow them to possibly use it. Convene the meeting and discuss the subject-area expert’s experiences with using the Guidelines. Revise/modify the Guidelines to improve the Guidelines based on the comments.

14. Task 11: Recommendations Develop recommendations for implementation for hardware modification acceptance, including a standardized report format for documenting the verification and validation of the model. How can the procedures and guidelines be incorporated into the State/Federal acceptance progress? The Guide should be a “self certification” document. The validation report should act in a similar way to a crash test report submitted as documentation to the FHWA for acceptance.