Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 28, 2025

Structural Design and Manufacturing of a Cruiser Class Solar Vehicle
Published on: January 30, 2019
Comparison of frontal crash compatibility metrics between battery-electric and internal-combustion-engine passenger
Becky C Mueller1, Matthew L Brumbelow1, Haden Bragg1
1Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Ruckersville, VA, USA.
Objective:
The objective of this study was to determine if there are any emerging issues related to battery-electric vehicles' (BEVs') geometry, force distribution, and extra weight that may make them more aggressive partners in front-to-front crashes through comparisons of stiffness metrics derived from crash tests.
Methods:
We examined load cell wall data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA's) New Car Assessment Program full-width frontal crash test at 56 km/h. Fourteen BEVs, ranging in class from small cars to large SUVs, were compared with 92 internal-combustion-engine (ICE) vehicles, ranging in class from small cars to midsize pickups. We selected vehicles based on the test results available in the NHTSA Vehicle Crash Test Database, and there were no tests of battery-electric (BE) pickups. Data included load-cell-wall force-time histories and longitudinal vehicle acceleration from the body structure. We constructed force-displacement diagrams and calculated static, dynamic, energy-equivalent, and initial front-end-stiffness metrics from load cell wall forces, vehicle acceleration, and static front-end crush measurements for each vehicle. Linear regression models were applied to the metrics for comparison between powertrains.
Results:
BE cars and BE SUVs weighed more than their ICE counterparts, on average 369 kg and 286 kg more, respectively. Initial (200 mm and 400 mm), energy-equivalent and dynamic front-end-stiffness metrics, average height of force, and individual maximum forces, when compared with vehicle shadow, were not statistically different between powertrains. Static stiffness (p = 0.04) and initial stiffness (300 mm; p = 0.05) decreased for BEVs with greater shadow and increased with greater shadow for ICE vehicles. When controlling for vehicle shadow, dynamic crush was greater (p = 0.01), the percentage of center force was lower (p < 0.001), and maximum peak force was higher (p = 0.01) for BEVs compared with ICE vehicles. For the Kia Niro BEV and ICE pair, the 329 kg heavier BEV had a 165 mm longer crush distance, which resulted in lower forces and stiffness metrics compared with the traditional ICE counterpart.
Conclusion:
Overall, this study indicates that current BEVs are not excessively aggressive in terms of stiffness metrics for frontal crash compatibility compared with ICE vehicles.
More Related Videos
09:34Implementation of Portable Emissions Measurement Systems PEMS for the Real-driving Emissions RDE Regulation in Europe
Published on: December 4, 2016
11:25Identification and Quantification of Decomposition Mechanisms in Lithium-Ion Batteries; Input to Heat Flow Simulation for Modeling Thermal Runaway
Published on: March 7, 2022
Related Concept Videos
Batteries and Fuel Cells
Internal Combustion Engine
Elastic Collisions: Case Study
Impulse
Additionally, it can be shown that the...
Otto and Diesel Cycle
Multiple Voltage Sources
In series, the positive terminal of one battery is connected to the negative terminal of another battery. Hence, the voltage of each battery is added to give the net voltage, which is increased because each battery boosts the electrons that enter it. The same current flows through each battery because they are connected in series.
Batteries are...