Modelling head injury due to unmanned aircraft systems collision: Crash dummy vs human body

Abstract

Recent developments in the concept of UAS operations in urban areas have led to risk concerns of UAS collision with human. To better understand this risk, head and neck injuries due to UAS collisions have been investigated by different research teams using crash dummies. Because of the limitations in biofidelity of a crash dummy, head injury level for a crash dummy impact may differ from the human body impact. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to investigate differences in head and neck injuries subject to UAS collision between an often-used Hybrid III crash dummy and a human body. To perform such investigation, multibody system (MBS) impact models have been used to simulate UAS impacts on validated models of the Hybrid III crash dummy and the human body at various impact conditions. The findings show that the Hybrid III predicts similar head and neck injury compared to the human body when UAS collides horizontally from front and rear. However, the Hybrid III over-predicts head injury due to horizontal side impact. Moreover, under vertical drop and 45 degree elevated impact of UAS, the Hybrid III under-predicts head injury, and over-predicts neck injury.

Modeling and Simulating Human Fatality due to Quadrotor UAS Impact

“…This human body model can be seen in Figure 7. The comparison of these novel integrated MBS model simulations has shown that there is a discrepancy between the Hybrid III ATD and a human body model for head and neck injury [16,17]. Neck loads were found to be different fundamentally between the crash dummy and the human model.…”

“…This MBS simulation model allows large variations of UAS impact cases to be evaluated on a validated MBS model of a 50 th percentile human body. The second study [16,17] performed a numerical comparison between the Hybrid III crash dummy and the 50 th percentile human body model. It was found that the human ATD used (i.e.…”

“…Section III reviews the main background. This consists of UAS fatality risk curves from RCC and BC models, as well as the results from our preceding two MBS studies [15][16][17]. Section IV 3 presents the extension of the MBS model with injury criteria for thorax and abdomen due to UAS impact, and provides simulations result of DJI Phantom III impacts of the head, thorax, and abdomen as a function of increasing impact energy.…”

Simulating 3D Human Postural Stabilization in Vibration and Dynamic Driving

“…The human active model (version 3.3), as distributed with MADYMO 2022, was adopted using Matlab and Simulink for running simulations and post-processing. The model was developed and validated primarily to simulate high-severity crashes [22][23][24][25] and extended with postural stabilization for low-severity conditions [26][27][28][29]. It represents a mid-size male adult of 75 kg, 1.76 m standing height and 0.92 m erect sitting height.…”