Modification of Part 572 Dummy for Lateral Impact According to Biomechanical Data

Stalnaker, Richard L.; Tarrière, C; Fayon, A.; Walfisch, G.; Balthazard, M.; Masset, J.; Got, C.; Patel, Amitkumar

doi:10.4271/791031

Cited by 46 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Perhaps the most widely-cited of these are the frontal hub impacts published by Nahum et al (1971), Kroell and Schneider (1971), and others to establish benchmarking standards for physical and computational models of the thorax. Follow-up studies have looked at thoracic response in other impact directions, including lateral (e.g., Stalnaker et al 1979, Marcus et al 1983, Viano et al 1989, Cavanaugh et al 1993, Pintar et al 2007 and oblique loading (e.g., Shaw et al 2006). Additional studies have investigated the influence of muscle stimulus (L'Abbe et al 1982, Kent et al 2003, restraint type (e.g., Kent et al 2004), and superficial and visceral tissue (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Structural Response of Cadaveric Ribcages Under a Localized Loading: Stiffness and Kinematic Trends

Kindig¹,

Lau²,

Forman³

et al. 2010

SAE Technical Paper Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To improve understanding of structural coupling and deformation patterns throughout the loaded ribcage, the present study reports the force-displacement and kinematic responses under a highly-localized loading condition using three PMHS ribcages (ages 44, 61, and 63 years). The ribcages were quasi-statically loaded locally to a non-failure displacement (nominally 15% of the ribcage depth at the loaded rib level) at approximately 25 unilateral locations and 5-7 geometrically symmetric bilateral locations on the anterior surface of each ribcage, for a total of 94 tests. The translations of 56 points distributed around the anterior, lateral, and posterior portions of the superficial surface of the ribcage were measured while under loading. Each of the first through sixth rib levels was then separated from the remaining ribs, and this "rib ring" structure was individually loaded at the sternum in the anterior-posterior direction. The force when the ribcage was deflected to 8% of its initial depth was normalized to the force at the upper sternum (viz. 81.232.2 N). The normalized unilateral force at the costo-chondral junction was found to vary from 0.760.29 at rib 1 to 0.150.02 at rib 9, while bilateral forces (sum of left and right aspects) varied from 0.92 to 1.11. The rib rings were generally less stiff, ranging from 0.780.24 for rib 1 to 0.190.01 for rib 6. The deformation patterns under all loading conditions were quantified. In general, bilateral loading produced an approximately symmetric deformation pattern, while unilateral loading resulted in approximately twice as much resultant deformation on the ipsilateral side compared to the contralateral side.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Structural Response of Cadaveric Ribcages Under a Localized Loading: Stiffness and Kinematic Trends

Kindig¹,

Lau²,

Forman³

et al. 2010

SAE Technical Paper Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The model output of force vs. time can be seen in comparison with the average data from Stalnaker et al 49 and corridors from ISO TR 9790 in Fig. 8.…”

Section: Force and Deflection Comparisonsmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…29 Similarly, pelvic fracture is predicted by deleting elements past a prescribed failure strain, 0.03 in cortical bone, 23,46 using a plastic kinematic material model. Rib failure strains were determined by computational optimization based on work by Li et al 46 49 In all cases, the geometry of the sled, including the contacting surface, was readily available from the literature study. The lateral Sled A tests were conducted at two velocities, 6.7 and 8.9 m/s and employed a Heidelberg-type side-impact sled to create a left-sided impact.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lateral Impact Validation of a Geometrically Accurate Full Body Finite Element Model for Blunt Injury Prediction

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study presents four validation cases of a mid-sized male (M50) full human body finite element model-two lateral sled tests at 6.7 m/s, one sled test at 8.9 m/s, and a lateral drop test. Model results were compared to transient force curves, peak force, chest compression, and number of fractures from the studies. For one of the 6.7 m/s impacts (flat wall impact), the peak thoracic, abdominal and pelvic loads were 8.7, 3.1 and 14.9 kN for the model and 5.2 ± 1.1 kN, 3.1 ± 1.1 kN, and 6.3 ± 2.3 kN for the tests. For the same test setup in the 8.9 m/s case, they were 12.6, 6, and 21.9 kN for the model and 9.1 ± 1.5 kN, 4.9 ± 1.1 kN, and 17.4 ± 6.8 kN for the experiments. The combined torso load and the pelvis load simulated in a second rigid wall impact at 6.7 m/s were 11.4 and 15.6 kN, respectively, compared to 8.5 ± 0.2 kN and 8.3 ± 1.8 kN experimentally. The peak thorax load in the drop test was 6.7 kN for the model, within the range in the cadavers, 5.8-7.4 kN. When analyzing rib fractures, the model predicted Abbreviated Injury Scale scores within the reported range in three of four cases. Objective comparison methods were used to quantitatively compare the model results to the literature studies. The results show a good match in the thorax and abdomen regions while the pelvis results over predicted the reaction loads from the literature studies. These results are an important milestone in the development and validation of this globally developed average male FEA model in lateral impact.

show abstract

“…Depending on the region of impact and orientation of the surrogate, free-fall tests characterize the biomechanical response of the chest, abdomen or pelvis. For the chest region, an earlier study, reported in 1979, used 15 intact PMHS (25-70 yr) in free-fall impact onto padded or rigid force plates from a height of 0.5-2.03 m (3-6 m/s) and developed force-deflection corridors (Stalnaker et al, 1979). Half-chest compression of 35% represented the limit for AIS p3 rib injury.…”

Section: Free-fall (Drop) Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomechanics of side impact: Injury criteria, aging occupants, and airbag technology

Yoganandan

Pintar

Stemper

et al. 2007

Journal of Biomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a survey of side impact trauma-related biomedical investigations with specific reference to certain aspects of epidemiology relating to the growing elderly population, improvements in technology such as side airbags geared toward occupant safety, and development of injury criteria. The first part is devoted to the involvement of the elderly by identifying variables contributing to injury including impact severity, human factors, and national and international field data. This is followed by a survey of various experimental models used in the development of injury criteria and tolerance limits. The effects of fragility of the elderly coupled with physiological changes (e.g., visual, musculoskeletal) that may lead to an abnormal seating position (termed out-of-position) especially for the driving population are discussed. Fundamental biomechanical parameters such as thoracic, abdominal and pelvic forces; upper and lower spinal and sacrum accelerations; and upper, middle and lower chest deflections under various initial impacting conditions are evaluated. Secondary variables such as the thoracic trauma index and pelvic acceleration (currently adopted in the United States Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards), peak chest deflection, and viscous criteria are also included in the survey. The importance of performing research studies with specific focus on out-of-position scenarios of the elderly and using the most commonly available torso side airbag as the initial contacting condition in lateral impacts for occupant injury assessment is emphasized.

show abstract

Modification of Part 572 Dummy for Lateral Impact According to Biomechanical Data

Cited by 46 publications

References 1 publication

Structural Response of Cadaveric Ribcages Under a Localized Loading: Stiffness and Kinematic Trends

Structural Response of Cadaveric Ribcages Under a Localized Loading: Stiffness and Kinematic Trends

Lateral Impact Validation of a Geometrically Accurate Full Body Finite Element Model for Blunt Injury Prediction

Biomechanics of side impact: Injury criteria, aging occupants, and airbag technology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About