Rear Impact Responses of Different Sized Adult Hybrid III Dummies

DeRosia, John; Yoganandan, Narayan; Pintar, Frank A.

doi:10.1080/15389580490269182

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The concept of vertical mismatch in head-tohead restraint positioning was advanced in 2004 22 (FIGURE 3). From a geometric standpoint, if a vertical mismatch exists, the cervical spine can be subjected to increased loading as the head is either extended over the top of a head restraint that is too low (for taller occupants) or strikes the seatback and is pushed up into contact with a head restraint that is too high (for shorter occupants).…”

Section: Differences In Head and Neck Morphologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Whiplash-Associated Disorders: Occupant Kinematics and Neck Morphology

Stemper¹,

Corner²

2016

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

FIGURE 1.Initial phases of head-neck response to automotive rear impacts. The rear impact initiates with the occupant in a neutral upright position. As the thorax is accelerated anteriorly, the head remains stationary during the retraction phase, producing an S-shaped cervical spine curvature. Eventually, loads from the thorax are transferred up the cervical spine and the head-neck complex transitions into extension, with the cervical spine in an overall C-shaped extension curvature. The head eventually rebounds forward (not shown), and the cervical spine then transitions into flexion. Used with permission from Stemper et al. 93 Copyright ©2011 Wiley-Liss, Inc. foam/springs and rearward deflection, which absorb energy and decrease impact severity for the occupant. The magnitude of seatback deformation and deflection is dependent on the occupant's torso mass and center of gravity. Greater mass and higher center of gravity contribute to greater deflection and decreased overall impact severity. Average female body mass is 20% lighter and torso height is 8% shorter. 30,31 Therefore, the ability to deflect the seatback is decreased in females, who would experience more severe loading on the head-neck complex during a given rear impact.This section highlighted the role of body size on cervical spine injury risk during automotive rear impacts, advancing the theory that size-based mismatches between the vehicle seat and occupant anthropometrics contribute to greater injury risk for smaller occupants. This concept would hold true for either males or females, but may help explain the preponderance of whiplash injuries in females due to their generally smaller body size. Shorter sitting height can result in head interaction with the bottom of the head restraint, which increases injury risk. However, taller occupants with incorrectly adjusted head restraints also experience increased injury risk due to the head rotating over the head restraint and increasing extension moments on the cervical spine. Decreased body mass and shorter center-of-torso mass in smaller occupants also contribute to decreased dynamic energy absorption of the seatback. While these differences illustrate mechanisms of increased injury risk for smaller occupants, other morphological differences may also contribute. Differences in Head and Neck MorphologyGiven that a majority of injuries resulting from automotive rear impacts affect the cervical spine, 9 differences in headneck morphology can influence injury risk. Once again, sex-based differences will be used to demonstrate this concept. Neck slenderness, a mechanical term body sizes farther from those standards may not be protected as well.Research studies report that head-tohead restraint backset is lower in females than in males due to rearward incline of automotive seats and decreased sitting height for average females compared to males.12 Sitting height for average females is approximately 6 cm shorter than that for average males. 30,31 This means that the posterior aspect of the head for the comp...

show abstract

Section: Differences In Head and Neck Morphologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Whiplash-Associated Disorders: Occupant Kinematics and Neck Morphology

Stemper¹,

Corner²

2016

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Test dummies thus have been widely used in numerous applications related to human dynamic simulations. 3,4 Recently, rapid advances in computer technology have enabled applied mathematicians, engineers and scientists to achieve significant progress in solving previously intractable problems. In vehicle collision analysis, mathematical modelling is essential for investigating the dynamic behaviour of occupants and also in injury analysis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Kane’s method applied to the simulation of a vehicle occupant in side impact

Teng

Liang

Huang

et al. 2012

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part K:

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For measuring the response of vehicle occupants, dummy models were used to obtain fundamental information about the human body’s ability to withstand the crushing and tearing forces in a crash test. Various numerical dummy models that accurately simulate human response in crash simulations have been developed for research and development purposes. Multi-body dynamics analyses have recently been applied extensively to biodynamic modelling and to studies of the dynamic behaviour of bio-systems. This study presents three-dimensional 15-segment seated human body model and algorithm based on techniques developed in the study of rigid multi-body system dynamics. The dynamic response and injuries assessment of the vehicle occupant in a side impact was discussed. To confirm the accuracy of the proposed human body model and numerical procedure, the current results were compared with experimental data. The results indicate that the numerical method proposed in this study has considerable potential for evaluating a vehicle’s crash safety performance and guiding the future development of safety technologies.

show abstract

Embracing chaos: the scope and importance of clinical and pathological heterogeneity in mTBI

Rosenbaum

Lipton

2012

Brain Imaging and Behavior

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) manifests a wide array of clinical features, indicating great heterogeneity of its underlying pathologic features. mTBI diversity is related to pre-injury inter-individual differences and differences in the characteristics of each injury. This review summarizes key features of mTBI patients, their injuries and outcomes to give context to the scope of complexity inherent in this disorder. These differences are underscored by heterogeneity in postmortem pathology and in vivo imaging studies. Recognition, understanding and accounting for disease heterogeneity in mTBI are needed to enhance diagnosis and patient management, as approaches that do not account for inter-individual variation in pathology and patient characteristics relevant to real-life clinical trial participants, may entirely miss therapeutic targets. Refining our approach to TBI diagnosis, in light of inter-individual differences, can facilitate the development of effective prognostic tools and algorithms. New paradigms, which embrace heterogeneity of mTBI, in both preclinical and clinical investigation as well the appreciation of this variability in clinical care, offer much promise for enhancing outcomes and mitigating the burden of mTBI on its victims.

show abstract

Rear Impact Responses of Different Sized Adult Hybrid III Dummies

Cited by 6 publications

References 3 publications

Whiplash-Associated Disorders: Occupant Kinematics and Neck Morphology

Whiplash-Associated Disorders: Occupant Kinematics and Neck Morphology

Kane’s method applied to the simulation of a vehicle occupant in side impact

Embracing chaos: the scope and importance of clinical and pathological heterogeneity in mTBI

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About