Rear Impact Dummy Biofidelity
|
|
|
- Morris Young
- 10 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 GTR 7 Informal Working Group February 28 March Brussels, Belgium Rear Impact Dummy Biofidelity Kevin Moorhouse, Ph.D. NHTSA Yun-Seok Kang Ohio State University
2 Objectives & Tasks Evaluate biofidelity of available RIDs (BioRID, RID3D, HyIII) Choose biofidelity test condition Develop experimental seat for rear impact sled testing Conduct sled tests PMHS (Post-Mortem Human Subjects) Dummies (BioRID II, RID3D, Hybrid III) Assess biofidelity and repeatability of dummies Investigate the mechanism of injury Develop and validate 3-D cervical spine kinematic instrumentation Identify injurious kinematics (if possible) Choose appropriate dummy & injury criterion Assess efficacy of various ICs (if possible)
3 Objectives & Tasks Evaluate biofidelity of available RIDs (BioRID, RID3D, HyIII) Choose biofidelity test condition Develop experimental seat for rear impact sled testing Conduct sled tests PMHS (Post-Mortem Human Subjects) Dummies (BioRID II, RID3D, Hybrid III) Assess biofidelity and repeatability of dummies Investigate the mechanism of injury Develop and validate 3-D cervical spine kinematic instrumentation Identify injurious kinematics (if possible) Choose appropriate dummy & injury criterion Assess efficacy of various ICs (if possible)
4 Objectives & Tasks Evaluate biofidelity of available RIDs (BioRID, RID3D, HyIII) Choose biofidelity test condition Develop experimental seat for rear impact sled testing Conduct sled tests PMHS (Post-Mortem Human Subjects) Dummies (BioRID II, RID3D, Hybrid III) Assess biofidelity and repeatability of dummies Investigate the mechanism of injury Develop and validate 3-D cervical spine kinematic instrumentation Identify injurious kinematics (if possible) Choose appropriate dummy & injury criterion Assess efficacy of various ICs (if possible)
5 Pulses: Low & Moderate speed Low (16.7kph/8.5g)-ATD Low (16.7kph/8.5g)-PMHS Moderate (24kph/1.5g)-ATD Moderate (24kph/1.5g) - PMHS Acceleration[g] Time [msec]
6 Objectives & Tasks Evaluate biofidelity of available RIDs (BioRID, RID3D, HyIII) Choose biofidelity test condition Develop experimental seat for rear impact sled testing Conduct sled tests PMHS (Post-Mortem Human Subjects) Dummies (BioRID II, RID3D, Hybrid III) Assess biofidelity and repeatability of dummies Investigate the mechanism of injury Develop and validate 3-D cervical spine kinematic instrumentation Identify injurious kinematics (if possible) Choose appropriate dummy & injury criterion Assess efficacy of various ICs (if possible)
7 Experimental Seat Design goals for experimental seat: Repeatable & Reproducible Two seats side-by-side Capable of measuring/evaluating external biofidelity 6 load cells in seat back 4 load cells in seat pan 4 load cells in head restraint Able to match the yielding seat back motion of a typical OEM seat Durable and Reusable Withstand multiple tests without degradation in response
8 Head restraint Diameter :17 mm Damper One-way damper ( 2) Experimental Seat Angular rate sensor Mass : 5.5 kg Seat -Mass: 3 kg -Padding / cushions / seat cover of 1999 Toyota Camry seat Seat instrumentation HR LCs SB LCs Spring Stiffness: 135 N/m ( 2) SP LCs
9 R&R Steel Ballast: Experimental Seat Driver- Seat back rotation Passenger- Seat back rotation Rotation[Deg] DTS Test1 DTS Test2 DTS Test3 DTS Test4 DTS Test5 TEMA Test1 TEMA Test2 TEMA Test3 TEMA Test4 TEMA Test5 Rotation[Deg] DTS Test#1 DTS Test#2 DTS Test#4 DTS Test#5 TEMA Test#1 TEMA Test#2 TEMA Test#3 TEMA Test#4 TEMA Test# Time [msec] Time [msec] Repeatability (driver): CV = 3.4 % (DTS); CV = 3.5 % (Video) Repeatability (passenger): CV = 2.7 % (DTS); CV = 2.7 % (Video) Reproducibility: CV = 3. % (DTS); CV = 3. % (Video)
10 Objectives & Tasks Evaluate biofidelity of available RIDs (BioRID, RID3D, HyIII) Choose biofidelity test condition Develop experimental seat for rear impact sled testing Conduct sled tests PMHS (Post-Mortem Human Subjects) Dummies (BioRID II, RID3D, Hybrid III) Assess biofidelity and repeatability of dummies Investigate the mechanism of injury Develop and validate 3-D cervical spine kinematic instrumentation Identify injurious kinematics (if possible) Choose appropriate dummy & injury criterion Assess efficacy of various ICs (if possible)
11 Test Matrix Test Number Three repeats at each speed Test Speed Dummies Driver Side Dummy Passenger Side Dummy 1 L Hybrid III 5 th BioRID II 2 L Hybrid III 5 th BioRID II 3 L RID3D BioRID II 4 L RID3D BioRID II 5 L RID3D Hybrid III 5 th 6 M RID3D Hybrid III 5 th 7 M RID3D Hybrid III 5 th 8 M RID3D BioRID II 9 M RID3D BioRID II 7 PMHS at each speed Test Number PMHS Test Speed Driver Side Dummy 1 M PMHS 1 2 L (4) PMHS 2 3 L/M PMHS 3 4 L/M PMHS 4 5 L/M PMHS 5 6 L/M PMHS 6 7 L/M PMHS 7 8 L/M PMHS 8 1 M Hybrid III 5 th BioRID II
12 Internal Biofidelity Measures Accelerometers (x, z) Accelerometers (x, z) & angular rate sensor (y) Load cell Aluminum tetrahedron -9au -3aω -6aω ω y (DTS3LL) A z2 (ACC-2LR) A y (ACC-3UP) x 3 z A z (ACC-2UP) 2 y A ω z (DTS2LL) y3 (ACC-3LR) A x (ACC-1UP) <RID3D> <BioRID II> <Hybrid III> ω x (DTS1LL) A x1 (ACC-1LR) <PMHS> 1 RID 3D BioRID II Hybrid III PMHS Head Two Acc (x, z) Two Acc (x, z) Two Acc (x, z) One ARS (y) One ARS (y) One ARS (y) 6aω T1 Two Acc (x, z) One ARS (y) Two Acc (x, z) One ARS (y) Two Acc (x, z) One ARS (y) Two Acc (x, z) One ARS (y) T8 None Two Acc (x, z) None Two Acc (x, z) T12 Two Acc (x, z) None None L1 None Two Acc (x, z) None Pelvis Two Acc (x, z) One ARS (y) Two Acc (x, z) One ARS (y) Two Acc (x, z) One ARS (y) Two Acc (x, z) Two Acc (x, z) One ARS (y) RID 3D BioRID II Hybrid III PMHS Skull Cap Fx, Fz Fx, Fz None None Upper neck Fx, Fz, My Fx, Fz, My Fx, Fz, My None Lower neck Fx, Fz, My Fx, Fz, My Fx, Fz, My None Lumbar Fx, Fz, My Fx, Fz, My Fx, Fz, My None Muscle Substitute (front) Muscle Substitute (rear) None Fx None None None Fx None None
13 Sled Tests Low Speed (8.5 g, 16.7 kph FMVSS 22) RID3D PMHS 1 BioRID II Hybrid III
14 Sled Tests Moderate Speed (1.5 g, 24. kph) RID3D PMHS1 BioRID II Hybrid III
15 Methodology Create Biomechanical Targets from PMHS data Calculate mean and standard deviation curves Phase shift optimally aligned (Donnelly & Moorhouse, 21) Calculate ATD mean curves Calculate biofidelity ranking Updated NHTSA Biofidelity Ranking System Calculate Repeatability Peak %CV Average time-based %CV
16 Methodology Create Biomechanical Targets from PMHS data Calculate mean and standard deviation curves Phase shift optimally aligned (Donnelly & Moorhouse, 21) Calculate ATD mean curves Calculate biofidelity ranking Updated NHTSA Biofidelity Ranking System Calculate Repeatability Peak %CV Average time-based %CV
17 Methodology (Phase Alignment) Acceleration [g] PMHS2 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS
18 Methodology (Phase Alignment) Acceleration [g] PMHS2 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
19 Methodology (Phase Alignment) Acceleration [g] PMHS2 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS
20 Methodology (Phase Alignment) Acceleration [g] PMHS2 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS
21 Methodology (Phase Alignment) Acceleration [g] PMHS2 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
22 Methodology (Phase Alignment) Acceleration [g] PMHS2 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
23 Methodology (Phase Alignment) Acceleration [g] PMHS2 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
24 Methodology Create Biomechanical Targets from PMHS data Calculate mean and standard deviation curves Phase shift optimally aligned (Donnelly & Moorhouse, 21) Calculate ATD mean curves Calculate biofidelity ranking Updated NHTSA Biofidelity Ranking System Calculate Repeatability Peak %CV Average time-based %CV
25 Methodology Create Biomechanical Targets from PMHS data Calculate mean and standard deviation curves Phase shift optimally aligned (Donnelly & Moorhouse, 21) Calculate ATD mean curves Calculate biofidelity ranking Updated NHTSA Biofidelity Ranking System Calculate Repeatability Peak %CV Average time-based %CV
26 Methodology (Biofidelity) Biomechanical Target Mean PMHS response ± one standard deviation NHTSA Bio Rank (Rhule et al., 22, 29) B m j= 1 V = m j j= 1 n k = 1 V j n R j,k B = biofidelity rank V = test condition weight R = response measurement comparison value (DCV/CCV) j = test condition k = response measurement m = # of test conditions n = # of response measurements per test condition
27 Methodology (Biofidelity) Biomechanical Target Mean PMHS response ± one standard deviation NHTSA Bio Rank (Rhule et al., 22, 29) B m j= 1 V = m j j= 1 n k = 1 V j n R j,k B = biofidelity rank V = test condition weight R = response measurement comparison value (DCV/CCV) j = test condition k = response measurement m = # of test conditions n = # of response measurements per test condition
28 Methodology (Biofidelity) Biomechanical Target Biomechanical Target Mean PMHS response ± one standard deviation NHTSA Bio Rank (Rhule et al., 22) B m j= 1 V = m j j= 1 n k = 1 V j n R j,k R = DCV / B = biofidelity CCVrank V = test Mean condition + 1 SDweight R = response 1 SD measurement comparison value (DCV/CCV) j = test Mean condition k = response n measurement m = # of test conditions n = # of Mean response 1 SD 1 measurements per test condition
29 Methodology (Biofidelity) Biomechanical Target Mean PMHS response ± one standard deviation NHTSA Bio Rank (Rhule et al., 22) B m j= 1 V = m j j= 1 n k = 1 V j n R j,k R = DCV / B = biofidelity CCVrank V = test condition weight R = response measurement comparison value (DCV/CCV) t j = test = condition e 2 DCV ( Dummy(t) MeanPMHS(t) ) k = response ts measurement m = # of test conditions n = # of response measurements per test condition
30 Methodology (Biofidelity) Biomechanical Target Mean PMHS response ± one standard deviation NHTSA Bio Rank (Rhule et al., 22) B m j= 1 V = m j j= 1 n k = 1 V j n R j,k R = DCV / B = biofidelity CCVrank V = test condition weight R = response te measurement comparison value 2 CCV = (DCV/CCV) ( MeanPMHS(t) + SD(t) MeanPMHS(t) ) ts te j = test condition 2 = ( SD(t) ) k = response measurement ts te m = # of test conditions = VariancePMHS(t) ts n = # of response measurements per test condition
31 Methodology (Biofidelity) Biomechanical Target Mean PMHS response ± one standard deviation NHTSA Bio Rank (Rhule et al., 22, 29) B m j= 1 V = m j j= 1 n k = 1 V j n R j,k B = biofidelity rank V = test condition weight R = response measurement comparison value (DCV/CCV) j = test condition k = response measurement m = # of test conditions n = # of response measurements per test condition
32 Methodology Create Biomechanical Targets from PMHS data Calculate mean and standard deviation curves Phase shift optimally aligned (Donnelly & Moorhouse, 21) Calculate ATD mean curves Calculate biofidelity ranking Updated NHTSA Biofidelity Ranking System Calculate Repeatability Peak %CV Average time-based %CV
33 Methodology (Repeatability) Peak analysis (Rhule 25) Coefficient of variation R&R rating C.V. % Excellent to 5 Good >5 to 8 Acceptable >8 to 1 Poor >1
34 Methodology (Repeatability) Peak analysis (Rhule 25) Coefficient of variation R&R rating C.V. % Excellent to 5 Good >5 to 8 Acceptable >8 to 1 Poor >1 Time based analysis (J Shaw 26) Average C.V. across time Upper 5% only
35 External Biofidelity Parameters Measured Signals SB Upper Left SB Upper Right SB Center Left SB Center Right SB Lower Left SB Lower Right SP Rear Left SP Rear Right SP Front Left SP Front Right HR Contact Time HR Fx Top HR Fx Bottom HR Fz Left HR Fz Right Lap Belt Tension
36 External Biofidelity Parameters Measured Signals SB Upper Left SB Upper Right SB Center Left SB Center Right SB Lower Left SB Lower Right SP Rear Left SP Rear Right SP Front Left SP Front Right HR Contact Time HR Fx Top HR Fx Bottom HR Fz Left HR Fz Right Lap Belt Tension Included in BioRank Sum SB Total Sum SP Total HR Contact Time Sum HR Fx Sum HR Fz
37 Internal Biofidelity Parameters Measured Signals Head Acc x Head Acc z Head Ang Vy T1 Acc x T1 Acc z T1 Ang Vy T8 Acc x T8 Acc z T12 Acc x T12 Acc z Pelvis Acc x Pelvis Acc z Pelvis Ang Vy
38 Internal Biofidelity Parameters Measured Signals Head Acc x Head Acc z Head Ang Vy T1 Acc x T1 Acc z T1 Ang Vy T8 Acc x T8 Acc z T12 Acc x T12 Acc z Pelvis Acc x Pelvis Acc z Pelvis Ang Vy Included in BioRank Head Acc Res Head Rotation T1 Acc Res T1 Rotation T8 Acc Res T12 Acc Res Pelvis Acc Res Pelvis Rotation HIC Head to T1 Rotation
39 External Biofidelity Low Speed Total Seat Back Load 1-1 Force [N] PMHS2 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
40 External Biofidelity Low Speed Total Seat Back Load 1 Force [N] HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS R R
41 External Biofidelity Low Speed Total Seat Back Load 1 Force [N] HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg)
42 External Biofidelity Low Speed Total Seat Pan Load 2-2 Force [N] PMHS2 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
43 External Biofidelity Low Speed Total Seat Pan Load 2 HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Force [N] R R
44 External Biofidelity Low Speed Total Seat Pan Load 2 HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Force [N] %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg)
45 External Biofidelity Low Speed HR Contact Time HR Contact Time (Low Speed) PMHS 113. ± 7.4 ms HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII Mean HR Contact Time (Low Speed) HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII R Peak C.V
46 External Biofidelity Low Speed Total HR Load (Front) 5-5 Force [N] PMHS2 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
47 External Biofidelity Low Speed Total HR Load (Front) 5 Force [N] HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS R R
48 External Biofidelity Low Speed Total HR Load (Front) 5 Force [N] HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg)
49 External Biofidelity Low Speed Results External Biofidelity (Low Speed) HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII R Sum SB Total Sum SP Total HR Contact Time Sum HR Fx Sum HR Fz N/A N/A N/A Mean
50 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed Head Acceleration (Resultant) Acceleration [g] PMHS2 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
51 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed Head Acceleration (Resultant) HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Acceleration [g] R R
52 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed Head Acceleration (Resultant) HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Acceleration [g] %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg)
53 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed Head Rotation Rotation [deg] PMHS2 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
54 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed Head Rotation HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Rotation [deg] R R
55 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed Head Rotation Rotation [deg] HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg)
56 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed T1 Acceleration (Resultant) Acceleration [g] PMHS2 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
57 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed T1 Acceleration (Resultant) 5 4 HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Acceleration [g] R R
58 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed T1 Acceleration (Resultant) 5 4 HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Acceleration [g] %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg)
59 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed T1 Rotation Rotation [deg] PMHS2 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
60 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed T1 Rotation 5 4 HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Rotation [deg] R R
61 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed T1 Rotation 5 4 HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Rotation [deg] %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg)
62 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed T8 Acceleration (Resultant) Acceleration [g] PMHS2 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS8 Mean
63 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed T8 Acceleration (Resultant) BioRIDII PMHS Acceleration [g] R R N/A N/A 1.
64 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed T8 Acceleration (Resultant) BioRIDII PMHS Acceleration [g] %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg) N/A N/A N/A N/A
65 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed T12/L1 Acceleration (Resultant) Acceleration [g] PMHS2 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
66 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed T12/L1 Acceleration (Resultant) 12 1 RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Acceleration [g] R R N/A
67 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed T12/L1 Acceleration (Resultant) 12 1 RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Acceleration [g] %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg) N/A N/A
68 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed Pelvis Acceleration (Resultant) Acceleration [g] PMHS2 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
69 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed Pelvis Acceleration (Resultant) 25 2 HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Acceleration [g] R R
70 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed Pelvis Acceleration (Resultant) 25 2 HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Acceleration [g] %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg)
71 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed Pelvis Rotation Rotation [deg] PMHS2 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
72 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed Pelvis Rotation HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Rotation [deg] R R
73 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed Pelvis Rotation Rotation [deg] HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg)
74 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed Head to T1 Rotation 5 25 Rotation [deg] PMHS2 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
75 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed Head to T1 Rotation 5 25 Rotation [deg] HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII Mean R R
76 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed HIC PMHS 39.1 ± 8.5 HIC (Low Speed) HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII Mean HIC (Low Speed) HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII R Peak C.V
77 Internal Biofidelity Low Speed Results Internal Biofidelity (Low Speed) HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII R Head Acc Res Head Rotation T1 Acc Res T1 Rotation T8 Acc Res N/A N/A 1. T12 Acc Res N/A Pelvis Acc Res Pelvis Rotation Head to T HIC Mean
78 Sled Pulse Moderate Speed (1.5 g, 24. kph) Acceleration [g] HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Velocity [km/h] HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS
79 External Biofidelity Moderate Speed Total Seat Back Load 2-2 Force [N] PMHS1 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
80 External Biofidelity Moderate Speed Total Seat Back Load 2 Force [N] HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS R R
81 External Biofidelity Moderate Speed Total Seat Back Load 2 Force [N] HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg)
82 External Biofidelity Moderate Speed Total Seat Pan Load 2-2 Force [N] PMHS1 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
83 External Biofidelity Moderate Speed Total Seat Pan Load 2 HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Force [N] R R
84 External Biofidelity Moderate Speed Total Seat Pan Load 2 HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Force [N] %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg)
85 External Biofidelity Moderate Speed HR Contact Time HRContact Time (Moderate Speed) PMHS ± 11.5 ms HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII Mean HR Contact Time (Moderate Speed) HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII R Peak C.V
86 External Biofidelity Moderate Speed Total HR Load (Front) Force [N] PMHS1 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
87 External Biofidelity Moderate Speed Total HR Load (Front) Force [N] HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS R R
88 External Biofidelity Moderate Speed Total HR Load (Front) Force [N] HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg)
89 External Biofidelity Moderate Speed Total HR Load (Top) Force [N] PMHS1 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
90 External Biofidelity Moderate Speed Total HR Load (Top) HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Force [N] R R
91 External Biofidelity Moderate Speed Total HR Load (Top) HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Force [N] %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg) N/A N/A N/A N/A
92 External Biofidelity Moderate Speed Results External Biofidelity (Moderate Speed) HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII R Sum SB Total Sum SP Total HR Contact Time Sum HR Fx Sum HR Fz Mean
93 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed Head Acceleration (Resultant) Acceleration [g] PMHS1 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
94 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed Head Acceleration (Resultant) HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Acceleration [g] R R
95 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed Head Acceleration (Resultant) HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Acceleration [g] %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg)
96 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed Head Rotation Rotation [deg] PMHS1 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
97 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed Head Rotation 1 75 HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Rotation [deg] 5 25 R R
98 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed Head Rotation 1 75 HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Rotation [deg] 5 25 %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg)
99 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed T1 Acceleration (Resultant) Acceleration [g] PMHS1 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
100 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed T1 Acceleration (Resultant) HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Acceleration [g] R R
101 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed T1 Acceleration (Resultant) HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Acceleration [g] %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg)
102 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed T1 Rotation Rotation [deg] PMHS1 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
103 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed T1 Rotation 8 6 HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Rotation [deg] 4 2 R R
104 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed T1 Rotation 8 6 HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Rotation [deg] 4 2 %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg)
105 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed T8 Acceleration (Resultant) Acceleration [g] PMHS1 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
106 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed T8 Acceleration (Resultant) 7 6 BioRIDII PMHS Acceleration [g] R R N/A N/A
107 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed T8 Acceleration (Resultant) 7 6 BioRIDII PMHS Acceleration [g] %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg) N/A N/A N/A N/A
108 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed T12/L1 Acceleration (Resultant) Acceleration [g] PMHS1 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
109 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed T12/L1 Acceleration (Resultant) RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Acceleration [g] R R N/A
110 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed T12/L1 Acceleration (Resultant) RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Acceleration [g] %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg) N/A N/A
111 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed Pelvis Acceleration (Resultant) Acceleration [g] PMHS1 PMHS4 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
112 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed Pelvis Acceleration (Resultant) HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Acceleration [g] R R
113 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed Pelvis Acceleration (Resultant) 4 35 HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Acceleration [g] %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg)
114 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed Pelvis Rotation Rotation [deg] PMHS1 PMHS3 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
115 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed Pelvis Rotation 4 3 HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Rotation [deg] R R
116 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed Pelvis Rotation 4 3 HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII PMHS Rotation [deg] %CV %CV (Peak) (Avg)
117 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed Head to T1 Rotation 5 25 Rotation [deg] PMHS1 PMHS3 PMHS4 PMHS5 PMHS6 PMHS7 PMHS8 Mean
118 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed Head to T1 Rotation 5 25 Rotation [deg] HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII Mean R R
119 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed HIC HIC (Moderate Speed) PMHS 62.3 ± 18. HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII Mean HIC (Moderate Speed) HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII R Peak C.V
120 Internal Biofidelity Moderate Speed Results Internal Biofidelity (Moderate Speed) HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII R Head Acc Res Head Rotation T1 Acc Res T1 Rotation T8 Acc Res N/A N/A 2.47 T12 Acc Res N/A Pelvis Acc Res Pelvis Rotation Head to T HIC Mean
121 Final Biofidelity Results Final Biofidelity Results HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII R External (Low) Internal (Low) Total (Low) External (Moderate) Internal (Moderate) Total (Moderate)
122 Repeatability Results Repeatability (Peak CV) Repeatability (Avg CV) HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII % C.V. (Peak) Low Speed Moderate Speed HybridIII RID3D BioRIDII % C.V. (Avg) Low Speed Moderate Speed
123 Conclusions Biofidelity Low Speed External Biofidelity BioRID II Internal Biofidelity BioRID II, RID3D Total Biofidelity BioRID II Moderate Speed External Biofidelity BioRID II, RID3D Internal Biofidelity BioRID II Total Biofidelity BioRID II, RID3D Repeatability BioRID II had best overall repeatability (all dummies acceptable)
124 Questions? Thank you
ENHANCEMENT OF SEAT PERFORMANCE IN LOW-SPEED REAR IMPACT
ENHANCEMENT OF SEAT PERFORMANCE IN LOW-SPEED REAR IMPACT Harald Zellmer Michael Stamm Alexander Seidenschwang Autoliv GmbH, Elmshorn, Germany Anton Brunner Winterthur Insurance Corp., Dep. of Accident
ABSTRACT INJURY CRITERION TO ASSESS WHIPLASH INJURY IN FMVSS NO. 202 DYNAMIC TEST OPTION
KINEMATICALLY BASED WHIPLASH INJURY CRITERION Shashi Kuppa, James Saunders, Jason Stammen National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Ann Mallory Transportation Research Center Inc. U.S.A 05-0211 ABSTRACT
Assessment of Whiplash Protection in Rear Impacts. Crash Tests and Real-life Crashes
Assessment of Whiplash Protection in Rear Impacts Crash Tests and Real-life Crashes Maria Krafft, Anders Kullgren Folksam Anders Lie, Claes Tingvall Swedish National Road Administration June 24 Summary
COMPARISON OF BIORID INJURY CRITERIA BETWEEN DYNAMIC SLED TESTS AND VEHICLE CRASH TESTS
COMPARISON OF BIORID INJURY CRITERIA BETWEEN DYNAMIC SLED TESTS AND VEHICLE CRASH TESTS David A. Aylor David S. Zuby Insurance Institute for Highway Safety United States Paper No. 11-235 ABSTRACT The Insurance
Minutes. GTR No. 7 / BioRID TEG. Group of Experts Whiplash Injury Criteria Meeting
Minutes GTR No. 7 / BioRID TEG Group of Experts Whiplash Injury Criteria Meeting Date & Timing: Location: Minutes drafted by: Participants: Documents: Monday September 8 th 2014, 13:00-17:30 (CET) and
WHIPLASH INJURIES, NOT ONLY A PROBLEM IN REAR-END IMPACT
WHIPLASH INJURIES, NOT ONLY A PROBLEM IN REAR-END IMPACT Hans Cappon Michiel van Ratingen Jac Wismans TNO Automotive The Netherlands Wolf Hell and Dina Lang German Institute for Vehicle Safety (GDV) Germany
Summary Report: Requirements and Assessment of Low-Speed Rear Impact Whiplash Dummies
Summary Report: Requirements and Assessment of Low-Speed Rear Impact Whiplash Dummies WG12 report October 2008 Report published on the EEVC web site: www.eevc.org Report obtained from EEVC web site www.eevc.org
Q dummy family. Fahrzeugsicherheit Berlin e.v. Robert Kant, Christian Kleessen (Humanetics)
Computational models of Q dummy family Ines Lehmann, Heiko Johannsen (VFSB) Robert Kant, Christian Kleessen (Humanetics) Protection of children hld in cars, December 2 3, 2010, Munich Fahrzeugsicherheit
A multi-body head and neck model for low speed rear impact analysis
12th IFToMM World Congress, Besançon (France), June18-21, 27 A multi-body head and neck model for low speed rear impact analysis S. Himmetoglu *, M. Acar, A.J. Taylor, K. Bouazza-Marouf Mechanical and
PERFORMANCE OF SEATS WITH ACTIVE HEAD RESTRAINTS IN REAR IMPACTS
PERFORMANCE OF SEATS WITH ACTIVE HEAD RESTRAINTS IN REAR IMPACTS Liming Voo Bethany McGee Andrew Merkle Michael Kleinberger Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory United States of America
US FMVSS 202 Final Rule
Comparison of Regulations FMVSS 202 (Current standard, Final Rule, and ) A. Application 1. Vehicles Front outboard seating positions in passenger cars, MPVs and trucks with a GVWR 4536 kg 2. Requirements
Assessing the Female Neck Injury Risk
Content 1 Assessing the Female Neck Injury Risk 3 Thesis About why Females are at Greater Risk of Sustaining Whiplash Injuries Assessing the Female Neck Injury Risk 4 High Speed X-Ray Motion Analysis of
BioRID II Dummy Model Development -- Influence of Parameters in Validation and Consumer Tests
9 th International LS-DYNA Users Conference Crash/Safety (2) BioRID II Dummy Model Development -- Influence of Parameters in Validation and Consumer Tests S. Stahlschmidt*, B. Keding*, U. Franz*, A. Hirth**
INVESTIGATION OF LOWER SPINE COMPRESSION FRACTURES IN FRONTAL CRASHES
INVESTIGATION OF LOWER SPINE COMPRESSION FRACTURES IN FRONTAL CRASHES Rodney W. Rudd, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Company Logo Here Overview Lower spine includes: 10 th through 12 th
Safety performance comparisons of different types of child seats in high speed impact tests
Safety performance comparisons of different types of child seats in high speed impact tests Jia Hu Dazhi Wang Michael Mellor Guoqiang Chen Dayong Wang Zheng Li Yongguang Wang Xing Su Jianyong Ma Xiaodong
Thoracic Injury Criterion for Frontal Crash Applicable to All Restraint Systems
Stapp Car Crash Journal, Vol. 47 (October 2003), pp. 323-348 Copyright 2003 The Stapp Association Stapp Car Crash Journal 2003-22-0015 Thoracic Injury Criterion for Frontal Crash Applicable to All Restraint
A NEW TEST METHOD FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF NECK INJURIES IN REAR-END COLLISIONS
A NEW TEST METHOD FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF NECK INJURIES IN REAR-END COLLISIONS Hans Cappon, Mat Philippens, Jac Wismans TNO Automotive The Netherlands Paper # 242 ABSTRACT Whiplash injuries due to rear-end
Field Accident Data Analysis of 2 nd Row Children and Individual Case Reviews
Field Accident Data Analysis of 2 nd Row Children and Individual Case Reviews David C Viano, Chantal S Parenteau ProBiomechanics LLC SAE 2008-01 01-18511851 CSS 38% U 50% Front 45% Background Children
Volvo Trucks view on Truck Rollover Accidents
Volvo Trucks view on Truck Rollover Accidents Mario Ligovic, Volvo Truck Corporation, Göteborg, Sweden INTRODUCTION Rollover is the most common heavy truck accident type. Experiencing a rollover is like
Digges 1 INJURIES TO RESTRAINED OCCUPANTS IN FAR-SIDE CRASHES. Kennerly Digges The Automotive Safety Research Institute Charlottesville, Virginia, USA
INJURIES TO RESTRAINED OCCUPANTS IN FAR-SIDE CRASHES Kennerly Digges The Automotive Safety Research Institute Charlottesville, Virginia, USA Dainius Dalmotas Transport Canada Ottawa, Canada Paper Number
INFLUENCE OF SEATBACK CONTENT AND DEFLECTION ON FMVSS 202A DYNAMIC RESPONSE
INFLUENCE OF SEATBACK CONTENT AND DEFLECTION ON FMVSS 22A DYNAMIC RESPONSE Gerald Locke Eric Veine Lear Corporation Andrew Merkle Michael Kleinberger Ian Wing Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory
Pedestrian protection - Pedestrian in collision with personal car
Pedestrian protection - Pedestrian in collision with personal car Authors: Jiří Svoboda, Ing; Zdeněk Šolc, Ing. Czech Technical University in Prague, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Department of Automotive
SAE / Government Meeting. Washington, D.C. May 2005
SAE / Government Meeting Washington, D.C. May 2005 Overview of the Enhancements and Changes in the CIREN Program History of Phase One Established 1997 (7 centers) Four Federal centers Three GM centers
LATIN AMERICAN & CARRIBEAN NEW CAR ASSESSMENT PROGRAMME (Latin NCAP) ASSESSMENT PROTOCOL ADULT OCCUPANT PROTECTION 2016
LATIN AMERICAN & CARRIBEAN NEW CAR ASSESSMENT PROGRAMME (Latin NCAP) ASSESSMENT PROTOCOL ADULT OCCUPANT PROTECTION 2016 Version 3.0 AKNOWLEDGEMENT Copyright Latin NCAP 2014 - This work is the intellectual
On Predicting Lower Leg Injuries. for the EuroNCAP Front Crash
On Predicting Lower Leg Injuries for the EuroNCAP Front Crash Thomas Hofer, Altair Engineering GmbH Peter Karlsson, Saab Automobile AB Niclas Brännberg, Altair Engineering AB Lars Fredriksson, Altair Engineering
Euro NCAP Whiplash Rating - Toyota Position & Proposal. May 2011
Euro NCAP Whiplash Rating - Toyota Position & Proposal May 2011 1 Content Background and Priority J-NCAP Extended Review Overall Conclusion 2 Schedule 2011 February June 7 14 21 28 Folksam Chalmers TNO
How To Compare Head Injury Risk From A Front Crash Test To Head Injury From A Head Injury
Comparison of HIC and BrIC head injury risk in IIHS frontal crash tests to real-world head injuries 2015 ESV Conference Gothenburg, Sweden June 10, 2015 Becky Mueller Senior Research Engineer iihs.org
Injury Criteria for Q Dummies in Frontal Impact
CRS-1-3 Injury Criteria for Q Dummies in Frontal Impact Analysis performed for EEVC WG12 & 18 Prepared by: Kees Waagmeester (on behalf of EEVC WG12&18) Date: June 13, 2007 Presentation Contents Summary
Proposing a 2D Dynamical Model for Investigating the parameters Affecting Whiplash Injuries
Proposing a 2D Dynamical Model for Investigating the parameters Affecting Whiplash Injuries Seyed Mohammad Rajaai i, and Mohammad H Farahani ii ABSTRACT: This paper proposes a 2D dynamical model for evaluating
DOCUMENT RETRIEVAL INFORMATION
AUSTRALIAN TRANSPORT SAFETY BUREAU DOCUMENT RETRIEVAL INFORMATION Title and Subtitle Development of an Anti-Whiplash Seat Authors Michael Yuen, Mr. Lynne E. Bilston, Dr. Performing Organisation The Prince
Biomechanics of the Neck in Rear Impacts for improved Seat Design
Biomechanics of the Neck in Rear Impacts for improved Seat Design Dr.-Ing. Tjark Kreuzinger Regulatory & Technical Affairs Toyota Motor Europe NV/SA Studiedag BEPALING VAN MENSELIJKE SCHADE DOOR SLINGERLETSELS
Relationship of Dynamic Seat/Head Restraint Ratings to Real-world Neck Injury Rates
Relationship of Dynamic Seat/Head Restraint Ratings to Real-world Neck Injury Rates Charles M. Farmer, Laurie A. Hellinga, Jo Ann K. Wells, David S. Zuby Basic method Collect insurance claims for late
Evaluation of Seat Performance Criteria for Future Rear-end Impact Testing
EEVC WG12 Report Document Number 578 final version Evaluation of Seat Performance Criteria for Future Rear-end Impact Testing May 2013 Authors Johan Davidsson, Chalmers University of Technology Anders
ARP5765 : Analytical Methods for Aircraft Seat Design and Evaluation Prasanna Bhonge, PhD Cessna Aircraft Company Wichita, KS 7 August 2012
SAE Aircraft SEAT Committee ARP5765 : Analytical Methods for Aircraft Seat Design and Evaluation Prasanna Bhonge, PhD Cessna Aircraft Company Wichita, KS 7 August 2012 Industry group (including the FAA,
The safety of child wheelchair occupants in road passenger vehicles
TRL Report TRL667 The safety of child wheelchair occupants in road passenger vehicles C Visvikis, M Le Claire, O Goodacre, A Thompson and J Carroll The safety of child wheelchair occupants in road passenger
DEVELOPMENT OF MOVING DEFORMABLE BARRIER IN JAPAN - PART 2 -
DEVELOPMENT OF MOVING DEFORMABLE BARRIER IN JAPAN - PART 2 - Masanori Ueno Takeshi Harigae Haruo Ohmae Japan Automobile Research Institute Takahiko Uchimura Eiji Fujiwara Japan Automobile Manufacturers
A NEW NECK INJURY CRITERION CANDIDATE FOR REAR-END COLLISIONS TAKING INTO ACCOUNT SHEAR FORCES AND BENDING MOMENTS
A NEW NECK INJURY CRITERION CANDIDATE FOR REAR-END COLLISIONS TAKING INTO ACCOUNT SHEAR FORCES AND BENDING MOMENTS K.-U. Schmitt 1,2, M. H. Muser 2 and P. Niederer 1 1 Institute of Biomedical Engineering,
CORRELATION OF VEHICLE AND ROADSIDE CRASH TEST INJURY CRITERIA
CORRELATION OF VEHICLE AND ROADSIDE CRASH TEST INJURY CRITERIA Douglas Gabauer Rowan University United States Robert Thomson Chalmers University Sweden Paper Number 5-3 ABSTRACT The vehicle safety and
Dynamic Analysis of Child in Misused CRS During Car Accident
Dynamic Analysis of Child in Misused CRS During Car Accident T. KOIZUMI, N. TSUJIUCHI, and R. KAWAMURA Department of Mechanical Engineering Doshisha University Kyotanabe, Kyoto 610-0321 JAPAN Abstract
NCAP New Car Assessment Programme
New Car Assessment Programme Harald Zellmer Autoliv B.V. & Co. KG, Elmshorn, Germany International Course on Transportation Planning and Safety New Delhi December 2010 PRIVATE/PROPRIETARY : New Car Assessment
ADSEAT. An EU funded project within the 7th Framework Programme. Adaptive Seat to Reduce Neck Injuries for Female and Male Occupants
ADSEAT An EU funded project within the 7th Framework Programme Adaptive Seat to Reduce Neck Injuries for Female and Male Occupants Citizens who annually suffer whiplash injuries in the EU 800 000 Socio-economic
CIREN Improved Injury Causation Coding Methods; An Initial Review
CIREN Improved Injury Causation Coding Methods; An Initial Review Mark Scarboro, NHTSA This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright in the United States; it may be used or reprinted
Classification of Crash Pattern Based on Vehicle Acceleration and Prediction Algorithm for Occupant Injury
M. Katagiri et al./international Journal of Automotive Engineering 4 (3) 9-6 Research Paper 3497 Classification of Crash Pattern Based on Vehicle Acceleration and Prediction Algorithm for Occupant Injury
A pregnant woman model to study injury mechanisms in car crashes
A pregnant woman model to study injury mechanisms in car crashes Authors: Jérémie Pérès*, Michel Behr*, Lionel Thollon*, Kambiz Kayvantash**. *IFSTTAR, **CADLM Correspondance: Jérémie Pérès Laboratoire
Impact Kinematics of Cyclist and Head Injury Mechanism in Car to Bicycle Collision
Impact Kinematics of Cyclist and Head Injury Mechanism in Car to Bicycle Collision Tadasuke Katsuhara, Hiroshi Miyazaki, Yuichi Kitagawa, Tsuyoshi Yasuki Abstract The number of cyclist fatalities is the
The influence of passive safety systems on head injuries suffered by the vehicle s driver
The influence of passive safety systems on head injuries suffered by the vehicle s driver Oana V. Oţăt, Nicolae Dumitru, and Victor Oţăt Abstract - The present research paper underpins a thorough comparative
Comparisons EBB 11/12/02 Snell M2000, DOT, BSI 6658-85 Type A and EN 22/05
The tables compare four standards:, DOT, BSI 6658-85 Type A and Regulation 22 Rev. 5, also known as EN 22/05. and the current DOT Standard (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 218) apply largely to helmets
Overview of evidence: Prognostic factors following whiplash injury
Overview of evidence: Prognostic factors following whiplash injury Confidence in conclusions (that an association exists) are presented in both text and graphical format, using the following legend: =
FIRST RESULTS FROM THE JAMA HUMAN BODY MODEL PROJECT
FIRST RESULTS FROM THE JAMA HUMAN BODY MODEL PROJECT Tomiji Sugimoto Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association, Inc. Kunio Yamazaki Japan Automobile Research Institute Japan Paper Number 05-0291 ABSTRACT
Pregnant Woman Model to Understand Injury Mechanisms in Case of Frontal Impact
Pregnant Woman Model to Understand Injury Mechanisms in Case of Frontal Impact *Laboratoire de Biomécanique Appliquée (www.inrets.fr) Faculté de Médecine nord Bd Dramard 13916 Marseille, France email:
A PROPOSED ROLLOVER AND COMPREHENSIVE RATING SYSTEM
A PROPOSED ROLLOVER AND COMPREHENSIVE RATING SYSTEM Donald Friedman Center for Injury Research United States Raphael Grzebieta Injury Risk Management Research Centre University of New South Wales Australia
Working Paper. Extended Validation of the Finite Element Model for the 2010 Toyota Yaris Passenger Sedan
Working Paper NCAC 2012-W-005 July 2012 Extended Validation of the Finite Element Model for the 2010 Toyota Yaris Passenger Sedan Dhafer Marzougui Randa Radwan Samaha Chongzhen Cui Cing-Dao (Steve) Kan
F1 Fuel Tank Surging; Model Validation
F1 Fuel Tank Surging; Model Validation Luca Bottazzi and Giorgio Rossetti Ferrari F1 team, Maranello, Italy SYNOPSIS A Formula One (F1) car can carry more than 80 kg of fuel in its tank. This has a big
INFLUENCE OF CRASH SEVERITY ON VARIOUS WHIPLASH INJURY SYMPTOMS: A STUDY BASED ON REAL-LIFE REAR-END CRASHES WITH RECORDED CRASH PULSES
INFLUENCE OF CRASH SEVERITY ON VARIOUS WHIPLASH INJURY SYMPTOMS: A STUDY BASED ON REAL-LIFE REAR-END CRASHES WITH RECORDED CRASH PULSES Maria Krafft*, Anders Kullgren*, Sigrun Malm**, Anders Ydenius* *Folksam
Motor Vehicle Collision Form
Patients Name: Date: / / 1) Please choose the date of the MVC: / / 2) Please the time of the MVC: : am / pm 3) Please enter the number of vehicles involved in the MVC: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 4) In dollars,
Development of Improved Injury Criteria for the Assessment of Advanced Automotive Restraint Systems - II
Development of Improved Injury Criteria for the Assessment of Advanced Automotive Restraint Systems - II By Rolf Eppinger, Emily Sun, Faris Bandak, Mark Haffner, Nopporn Khaewpong, Matt Maltese National
THUMS User Community
THUMS User Community Project Overview Th. Fuchs 1, K. Zhou 1, Prof. Dr. S. Peldschus 1,2 1 Biomechanics Group, Institute of Legal Medicine, University of Munich 2 Hochschule Furtwangen University Stuttgart,
TRAIN-TO-TRAIN IMPACT TEST OF CRASH ENERGY MANAGEMENT PASSENGER RAIL EQUIPMENT: OCCUPANT EXPERIMENTS
Proceedings of IMECE2006 2006 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress Proceedings and of Exposition IMECE 06 ASME 2006 International Mechanical November Engineering 5-10, 2006, Congress Chicago,
40,46 16,22 16,25. no fx thoracic sp. Fx lumbar spine. no fx lumbar. spine
Spine injuries in motor vehicle accidents an analysis of 34188 injured front passengers with special consideration of injuries of the thoracolumbar in relation to injury mechanisms C. W. Müller, D. Otte,
UPDATED REVIEW OF POTENTIAL TEST PROCEDURES FOR FMVSS NO. 208
UPDATED REVIEW OF POTENTIAL TEST PROCEDURES FOR FMVSS NO. 208 Prepared By The OFFICE OF VEHICLE SAFETY RESEARCH WILLIAM T. HOLLOWELL HAMPTON C. GABLER SHELDON L. STUCKI STEPHEN SUMMERS JAMES R. HACKNEY,
FE SIMULATIONS OF MOTORCYCLE CAR FRONTAL CRASHES, VALIDATION AND OBSERVATIONS
FE SIMULATIONS OF MOTORCYCLE CAR FRONTAL CRASHES, VALIDATION AND OBSERVATIONS A. CHAWLA, S. MUKHERJEE, D. MOHAN, Dipan BOSE, Prakash RAWAT, Transportation Research & Injury Prevention Programme Indian
Chapter 8: Rotational Motion of Solid Objects
Chapter 8: Rotational Motion of Solid Objects 1. An isolated object is initially spinning at a constant speed. Then, although no external forces act upon it, its rotational speed increases. This must be
Understanding brain injury mechanism: integrating real world lesions, ATD response and finite element modeling
Understanding brain injury mechanism: integrating real world lesions, ATD response and finite element modeling Jillian E. Urban, Sarah Lynch, Christopher T. Whitlow, Joseph Maldjian, Alexander Powers,
EFFECT OF VEHICLE DESIGN ON HEAD INJURY SEVERITY AND THROW DISTANCE VARIATIONS IN BICYCLE CRASHES
EFFECT OF VEHICLE DESIGN ON HEAD INJURY SEVERITY AND THROW DISTANCE VARIATIONS IN BICYCLE CRASHES S. Mukherjee A. Chawla D. Mohan M. Singh R. Dey Transportation Res. and Injury Prevention program Indian
Side Impact Causes Multiplanar Cervical Spine Injuries
Side Impact Causes Multiplanar Cervical Spine Injuries 1 The Journal of Trauma, Injury, infection and Critical Care Volume 63(6), December 2007, pp 1296-1307 Maak, Travis G. MD; Ivancic, Paul C. PhD; Tominaga,
RCAR Low-speed structural crash test protocol
RCAR Low-speed structural crash test protocol Issue 2.2 July 2011 1 / 15 INDEX 1.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 SCOPE 3.0 DEFINITIONS 4.0 TEST FACILITY AND TEST VEHICLE PREPARATION - FRONT IMPACT 5.0 TEST FACILITY
Address for Correspondence
International Journal of Advanced Engineering Technology E-ISSN 0976-3945 Research Paper DEVELOPMENT OF LOW COST SHAKE TABLES AND INSTRUMENTATION SETUP FOR EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING LABORATORY C. S. Sanghvi
PHY121 #8 Midterm I 3.06.2013
PHY11 #8 Midterm I 3.06.013 AP Physics- Newton s Laws AP Exam Multiple Choice Questions #1 #4 1. When the frictionless system shown above is accelerated by an applied force of magnitude F, the tension
Out-of-Position Occupant Testing (OOPS3 Series)
. University of Virginia Automobile Safety Laboratory Out-of-Position Occupant Testing (OOPS3 Series).......... Cameron R. Bass Jeff R. Crandall Walter D. Pilkey September 1998 Report OOPS3 TABLE OF CONTENTS
STUDY OF COMPRESSION-RELATED LUMBAR SPINE FRACTURE CRITERIA USING A FULL BODY FE HUMAN MODEL
STUDY OF COMPRESSION-RELATED LUMBAR SPINE FRACTURE CRITERIA USING A FULL BODY FE HUMAN MODEL Ning Zhang Jay Zhao Takata (TK Holdings) United States Paper Number 13-288 ABSTRACT A detailed lumbar spine
Work Package Number 1 Task Number 1.1 Literature review, accident analysis and injury mechanisms
Enabling Protection for Older Children SEVENTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME THEME 7 Transport (including AERONAUTICS) EPOCh 218744 FINAL PROJECT REPORT Work Package Number 1 Task Number 1.1 Literature review, accident
ACCELERATION CHARACTERISTICS OF VEHICLES IN RURAL PENNSYLVANIA
www.arpapress.com/volumes/vol12issue3/ijrras_12_3_14.pdf ACCELERATION CHARACTERISTICS OF VEHICLES IN RURAL PENNSYLVANIA Robert M. Brooks Associate Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Cyclist kinematics in car impacts reconstructed in simulations and full scale testing with Polar dummy
Cyclist kinematics in car impacts reconstructed in simulations and full scale testing with Polar dummy Margriet van Schijndel 1, Stefanie de Hair 2, Carmen Rodarius 3, Rikard Fredriksson 4 Abstract For
FIMCAR III Car-to-Car Test Results
Peter Sandqvist, Robert Thompson, Anders Kling, Linus Wagström, Pascal Delannoy, Nicolas Vie, Ignacio Lazaro, Stefano Candellero, Jean-Louis Nicaise, Fabien Duboc FIMCAR III Car-to-Car Test Results The
A Systematic Approach for Improving Occupant Protection in Rollover Crashes
SAE 2011 Government / Industry Meeting A Systematic Approach for Improving Occupant Protection in Rollover Crashes Jingwen Hu, PhD University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute King H. Yang,
How Do Euro NCAP Results Correlate with Real-Life Injury Risks? A Paired Comparison Study of Car-to-Car Crashes
Traffic Injury Prevention, 3:288 293, 2002 Copyright C 2002 Taylor & Francis 1538-9588/02 $12.00 +.00 DOI: 10.1080/15389580290129044 How Do Euro NCAP Results Correlate with Real-Life Injury Risks? A Paired
Determining the Posture, Shape and Mobility of the Spine
Determining the Posture, Shape and Mobility of the Spine The World of Biomechanics Assessment of the Mobility Function Using a special Triple Cervical marker set comprising miniature ultrasound transmitters,
Car Safety for Children with Cerebral Palsy
Car Safety for Children with Cerebral Palsy Children with cerebral palsy may have special needs that can affect how they travel. This brochure answers some questions you may have about transporting your
SEAT BELT Installation Manual
SEAT BELT Installation Manual You have purchase a premium set of Simpson Seat Belts. They are designed with attention to detail, just like your entire Simpson safety system. WARNING: THIS ARTICLE IS SOLD
CASPER CHILD ADVANCED SAFETY PROJECT FOR EUROPEAN ROADS. Car Technology. SPEAKER: Britta Schnottale BASt. CASPER and EPOCh Final Workshop 13 th -15
CHILD ADVANCED SAFETY PROJECT FOR EUROPEAN ROADS BASt and EPOCh Final Workshop 13 th -15 th March 2012 Berlin, Germany Content Introduction Accident data ISOFix Safety devices - Pre-tensioner and Load
Wheelchair Back Supports
Wheelchair Back Supports Mark R. Schmeler, MS, OTR/L, ATP Mary Ellen Buning, MS, OTR, ATP Center for Assistive Technology, UPMC Health System Department of Rehabilitation Science & Technology University
Thorsten Adolph, Marcus Wisch, Andre Eggers, Heiko Johannsen, Richard Cuerden, Jolyon Carroll, David Hynd, Ulrich Sander
IRC-13-17 Analyses of Thoracic and Lumbar Spine Injuries in Frontal IRCOBI Impacts Conference 13 Thorsten Adolph, Marcus Wisch, Andre Eggers, Heiko Johannsen, Richard Cuerden, Jolyon Carroll, David Hynd,
Study of Davit-Launched Lifeboats During Lowering, Water Entry, Release and Sailaway
Study of Davit-Launched Lifeboats During Lowering, Water Entry, Release and Sailaway Phases Ole Gabrielsen/DNV, Bjørn Helland/ConocoPhillips, Per Otto Selnes/OLF, Lars Rune Helland/Global Maritime (currently
ASSESSING MOTORCYCLE CRASH-RELATED HEAD INJURIES USING FINITE ELEMENT SIMULATIONS
ISSN 1726-4529 Int j simul model 9 (2010) 3, 143-151 Professional paper ASSESSING MOTORCYCLE CRASH-RELATED HEAD INJURIES USING FINITE ELEMENT SIMULATIONS Toma, M. * ; Njilie, F. E. A. * ; Ghajari, M. **
THE EURO NCAP WHIPLASH TEST
THE EURO NCAP WHIPLASH TEST Michiel van Ratingen James Ellway Euro NCAP Belgium Matthew Avery Thatcham United Kingdom Peter Gloyns VSC, on behalf of ICRT United Kingdom Volker Sandner ADAC Germany Ton
SPECIFIC SPINAL EXERCISE
SPECIFIC SPINAL EXERCISE Three Case Studies Using the MedX Lumbar Extension Machine Brian D. Johnston IART Research ABSTRACT The purpose of this research project was to ascertain the effects of specific
PREDICTING THROW DISTANCE VARIATIONS IN BICYCLE CRASHES
PREDICTING THROW DISTANCE VARIATIONS IN BICYCLE CRASHES MUKHERJEE S, CHAWLA A, MOHAN D, CHANDRAWAT S, AGARWAL V TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND INJURY PREVENTION PROGRAMME INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY NEW
Clinical Biomechanics
Clinical Biomechanics 2 (29) 699 77 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Clinical Biomechanics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/clinbiomech Whiplash injury prevention with active head restraint
Motorcycle accident reconstruction in VL Motion
Motorcycle accident reconstruction in VL Motion Presenter Nicola Cofelice ESR 14 AGENDA 1 Motorcycle accident reconstruction - Overview 2 Research progress 3 What s next? copyright LMS International -
Think Before You Drive is a global road safety initiative of the FIA Foundation, Bridgestone Corporation and motoring clubs worldwide. FIA Foundation for the Automobile and Society www.fiafoundation.com
Time Domain and Frequency Domain Techniques For Multi Shaker Time Waveform Replication
Time Domain and Frequency Domain Techniques For Multi Shaker Time Waveform Replication Thomas Reilly Data Physics Corporation 1741 Technology Drive, Suite 260 San Jose, CA 95110 (408) 216-8440 This paper