Technical Briefs

The Tolerance of the Maxilla to Blunt Impact

[+] Author and Article Information
Joseph Cormier, Jill Bisplinghoff, Steve Rowson, Anthony Santago, Craig McNally

Sarah Manoogian

 Biodynamic Research Corporation, San Antonio, TX 78249smanoogian@brconline.com

Stefan Duma

 Center for Injury Biomechanics, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061duma@vt.edu

John Bolte

Injury Biomechanics Research Laboratory,  The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210 e-mail: bolte.6@osu.edu

J Biomech Eng 133(6), 064501 (Jun 14, 2011) (5 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4004248 History: Received November 18, 2010; Revised May 06, 2011; Posted May 17, 2011; Published June 14, 2011; Online June 14, 2011

This study reports the results of 38 infraorbital maxilla impacts performed on male cadavers. Impacts were performed using an unpadded, cylindrical impactor (3.2 kg) at velocities between 1 and 5 m/s. The peak force and acoustic emission data were used to develop a statistical relationship of fracture risk as a function of impact force. Acoustic emission sensors were used to provide a noncensored measure of the maxilla tolerance and were essential due to the increase in impactor force after fracture onset. Parametric and nonparametric techniques were used to estimate the risk of fracture tolerance. The nonparametric technique produced an estimated 50% risk of fracture between 970 and 1223 N. The results obtained from the parametric and nonparametric techniques were in good agreement. Peak force values achieved in this study were similar to those of previous work and were unaffected by impactor velocity. The results of this study suggest that an impact to the infraorbital maxilla is a load-limited event due to compromise of structural integrity.

Copyright © 2011 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Maxilla peak force with respect to impactor energy by study

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Risk of maxilla fracture estimated using parametric and nonparametric models

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Relationship between maxilla contact area and peak force

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Peak impactor force by impactor energy and fracture status

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Acoustic emission and force during an impact without maxilla fracture. AE data did not exceed 0.1 Vs.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Acoustic emission and force during an impact resulting in a maxilla fracture

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Impact location used in the current study

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Schematic of test apparatus used in the current study



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In