0
Research Papers

Deflection Corridors of Abdomen and Thorax in Oblique Side Impacts Using Equal Stress Equal Velocity Approach: Comparison With Other Normalization Methods

[+] Author and Article Information
Narayan Yoganandan

Professor of Neurosurgery and Orthopaedic
Surgery, Chair, Biomedical Engineering,
Department of Neurosurgery,
Medical College of Wisconsin,
9200 West Wisconsin Avenue,
Milwaukee, WI 53226
e-mail: yoga@mcw.edu

Mike W. J. Arun, John Humm, Frank A. Pintar

Department of Neurosurgery,
Medical College of Wisconsin,
Milwaukee, WI 53226

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received December 3, 2013; final manuscript received June 27, 2014; accepted manuscript posted July 18, 2014; published online August 14, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Joel D. Stitzel.

J Biomech Eng 136(10), 101012 (Aug 14, 2014) (8 pages) Paper No: BIO-13-1565; doi: 10.1115/1.4028032 History: Received December 03, 2013; Revised June 27, 2014; Accepted July 18, 2014

The first objective of the study was to determine the thorax and abdomen deflection time corridors using the equal stress equal velocity approach from oblique side impact sled tests with postmortem human surrogates fitted with chestbands. The second purpose of the study was to generate deflection time corridors using impulse momentum methods and determine which of these methods best suits the data. An anthropometry-specific load wall was used. Individual surrogate responses were normalized to standard midsize male anthropometry. Corridors from the equal stress equal velocity approach were very similar to those from impulse momentum methods, thus either method can be used for this data. Present mean and plus/minus one standard deviation abdomen and thorax deflection time corridors can be used to evaluate dummies and validate complex human body finite element models.

Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Yoganandan, N., Pintar, F. A., Stemper, B. D., Gennarelli, T. A., and Weigelt, J. A., 2007, “Biomechanics of Side Impact: Injury Criteria, Aging Occupants, and Airbag Technology,” J. Biomech., 40(2), pp. 227–243. [CrossRef]
Nahum, A., and Melvin, J., eds., 2002, Accidental Injury: Biomechanics and Prevention, 2nd ed., Springer, New York, p. 637.
Donnelly, B. R., Moorhouse, K. M., Stammen, J. A., and Rhule, H. H., 2013, “A Methodology for Creating PMHS Targets With a Two-Dimensional Standard Deviation Ellipse Tolerance for Quantitatively Assessing Dummy Biofidelity,” Proceedings of the International Conference of International Research Council on Biomechanics of Injury, Gorenborg, Sweden, p. 854.
Kuppa, S., Eppinger, R. H., McKoy, F., Nguyen, T., Pintar, F. A., and Yoganandan, N., 2003, “Development of Side Impact Thoracic Injury Criteria and Their Application to the Modified ES-2 Dummy With Rib Extensions (ES-2re),” Stapp Car Crash J., 47, pp. 189–210.
Moorhouse, K., 2013, “An Improved Normalization Methodology for Developing Mean Human Response Curves,” Proceedings of the International Conference of Enhanced Safety of Vehicles, Seoul, Korea, Paper No.13-0192-W.
Yoganandan, N., Humm, J. R., Arun, M. W. J., and Pintar, F. A., 2013, “Oblique Lateral Impact Biofidelity Deflection Corridors From Post Mortem Human Surrogates,” Stapp Car Crash J., 57, pp. 447–479.
Cavanaugh, J., Zhu, Y., Huang, Y., and King, A., 1993, “Injury and Response of Thorax in Side Impact Cadaveric Tests,” Proceedings of the 37th Stapp Car Crash Conference, Society of Automotive Engineers, San Antonio, TX, pp. 199–222.
Mertz, H. J., “A Procedure for Normalizing Impact Response Data,” SAE Paper No. 8408841984. [CrossRef]
Cavanaugh, J. M., Walilko, T. J., Malhotra, A., Zhu, Y., and King, A. I., 1990, “Biomechanical Response and Injury Tolerance of the Thorax in Twelve Sled Side Impacts,” Proceedings of the 34th Stapp Car Crash Conference, Orlando, FL, pp. 23–38.
Maltese, M. R., Eppinger, R. H., Rhule, H. H., Donnelly, B. R., Pintar, F. A., and Yoganandan, N., 2002, “Response Corridors of Human Surrogates in Lateral Impacts,” Stapp Car Crash J., 46, pp. 321–351.
Pintar, F. A., Maiman, D. J., and Yoganandan, N., 2007, “Injury Patterns in Side Pole Crashes,” Ann. Adv. Automot. Med., 51, pp. 419–433.
Yoganandan, N., Humm, J. R., and Pintar, F. A., 2013, “Force Corridors of Post Mortem Human Surrogates in Oblique Side Impacts From Sled Tests,” Ann. Biomed. Eng., 41(11), pp. 2391–2398. [CrossRef]
Yoganandan, N., Humm, J. R., Pintar, F. A., and Brasel, K., 2011, “Region-Specific Deflection Responses of WorldSID and ES2-re Devices in Pure Lateral and Oblique Side Impacts,” Stapp Car Crash J., 55, pp. 351–378.
Eppinger, R., 1989, “On the Development of a Deformation Measurement System and Its Application Toward Developing Mechanically Based Injury Indices,” 33rd Stapp Car Crash Conference, Washington, DC, pp. 21–28.
SAE, 2003, Instrumentation for Impact Test: Part 1—Electronic Instrumentation-SAE J211/1, Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), Warrendale, PA.
Eppinger, R., 1976, “Prediction of Thoracic Injury Using Measurable Experimental Parameters,” Proceedings of the International Conference of Experimental Safety Vehicles, NHTSA, Washington, DC, pp. 770–780.
Schneider, L. W., Robbins, D. H., Pflüg, M. A., and Snyder, R. G., 1983, “Development of Anthropometrically Based Design Specifications for an Advanced Adult Anthropomorphic Dummy Family,” UMTRI, Ann Arbor, MI, Vol. I.
Kuppa, S., Eppinger, F., Maltese, M., Naik, R., Yoganandan, N., Pintar, F., Saul, R., and McFadden, J., 2000, “Assessment of Thoracic Injury Criteria for Side Impact,” Proceedings of the International Research Council on Biomechanics of Injury, Montpellier, France, pp. 131–146.
Belcher, T., Terrell, M., and Tylko, S., 2011, “An Assessment of WorldSID 50th Percentile Male Injury Responses to Oblique and Perpendicular Pole Side Impacts,” Proceedings of the International Conference of Enhanced Safety of Vehicles, Washington, DC, Paper No. 11-0133-O, pp. 1–17.
Scherer, R., Bortenschlager, K., Akiyama, A., Tylko, S., Hartlieb, M., and Harigae, T., 2009, “WorldSID Production Dummy Biomechanical Responses,” Proceedings of the International Conference of Enhanced Safety of Vehicles, Stuttgart, Germany, Paper No. 09-0505-O.
Iwamoto, M., Nakahira, Y., Tamura, A., Kimpara, H., Watanabe, I., and Miki, K., 2006, “Development of Advanced Human Body Model in THUMS,” Sixth European LS-DYNA User's Conference, pp. 47–56.
Thompson, A. B., Gayzik, F. S., Moreno, D. P., Rhyne, A. C., Vavalle, N. A., and Stitzel, J. D., 2012, “A Paradigm for Human Body Finite Element Model Integration From a Set of Regional Models,” Biomed. Sci. Instrum., 48, pp. 423–430.
Vavalle, N. A., Moreno, D. P., Rhyne, A. C., Stitzel, J. D., and Gayzik, F. S., 2013, “Lateral Impact Validation of a Geometrically Accurate Full Body Finite Element Model for Blunt Injury Prediction,” Ann. Biomed. Eng., 41(3), pp. 497–512. [CrossRef]
FMVSS-214, 1990, Federal Register, Docket No. 88-06, in 49 CFR; Parts 571, Side Impact Protection, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, pp. 43722–45780.
Kallieris, D., Mattern, R., Schmidt, G., and Eppinger, R. H., 1981, “Quantification of Side Impact Responses and Injuries,” Stapp Car Crash Conference, Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc., San Francisco, CA, pp. 329–366.
FMVSS-214, 2008, 49Code of Federal Regulations: 571.214, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
Kleinberger, M., Sun, E., Eppinger, R., Kuppa, S., and Saul, R., 1998, Development of Improved Injury Criteria for the Assessment of Advanced Automotive Restraint Systems, NHTSA, Washington, DC, p. 115.
Morgan, R. M., Eppinger, R. H., Haffner, M. P., Yoganandan, N., Pintar, F. A., and Sances, A., Jr., 1994, “Thoracic Trauma Assessment Formulations for Restrained Drivers in Frontal Impact,” Stapp Car Crash Conference, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, pp. 15–34.
Irwin, A., Walilko, T., Cavanaugh, J., Zhu, Y., and King, A., 1993, “Displacement Responses of the Shoulder and Thorax in Lateral Sled Impacts,” Stapp Car Crash Conference, San Antonio, TX, pp. 165–173.
Irwin, A. L., Sutterfield, A., Hsu, T. P., Kim, A., Mertz, H. J., Rouhana, S. W., and Scherer, R., 2005, “Side Impact Response Corridors for the Rigid Flat-Wall and Offset-Wall Side Impact Tests of NHTSA Using the ISO Method of Corridor Development,” Stapp Car Crash J., 49, pp. 423–456.
ISO, 1997, ISO/TR9790—Road Vehicles-Lateral Impact Response Requirements to Assess the Biofidelity of the Dummy, ISO/TC22/SC12/WG5, International Standards Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Yoganandan, N., Arun, M. W. J., and Pintar, F. A., “Normalizing and Scaling of Data to Derive Human Response Corridors From Impact Tests,” J. Biomech., pp. 1749–1756. [CrossRef]
Yoganandan, N., Pintar, F. A., Humm, J., Brasel, K., Rudd, R. W., and Ridella, S. A., 2012, “Thoraco-Abdominal Deflection Responses of PMHS in Side Impacts,” Stapp Car Crash J., 56, pp. 49–64.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

A perspective view of the entire load wall system showing plates for the shoulder (a), thorax (b), abdomen (c) and pelvis ((d) and (e)), and a separate plate (f) for the lower leg of the PMHS

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Schematic showing the various load wall plates and the bench seat and the alignment and positioning of the load wall plates with respect to the PMHS anthropometry

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Pretest contour (contour indicated by the longer arrow) and the deformed contour corresponding to the peak deflection vector (contour indicated by the shorter arrow) illustrating the extraction of deflection-time traces. The spine-sternum (bottom to top) is shown as dashed lines in the contours. The solid line with the arrow on the deformed contour indicates the vector from the origin to the point of maximum deflection, with the arrow end referring to the point of occurrence. The solid line with the arrow on the pretest contour indicates the vector to the same point (arrow head). Peak deflection is the difference between the two arrowhead lines. The dashed vertical line from the spine to sternum represents the y-axis and the line (not shown) perpendicular to this represents the x-axis with the origin at the middle of the vertical line.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Typical sled acceleration-time pulse

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Non-normalized deflections for each specimen for the thorax. PMHS ID given in Table 2.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Non-normalized deflections for each specimen for the abdomen. PMHS ID given in Table 2.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Mean and plus/minus one standard deviation thorax deflection corridor obtained using equal stress equal velocity method (method a). Individual responses are also shown.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Mean and plus/minus one standard deviation abdomen deflection corridor obtained using the equal stress equal velocity method (method a)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Mean and plus/minus one standard deviation thorax deflection corridor obtained using the impulse momentum method. Characteristic length was used to determine the stiffness factor (method b).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Mean and plus/minus one standard deviation abdomen deflection corridor obtained using the impulse momentum method. Characteristic length was used to determine the stiffness factor (method b).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Mean and plus/minus one standard deviation thorax deflection corridor obtained using the impulse momentum method. Specimen-specific force and deflection data were used to determine the stiffness factor (method c).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Mean and plus/minus one standard deviation abdomen deflection corridor obtained using the impulse momentum method. Specimen-specific force and deflection data were used to determine the stiffness factor (method c).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Coefficients of variation from the three methods for the thorax and abdomen regions. ESEV: Equal stress equal velocity. IM-1: Impulse momentum method using effective mass and characteristic length approach. IM-2: Impulse momentum with effective mass, and effective stiffness and characteristic length approach.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Overlay of thorax deflection time corridors from the three methods ESEV: Equal stress equal velocity. IM-1: Impulse momentum method using effective mass and characteristic length approach. IM-2: Impulse momentum with effective mass, and effective stiffness and characteristic length approach.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Overlay of abdomen deflection time corridors from the three methods. ESEV: Equal stress equal velocity. IM-1: Impulse momentum method using effective mass and characteristic length approach. IM-2: Impulse momentum with effective mass, and effective stiffness and characteristic length approach.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

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