Modular incorporation of deformable spine and 3D neck musculature into a simplified human body finite element model.

Spinal injuries are a concern for automotive applications, requiring large parametric studies to understand spinal injury mechanisms under complex loading conditions. Finite element computational human body models (e.g. Global Human Body Models Consortium (GHBMC) models) can be used to identify spinal injury mechanisms. However, the existing GHBMC detailed models (with high computational time) or GHBMC simplified models (lacking vertebral fracture prediction capabilities) are not ideal for studying spinal injury mechanisms in large parametric studies. To overcome these limitations, a modular 50th percentile male simplified occupant model combining advantages of both the simplified and detailed models, M50-OS + DeformSpine, was developed by incorporating the deformable spine and 3D neck musculature from the detailed GHBMC model M50-O (v6.0) into the simplified GHBMC model M50-OS (v2.3). This new modular model was validated against post-mortem human subject test data in four rigid hub impactor tests and two frontal impact sled tests. The M50-OS + DeformSpine model showed good agreement with experimental test data with an average CORrelation and Analysis (CORA) score of 0.82 for the hub impact tests and 0.75 for the sled impact tests. CORA scores were statistically similar overall between the M50-OS + DeformSpine (0.79 ± 0.11), M50-OS (0.79 ± 0.11), and M50-O (0.82 ± 0.11) models (p > 0.05). This new model is computationally 6 times faster than the detailed M50-O model, with added spinal injury prediction capabilities over the simplified M50-OS model.

Assessment of finite element human body and ATD models in estimating injury risk in far-side impacts using field-based injury risk.

The objective of this study was to assess the ability of finite element human body models (FEHBMs) and Anthropometric Test Device (ATD) models to estimate occupant injury risk by comparing it with field-based injury risk in far-side impacts. The study used the Global Human Body Models Consortium midsize male (M50-OS+B) and small female (F05-OS+B) simplified occupant models with a modular detailed brain, and the ES-2Re and SID-IIs ATD models in the simulated far-side crashes. A design of experiments (DOE) with a total of 252 simulations was conducted by varying lateral ΔV (10-50kph; 5kph increments), the principal direction of force (PDOF 50°, 60°, 65°, 70°, 75°, 80°, 90°), and occupant models. Models were gravity-settled and belted into a simplified vehicle model (SVM) modified for far-side impact simulations. Acceleration pulses and vehicle intrusion profiles used for the DOE were generated by impacting a 2012 Camry vehicle model with a mobile deformable barrier model across the 7 PDOFs and 9 lateral ΔV's in the DOE for a total of 63 additional simulations. Injury risks were estimated for the head, chest, lower extremity, pelvis (AIS 2+; AIS 3+), and abdomen (AIS 3+) using logistic regression models. Combined AIS 3+ injury risk for each occupant was calculated using AIS 3+ injury risk estimations for the head, chest, abdomen, and lower extremities. The injury risk calculated using computational models was compared with field-based injury risk derived from NASS-CDS by calculating their correlation coefficient. The field-based injury risk was calculated using risk curves that were created based on real-world crash data in a previous study (Hostetler et al., 2020). Occupant age (40 years), seatbelt use (belted occupant), collision deformation classification, lateral ΔV, and PDOF of the crash event were used in these curves to estimate field injury risk. Large differences in the kinematics were observed between HBM and ATD models. ATD models tended to overestimate risk in almost every case whereas HBMs yielded better risk estimates overall. Chest and lower extremity risks were the least correlated with field injury risk estimates. The overall risk of AIS 3+ injury risk was the strongest comparison to the field data-based risk curves. The HBMs were still not able to capture all the variance but future studies can be carried out that are focused on investigating their shortfalls and improving them to estimate injury risk closer to field injury risk in far-side crashes.

Preliminary validation of the GHBMC average male occupant models and 70YO aged model in far-side impact.

The objective of the current study was to perform a preliminary validation of the Global Human Body Models Consortium (GHBMC) average male occupant models, simplified (M50-OS) and detailed (M50-O) and the 70YO aged model in Far-side impacts and compare the head kinematics against the PMHS responses published by Petit et al. (2019). The buck used to simulate the far-side impacts comprised a seat, headrest, center console plate, leg support plate, and footrest plate with rigid material properties. The three occupant models were gravity settled onto the rigid seat and belted with a 3-point seatbelt. Positioning details of the PMHS were followed in the model setup process. A deceleration pulse with ΔV of 8 m/s was applied. The far-side crash simulations were performed with and without the addition of a plexiglass cover around the setup similar to the experimental setup. The head kinematics were extracted from the models for comparison against the PMHS data. Peak head displacements in Y and Z axes from the three models were compared to the PMHS data in addition to the head rotation along X axes. The peak head displacement values for the M50-OS, M50-O, and M50-O 70YO aged models are 594.10 mm, 568.44 mm, and 567.90 mm along Y and 325.21 mm, 402.66 mm, and 375.92 mm respectively along Z when the plexiglass cover is included in the test. The peak head rotation values for the M50-OS, M50-O, and M50-O 70YO aged models are 95.64°, 122.15°, and 129.08° respectively when the plexiglass cover is included in the test. The three occupant models capture the general trend of the PMHS data. The detailed occupant models have higher head rotation compared to the simplified model because of the deformable structure of the spine and intervertebral discs modeled. These three occupant models can be used for further parametric studies in this condition to study the influence of restraint parameters.

Effect of Active Muscles on Astronaut Kinematics and Injury Risk for Piloted Lunar Landing and Launch While Standing.

While astronauts may pilot future lunar landers in a standing posture, the response of the human body under lunar launch and landing-related dynamic loading conditions is not well understood. It is important to consider the effects of active muscles under these loading conditions as muscles stabilize posture while standing. In the present study, astronaut response for a piloted lunar mission in a standing posture was simulated using an active human body model (HBM) with a closed-loop joint-angle based proportional integral derivative controller muscle activation strategy and compared with a passive HBM to understand the effects of active muscles on astronaut body kinematics and injury risk. While head, neck, and lumbar spine injury risk were relatively unaffected by active muscles, the lower extremity injury risk and the head and arm kinematics were significantly changed. Active muscle prevented knee-buckling and spinal slouching and lowered tibia injury risk in the active vs. passive model (revised tibia index: 0.02-0.40 vs. 0.01-0.58; acceptable tolerance: 0.43). Head displacement was higher in the active vs. passive model (11.6 vs. 9.0 cm forward, 6.3 vs. 7.0 cm backward, 7.9 vs. 7.3 cm downward, 3.7 vs. 2.4 cm lateral). Lower arm movement was seen with the active vs. passive model (23 vs. 35 cm backward, 12 vs. 20 cm downward). Overall simulations suggest that the passive model may overpredict injury risk in astronauts for spaceflight loading conditions, which can be improved using the model with active musculature.

Development and Validation of an Active Muscle Simplified Finite Element Human Body Model in a Standing Posture.

Active muscles play an important role in postural stabilization, and muscle-induced joint stiffening can alter the kinematic response of the human body, particularly that of the lower extremities, under dynamic loading conditions. There are few full-body human body finite element models with active muscles in a standing posture. Thus, the objective of this study was to develop and validate the M50-PS+Active model, an average-male simplified human body model in a standing posture with active musculature. The M50-PS+Active model was developed by incorporating 116 skeletal muscles, as one-dimensional beam elements with a Hill-type material model and closed-loop Proportional Integral Derivative (PID) controller muscle activation strategy, into the Global Human Body Models Consortium (GHBMC) simplified pedestrian model M50-PS. The M50-PS+Active model was first validated in a gravity standing test, showing the effectiveness of the active muscles in maintaining a standing posture under gravitational loading. The knee kinematics of the model were compared against volunteer kinematics in unsuited and suited step-down tests from NASA's active response gravity offload system (ARGOS) laboratory. The M50-PS+Active model showed good biofidelity with volunteer kinematics with an overall CORA score of 0.80, as compared to 0.64 (fair) in the passive M50-PS model. The M50-PS+Active model will serve as a useful tool to study the biomechanics of the human body in vehicle-pedestrian accidents, public transportation braking, and space missions piloted in a standing posture.

Comparison of morphing techniques to develop subject-specific finite element models of vertebrae.

This study compared two morphing techniques (and their serial combination) to create subject-specific finite element models of 15 astronaut vertebrae. Surface deviations of the morphed models were compared against subject geometries extracted from medical images. The optimal morphing process yielded models with minimal difference in root-mean-square (RMS) deviation (C3, 0.52 ± 0.14 mm; T3, 0.34 ± 0.04 mm; L1, 0.59 ± 0.16 mm) of the subject's vertebral geometry. <1% of model elements failed quality checks and compression simulations ran to completion. This research lays the foundation for the development of subject-specific finite element models to quantify musculoskeletal changes and injury risk from spaceflight.

Sensitivity Analysis for Multidirectional Spaceflight Loading and Muscle Deconditioning on Astronaut Response.

A sensitivity analysis for loading conditions and muscle deconditioning on astronaut response for spaceflight transient accelerations was carried out using a mid-size male human body model with active musculature. The model was validated in spaceflight-relevant 2.5-15 g loading magnitudes in seven volunteer tests, showing good biofidelity (CORA: 0.69). Sensitivity analysis was carried out in simulations varying pulse magnitude (5, 10, and 15 g), rise time (32.5 and 120 ms), and direction (10 directions: frontal, rear, vertical, lateral, and their combination) along with muscle size change (± 15% change) and responsiveness (pre-braced, relaxed, vs. delayed response) changes across 600 simulations. Injury metrics were most sensitive to the loading direction (50%, partial-R2) and least sensitive to muscle size changes (0.2%). The pulse magnitude also had significant effect on the injury metrics (16%), whereas muscle responsiveness (3%) and pulse rise time (2%) had only slight effects. Frontal and upward loading directions were the worst for neck, spine, and lower extremity injury metrics, whereas rear and downward directions were the worst for head injury metrics. Higher magnitude pulses and pre-bracing also increased the injury risk.

Effects of Standing, Upright Seated, vs. Reclined Seated Postures on Astronaut Injury Biomechanics for Lunar Landings.

Astronauts may pilot a future lunar lander in a standing or upright/reclined seated posture. This study compared kinematics and injury risk for the upright/reclined (30°; 60°) seated vs. standing postures for lunar launch/landing using human body modeling across 30 simulations. While head metrics for standing and upright seated postures were comparable to 30 cm height jumps, those of reclined postures were closer to 60 cm height jumps. Head linear acceleration for 60° reclined posture in the 5 g/10 ms pulse exceeded NASA's tolerance (10.1 g; tolerance: 10 g). Lower extremity metrics exceeding NASA's tolerance in the standing posture (revised tibia index: 0.36-0.53; tolerance: 0.43) were lowered in seated postures (0.00-0.04). Head displacement was higher in standing vs. seated (9.0 cm vs. 2.4 cm forward, 7.0 cm vs. 1.3 cm backward, 2.1 cm vs. 1.2 cm upward, 7.3 cm vs. 0.8 cm downward, 2.4 cm vs. 3.2 cm lateral). Higher arm movement was seen with seated vs. standing (40 cm vs. 25 cm forward, 60 cm vs. 15 cm upward, 30 cm vs. 20 cm downward). Pulse-nature contributed more than 40% to the injury metrics for seated postures compared to 80% in the standing posture. Seat recline angle contributed about 22% to the injury metrics in the seated posture. This study established a computational methodology to simulate the different postures of an astronaut for lunar landings and generated baseline injury risk and body kinematics data.

Simulated Astronaut Kinematics and Injury Risk for Piloted Lunar Landings and Launches While Standing.

During future lunar missions, astronauts may be required to pilot vehicles while standing, and the associated kinematic and injury response is not well understood. In this study, we used human body modeling to predict unsuited astronaut kinematics and injury risk for piloted lunar launches and landings in the standing posture. Three pulses (2-5 g; 10-150 ms rise times) were applied in 10 directions (vertical; ± 10-degree offsets) for a total of 30 simulations. Across all simulations, motion envelopes were computed to quantify displacement of the astronaut's head (max 9.0 cm forward, 7.0 cm backward, 2.1 cm upward, 7.3 cm downward, 2.4 cm lateral) and arms (max 25 cm forward, 35 cm backward, 15 cm upward, 20 cm downward, 20 cm lateral). All head, neck, lumbar, and lower extremity injury metrics were within NASA's tolerance limits, except tibia compression forces (0-1543 N upper tibia; 0-1482 N lower tibia; tolerance-1350 N) and revised tibia index (0.04-0.58 upper tibia; 0.03-0.48 lower tibia; tolerance-0.43) for the 2.7 g/150 ms pulse. Pulse magnitude and duration contributed over 80% to the injury metric values, whereas loading direction contributed less than 3%. Overall, these simulations suggest piloting a lunar lander vehicle in the standing posture presents a tibia injury risk which is potentially outside NASA's acceptance limits and warrants further investigation.

A detailed finite element model of a mid-sized male for the investigation of traffic pedestrian accidents.

The pedestrian is one of the most vulnerable road users and comprises approximately 23% of the road crash-related fatalities in the world. To protect pedestrians during Car-to-Pedestrian Collisions (CPC), subsystem impact tests are used in regulations. These tests provide insight but cannot characterize the complex vehicle-pedestrian interaction. The main purpose of this study was to develop and validate a detailed pedestrian Finite Element (FE) model corresponding to a 50th percentile male to predict CPC induced injuries. The model geometry was reconstructed using a multi-modality protocol from medical images and exterior scan data corresponding to a mid-sized male volunteer. To investigate injury response, this model included internal organs, muscles and vessels. The lower extremity, shoulder and upper body of the model were validated against Post Mortem Human Surrogate (PMHS) test data in valgus bending, and lateral/anterior-lateral blunt impacts, respectively. The whole-body pedestrian model was validated in CPC simulations using a mid-sized sedan and simplified generic vehicles bucks and previously unpublished PMHS coronal knee angle data. In the component validations, the responses of the FE model were mostly within PMHS test corridors and in whole body validations the kinematic and injury responses predicted by the model showed similar trends to PMHS test data. Overall, the detailed model showed higher biofidelity, especially in the upper body regions, compared to a previously reported simplified pedestrian model, which recommends using it in future pedestrian automotive safety research.

Finite element reconstruction of a vehicle-to-pedestrian impact.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to reconstruct a real-world Crash Injury Research and Engineering Network vehicle-to-pedestrian impact to supplement the determination of pedestrian kinematics and injury causation. METHODS: A case involving a 46-year-old male pedestrian with a height of 163 cm and mass of 100 kg that was impacted by a 2019 Dodge Charger Pursuit police cruiser at an approximate velocity of 20.1 m/s was reconstructed. The case vehicle was represented by a rigid shell of a 2019 Dodge Charger vehicle exterior from an open-source database. The case pedestrian was represented by the Global Human Body Models Consortium (GHBMC) 50th percentile male simplified pedestrian human body model. The GHBMC model was isometrically scaled to a height of 163 cm and the external layer of flesh was morphed to a male reference geometry with the same age, height, and body mass index as the case pedestrian. The approximate location and position of the pedestrian at the time of impact was determined from case vehicle dashboard camera images and the pedestrian model was adjusted accordingly. RESULTS: Reconstruction kinematics aligned with proposed CIREN case kinematics. The GHBMC model predicted fractures of the left inferior ischiopubic ramus, superior pubic ramus, ilium, sacral ala, acetabulum, and right ilium. CONCLUSIONS: Finite element reconstructions of real-world pedestrian impacts are useful for analyzing pedestrian kinematics and provide an effective tool for improving pedestrian impact injury analyses.

Comparison of Neck Injury Criteria Values Across Human Body Models of Varying Complexity.

Due to the severity and frequency of cervical spine injuries, the neck injury criterion (Nij) was developed to provide a quantitative relationship between forces and moments of the upper neck with accompanied injury risk. The present study was undertaken to evaluate differences in calculated Nij for the Global Human Body Model Consortium's detailed and simplified average 50th percentile male models. The simplified model is a computationally light version of the more detailed model and therefore it is of interest to achieve similar Nij values between the two models. These models were compared in 15 match paired conditions of rigid head impact and a mixture of seven full body rigid hub and sled pulses, for 44 total simulations. Collectively, Nij values of the simplified model were found to exhibit a second-degree polynomial fit, allowing for a conversion to the prediction of the detailed model. Correlates were also derived for impact and inertial loading cases individually, for which the latter may be the subject of future work. The differences in Nij may be attributed to a variety of modeling approach differences related to neck muscles (attachment location and morphometric implementation), localization of head mass within the M50-OS, head geometry, and intervertebral joint space properties. With a primary focus on configurations in the anterior-posterior direction, there is a potential limitation in extensibility to lateral loading cases. In response to the relatively low Nij values exhibited, future work should evaluate the appropriateness of the established critical intercepts of Nij for computational human body models.

Development and validation of a finite element model of a small female pedestrian.

Pedestrians are the most vulnerable road user and represent about 23% of the road traffic deaths in the world. A finite element (FE) model corresponding to a 5th percentile female pedestrian (F05-PS) was developed by morphing the Global Human Body Models Consortium (GHBMC) 50th percentile male pedestrian (M50-PS) model to the reconstructed geometry of a recruited small female subject. The material properties of the pedestrian model were assigned based on GHBMC M50-PS model. In model validation, the knee lateral stiffness and force time histories of F05-PS upper body showed similar trends, but softer responses than the corresponding data recorded in post mortem human surrogate (PMHS) tests and linearly scaled to average male anthropometry. Finally, the pedestrian model was verified in a Car-to-Pedestrian Collison (CPC) simulation. The marker trajectories recorded in simulation were close to the data recorded on small PMHS in testing and the model predicted typical knee ligament ruptures. Therefore, we believe the F05-PS model, the first FE model developed based on a female reconstructed geometry, could be used to improve vehicle front-end design for pedestrian protection and/or to investigate various pedestrian accidents.

Lumbar Spine Response of Computational Finite Element Models in Multidirectional Spaceflight Landing Conditions.

The goals of this study are to compare the lumbar spine response variance between the hybrid III, test device for human occupant restraint (THOR), and global human body models consortium simplified 50th percentile (GHBMC M50-OS) finite element models and evaluate the sensitivity of lumbar spine injury metrics to multidirectional acceleration pulses for spaceflight landing conditions. The hybrid III, THOR, and GHBMC models were positioned in a baseline posture within a generic seat with side guards and a five-point restraint system. Thirteen boundary conditions, which were categorized as loading condition variables and environmental variables, were included in the parametric study using a Latin hypercube design of experiments. Each of the three models underwent 455 simulations for a total of 1365 simulations. The hybrid III and THOR models exhibited similar lumbar compression forces. The average lumbar compression force was 45% higher for hybrid III (2.2 ± 1.5 kN) and 51% higher for THOR (2.0 ± 1.6 kN) compared to GHBMC (1.3 ± 0.9 kN). Compared to hybrid III, THOR sustained an average 64% higher lumbar flexion moment and an average 436% higher lumbar extension moment. The GHBMC model sustained much lower bending moments compared to hybrid III and THOR. Regressions revealed that lumbar spine responses were more sensitive to loading condition variables than environmental variables across all models. This study quantified the intermodel lumbar spine response variations and sensitivity between hybrid III, THOR, and GHBMC. Results improve the understanding of lumbar spine response in spaceflight landings.

Validated thoracic vertebrae and costovertebral joints increase biofidelity of a human body model in hub impacts.

Objective: A recent emphasis on nontraditional seating and omnidirectional impact directions has motivated the need for deformable representation of the thoracic spine (T-spine) in human body models. The goal of this study was to develop and validate a deformable T-spine for the Global Human Body Models Consortium (GHBMC) M50-O (average male occupant) human model and to demonstrate improved biofidelity.Methods: Eleven functional spinal units (FSUs) were developed with deformable vertebrae (cortical and trabecular), spinal and costovertebral ligaments, and intervertebral discs. Material properties for all parts were obtained from the literature.FSUs were subjected to quasistatic loads per Panjabi et al. (1976) in 6 degrees of freedom. Stiffness values were calculated for each moment (Nm/°) and translational force (N/µm). Updated costovertebral (CV) joints of ribs 2, 6, and 10 were subjected to moments along 3 axes per Duprey et al. (2010). The response was optimized by maximum force and laxity in the ligaments. In both cases, updated models were compared to the baseline approach, which employed rigid bodies and joint-like behavior. The deformable T-spine and CV joints were integrated into the full M50-O model Ver. 5.0ß and 2 full-body cases were run: (1) a rear pendulum impact per Forman et al. (2015) at speeds up to 5.5 m/s. and (2) a lateral shoulder impact per Koh (2005) at 4.5 m/s. Quantitative evaluation protocols were used to evaluate the time history response vs. experimental data, with an average correlation and analysis (CORA) score of 0.76.Results: All FSU responses showed reduced stiffness vs. baseline. Tension, extension, torsion, and lateral bending became more compliant than experimental data. Like the experimental results, no trend was observed for joint response by level. CV joints showed good biofidelity. The response at ribs 2, 6, and 10 generally followed the experimental data.Conclusions: Deformable T-spine and CV joint validation has not been previously published and yielded high biofidelity in rear impact and notable improvement in lateral impact at the full body level. Future work will focus on localized T-spine injury criteria made possible by the introduction of this fully deformable representation of the anatomy.

Evaluation of finite element human body models for use in a standardized protocol for pedestrian safety assessment.

Objective: Finite element human body models (HBMs) must be certified for use within the EuroNCAP pedestrian safety assessment protocol. We demonstrate that the Global Human Body Model Consortium (GHBMC) simplified pedestrian series of HBMs meet all criteria set forth in Technical Bulletin (TB) 024 (v 1.1 Jan. 2019) for model certification. We further explore variation in head contact time (HIT) and location by HBM size and impact speed across 48 full body impact simulations.Methods: The EuroNCAP Pedestrian Protocol (v. 8.5, Oct. 2018) assesses the overall safety of adult and child pedestrians by outlining a variety of physical tests and finite element simulations using HBMs. These tests are designed to assess the efficacy of vehicle safety technology such as active bonnets. The 50th percentile male simplified pedestrian model (M50-PS, H:175 cm, W:74.5 kg), six-year-old (6YO-PS, H:117 cm, W:23.4 kg), 5th percentile female (F05-PS, H:150 cm, W:50.7 kg), and 95th percentile male (M95-PS, H:190 cm, W:102 kg) were simulated through the suite of cases totaling 48 simulations (12 each). The process gathers three kinematic trajectories and contact force data from designated anatomical locations. The impacting vehicles include a family car (FCR), multi-purpose vehicle (MPV), roadster (RDS), and sports utility vehicle (SUV), all provided by TU Graz, Vehicle Safety Institute as part of the Coherent Project, each simulated at 30 kph, 40 kph, and 50 kph. Each simulation underwent a 23-point pre-simulation check and post-simulation model response comparison. The posture of all HBMs met criteria consisting of 15 measures. All simulations were conducted in LS-Dyna R. 7.1.2.Results and Conclusions: All simulations normal terminated. For each of the simulations, sagittal plane coordinate histories of the center of the head, 12th thoracic vertebrae, and center of acetabulum were compared with standard corridors and did not exceed the tolerance of 50 mm deviation. Head contact time was also compared with the reference values and did not exceed the tolerance interval of +3.5% and -7%. Comparison of contact forces was required for monitoring purposes only. The head contact time of the models for each simulation was recorded and compared by model size, impact speed, and vehicle geometry. Head contact times varied by roughly 3-fold, were lowest for the child model, and showed the greatest sensitivity for the tallest stature model (M95-PS). As stated in the certification process, other body sizes within a model family qualify for certification if the 50th percentile male model passes, provided that model sizes meet the required posture.

Modeling Human Volunteers in Multidirectional, Uni-axial Sled Tests Using a Finite Element Human Body Model.

A goal of the Human Research Program at National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is to analyze and mitigate the risk of occupant injury due to dynamic loads. Experimental tests of human subjects and biofidelic anthropomorphic test devices provide valuable kinematic and kinetic data related to injury risk exposure. However, these experiments are expensive and time consuming compared to computational simulations of similar impact events. This study aimed to simulate human volunteer biodynamic response to unidirectional accelerative loading. Data from seven experimental studies involving 212 volunteer tests performed at the Air Force Research Laboratory were used to reconstruct 13 unique loading conditions across four different loading directions using finite element human body model (HBM) simulations. Acceleration pulses and boundary conditions from the experimental tests were applied to the Global Human Body Models Consortium (GHBMC) simplified 50th percentile male occupant (M50-OS) using the LS-Dyna finite element solver. Head acceleration, chest acceleration, and seat belt force traces were compared between the experimental and matched simulation signals using correlation and analysis (CORA) software and averaged into a comprehensive response score ranging from 0 to 1 with 1 representing a perfect match. The mean comprehensive response scores were 0.689 ± 0.018 (mean ± 1 standard deviation) in two frontal simulations, 0.683 ± 0.060 in four rear simulations, 0.676 ± 0.043 in five lateral simulations, and 0.774 ± 0.013 in two vertical simulations. The CORA scores for head and chest accelerations in these simulations exceeded mean scores reported in the original development and validation of the GHBMC M50-OS model. Collectively, the CORA scores indicated that the HBM in these boundary conditions closely replicated the kinematics of the human volunteers across all loading directions.

Objective Evaluation of Whole Body Kinematics in a Simulated, Restrained Frontal Impact.

The use of human body models as an additional data point in the evaluation of human-machine interaction requires quantitative validation. In this study a validation of the Global Human Body Models Consortium (GHBMC) average male occupant model (M50-O v. 4.5) in a restrained frontal sled test environment is presented. For vehicle passengers, frontal crash remains the most common mode, and the most common source of fatalities. A total of 55-time history traces of reaction loads and kinematics from the model were evaluated against corresponding PMHS data (n = 5). Further, the model's sensitivity to the belt path was studied by replicating two documented PMHS cases with prominent lateral and medial belt paths respectively. Results were quantitatively evaluated using open source CORA software. A tradeoff was observed; better correlation scores were achieved on gross measures (e.g. reaction loads), whereas better corridor scores were achieved on localized measures (rib deflections), indicating that subject specificity may dominate the comparison at localized anatomical regions. On an overall basis, the CORA scores were 0.68, 0.66 and 0.60 for force, body kinematics and chest wall kinematics. Belt force responses received the highest grouped CORA score of 0.85. Head and sternum kinematics earning a 0.8 and 0.7 score respectively. The model demonstrated high sensitivity to belt path, resulting in a 20-point increase in CORA score when the belt was routed closer to analogous location of data collection. The human model demonstrated overall reasonable biofidelity and sensitivity to countermeasures in frontal crash kinematics.

Numerical investigation of driver lower extremity injuries in finite element frontal crash reconstruction.

OBJECTIVE: Lower extremity injuries are the most frequent Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) 2 injury for drivers in frontal crashes. The objective was to reconstruct 11 real-world motor vehicle crashes (2 with AIS 2+ distal lower extremity injury and 9 without lower extremity injury) and to analyze the vehicle parameters and driver attributes that affect injury risk. METHODS: Eleven frontal crashes were reconstructed with a finite element simplified vehicle model (SVM) using a semi-automated optimization method. The SVM was tuned to each corresponding vehicle and the Total HUman Model for Safety (THUMS) Ver 4.01 was scaled and positioned in a baseline configuration to mimic the documented precrash driver posture. The event data recorder crash pulse was applied as the boundary condition for each case. Additionally, for the 2 cases with lower extremity injury, 120 simulations to quantify the uncertainty and response variation were performed varying the following parameters using a Latin hypercube design of experiment (DOE): seat track position, seatback angle, steering column angle, steering column position, and D-ring height. Injury metrics implemented within THUMS were calculated from the femur, tibia, and ankle and cross-compared among the 11 baseline cases using tibia index and multiple injury risk functions. Kinetic and kinematic data from the 120-simulation DOE were analyzed and fit to regression models to examine any causal relationship between occupant positioning and lower extremity injury risk. RESULTS: Of the 11 real-world crashes, both cases with lower extremity injuries resulted in elevated tibia axial forces and resultant bending moments, compared to the 9 cases without lower extremity injury. The average tibia index of the 2 cases with distal lower extremity injury (left: 1.79; right: 1.19) was higher than that in the 9 cases without lower extremity injury (left: 1.16, P =.024; right: 0.82, P =.024). An increased risk of AIS 2+ tibia shaft (33.6%), distal tibia and hindfoot (20.0%), as well as ankle malleolar (14.5%) fracture was also observed for the injured compared to the noninjured cases. Rearward seat track position, reclined seat back angle, and reduced seat height were correlated with elevated tibia axial force and increased tibia index, imposing additional lower extremity injury risk. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a computational framework for assessing lower extremity injuries and elucidates the effect of precrash driver posture on lower extremity injury risk while accounting for vehicle parameters and driver attributes. Results from the study aid in the evaluation of real-world injury data, the understanding of factors contributing to injury risk, and the prevention of lower extremity injuries.