Improving Hybrid III injury assessment in steering wheel rim to chest impacts using responses from finite element Hybrid III and human body model.

OBJECTIVE: The main aim of this study was to improve the quality of injury risk assessments in steering wheel rim to chest impacts when using the Hybrid III crash test dummy in frontal heavy goods vehicle (HGV) collision tests. Correction factors for chest injury criteria were calculated as the model chest injury parameter ratios between finite element (FE) Hybrid III, evaluated in relevant load cases, and the Total Human Model for Safety (THUMS). This is proposed to be used to compensate Hybrid III measurements in crash tests where steering wheel rim to chest impacts occur. METHODS: The study was conducted in an FE environment using an FE-Hybrid III model and the THUMS. Two impactor shapes were used, a circular hub and a long, thin horizontal bar. Chest impacts at velocities ranging from 3.0 to 6.0 m/s were simulated at 3 impact height levels. A ratio between FE-Hybrid III and THUMS chest injury parameters, maximum chest compression C max, and maximum viscous criterion VC max, were calculated for the different chest impact conditions to form a set of correction factors. The definition of the correction factor is based on the assumption that the response from a circular hub impact to the middle of the chest is well characterized and that injury risk measures are independent of impact height. The current limits for these chest injury criteria were used as a basis to develop correction factors that compensate for the limitations in biofidelity of the Hybrid III in steering wheel rim to chest impacts. RESULTS: The hub and bar impactors produced considerably higher C max and VC max responses in the THUMS compared to the FE-Hybrid III. The correction factor for the responses of the FE-Hybrid III showed that the criteria responses for the bar impactor were consistently overestimated. Ratios based on Hybrid III and THUMS responses provided correction factors for the Hybrid III responses ranging from 0.84 to 0.93. These factors can be used to estimate C max and VC max values when the Hybrid III is used in crash tests for which steering wheel rim to chest interaction occurs. CONCLUSIONS: For the FE-Hybrid III, bar impacts caused higher chest deflection compared to hub impacts, although the contrary results were obtained with the more humanlike THUMS. Correction factors were developed that can be used to correct the Hybrid III chest responses. Higher injury criteria capping limits for steering wheel impacts are acceptable. Supplemental materials are available for this article. Go to the publisher's online edition of Traffic Injury Prevention to view the supplemental file.

A new THOR shoulder design: a comparison with volunteers, the Hybrid III, and THOR NT.

OBJECTIVE: Since the shoulders are rarely seriously injured in frontal or oblique collisions, they have been given low priority in the development of frontal impact crash test dummies. The shoulder complex geometry and its kinematics are of vital importance for the overall dummy kinematics. The shoulder complex also influences the risk of the safety belt slipping off the shoulder in oblique forward collisions. The first aim of this study was to develop a new 50th percentile male THOR shoulder design, while the second was to compare the new shoulder, mounted on a THOR NT dummy, with volunteer, THOR NT, and Hybrid III range of motion and stiffness data. The third aim was to test the repeatability of the new shoulder during dynamic testing and to see how the design behaves with respect to belt slippage in a 45 degrees far-side collision. METHODS: The new 50th percentile THOR shoulder design was developed with the aid of a shell model of the seated University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI) 50th percentile male with coordinates for joints and bony landmarks (Schneider et al., 1983). The new shoulder design has human-like bony landmarks for the acromion and coracoid processes. The clavicle curvature and length are also made similar to that of a male human, as is the range of motion in the anterior-posterior, superior-inferior, and medial-lateral directions. The new shoulder design was manufactured and tested under the same conditions that Törnvall et al. (2005b) used to compare the shoulder range of motion for the volunteers, Hybrid III, and THOR Alpha. The new design was also tested in two dynamic test configurations: the first was a 0 degrees full-frontal test and the second was a 45 degrees far-side test. The dummy tests were conducted with an R-16 seat with a three-point belt, the Delta V was 27.0+/-0.5 km/h and the maximum peak acceleration was approximately 14.6+/-0.5 g for each test. RESULTS: A new shoulder design with geometry close to that of humans was developed to be retrofitted to the THOR NT dummy. The results showed that the range of motion for the new shoulder complex during static loading was larger by at least a factor of three, for the maximum load (200 N/arm), than that of either the Hybrid III or the THOR NT; this means it was more similar to the volunteers' range of motion. It was observed that the THOR NT with the new shoulder did not slide out of the shoulder belt during a far-side collision. The performance of the new shoulder was reasonably repeatable and stable during both the static tests and the sled tests. CONCLUSION: A new shoulder for the THOR NT has been designed and developed, and data from static range of motion tests and sled tests indicate that the new shoulder complex has the potential to function in a more human-like manner on the THOR dummy.

Frontal impact dummy kinematics in oblique frontal collisions: evaluation against post mortem human subject test data.

OBJECTIVE: Today, a predominant percentage of vehicles involved in car crashes are exposed to oblique or frontal offset collisions. The aim of this study is to evaluate the 50th percentile male Hybrid III, THOR 99, and THOR Alpha dummies by comparing them with the corresponding kinematics of post mortem human subjects (PMHS) in this type of collision. METHODS: The PMHS data include results from oblique frontal collision tests. They include sled tests with near-side and far-side belt geometries at 15 degrees , 30 degrees , and 45 degrees angles. The test subjects were restrained with a three-point lap-shoulder belt and the Delta V was 30 km/h. RESULTS: The results from the Hybrid III and THOR 99 tests showed that, in most of the test, the head trajectories were an average of approximately 0.1 m shorter than those from equivalent PMHS. The Hybrid III and THOR 99 far-side belt geometry tests showed that the belt remained in place longer on the shoulder of the Hybrid III than on the THOR 99 and the THOR Alpha. This was probably due to a stiffer lumbar spine in the Hybrid III and to a large groove in the steel of the superior surface of the Hybrid III shoulder structure. The THOR 99 escaped from the shoulder belt about 40-50 ms earlier than the THOR Alpha. The results from the THOR Alpha tests show that the head trajectory accorded fairly well with the PMHS data, as long as the shoulder belt did not slip off the shoulder. Although the THOR Alpha shoulder escaped the shoulder belt in the 45 degrees far-side belt geometry, the PMHS did not. This may be due to the THOR Alpha shoulder design, with approximately 0.05 m smaller superior and medial shoulder range-of-motion, in combination with a relatively soft lumbar spine. CONCLUSIONS: The THOR Alpha provides head trajectories similar to those of the PMHS under these loading conditions, provided the shoulder belt remains in position on the shoulder. When the shoulder belt slipped off the dummy shoulder, the head kinematics was altered. The shoulder range-of-motion may be a contributing factor to the overall kinematics of an occupant in oblique frontal impact situations where the occupant moves in a trajectory at an angle from that of the longitudinal direction of the car.