Search Results

Past studies have found that a pressure based injury risk function was the best predictor of liver injuries due to blunt impacts. In an effort to expand upon these findings, this study investigated the biomechanical responses of the abdomen of post mortem human surrogates (PMHS) to high-speed seatbelt loading and developed external response targets in conjunction with proposing an abdominal injury criterion. A total of seven unembalmed PMHS, with an average mass and stature of 71 kg and 174 cm respectively were subjected to belt loading using a seatbelt pull mechanism, with the PMHS seated upright in a free-back configuration. A pneumatic piston pulled a seatbelt into the abdomen at the level of the umbilicus with a nominal peak penetration speed of 4.0 m/s. Pressure transducers were placed in the re-pressurized abdominal vasculature, including the inferior vena cava (IVC) and abdominal aorta, to measure internal pressure variation during the event.

In ISO Technical Report 9790 (1999) normalized lateral and oblique thoracic force-time responses of PMHS subjected to blunt pendulum impacts at 4.3 m/s were deemed sufficiently similar to be grouped together in a single biomechanical response corridor. Shaw et al., (2006) presented results of paired oblique and lateral thoracic pneumatic ram impact tests to opposite sides of seven PMHS at sub-injurious speed (2.5 m/s). Normalized responses showed that oblique impacts resulted in more deflection and less force, whereas lateral impacts resulted in less deflection and more force. This study presents results of oblique and lateral thoracic impacts to PMHS at higher speeds (4.5 and 5.5 m/s) to assess whether lateral relative to oblique responses are different as observed by Shaw et al., or similar as observed by ISO.

A new biofidelity assessment system is being developed and applied to three side impact dummies: the WorldSID-α, the ES-2 and the SID-HIII. This system quantifies (1) the ability of a dummy to load a vehicle as a cadaver does, “External Biofidelity,” and (2) the ability of a dummy to replicate those cadaver responses that best predict injury potential, “Internal Biofidelity.” The ranking system uses cadaver and dummy responses from head drop tests, thorax and shoulder pendulum tests, and whole body sled tests. Each test condition is assigned a weight factor based on the number of human subjects tested to form the biomechanical response corridor and how well the biofidelity tests represent FMVSS 214, side NCAP (SNCAP) and FMVSS 201 Pole crash environments.