Search Results

Biomechanical data are often assumed to be doubly censored. In this paper, this assumption is evaluated critically for several previously published sets of data. Injury risk functions are compared using simple logistic regression and using survival analysis with 1) the assumption of doubly censored data and 2) the assumption of right-censored (uninjured specimens) and uncensored (injured) data. It is shown that the injury risk functions that result from these differing assumptions are not similar and that some experiments will require a preliminary assessment of data censoring prior to finalizing the experimental design. Some types of data are obviously doubly censored (e.g., chest deflection as a predictor of rib fracture risk), but many types are not left censored since injury is a force-limiting phenomenon (e.g., axial force as a predictor of tibia fracture). Guidelines for determining the censoring for various types of experiment are presented.

This paper presents a technique for developing corridors from individual subject responses contained in experimental biomechanical data sets. Force-deflection response is used as an illustrative example. The technique begins with a method for averaging human subject force-deflection responses in which curve shape characteristics are maintained and discontinuities are avoided. Individual responses sharing a common characteristic shape are averaged based upon normalized deflection values. The normalized average response is then scaled to represent the given data set using the mean peak deflection value associated with the set of experimental data. Finally, a procedure for developing a corridor around the scaled normalized average response is presented using standard deviation calculations for both force and deflection.

Crash test dummies rely on biomechanical data from cadaver studies to biofidelically reproduce loading and predict injury. Unfortunately, it is difficult to obtain equivalent measurements of leg loading in a dummy and a cadaver, particularly for bending moments. A methodology is presented here to implant load cells in the tibia and fibula while minimally altering the functional anatomy of the two bones. The location and orientation of the load cells can be measured in all six degrees of freedom from post-test radiographs. Equations are given to transform tibial and fibular load cell measurements from a cadaver or dummy to a common leg coordinate frame so that test data can be meaningfully compared.

The biomechanical behavior of 4-point seat belt systems was investigated through MADYMO modeling, dummy tests and post mortem human subject tests. This study was conducted to assess the effect of 4-point seat belts on the risk of thoracic injury in frontal impacts, to evaluate the ability to prevent submarining under the lap belt using 4-point seat belts, and to examine whether 4-point belts may induce injuries not typically observed with 3-point seat belts. The performance of two types of 4-point seat belts was compared with that of a pretensioned, load-limited, 3-point seat belt. A 3-point belt with an extra shoulder belt that “crisscrossed” the chest (X4) appeared to add constraint to the torso and increased chest deflection and injury risk. Harness style shoulder belts (V4) loaded the body in a different biomechanical manner than 3-point and X4 belts.

The objective of the current study was to provide a comprehensive characterization of human biomechanical response to whole-body, lateral impact. Three approximately 50th-percentile adult male PMHS were subjected to right-side pure lateral impacts at 4.3 ± 0.1 m/s using a rigid wall mounted to a rail-mounted sled. Each subject was positioned on a rigid seat and held stationary by a system of tethers until immediately prior to being impacted by the moving wall with 100 mm pelvic offset. Displacement data were obtained using an optoelectronic stereophotogrammetric system that was used to track the 3D motions of the impacting wall sled; seat sled, and reflective targets secured to the head, spine, extremities, ribcage, and shoulder complex of each subject. Kinematic data were also recorded using 3-axis accelerometer cubes secured to the head, pelvis, and spine at the levels of T1, T6, T11, and L3. Chest deformation in the transverse plane was recorded using a single chestband.