Laboratory Study of Hybrid-III and THOR Dummy Head/neck Responses to Airbag Load at Close Proximity

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philemon C. Chan ◽  
Zi Lu
Keyword(s):  
Laboratory Study ◽  
Close Proximity ◽  
Hybrid Iii ◽  
Head Neck

The Influence of Hard Hat Design Features on Head Acceleration Attenuation

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Arthur Alves Dos Santos ◽  
James Sorce ◽  
Alexandra Schonning ◽  
Grant Bevill
Keyword(s):  
Lead Shot ◽  
Construction Site ◽  
Head Acceleration ◽  
Protective Capacity ◽  
Design Features ◽  
Shell Design ◽  
Hybrid Iii ◽  
Hard Hat ◽  
Head Neck

This study evaluated the performance of 6 commercially available hard hat designs—differentiated by shell design, number of suspension points, and suspension tightening system—in regard to their ability to attenuate accelerations during vertical impacts to the head. Tests were conducted with impactor materials of steel, wood, and lead shot (resembling commonly seen materials in a construction site), weighing 1.8 and 3.6 kg and dropped from 1.83 m onto a Hybrid III head/neck assembly. All hard hats appreciably reduced head acceleration to the unprotected condition. However, neither the addition of extra suspension points nor variations in suspension tightening mechanism appreciably influenced performance. Therefore, these results indicate that additional features available in current hard hat designs do not improve protective capacity as related to head acceleration metrics.

scholarly journals Response of an Impact Test Apparatus for Fall Protective Headgear Testing Using a Hybrid-III Head/Neck Assembly

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 413-427 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Caccese ◽  
J. Ferguson ◽  
J. Lloyd ◽  
M. Edgecomb ◽  
M. Seidi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Impact Test ◽  
Test Apparatus ◽  
Hybrid Iii ◽  
Head Neck

scholarly journals Mathematical modeling of the hybrid III manikin head-neck structure

1988 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 430-435 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian J. Doherty ◽  
Jacqueline G. Paver
Keyword(s):  
Mathematical Modeling ◽  
Hybrid Iii ◽  
Head Neck

The Influence of Neck Kinematics on Brain Pressures and Strains Under Blast Loading

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. C. Roberts ◽  
T. P. Harrigan ◽  
E. E. Ward ◽  
D. Nicolella ◽  
L. Francis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Shock Tube ◽  
Blast Loading ◽  
Human Head ◽  
Pressure Response ◽  
System Level ◽  
Hybrid Iii ◽  
Head Rotations ◽  
The Brain ◽  
Head Neck

Strains and pressures in the brain are known to be influenced by rotation of the head in response to loading. This brain rotation is governed by the motion of the head, as permitted by the neck, due to loading conditions. In order to better understand the effect neck characteristics have on pressures and strains in the brain, a human head finite element model (HHFEM) was attached to two neck FEMs: a standard, well characterized Hybrid III Anthropometric Test Device neck FEM; and a high fidelity parametric probabilistic human FEM neck that has been hierarchically validated. The Hybrid III neck is well-established in automotive injury prevention studies, but is known to be much stiffer than in vivo human necks. The parametric FEM is based on CT scans and anatomic data, and the components of the model are validated against biomechanical tests at the component and system level. Both integrated head-neck models were loaded using pressure histories based on shock tube exposures. The shock tube loading applied to these head models were obtained using a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model of the HHFEM surface in front of a 6 inch diameter shock tube. The calculated pressure-time histories were then applied to the head-neck models. The global head rotations, pressures, brain displacements, and brain strains of both head-neck models were compared for shock tube driver pressures from 517 to 862 kPa. The intracranial pressure response occurred in the first 1 to 5 msec, after blast impact, prior to a significant kinematic response, and was very similar between the two models. The global head rotations and the strains in the brain occurred at 20 to 100 msec after blast impact, and both were approximately two times higher in the model using the head parametric probabilistic neck FEM (H2PN), as compared to the model using the head Hybrid III neck FEM (H3N). It was also discovered that the H2PN exhibited an initial backward and small downward motion in the first 10 ms not seen in the H3N. The increased displacements and strains were the primary difference between the two combined models, indicating that neck constraints are a significant factor in the strains induced by blast loading to the head. Therefore neck constraints should be carefully controlled in studies of brain strain due to blast, but neck constraints are less important if pressure response is the only response parameter of primary interest.

scholarly journals Response of an Impact Test Apparatus for Fall Protective Headgear Testing Using a Hybrid-III Head/Neck Assembly

2014 ◽  
pp. n/a-n/a ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Caccese ◽  
J. Ferguson ◽  
J. Lloyd ◽  
M. Edgecomb ◽  
M. Seidi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Impact Test ◽  
Test Apparatus ◽  
Hybrid Iii ◽  
Head Neck

Correlation of Field Injuries and GM Hybrid III Dummy Responses for Lap-Shoulder Belt Restraint

1980 ◽  
Vol 102 (2) ◽  
pp. 103-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. W. Nyquist ◽  
P. C. Begman ◽  
A. I. King ◽  
H. J. Mertz
Keyword(s):  
General Motors ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Impact Tests ◽  
Body Regions ◽  
Injury Data ◽  
Hybrid Iii ◽  
Accident Injury ◽  
Head Neck

Simulated frontal, lap-shoulder belted, barrier impact tests were performed using a Volvo sedan and General Motors Hybrid III anthropomorphic test dummy. Swedish field accident injury data for this vehicle are available from another published study. For the purpose of this program, the injuries were logically subdivided into four body regions: head, neck, thorax, and lower torso. The Hybrid III has instrumentation in each of these regions. The results of three replicated tests at barrier equivalent velocities of nominally 32 and 48 km/h are discussed in terms of the field injuries, thereby providing a basis for more intelligent interpretation of future Hybrid III test results.

The Prediction of Hybrid III Manikin Head-Neck Kinematics and Dynamics

1990 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacqueline G. Paver ◽  
Tara P. Khatua ◽  
Robert L. Piziali ◽  
Jennifer Whitestone ◽  
Ints Kaleps ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Kinematics And Dynamics ◽  
Hybrid Iii ◽  
Head Neck

Biomechanical Evaluation of the Axial Compressive Responses of the Human Cadaveric and Manikin Necks

1989 ◽  
Vol 111 (3) ◽  
pp. 250-255 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Yoganandan ◽  
A. Sances ◽  
F. Pintar
Keyword(s):  
Human Head ◽  
Axial Stiffness ◽  
Axial Loads ◽  
Anatomic Structure ◽  
Clinical Prognosis ◽  
Cervical Spine Injuries ◽  
Compressive Response ◽  
Hybrid Iii ◽  
Human Cadavers ◽  
Head Neck

Cervical spine injuries such as wedge, burst, and tear drop fractures are often associated with compressive axial loads delivered to the human head-neck complex. Understanding the injury mechanisms, the kinematics of the anatomic structure, and the tissue tolerances can improve clinical prognosis and facilitate a better design for anthropomorphic devices. The axial compressive response of human cadaveric preparations was compared with the 50th percentile anthropomorphic Hybrid III manikin under various loading rates. Ten fresh human cadavers were used in the study. Intact cadaver torsos, head-cervical spines, and ligamentous cervical columns were tested. The head-neck structure and the neck (without head) of the Hybrid III manikin were also tested. Responses of the human cadaveric preparations and manikin structures were nonlinear at all rates of loading. However, axial stiffness, a measure of the ability of the structure to withstand external force, was higher under all rates of loading for manikin preparations when compared with the human cadaveric tissues.

Response Corridors for Blunt Impacts to the Back

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 123-138
Author(s):  
Chantal S Parenteau ◽  
David C Viano ◽  
Warren N Hardy
Keyword(s):  
Motor Vehicle ◽  
Human Subjects ◽  
Neck Extension ◽  
Safety Standards ◽  
Crash Testing ◽  
Blunt Impact ◽  
Hybrid Iii ◽  
Male Hybrid ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Head Neck

Corridors for the biofidelity of blunt impact to the back are important for sled and crash testing with Anthropomorphic Test Devices (ATDs). The Hybrid III is used in rear sled tests as part of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) 202a. The only corridor for biofidelity is the neck extension. Eight Post Mortem Human Subjects (PMHS) were subjected to 20 blunt impacts with a 15.2 cm (6 in.) diameter pendulum weighing 23.4 kg. The impact was below T1 at 4.5 m/s and 6.7 m/s and below T6 at 4.5 m/s centered on the back. Head, neck, and chest responses were reported in 2001 [8]. In this study, the responses were scaled to the 50th male Hybrid III, and corridors were determined defining biofidelity for blunt impacts to the back. The scaled data gives an average peak force of 3.44 kN ± 0.74 kN at T1 and 4.5 m/s, 5.08 kN ± 1.35 kN at T1 and 6.7 ms, and 3.4 kN ± 1.2 kN at T6 and 4.5 m/s. The corresponding scaled deflection was 44.0 ± 19.7 mm, 60.2 ± 21.2 mm, and 53.1 ± 16.5 mm. The average stiffness of the back was 1.21 kN/cm at T1 and 4.5 m/s, 1.17 kN/cm at T1 and 6.7 m/s, and 1.14 kN/cm at T6 and 4.5 m/s. The corridors help to define biofidelity and can be used to assess the performance of the Hybrid III, Biofidelic Rear Impact Dummy (BioRID) II, and other ATDs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document