Occupant Kinematics and Injury Causation in Side Impacts-Field Accident Experience

1991 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ludo M. M. Carȇme
Keyword(s):  
Side Impacts ◽  
Occupant Kinematics ◽  
Injury Causation

Human Occupant Kinematics in Low Speed Side Impacts

2002 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas F. Fugger ◽  
Bryan C. Randles ◽  
Jesse L. Wobrock ◽  
Judson B. Welcher ◽  
Daniel P. Voss ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Speed ◽  
Side Impacts ◽  
Occupant Kinematics

Evaluation of Occupant Kinematics during Low- to Moderate-Speed Side Impacts

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juff George ◽  
Mathieu Davis ◽  
Sarah Sharpe ◽  
Joseph Olberding ◽  
Stacy Imler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Side Impacts ◽  
Occupant Kinematics

Biomechanical Analysis of Occupant Kinematics: Interpretation of Witness Marks

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph C. McGowan ◽  
Jacob L. Fisher ◽  
Scott R. Lucas
Keyword(s):  
Biomechanical Analysis ◽  
Accident Reconstruction ◽  
Complete Understanding ◽  
Photographic Evidence ◽  
Vehicle Inspection ◽  
Witness Statements ◽  
Improved Design ◽  
Accident Scenarios ◽  
Occupant Kinematics ◽  
Injury Causation

Understanding the occupant kinematics associated with an automotive accident is essential to evaluating injury causation and can lead to improved design of vehicles and restraint systems. Biomechanical analysis can be undertaken with knowledge of the accident reconstruction, that is, velocities and trajectories of the involved vehicle or vehicles, as well as the results of a detailed vehicle inspection and evaluation of other physical and photographic evidence. Evidence can be incomplete, seemingly contradictory, or compromised by the passage of time, and the biomechanical engineer must seek an explanation that is consistent with all that is known. Sometimes a physical examination of the accident vehicle provides a vivid understanding of injury causation. At other times the information obtained from the vehicle is understood only in the context of injuries sustained, witness statements, and/or information derived from other sources. We explain a methodology for conduct of a physical inspection of an accident vehicle to develop insight to be used in conjunction with information from other sources to elicit a clear and complete understanding of injury causation. We specify common and less common “witness marks” that are examined to develop constraints on possible occupant kinematics. Selected case studies highlight the importance of a careful inspection and suggest specific applications to accident scenarios.

Shoulder Pain at Work: Causation Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-16
Author(s):  
Joel Weddington ◽  
Charles N. Brooks ◽  
Mark Melhorn ◽  
Christopher R. Brigham
Keyword(s):  
Epidemiological Data ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Individual Case ◽  
Shoulder Injury ◽  
Work Related ◽  
Clear Cut ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Causation Analysis ◽  
Injury Causation ◽  
Relevant Factors

Abstract In most cases of shoulder injury at work, causation analysis is not clear-cut and requires detailed, thoughtful, and time-consuming causation analysis; traditionally, physicians have approached this in a cursory manner, often presenting their findings as an opinion. An established method of causation analysis using six steps is outlined in the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine Guidelines and in the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Disease and Injury Causation, Second Edition, as follows: 1) collect evidence of disease; 2) collect epidemiological data; 3) collect evidence of exposure; 4) collect other relevant factors; 5) evaluate the validity of the evidence; and 6) write a report with evaluation and conclusions. Evaluators also should recognize that thresholds for causation vary by state and are based on specific statutes or case law. Three cases illustrate evidence-based causation analysis using the six steps and illustrate how examiners can form well-founded opinions about whether a given condition is work related, nonoccupational, or some combination of these. An evaluator's causal conclusions should be rational, should be consistent with the facts of the individual case and medical literature, and should cite pertinent references. The opinion should be stated “to a reasonable degree of medical probability,” on a “more-probable-than-not” basis, or using a suitable phrase that meets the legal threshold in the applicable jurisdiction.

scholarly journals Is Acceleration a Valid Proxy for Injury Risk in Minimal Damage Traffic Crashes? A Comparative Review of Volunteer, ADL and Real-World Studies

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (6) ◽  
pp. 2901
Author(s):  
Paul S. Nolet ◽  
Larry Nordhoff ◽  
Vicki L. Kristman ◽  
Arthur C. Croft ◽  
Maurice P. Zeegers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
Injury Risk ◽  
Angular Acceleration ◽  
Traffic Crashes ◽  
Rear Impact ◽  
Comparative Review ◽  
Minimal Damage ◽  
Injury Causation ◽  
Crash Tests ◽  
Biomechanical Approach

Injury claims associated with minimal damage rear impact traffic crashes are often defended using a “biomechanical approach,” in which the occupant forces of the crash are compared to the forces of activities of daily living (ADLs), resulting in the conclusion that the risk of injury from the crash is the same as for ADLs. The purpose of the present investigation is to evaluate the scientific validity of the central operating premise of the biomechanical approach to injury causation; that occupant acceleration is a scientifically valid proxy for injury risk. Data were abstracted, pooled, and compared from three categories of published literature: (1) volunteer rear impact crash testing studies, (2) ADL studies, and (3) observational studies of real-world rear impacts. We compared the occupant accelerations of minimal or no damage (i.e., 3 to 11 kph speed change or “delta V”) rear impact crash tests to the accelerations described in 6 of the most commonly reported ADLs in the reviewed studies. As a final step, the injury risk observed in real world crashes was compared to the results of the pooled crash test and ADL analyses, controlling for delta V. The results of the analyses indicated that average peak linear and angular acceleration forces observed at the head during rear impact crash tests were typically at least several times greater than average forces observed during ADLs. In contrast, the injury risk of real-world minimal damage rear impact crashes was estimated to be at least 2000 times greater than for any ADL. The results of our analysis indicate that the principle underlying the biomechanical injury causation approach, that occupant acceleration is a proxy for injury risk, is scientifically invalid. The biomechanical approach to injury causation in minimal damage crashes invariably results in the vast underestimation of the actual risk of such crashes, and should be discontinued as it is a scientifically invalid practice.

Occupant pre-crash kinematics in rotated seat arrangements

2021 ◽  
pp. 095440702110045
Author(s):  
Alexander Diederich ◽  
Christophe Bastien ◽  
Karthikeyan Ekambaram ◽  
Alexis Wilson
Keyword(s):  
State Of The Art ◽  
The Other ◽  
Human Model ◽  
Multi Objective ◽  
Emergency Braking ◽  
Seating Arrangement ◽  
Current State ◽  
Occupant Comfort ◽  
Occupant Kinematics ◽  
Belt System

The introduction of automated L5 driving technologies will revolutionise the design of vehicle interiors and seating configurations, improving occupant comfort and experience. It is foreseen that pre-crash emergency braking and swerving manoeuvres will affect occupant posture, which could lead to an interaction with a deploying airbag. This research addresses the urgent safety need of defining the occupant’s kinematics envelope during that pre-crash phase, considering rotated seat arrangements and different seatbelt configurations. The research used two different sets of volunteer tests experiencing L5 vehicle manoeuvres, based in the first instance on 22 50th percentile fit males wearing a lap-belt (OM4IS), while the other dataset is based on 87 volunteers with a BMI range of 19 to 67 kg/m2 wearing a 3-point belt (UMTRI). Unique biomechanics kinematics corridors were then defined, as a function of belt configuration and vehicle manoeuvre, to calibrate an Active Human Model (AHM) using a multi-objective optimisation coupled with a Correlation and Analysis (CORA) rating. The research improved the AHM omnidirectional kinematics response over current state of the art in a generic lap-belted environment. The AHM was then tested in a rotated seating arrangement under extreme braking, highlighting that maximum lateral and frontal motions are comparable, independent of the belt system, while the asymmetry of the 3-point belt increased the occupant’s motion towards the seatbelt buckle. It was observed that the frontal occupant kinematics decrease by 200 mm compared to a lap-belted configuration. This improved omnidirectional AHM is the first step towards designing safer future L5 vehicle interiors.

Proposal for a Thorax Tolerance Level in Side Impacts Based on 62 Tests Performed With Cadavers Having Known Bone Condition

1982 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Sacreste ◽  
F. Brun-Cassan ◽  
A. Fayon ◽  
C. Tarrière ◽  
C. Got ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tolerance Level ◽  
Side Impacts ◽  
Bone Condition

Vibration Analysis Methods Applied to Forensic Engineering Problems

1991 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth J. Saczalski ◽  
Eugene B. Loverich
Keyword(s):  
Vibration Analysis ◽  
Motor Vehicle ◽  
Biomechanical Analysis ◽  
System Failures ◽  
Injury Criteria ◽  
Analysis Methods ◽  
Engineering Problems ◽  
Shock Impact ◽  
Forensic Engineering ◽  
Occupant Kinematics

Abstract Forensic engineering problems are reviewed to demonstrate how vibration analysis methods can be utilized in certain instances to determine cause of system failures and injury mechanics associated with certain vehicular accidents. A brief overview of injury criteria and biomechanical analysis methods for evaluation of motor vehicle occupant kinematics induced by shock impact loadings is also included.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document