International Journal of Crashworthiness

, Volume 8, Issue 6, pp 629–637 | Cite as

Impact response of Hybrid III dummy and cadaver knee-femur-pelvis complex

  • C Masson
  • C Cavallero
  • C Brunet
Article
  • 15 Downloads

Abstract

The purpose of this work was to compare the Hybrid III and PMHS responses to axial impacts of the lower limb. The tests consisted of impacting the knee joint of the subject in seated position with no back support at 2.8 m/s and 4 m/s with a 12kg pendulum. Force and resultant acceleration time histories were obtained for both kinds of subject and compared. The dummy and PMHS responses concerning the femur, the iliac crest corresponding to the impacted leg and the sacrum followed the same pattern and HIII peak values were in the PMHS corridors for both impact velocities. But nevertheless significant differences were observed. It appeared that the dummy knee impact force was larger in magnitude and shorter in duration than the cadaver knee load in both test conditions. The response of the iliac crest corresponding to the no impacted leg was outside the PMHS corridors. The cinematic of the PMHS was not reproduced by the dummy that had a backward movement and underestimated the rotation of the cadaver. The results showed that the Hybrid III femur-pelvis complex did not provide a completely realistic representation of the human one.

Keywords

Mechanical Engineer Crest Knee Joint Time History Iliac Crest 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.
    European Transport Safety Council, Priorities for Miller EU motor vehicle safety design, 2001.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    MILLER, T, MARTIN, P and Crandall, J R. 'Costs of lower limb injuries in highway crashes ', International Conference on Pelvic and Lower extremity Injuries, 1995.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    PATRICK, L, MERTZ, H. 'Cadaver knee, chest, head impacts loads ', SAE 670913, 11th Stapp Car Crash Conference, Warrendale, PA, 1967.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    KING, J, Fan, W and VARGOVICK, R. 'Femur load injury criteria-a realistic approach ', SAE 730984, 17th Stapp Car Crash Conference, Warrendale, PA, 1973.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    LEUNG, Y, HUE, B, FAYON, A, TARRIERE, C, Hamon, H, GOT, C PATEL, A and HUREAU, J. 'Study of “knee-thigh-hip ” protection criterion ', SAE 831629, 27th Stapp Car Crash Conference, Warrendale, PA, 1983.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    VIANO, D. 'Consideration for a femur injury criterion ', SAE 770925, 21th Stapp Car Crash Conference, Warrendale, PA, 1977.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    MELVIN, J, STALNAKER, R, ALEM, N, BENSON, J and MOHAN, D. 'Impact response and tolerance of the lower extremities ', SAE 751159, SAE 750925, 19th Stapp Car Crash Conference, Warrendale, PA, 1975.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    HORSCH, J, PATRICK, L. 'Cadaver and Dummy knee impact response ', SAE 760799, 20th Stapp Car Crash Conference, Warrendale, PA, 1976.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    DONNELLY, B and ROBERTS, D. 'Comparison of cadaver and hybrid III dummy response to axial impacts of the femur ', SAE 872204, 31st Stapp Car Crash Conference, Warrendale, PA, 1987.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    HAUT, R ATKINSON, P. 'Insult to the human cadaver patellofemoral joint:effects of age on fracture tolerance and occult injury ', SAE 952729, 39th Stapp Car Crash Conference, Warrendale, PA, 1995.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    HAYASHI, S, CHOI, H, LEVINE, R, YANG, K and KING, A. 'Experimental and analytical study of knee fracture mechanisms in a frontal knee impact ', SAE 962423, 40th Stapp Car Crash Conference, Warrendale, PA, 1996.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    ATKINSON, P, GARCIA, J, ALTI ERO, N and HAUT, R. 'The influence of impact interface on human knee injury: implications for instrument panel design and lower extremity injury criterion ', SAE 973327, 41st Stapp Car Crash Conference, Warrendale, PA, 1997.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    ATKINSON, P, ATKINSON, T, HAUT, R, EUSEBI, C, MARIPUDI, V, HILL, T and SAMBATUR, K. 'Development of Injury criteria of human surrogate to address current trends in knee-to-instrument panel injuries ', SAE 983146, 42th Stapp Car Crash Conference, Warrendale, PA, 1998.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    VIANO, D, CULVER, C, HAUT, R, MELVIN, J, BENDER, M, CULVER, R and LEVINE, R. 'Bolster impacts tot he knee and tibia of human cadavers and an anthropomorphic dummy ', SAE 780896, 22th Stapp Car Crash Conference, Warrendale, PA, 1978.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    NUSHOLTZ, G, ALEM, N and MELVIN, J. 'Impact response and injury of the pelvis ', SAE 821160, 26th Stapp Car Crash Conference, Warrendale, PA, 1982.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    ATKINSON, T, ATKINSON, P. 'Knee injuries in motor vehicle collisions:a study of the national accident sampling system database for the years 1979-1995 ', Accident Analysis and prevention, 2000 32 779-786.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    WINKLER, G. 'Manuel d 'Anatomie Topographique et Fonctionnelle ', Masson., Paris, 1974.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    REBIFFÉ, R, GUILLIEN, J and PASQUET, P. 'Enquête anthropométrique sur les conducteurs francais ', Laboratoire de physiologie et biomécanique de l 'Association Peugeot Renault, 1982.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    MASSON, C, VINEL, H, CAVALLERO, C and BRUNET, C 'Response of the human pelvis-femur-knee complex during low speed frontal impact ', IRCOBI, Munich, 2002.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    STALNAKER, R and MELVIN, J. 'Human tolerance to lower extremities impacts '. SAE 1976-13-0032, Warrendale, PA, 1976.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    EPPINGER, R, MARCUS, J and MORGAN, R. 'Develpment of Dummy and injury index for NHTSA 's Thoracic side impact protection research program ', SAE 840885, 28th Stapp Car Crash Conference, Warrendale, PA, 1984.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Woodhead Publishing 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • C Masson
  • C Cavallero
  • C Brunet

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations