Search Results

In highly automated vehicles (HAVs), new seat configurations may be desirable to allow occupants to perform new activities. One of the current HAV concepts is the swiveled seat layout, which might facilitate communication between occupants. The main objective of this study was to investigate the effects of seat swiveling angles on occupant kinematics and injury risk predicted by a Human Body Model (HBM) during a frontal impact. A detailed 50th percentile male HBM (GHBMC M50-O) was subjected to two frontal crash pulses in a sled setup. The model was positioned on a semi-rigid seat and restrained using a pre-inflated airbag and a three-point seatbelt. Simulations included four seat swiveling angles (0, -10, -20, and -30 degrees), three occupant positions (Sedan driver, large VAN driver or Laptop user), two airbag initial locations (nominal or matching the head Y location), and the inclusion of lateral supports on the seat pan.

Petit et al. 2015 and Lebarbé et al. 2016 reported on two studies where the injury mechanism and threshold of the sacroiliac joint were investigated in two slightly oblique crash test conditions from 18 Post Mortem Human Subjects (PMHS) tests. They concluded that the sacroiliac joint fractures were associated with pubic rami fractures. These latter being reported to occur first in the time history. Therefore it was recommended not to define a criterion specific for the sacroiliac joint. In 2012, injury risk curves were published for the WorldSID dummy by Petitjean et al. For the pelvis, dummy and PMHS paired tests from six configurations were used (n = 55). All of these configurations were pure lateral impacts. In addition, the sacroiliac joint and femur neck loads were not recorded, and the dummy used was the first production version (WorldSID revision 1). Since that time, the WorldSID was updated several times, including changes in the pelvis area.

An ideal injury criterion should be predictive of the risk of injury across the range of loading conditions where it may be applied. The injury risk curve associated with this criterion should be applicable to all loading conditions. With respect to side impact, the injury risk curve should apply to pure lateral or oblique loading by rigid and padded walls, as well as airbags. Trosseille et al., (2009) reported that the number of fractured ribs was higher in pure lateral impact than in forward oblique interaction with an airbag. A good dummy criterion should be able to account for this difference. To evaluate various injury criteria with the WorldSID 50th and ES-2re dummies, the dummies were exposed to the same airbag loadings as the PMHS. The criteria measured in the dummy tests were paired with the rib fractures from the PMHS tests.

Very few finite element head models have been validated as required before being used to study brain injury mechanisms. This paper deals with the validation study of a 3D head model [1] against five cadaver tests [2]. It evaluates the current model ability to simulate brain responses and draws the research lines to improve it. Velocities on the closed rigid skull model were fixed to duplicate experimental applied loads. Validation parameters were constituted by three intra-cranial accelerations, three epidural pressures and in two cases, two extra pressures in the ventricles. The model response matched experimental results in terms of trend but presented significant oscillations. Moreover, there was a shift between experimental and numerical pressure curves. Brain material damping was introduced but numerical oscillations were slightly reduced.