Search Results

Advancements in computational techniques used to simulate human impact injury response, coupled with those in computer hardware, bring the idea of detailed injury assessment closer to reality. Consequently, next-generation (G2) injury assessment processes are being explored to potentially augment or replace methods using dummy-based, empirically-derived, gross injury risk relationships. These processes use computational models that give more detailed injury response resulting from dummy-measured loading. This paper discusses the development of an initial version of such a next-generation injury assessment tool called SIMon: A Simulated Injury Monitor, as it is applied to the assessment of brain injury.

Early influences upon Thor ATD development are described, and the path of Thor development is traced up to the release of the current Thor ALPHA ATD design. Since the display of the first Thor ATD prototype at the 15th ESV Conference in Melbourne in 1996, Thor has undergone extensive test and evaluation on an international basis in cooperation with many partner institutions. This paper summarizes some of the lessons learned from this broad test experience, and documents actions which have been undertaken to upgrade the Thor product to ALPHA status in light of this experience.

A new lower extremity has been developed to be used with Thor, the NHTSA Advanced Frontal Dummy. The new lower extremity, known as Thor-Lx, consists of the femur, tibia, ankle joints, foot, a representation of the Achilles' tendon and the associated flash/skins, it has been designed to improve biomechanical response under axial loading of the femur during knee impacts, axial loading of the tibia, static and dynamic dorsiflexion, static plantarflexion and inversion/aversion. Instrumentation includes a standard Hybrid ill femur load cell, accelerometers, load cells, and rotary potentiometers to capture relevant kinematic and dynamic information from the foot and tibia. The design also allows the Tnor-Lx to be attached to the Hybrid III, either at the hip, or at the knee.

Recently there has been a greater awareness of the increased risk of certain injuries associated with air bag deployment, especially the risks to small occupants, often women. These injuries include serious eye and upper extremity injuries and even fatalities. This study investigates the interaction of a deploying air bag with cadaveric upper extremities in a typical driving posture; testing concentrates on female occupants. The goals of this investigation are to determine the risk of upper extremity injury caused by primary contact with a deploying air bag and to elucidate the mechanisms of these upper extremity injuries. Five air bags were used that are representative of a wide range of air bag ‘aggressivities’ in the current automobile fleet. This air bag ‘aggressivity’ was quantified using the response of a dummy forearm under air bag deployment.

In a previous experimental study, a comparison was made between a 1978 Pontiac LeMans car front with a standard bumper and the same front with a more compliant bumper developed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The tests were made with the two car front and bumper systems mounted at the normal bumper level 45 cm and with a lower front configuration with the bumper level 32.5 cm above the ground. The experimental biological model system developed at Chalmers University of Technology for detailed kinetic analysis of car front to leg impact sequences was used for this comparison. The tests were carried out at 30 to 32 km/h impact speed. A significant difference was found only between the standard bumper in the higher position and the compliant bumper in the lower position. A still more compliant bumper than that used in the previous test series was produced by NHTSA and tested with the front and bumper system in the normal position 45 cm above the ground.