Quantitative evaluation of the occupant kinematic response of the THUMS 50th-percentile male model relative to PMHS laboratory rollover tests

References

• Adamec J, Praxl N, Miehling T, Muggenthaler H, Schonpflug M. The occupant kinematics in the first phase of a rollover accident—experiment and simulation. Paper presented at: International Research Council on Biomechanics of Injury (IRCOBI); September 21–23, 2005; Prague, Czech Republic.
   Google Scholar
• Barbat S, Fu Y, Zhan Z, Yang RJ, Gehre C. Objective rating metric for dynamic systems. Paper presented at: International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV); May 27–30, 2013; Seoul, Republic of Korea.
   Google Scholar
• Bedewi PG, Godrick DA, Digges KH, Bahouth GT. An investigation of occupant injury in rollover: NASS-CDS analysis of injury severity and source by rollover attributes. Progress in Technology. 2004;101:437–451.
   Google Scholar
• Begeman PC, Visarius H, Nolte LP, Prasad P. Visocelastic shear responses of the cadaver and Hybrid III lumbar spine. Stapp Car Crash J. 1994;38:1–14.
   Google Scholar
• Demetropoulos CK, Yang KH, Grimm MJ, Khalil TB, King AI. Mechanical Properties of the Cadaveric and Hybrid III Lumbar Spines. Warrendale, PA: SAE; 1998. SAE Technical Paper 983160.
   Google Scholar
• Eggers A, Zhu F, Yang KH, King AI. Predictions of neck load due to combined compression and lateral bending. Int J Vehicle Safety. 2005;1:118–128.
   Google Scholar
• Foltz P, Kim T, Kerrigan JR, Crandall JR. Vehicle greenhouse shape analysis for design of a parametric test buck for dynamic rollover testing. Paper presented at: International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV); June 13–16, 2011; Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Funk JR, Cormier JM, Manoogian SJ. Comparison of risk factors for cervical spine, head, serious, and fatal injury in rollover crashes. Accid Anal Prev. 2012;45:67–74.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gehre C, Gades H, Wernicke P. Objective rating of signals using test and simulation responses. Paper presented at: International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV); June 15, 2009; Stuttgart, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Hu J, Chou CC, Yang KH. Finite element investigation of seatbelt systems for improving occupant protection during rollover crashes. SAE International Journal of Passenger Cars - Mechanical Systems. 2009;2:904–913.
   Google Scholar
• Hu J, Yang KH, Chou CC, King AI. A numerical investigation of factors affecting cervical spine injuries during rollover crashes. Spine. 2008;33:2529–2535.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lai W, Ewers B, Richards D, Carhart M, Newberry W, Corrigan CF. Evaluation of human surrogate models for rollover. Paper presented at: SAE World Congress; April 11, 2005; Detroit, MI.
   Google Scholar
• Lessley DJ, Riley P, Zhang Q, et al. Occupant kinematics in laboratory rollover tests: PMHS response. Stapp Car Crash J. 2014;58:251–316.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lessley DJ, Shaw G, Riley P, Forman J, Crandall J. Assessment and validation of a methodology for measuring anatomical kinematics of restrained occupants during motor vehicle collisions. J Biosens Bioelectron. 2011;2(Suppl 1).
   Google Scholar
• Lopez-Valdes FJ, Lau SH, Riley P, Kent RW. Characterization of the in-vitro dynamic behavior of the human thoracic spine in flexion. Paper presented at: International Research Council on Biomechanics of Injury (IRCOBI); September 10–12, 2014; Berlin, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Markolf KL. Deformation of the thoracolumbar intervertebral joints in response to external loads: a biomechanical study using autopsy material. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1972;54:511–533.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mattos GA, Mcintosh AS, Grzebieta RH, Yoganandan N, Pintar FA. Sensitivity of head and cervical spine injury measures to impact factors relevant to rollover crashes. Traffic Inj Prev. 2015;16(Suppl 1):S140–S147.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• NHTSA. Traffic Safety Facts 2012. Washington, DC: Author, US Department of Transportation; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Nightingale RW, McElhaney JH, Camacho DL, Kleinberger M, Winkelstein BA, Myers BS. The dynamic response of the cervical spine: buckling, end conditions, and tolerance in compressive impacts. Stapp Car Crash J. 1997;74:451–471.
   Google Scholar
• Nightingale RW, McElhaney JH, Richardson WJ, Myers BS. Dynamic responses of the head and cervical spine to axial impact loading. J Biomech. 1996;29:307–318.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panjabi MM, Brand RA, White AA. Three-dimensional flexibility and stiffness properties of the human thoracic spine. J Biomech. 1976;9(4):185–192.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parent DP, Kerrigan J, Crandall J. Comprehensive computational rollover sensitivity study part 2: influence of vehicle, crash, and occupant parameters on head, neck, and thorax response. Paper presented at: SAE World Congress; April 12, 2011; Detroit, MI.
   Google Scholar
• Poulard D, Kent RW, Kindig M, Li Z, Subit D. Thoracic response targets for a computational model: a hierarchical approach to assess the biofidelity of a 50th-percentile occupant male finite element model. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2015;45:45–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poulard D, Subit D, Donlon JP, Kent RW. Development of a computational framework to adjust the pre-impact spine posture of a whole-body model based on cadaver tests data. J Biomech. 2015;48:636–643.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poulard D, Subit D, Donlon JP, et al. The contribution of pre-impact spine posture on human body model response in whole-body side impact. Stapp Car Crash J. 2014;58:385–422.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Poulard D, Subit D, Nie B, Donlon JP, Kent RW. The contribution of pre-impact posture on restrained occupant finite element model response in frontal impact. Traffic Inj Prev. 2015;16(2):S87–S95.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rhule HH, Maltese MR, Donnelly BR, Eppinger RH, Brunner JK, Bolte JH. Development of a new biofidelity ranking system for anthropomorphic test devices. Stapp Car Crash J. 2002;46:477–512.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shigeta K, Kitagawa Y, Yasuki T. Development of next generation human FE model capable of organ injury prediction. Paper presented at: International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV); June 15-18, 2009; Stuttgart, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Toczyski JT, Kerrigan JR, Mohan P, Crandall JR. Design of a deformable vehicle roof structure for rollover crash testing with a test buck. Paper presented at: International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV); May 27–30, 2013; Seoul, Republic of Korea.
   Google Scholar
• Toomey DE, Mason MJ, Hardy WN, Yang KH, Kopacz JM, Van Ee C. Exploring the role of lateral bending postures and asymmetric loading on cervical spine compression responses. Paper presented at: ASME 2009 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition; November 13–19, 2009, Lake Buena Vista, FL.
   Google Scholar
• Toyota Motor Corporation. THUMS User Manual AM50 Pedestrian/Occupant Model. Ver 4.0.1. Author; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Viano DC, Parenteau CS, Edwards ML. Rollover injury: effects of near- and far-seating position, belt use, and number of quarter rolls. Traffic Inj Prev. 2007;8:382–392.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yang KH, Hu J, White NA, King AI. Development of numerical models for injury biomechanics research: a review of 50 years of publications in the Stapp Car Crash Conference. Stapp Car Crash J. 2006;50:429–490.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang Q, Lessley D, Riley P, et al. Occupant kinematics in laboratory rollover tests: ATD response and biofidelity. Stapp Car Crash J. 2014;58:317–360.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar