Development of a Procedure to Compare Kinematics of Human Body Models for Pedestrian Simulations

Corina Klug, Florian Feist, Marco Raffler, Wolfgang Sinz, Philippe Petit, James Ellway, Michiel van Ratingen

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaperResearchpeer-review

Abstract

As Human Body Models are gaining increasingly relevance for the purpose of rating safety performance, it is essential that they behave consistently. Therefore, an objective method to compare human body models is needed. In this study a procedure to compare objectively human body kinematics was developed. Representative generic vehicle models were developed to simulate relevant pedestrian impacts. In a sensitivity study key boundary conditions influencing the head trajectory and contact time - such as the initial posture of the human body model or contact settings- were determined. Based on that findings a standardised procedure was developed and applied by propelling four generic vehicles at three impact velocities (30, 40 and 50 km/h) against two human body models (THUMS AM50 v4.02 and GHBMC M50 PS v1.4) in LS-Dyna. Trajectories of selected bony landmarks, head contact time and contact forces between the vehicle and the human body model were compared. Applying the developed procedure, the two human body models showed very comparable results in terms of trajectories and contact forces which gives the authors confidence in the robustness of the procedure developed and the models used.
Original languageEnglish
Pages508-530
Number of pages22
Publication statusPublished - 13 Sep 2017
EventIRCOBI Conference: International Research Council on the Biomechanics of Injury - Antwerp, Belgium
Duration: 13 Sep 201715 Sep 2017
Conference number: 2017
http://www.ircobi.org/

Conference

ConferenceIRCOBI Conference
Abbreviated titleIRCOBI
CountryBelgium
CityAntwerp
Period13/09/1715/09/17
Internet address

Fingerprint

Kinematics
Trajectories
Boundary conditions

Keywords

  • Human Body Models
  • Euro NCAP
  • Virtual Testing

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Automotive Engineering

Fields of Expertise

  • Mobility & Production

Cite this

Klug, C., Feist, F., Raffler, M., Sinz, W., Petit, P., Ellway, J., & van Ratingen, M. (2017). Development of a Procedure to Compare Kinematics of Human Body Models for Pedestrian Simulations. 508-530. Paper presented at IRCOBI Conference, Antwerp, Belgium.

Development of a Procedure to Compare Kinematics of Human Body Models for Pedestrian Simulations. / Klug, Corina; Feist, Florian; Raffler, Marco; Sinz, Wolfgang; Petit, Philippe; Ellway, James; van Ratingen, Michiel.

2017. 508-530 Paper presented at IRCOBI Conference, Antwerp, Belgium.

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaperResearchpeer-review

Klug, C, Feist, F, Raffler, M, Sinz, W, Petit, P, Ellway, J & van Ratingen, M 2017, 'Development of a Procedure to Compare Kinematics of Human Body Models for Pedestrian Simulations' Paper presented at IRCOBI Conference, Antwerp, Belgium, 13/09/17 - 15/09/17, pp. 508-530.
Klug C, Feist F, Raffler M, Sinz W, Petit P, Ellway J et al. Development of a Procedure to Compare Kinematics of Human Body Models for Pedestrian Simulations. 2017. Paper presented at IRCOBI Conference, Antwerp, Belgium.
Klug, Corina ; Feist, Florian ; Raffler, Marco ; Sinz, Wolfgang ; Petit, Philippe ; Ellway, James ; van Ratingen, Michiel. / Development of a Procedure to Compare Kinematics of Human Body Models for Pedestrian Simulations. Paper presented at IRCOBI Conference, Antwerp, Belgium.22 p.
@conference{b3184db61570468c957c228c68b6f65f,
title = "Development of a Procedure to Compare Kinematics of Human Body Models for Pedestrian Simulations",
abstract = "As Human Body Models are gaining increasingly relevance for the purpose of rating safety performance, it is essential that they behave consistently. Therefore, an objective method to compare human body models is needed. In this study a procedure to compare objectively human body kinematics was developed. Representative generic vehicle models were developed to simulate relevant pedestrian impacts. In a sensitivity study key boundary conditions influencing the head trajectory and contact time - such as the initial posture of the human body model or contact settings- were determined. Based on that findings a standardised procedure was developed and applied by propelling four generic vehicles at three impact velocities (30, 40 and 50 km/h) against two human body models (THUMS AM50 v4.02 and GHBMC M50 PS v1.4) in LS-Dyna. Trajectories of selected bony landmarks, head contact time and contact forces between the vehicle and the human body model were compared. Applying the developed procedure, the two human body models showed very comparable results in terms of trajectories and contact forces which gives the authors confidence in the robustness of the procedure developed and the models used.",
keywords = "Human Body Models, Euro NCAP, Virtual Testing",
author = "Corina Klug and Florian Feist and Marco Raffler and Wolfgang Sinz and Philippe Petit and James Ellway and {van Ratingen}, Michiel",
year = "2017",
month = "9",
day = "13",
language = "English",
pages = "508--530",
note = "IRCOBI Conference : International Research Council on the Biomechanics of Injury, IRCOBI ; Conference date: 13-09-2017 Through 15-09-2017",
url = "http://www.ircobi.org/",

}

TY - CONF

T1 - Development of a Procedure to Compare Kinematics of Human Body Models for Pedestrian Simulations

AU - Klug, Corina

AU - Feist, Florian

AU - Raffler, Marco

AU - Sinz, Wolfgang

AU - Petit, Philippe

AU - Ellway, James

AU - van Ratingen, Michiel

PY - 2017/9/13

Y1 - 2017/9/13

N2 - As Human Body Models are gaining increasingly relevance for the purpose of rating safety performance, it is essential that they behave consistently. Therefore, an objective method to compare human body models is needed. In this study a procedure to compare objectively human body kinematics was developed. Representative generic vehicle models were developed to simulate relevant pedestrian impacts. In a sensitivity study key boundary conditions influencing the head trajectory and contact time - such as the initial posture of the human body model or contact settings- were determined. Based on that findings a standardised procedure was developed and applied by propelling four generic vehicles at three impact velocities (30, 40 and 50 km/h) against two human body models (THUMS AM50 v4.02 and GHBMC M50 PS v1.4) in LS-Dyna. Trajectories of selected bony landmarks, head contact time and contact forces between the vehicle and the human body model were compared. Applying the developed procedure, the two human body models showed very comparable results in terms of trajectories and contact forces which gives the authors confidence in the robustness of the procedure developed and the models used.

AB - As Human Body Models are gaining increasingly relevance for the purpose of rating safety performance, it is essential that they behave consistently. Therefore, an objective method to compare human body models is needed. In this study a procedure to compare objectively human body kinematics was developed. Representative generic vehicle models were developed to simulate relevant pedestrian impacts. In a sensitivity study key boundary conditions influencing the head trajectory and contact time - such as the initial posture of the human body model or contact settings- were determined. Based on that findings a standardised procedure was developed and applied by propelling four generic vehicles at three impact velocities (30, 40 and 50 km/h) against two human body models (THUMS AM50 v4.02 and GHBMC M50 PS v1.4) in LS-Dyna. Trajectories of selected bony landmarks, head contact time and contact forces between the vehicle and the human body model were compared. Applying the developed procedure, the two human body models showed very comparable results in terms of trajectories and contact forces which gives the authors confidence in the robustness of the procedure developed and the models used.

KW - Human Body Models

KW - Euro NCAP

KW - Virtual Testing

M3 - Paper

SP - 508

EP - 530

ER -