Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Comparison of multibody and finite element human body models in pedestrian accidents with the focus on head kinematics.
KTH, School of Technology and Health (STH), Medical Engineering, Neuronic Engineering.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-0980-4051
KTH, School of Technology and Health (STH), Medical Engineering, Neuronic Engineering.
KTH, School of Technology and Health (STH), Medical Engineering, Neuronic Engineering.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0125-0784
2016 (English)In: Traffic Injury Prevention, ISSN 1538-9588, E-ISSN 1538-957X, Vol. 17, no 3Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare and evaluate the difference in head kinematics between the TNO and THUMS models in pedestrian accident situations.

METHODS: The TNO pedestrian model (version 7.4.2) and the THUMS pedestrian model (version 1.4) were compared in one experiment setup and 14 different accident scenarios where the vehicle velocity, leg posture, pedestrian velocity, and pedestrian's initial orientation were altered. In all simulations, the pedestrian model was impacted by a sedan. The head trajectory, head rotation, and head impact velocity were compared, as was the trend when various different parameters were altered.

RESULTS: The multibody model had a larger head wrap-around distance for all accident scenarios. The maximum differences of the head's center of gravity between the models in the global x-, y-, and z-directions at impact were 13.9, 5.8, and 5.6 cm, respectively. The maximum difference between the models in head rotation around the head's inferior-superior axis at head impact was 36°. The head impact velocity differed up to 2.4 m/s between the models. The 2 models showed similar trends for the head trajectory when the various parameters were altered.

CONCLUSIONS: There are differences in kinematics between the THUMS and TNO pedestrian models. However, these model differences are of the same magnitude as those induced by other uncertainties in the accident reconstructions, such as initial leg posture and pedestrian velocity.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis, 2016. Vol. 17, no 3
Keywords [en]
finite element; accident reconstruction; multibody; head injuries; pedestrian
National Category
Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-186232DOI: 10.1080/15389588.2015.1067803ISI: 000372360200016PubMedID: 26218752Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84961217239OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-186232DiVA, id: diva2:1057930
Note

QC 20170123

Available from: 2016-12-19 Created: 2016-05-06 Last updated: 2017-11-29Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records BETA

Fahlstedt, MadelenKleiven, Svein

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Fahlstedt, MadelenHalldin, PeterKleiven, Svein
By organisation
Neuronic Engineering
In the same journal
Traffic Injury Prevention
Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 245 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf