Research of injury mapping relationship of lumbar spine in reclined occupants between anthropomorphic test devices and human body model.

PURPOSE

To judge the injury mode and injury severity of the real human body through the measured values of anthropomorphic test devices (ATD) injury indices, the mapping relationship of lumbar injury between ATD and human body model (HBM) was explored.

METHODS

Through the ATD model and HBM simulation, the mapping relationship of lumbar injury between the 2 subjects was explored. The sled environment consisted of a semi-rigid seat with an adjustable seatback angle and a 3-point seat belt system with a seatback-mounted D-ring. Three seatback recline states of 25°, 45°, and 65° were designed, and the seat pan angle was maintained at 15°. A 23 g, 47 km/h pulse was used. The validity of the finite element model of the sled was verified by the comparison of ATD simulation and test results. ATD model was the test device for human occupant restraint for autonomous vehicles (THOR-AV) dummy model and HBM was the total human model for safety (THUMS) v6.1. The posture of the 2 models was adjusted to adapt to the 3 seat states. The lumbar response of THOR-AV and the mechanical and biomechanical data on L1 - L5 vertebrae of THUMS were output, and the response relationship between THOR-AV and THUMS was descriptive statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

Both THOR-AV and THUMS were submarined in the 65° seatback angle case. With the change of seatback angle, the lumbar spine axial compression force (F) of THOR-AV and THUMS changed in the similar trend. The maximum F ratio of THOR-AV to THUMS at 25° and 45° seatback angle cases were 1.6 and 1.7. The flexion moment (M) and the time when the maximum M occurred in the 2 subjects were very different. In particular, the form of moment experienced by the L1 - L5 vertebrae of THUMS also changed. The changing trend of M measured by THOR-AV over time can reflect the changing trend of maximum stress of L1 and L2 of THUMS.

CONCLUSION

The F of ATD and HBM presents a certain proportional relationship, and there is a mapping relationship between the 2 subjects on F. The mapping function can be further clarified by applying more pulses and adopting more seatback angles. It is difficult to map M directly because they are very different in ATD and HBM. The M of ATD and stress of HBM lumbar showed a similar change trend over time, and there may be a hidden mapping relationship.