Time and temperature sensitivity of the Hybrid III neck

Translating Cadaveric Injury Risk to Dummy Injury Risk at Iso-energy

Injury risk assessment based on cadaver data is essential for informing safety standards. The common 'matched-pair' method matches energy-based inputs to translate human response to anthropometric test devices (ATDs). However, this method can result in less conservative human injury risk curves due to intrinsic differences between human and ATDs. Generally, dummies are stiffer than cadavers, so force and displacement cannot be matched simultaneously. Differences in fracture tolerance further influence the dummy risk curve to be less conservative under matched-pair. For example, translating a human lumbar injury risk curve to a dummy of equivalent stiffness using matched-pair resulted in a dummy injury risk over 80% greater than the cadaver at 50% fracture risk. This inevitable increase arises because the dummy continues loading without fracture to attenuate energy beyond the 'matched' cadaver input selected. Human injury response should be translated using an iso-energy approach, as strain energy is well associated with failure in biological tissues. Until cadaver failure, dummy force is related to cadaver force at iso-energy. Beyond cadaver failure, dummy force is related to cadaver force through failure energy. This method does not require perfect cadaver/dummy biofidelity and ensures that energy beyond cadaver failure does not influence the injury risk function.

Effects of different helmet-mounted devices on pilot's neck injury under simulated ejection

The helmet plays an important role in protection of pilot's head and enhances the pilot's capabilities and performance significantly with the use of mounted devices such as the Night Vision Goggle (NVG). However, the use of helmet-mounted devices might increase the risk of injury due to the increased helmet weight and change in the centre of gravity of head. In this study, four helmets with different combinations of mounted devices were modelled in a validated human head-neck multi-body model to analyse their effects on the pilot's neck injury during simulated ejection. The probability of neck injury was evaluated and predicted using the N i j neck injury criteria and human injury risk curves, considering the tolerance of injury for upper and lower cervical segment. It was demonstrated that the helmet-mounted devices would increase the compression force and bending moment on cervical spine, especially for the lower cervical segments with higher N i j . In the cases with Night Vision Goggle, N i j of the lower cervical segment reached 0.54, which exceeded the requirement in aviation filed. For the cases with Visor, excessive extension occurred, resulting in a high N i j . The simulation results of this study could provide a reference for helmet and mounted devices design and offer a proposal for the protection of pilots during ejection.

Consensus Head Acceleration Measurement Practices (CHAMP): Laboratory Validation of Wearable Head Kinematic Devices

Wearable devices are increasingly used to measure real-world head impacts and study brain injury mechanisms. These devices must undergo validation testing to ensure they provide reliable and accurate information for head impact sensing, and controlled laboratory testing should be the first step of validation. Past validation studies have applied varying methodologies, and some devices have been deployed for on-field use without validation. This paper presents best practices recommendations for validating wearable head kinematic devices in the laboratory, with the goal of standardizing validation test methods and data reporting. Key considerations, recommended approaches, and specific considerations were developed for four main aspects of laboratory validation, including surrogate selection, test conditions, data collection, and data analysis. Recommendations were generated by a group with expertise in head kinematic sensing and laboratory validation methods and reviewed by a larger group to achieve consensus on best practices. We recommend that these best practices are followed by manufacturers, users, and reviewers to conduct and/or review laboratory validation of wearable devices, which is a minimum initial step prior to on-field validation and deployment. We anticipate that the best practices recommendations will lead to more rigorous validation of wearable head kinematic devices and higher accuracy in head impact data, which can subsequently advance brain injury research and management.

Time and temperature sensitivity of the hybrid III lumbar spine

OBJECTIVE

Researchers have found a variety of uses for the Hybrid III (HIII) dummy that fall beyond the scope of its original purpose as an automotive crash test dummy. Some of these expanded roles for the HIII introduce situations that were not envisioned in the dummy's original design parameters, such as a relatively rapid succession of tests or outdoor testing scenarios where temperature is not easily controlled. This study investigates how the axial compressive stiffness of the HIII lumbar spine component is affected by the duration of the time interval between tests. Further, it measures the effect of temperature on the compressive stiffness of the lumbar spine through a range of temperatures relevant to indoor and outdoor testing.

METHODS

High-rate axial compression tests were run on a 50^th percentile male HIII lumbar component in a materials testing machine. To characterize the effects of tests recovery intervals, between-test recovery was varied from 2 hours to 1 minute. To quantify temperature effects, environmental temperature conditions of 12.5°, 25°, and 37.5 °C were tested.

RESULTS

During repeated compressive loading, the force levels decreased consistently across long and short rest intervals. Even after 2 hours of rest between tests, full viscoelastic recovery was not observed. Temperature effects were pronounced, resulting in compressive force differences of 261% over the range of 12.5° to 37.5 °C. Compared to the stiffness of the lumbar at 25 °C, the stiffness at 37.5 °C fell by 40%; at 12.5 °C, the stiffness more than doubled, increasing by 115%.

CONCLUSIONS

A modest decrease in temperature can be sufficient to dramatically change the response and repeatability of the lumbar HIII component in compressive loading. The large magnitude of the temperature effect has severe implications in its ability to overwhelm the contributions of targeted test variables. These findings highlight the importance of controlling, monitoring and reporting temperature conditions during HIII testing, even in indoor laboratory environments.