Design Requirements and Specifications: Thorax Abdomen Development Task Interim Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
a& 7ciSlQ Q Design Requirements and U.S Department of Transportat~on Specifications: National Highway Traffic Safety Thorax Abdomen Administration Development Task Interim Report: Trauma Assessment Device Development Program Tuhnical Roport Documtuti'm Page 1. Report No. 2. Govemrmt Accession No. 3. Recipimt's Cotolog No. OOT HS 807 511 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Dote DESIGN REQUIREMENTS AND SPECIFICATIONS: THORAX- November 1989 ABDOMEN DEVELOPMENT TASK. INTERIM REPORT. 6. Performing Orgonirotion Cod. TRAUMA ASSESSMENT DEVICE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 8. Perfomin9 Orgonixation R.port No. 7. Authds) UMTRI-89-20 L.W. Schneider, A.I. Kinq,* and M.S. Beebe** 9. Pulorning Orgmirdion Mane md Address 10. Wok Unit No. (TRAIS) University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute 11. Controct or Gront NO. 2901 Baxter Road DTNH22-83-C-07005 . Ann Arbor, Michisan 48109-2150 13. Type of Report ond Period Covered 12. Sponsoring Agoncy Nre md Addr~ss SUBTASK 1-2 REPORT U.S. Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration *14, Sponsoring Code Washington, D.C. 20590 IS. Supplommtay Note. *Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan **Humanetics, Inc., Carson, California TR 11. Abstroct While the thorax (i.e., ribcage) of the Hybrid I11 ATD is significantly improved over that of its predecessor, Hybrid 11, additional design changes are needed to achieve improved interaction with, and injury assessment from, the variety of restraintlvehicle environments that are encountered in vehicle impact testing. The scope of these modifications includes not only the ribcage and thorax, but also the shoulder, spine, and abdomen components. In preparation for design and development of new and improved ATD torso components, it was considered important to define the performance requirements and specifications of the new system. This document sets forth design goals and specifications for an improved thorax/spine/shoulder/abdomen system of a frontal impact test dummy and presents the data and rationale upon which these requirements are based. As new biomechanical response and injury data are collected, and as additional analyses of old data increase our understanding of human response and injury tolerance for impact environments, the design requirements set forth in this document may require updating and modification. 17. Key Words 18. Dishihrtia Stotommt Anthropomorphic Test Device Document is available to the public Dummy Design from the National Technical Thorax Information Service, Springfield, Abdomen Virginia 22161 19. Swrity Classif. (of this mpd) 1D. kwrity CIuasif. (of this p-1 21. No. of Poges 22. Price None None 200 ~h~sdocument 1s diasem~natedunder the sponsorship of, the Department of Transportation in the interest of1 ' ~nf'ormat~onexchange The United States Government i I assumes no liabil~tyfor the contents or the use thereof, 1 I L- - -- -- -._ - - __ _- -- -- The authc~rswould like to express appreciation to Richard Chandler, Roger Daniel, Charles Kroell, John Melvin, Raymond Neathery, Priya Prasad, and David Viano for taking the time to review an earlier draft of this document and for providing written comments and input. The collective experience and insight of these researchers has been most helpful in formulating the design goals and specifications contained in this report. The authors would also like to acknowledge Dr. John Cavanaugh for collecting a~id analyzing static regional load-deflection characteristics of the human ribcage and Hybrid 111 and for the shoulder dissections conducted for the purpose of determining shoulder mass distribution. Special appreciation and recognition is also given to Leda Ricci for assisting with the literature review and compilation of biomechanical data and for preparing and editing multiple versions of this document. While the Hybrid I11 ATD is the most advanced anthropomorphic crash dummy for automotive frontal impact testing, improvements are needed in the biofidelity and injury assessment capability of the thorax and abdomen, particularly with regard to interaction with and injuries from restraint systems. These needed improvements have been the subject of much discussion within automotive industry user groups and at meetings of the SAE Mechanical Human Simulation Subcommittee of the Human Biomechanics Simulation Standards Committee. While near-term modifications to the Hybrid I11 thorax can and are being made to address these limitations, it is believed that a complete redesign will offer the greater performance benefit and injury assessment potential over the long run. In preparation for such a design effort, it was considered important to the NHTSA and to the project principals to define the design goals and performance specifications for the new hardware before beginning serious prototype development. This report was prepared to document these requirements and specifications and to provide rationale for them. It addresses both general design objectives such as durability, repeatability, and temperature sensitivity, as well as more specific biomechanical performance requirements, instrumentation needs, and anthropometric specifications. The need to modify and update these design goals and specifications as new biomechanical data ,become available is expected. CONTENTS ... ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................ 111 PREFACE ......................................................... v LIST OF 'I'M3LES ................................................... XI ... LISTOFFIG-URES .................................................. xlll INTRODUCTION ................................................... 1 PART A . DESIGN GOALS AND REQUIREMENTS ...................... 3 A1.O Priority of ThoradAbdomen Use Modes ......................... 3 Al.1 Rletrofit Subcomponent for Hybrid I11 .......................... 3 Al.2 Subcomponent Test Device .................................. 3 A1.3 Clomponent for Future ATDs ................................. 4 A2.0 Crash Vectors ................................................ 4 A3.0 Res tra.inWehicle Environments ................................ 4 A3.1. The Unrestrained Front Seat Occupant ........................ 5 143.1.1 Injury Patterns ..................................... 5 143.1.2 Loading Patterns ................................... 5 A3.2 Clccupants Restrained by Two- or Three-Point Belts ............... 7 113.2.1 Injury Patterns ..................................... 7 113.2.2 Loading Patterns ................................... 9 A3.3 Airbags and BeltIBag Combinations ........................... 11 113.3.1 Injury Patterns ..................................... 11 A3.3.2 Loading Patterns ................................... 11 A4.0 Maximum Crash Severity by RestrainWehicle Environment ...... 12 A5.0 Injury Assessment Range ...................................... 13 A6.O Temperature Sensitivity ....................................... 17 A6.1 Operating Temperature Range ............................... 17 A6.2 Durability Temperature Range ............................... 19 A7.0 Durability Requirements ...................................... 19 A8.0 Repeatability and Reproducibility .............................. 20 PART C. SUMMARY OF KEY DESIGN REQUIREMENTS AND PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS ........................ 113 C.l Primary Priorities ................................. ........... 113 C1.1 General Requirements ...................................... 113 C1.2 Thorax/Abdomen Response Biofidelity .......................... 113 C1.3 ShoulderISpine ............................................ 114 C1.4 Instrumentation ............................................ 114 C1.5 Anthropometry ........................: ................... 114 C1.6 Repeatability and Durability .................................1 115 C.2 Secondary Priorities ........................................... 115 C2.1 General Requirements ...................................... 115 C2.2 Response Biofidelity ........................................ 115 C2.3 Instrumentation ........................................... 115 REFERENCES ..................................................... 117 APPENDIX B: QUASI-STATIC FRONTAL LOADING OF THE THORAX OF HUMAN CADAVERS AND THE HYBRID III DUMMY ... 133 APPENDIX C: FORCE-TIME AND FORCE-DEFLECTION CURVES. Kroell et a1 .1971. 1974 ................................. 151 LIST OF TABLES Page Distribution of Thorax/Abdomen AIS23 Injuries and Harm for Unrestrained Drivers and Right-Front Passengers in Frontal Collisions (Haffner 1987) ............................................... Comparison of ThoraxIAbdomen Injuries Before and After Introduction of U.K Belt-Use Law (Haffner 1987 from Rutherford 1985) ............. UMIVOR ThoraxJAbdomen Injuries to Front-Seat Belted Occupants .... Closing Speed Between the ThoraxIAbdomen and Interior Components (Haffner 1987) ............................................... Chest Compression and External Deflection for Different AIS and Age Values (based on analysis of Kroell data by Neathery et al. 1975) ....... Summary of Elastic, Viscous, and Mass Parameter Values from Melvin et al. (1988a) Modeling of Kroell Data (Impactor mass=23.4 kg or 51.5 lbs) .............................. Preliminary Results from GWSUKroell Impact Tests 6.5 cm (3 in) Below the Xiphoid Process On the Midline (Viano, May 1989) .......... Peak Deflection for Quasi-Static Chest Loading with Airbag and Shoulder Belt (Kallieris 1987) ........................... Static Load-Deflection Coupling between Regions: Rib Loading (Cavanaugh