Track 5. Occupational and Impact Injury Biomechanics
Whiplash and Neck Injury Biomechanics $145
Serious injuries to the upper and especially the lower extremities are frequently
disabling, and are a challenging issue for countermeasure design.
This paper evaluates the risk of upper and lower extremity injury for vehicle
occupants exposed to far side crashes. Based on the analysis of U.S. crash
data from NASS/CDS 1995-2004 and Australian crash data from MIDS 1989-
2004, this study examines the injury outcome of over 4500 car, light truck,
and van occupants subjected to far side impact. The analysis was restricted
to 3-point belted occupants. The paper evaluates the nature of these upper
and lowers extremity impact injuries by examining the relevant prevalence of
injury by skeletal, vascular, or other soft tissue region injured in each crash.
As a means of developing countermeasure development priorities, the paper
presents injury risk as a function of injury contact source, struck body type,
collision partner, delta-V, crash direction (PDOF), and occupant compartment
intrusion. Injury risk is evaluated using the maximum injury severity for each
occupant, by injury severity for each body region, and by Harm, a social cost
measure.
6641 Mo, 09:15-09:30 (P5)
Characterizing occupant injuries in vehicle crashes with a deployed
side airbag
F.A. Pintar, N. Yoganandan. Medical College of Wisconsin and VA Medical
Center, Neuroscience and Biomechanics Research Laboratories, Milwaukee,
Wl, USA
To gather a sufficient data set to examine the characteristics of real-world
side airbag deployment crashes, both the United States National Automotive
Sampling System (NASS) and the US Crash Injury Research and Engineering
Network (CIREN) databases were queried. The weighted NASS data produced
7812 crashes between 1997 and 2004. AIS >~2 level injuries occurred to
5071 occupants. There were 3828 cases of torso only airbags, 955 cases of
torso-head bag combination, 288 inflatable tubular structure/curtain systems.
A preponderance of the side airbag systems deployed from the seat, followed
by some from the door and very few from the roof side rail. The CIREN data
set yielded a similar division between type of side airbag system. Side airbags
were not attributed to be the cause of head or chest injury to any occupant
at this level of severity. The predominance of torso airbags followed by torso-
head airbag combination systems reflected vehicle model years and changing
technology. Greater than 90% of occupants in these vehicles wore three-point
belts. The injuries were similar to those described in the literature for side
impacts without airbags; head and chest trauma predominated the data set.
The velocity at which equivalent trauma occurred however, appeared higher for
occupants in side airbag-deployed crashes. The additional detail included in
the CIREN database was beneficial in determining mechanisms of injury and
potential effectiveness of side airbag systems in real-world crashes. Because
airbag technology continues as a safety feature in motor vehicles, data from this
study may assist in future analysis of side airbag efficacy and countermeasure
design. This study presents the largest known real-world data set on side
airbag crashes.
7049 Mo, 09:30-09:45 (P5)
Predictors of traumatic rupture of the aorta in near-side impacts
J.M. Cavanaugh1, J. Augenstein 2, J. Stratton 2, J. Mackinnon2, L. Labiste2,
E. Perdeck2. 1Wayne State University, Bioengineering Center, Detroit, USA,
2University of Miami, Ryder Trauma Center, Miami, USA
Traumatic rupture of the aorta (TRA) is a leading cause of death in high velocity
motor vehicle accidents. The purpose of this study was determine occupant,
vehicle and injury parameters that predict aortic injury.
Methods: Near-side impacts occurring between 1996 and 2003 were analyzed
in the Crash Care database of the University of Miami Ryder Trauma Center.
Inclusion of subjects involved a consent process, clinical data collection, vehicle
inspection and case review and analysis. Occupant parameters included age,
height, weight and gender. Vehicle parameters included delta V, maximum
crush, maximum intrusion, and vehicle damage pattern. A damage pattern
to the side of the vehicle that included the occupant compartment and was
in the shape of a V when viewed from the top of the vehicle was termed V
damage. Injury parameters included the AIS and ISS values for rib fracture,
internal chest injury, abdominal injury, pelvic injury and combinations of these.
Logistic regression and Receiver-Operating Characteristics (ROC) were used
to determine the relationships between TRA and these parameters.
Results: Of the 167 near side impact victims, 84 were males and 83 females.
The average age was 38.6 years and average weight was 162 pounds. Forty-
four occupants (26%) had aortic injury. Occupant age, weight and height did
not predict aortic injury. Delta V, vehicle crush, vehicle intrusion and V damage
each had some ability to predict aortic injury. Delta V averaged 46.3kph,
maximum crush 64.4 cm and maximum intrusion 46.3cm in the aortic injury
group. These values were 39.1, 53.7 and 37.6, respectively, in the group
without aortic trauma. AIS and ISS values of rib fracture, internal chest injury
and abdominal injury were more predictive of aortic injury than vehicle crash
5.2.
parameters. Internal chest injury AIS averaged 3.5 in the aortic injury group
and 1.5 in the non-injury group. Linear combinations of delta V, intrusion, V
damage, age and chest injury severity improved the ability to predict aortic
injury compared to the individual parameters.
5.2. Whiplash and Neck Injury Biomechanics
4298 Mo, 11:00-11:15 (Pa)
The biomechanical and kinematic differences between rear impact and
frontal impact automobile crashes at low velocities
A.C. Croft. Spine Research Institute of San Diego; Southern California
University of Health Sciences, USA
Background: Numerous factors are believed to influence the risk for injury to
the cervical spine in low speed automobile crashes. Several studies have indi-
cated that rear impact crashes are associated with greater risk for injury and,
perhaps, a worse prognosis. We sought to answer the question concerning
the possible reasons for the disparity in risk between front vector crashes and
rear vector crashes using human subject crash testing.
Materials and Methods: Instrumented human subjects were placed in in-
strumented crash test vehicles. Occupant accelerations were recorded. Force
and moment analysis were calculated. Vehicle acceleration and speed metrics
were recorded. Volunteers were subjected to three rear impact crashes, two
of which were conducted in the unaware mode, and one in the aware mode
in which the subjects were allowed to brace for the impact. All variables were
held constant between frontal and rear impact sequences except the relative
roles of the two vehicles (e.g., striking or struck). Thus, the only variables with
this crossover study design were the impact vectors.
Results: Volunteers rated their subjective experiences in the rear impact
crashes as markedly more traumatic or physically unpleasant than in the frontal
crashes. When holding vehicle mass, crash speeds, occupant variables and
their interactions constant, the acceleration of the subjects' heads was nearly
three times higher in rear impact crash vectors vs. frontals. The resulting
occupant kinematics were more complex in the rear impact crash. Additionally,
it appears that the mechanism of injury in whiplash may vary with occupant
mass.
Conclusions: The results suggest that more attention should be given to
crashworthiness in the rear impact crash vector. The small study size does
not allow a high level of confidence in regards to our findings of differential
forces and resulting kinematics, but our results were always consistent and
the observed differences were quite large. To our knowledge, this is the first
study to look specifically at differential effects of rear vs. frontal crashes at low
speeds, holding all other variables constant.
6151 Mo, 11:15-11:30 (Pa)
Comparison of ATD upper and lower neck flexion/extension moments,
and implications for neck injury criteria
C. Raasch 1, M. Carhart 1,2. 1Exponent Failure Analysis Associates;
2Harrington Department of Bioengineering, Arizona State University, USA
Recent research on neck injury thresholds has focused on upper cervical spine
injury in airbag deployments; however, the lower cervical spine may often
be injured by other mechanisms. Anthropomorphic Test Device (ATD) injury
assessment reference values (IARVs) have been suggested for the lower neck,
and were derived by scaling upper neck values. We have undertaken a study
to independently develop ATD lower neck IARVs for extension and flexion by
matching ATD tests with cadaver studies where lower cervical spine injuries
were obtained (e.g., Clemens and Burow, SAE 720960). Pendulum and sled
tests simulating frontal and rear impacts were performed using Hybrid III 50 th-
percentile male and 5th-percentile female ATDs with upper and lower neck load
cells. Delta-Vs at the T1 level (or sled delta-V for rigid seatback tests) ranged
from 5 to 9 m/s, with pulse durations of 30 to 90 ms. For tests of similar severity,
the 50th-male upper and lower neck peak moments were higher than those of
the 5th-female, while head/neck angles were lower. Peak neck moments for
the 50th-male and 5th-female were found to be related by a scaling factor of
approximately 1.6 for lower neck, and 1.3 for upper neck. Comparison of lower
and upper neck moments within each test produced non-linear relationships. At
lower severities, lower and upper neck peak moments for both ATDs appeared
to be related by a factor of 2, as would be expected in longitudinal loading of the
upright head and neck, due to geometrical considerations alone. However, for
higher severities, peak lower neck moments were modulated more strongly
than upper neck moments, following power relationships. This may occur
because upper neck loading transitions from bending to tension with greater
head/neck angular excursion. Our results, in addition to preliminary threshold
values derived from matched cadaver tests, indicate that simple scaling of
upper neck injury thresholds may overestimate lower neck injury thresholds.