Comparison of small female PMHS thoracic responses to scaled response corridors in a frontal hub impact
Comparison of small female PMHS thoracic responses to scaled response corridors in a frontal hub impact
复制标题
额毂碰撞中小型女性 PMHS 胸部反应与尺度反应走廊的比较
DOI：
10.1080/15389588.2022.2147789
复制
发表时间：
2022
影响因子：
2
通讯作者：
A. Agnew
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Yun;Alexander Bendig;J. Stammen;Erin E. Hutter;K. Moorhouse;J. Bolte;A. Agnew
摘要目的研究女性胸部在正面碰撞过程中的生物力学响应通道，并对用于评估女性小型拟人试验装置（ATD）和人体模型（HBM）生物逼真度的缩放通道进行评价。方法3例小型女性尸体受试者（PMHS）在相同条件下，用14.0kg气动冲击器以4.3m/s的冲击速度撞击胸部。使用安装在直径为15.2 cm的圆形撞击器面后的测力传感器测量PMHS胸部的撞击力。使用位于胸骨中部的胸带定量胸部偏转。安装在肋骨和胸骨上的应变计确定了骨折时间。生物力学反应走廊（力偏转），并比较缩放的小女性胸部走廊使用传统的缩放方法（TSM）和肋骨反应为基础的缩放方法（RRSM）。使用BioRank系统评分（BRSS）来量化小型女性PMHS数据和两个缩放走廊之间的差异。结果三个小的女性PMHS响应的变异系数小于2%的峰值力和7%的峰值偏转。总体而言，从TSM和RRSM确定的缩放走廊平均值与平均小型女性PMHS走廊（BRSS < 2.0）的距离小于两个标准差。与TSM（BRSS = 1.7）相比，RRSM导致PMHS走廊的较小偏差（BRSS = 1.1），表明RRSM是一种合适的缩放方法。结论本研究提供了新的小型女性PMHS力-偏转数据。TSM的缩放走廊已用于优化当前的安全工具，与小型女性PMHS走廊相当。RRSM，这有很大的好处，而不是需要整个PMHS数据使用肋骨结构特性，导致更好的协议与小女性PMHS数据比TSM，值得进一步调查，以确定其他人口统计的比例因子。
Abstract Objective The purpose of this study was to generate biomechanical response corridors of the small female thorax during a frontal hub impact and evaluate scaled corridors that have been used to assess biofidelity of small female anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) and human body models (HBMs). Methods Three small female postmortem human subjects (PMHS) were tested under identical conditions, in which the thorax was impacted using a 14.0 kg pneumatic impactor at an impact velocity of 4.3 m/s. Impact forces to PMHS thoraces were measured using a load cell installed behind a circular impactor face with a 15.2 cm diameter. Thoracic deflections were quantified using a chestband positioned at mid-sternum. Strain gages installed on the ribs and sternum identified fracture timing. Biomechanical response corridors (force-deflection) were generated and compared to scaled small female thoracic corridors using a traditional scaling method (TSM) and rib response-based scaling method (RRSM). A BioRank System Score (BRSS) was used to quantify differences between the small female PMHS data and both scaled corridors. Results Coefficients of variation from the three small female PMHS responses were less than 2% for peak force and 7% for peak deflection. Overall, the scaled corridor means determined from the TSM and RRSM were less than two standard deviations away from the mean small female PMHS corridors (BRSS < 2.0). The RRSM resulted in smaller deviation (BRSS = 1.1) from the PMHS corridors than the TSM (BRSS = 1.7), suggesting the RRSM is an appropriate scaling method. Conclusions New small female PMHS force-deflection data are provided in this study. Scaled corridors from the TSM, which have been used to optimize current safety tools, were comparable to the small female PMHS corridors. The RRSM, which has the great benefit of using rib structural properties instead of requiring whole PMHS data, resulted in better agreement with the small female PMHS data than the TSM and deserves further investigation to identify scaling factors for other population demographics.