Citation

Kitagawa Y, Yasuki T, Hasegawa J. Traffic Injury Prev. 2008; 9(6): 574-582.

Affiliation

Toyota Motor Corporation, Toyota, Japan. yuichi@kitagawa.tec.toyota.co.jp

Copyright

(Copyright © 2008, Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1080/15389580802381954

PMID

19058105

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to examine the effectiveness of the active head restraint system in reducing neck injury risk of car occupants in low-speed rear impacts. METHODS: A human body FE model"THUMS"was used to simulate head and neck kinematics of the occupant and to evaluate loading to the neck. Joint capsule strain was calculated to predict neck injury risk as well as NIC. The validity of the model was confirmed comparing its mechanical responses to those in human subjects in the literatures. Seat FE models were also prepared representing one with a fixed head restraint and the other one with an active head restraint system. The active head restraint system was designed to move the head restraint forward and upward when the lower unit was lower unit was loaded by the pelvis. Rear impact simulations were performed assuming a triangular acceleration pulse at a delta-V of 25 km/h. RESULTS: The model reproduced similar head and neck motions to those measured in the human volunteer test, except for active muscular responses. The calculated joint capsule strain also showed a good match with those of PMHS tests in the literature. A rear-impact simulation was conducted using the model with the fixed head restraint. The result revealed that NIC was strongly correlated with the relative acceleration between the head and the torso and that its maximum peak appeared when the head contacted the head restraint. It was also found that joint capsule strain grew in later timing synchronizing with the relative displacement. Another simulation with the active head restraint system showed that both NIC and joint capsule strain were lowered owing to the forward and upward motion of the head restraint. A close investigation of the vertebral motion indicated that the active head restraint reduced the magnitude of shear deformation in the facet joint, which contributed to the strain growth in the fixed head restraint case. CONCLUSIONS: Rear-impact simulations were conducted using a human body FE model, THUMS, representing an average-size male occupant. The cervical system including the facet joint capsules was incorporated to the model. The validity of the model was examined comparing its mechanical responses to those in the literature such as the whole body motion of the volunteer subject and the vertebral motion in the PMHS tests. Rear-impact simulations were conducted using the validated THUMS model and two prototype seat models; one had a fixed head restraint and the other one was equipped with an active head restraint system. The active head restraint system works moving the head restraint forward and upward when the lower unit is loaded by the pelvis. The head and neck kinematics and responses were analyzed from the simulation results. The force and acceleration rose at the pelvis first, followed by T1 and the head. The early timing of force rise and its magnitude indicated that the pelvis force was a good trigger for the active head restraint system. The results showed that the head was supported earlier in a case with the active head restraint system, and both NIC and joint capsule strain were lowered. The study also analyzed the mechanism of strain growth in the joint capsules. Relatively greater strain was observed in the direction of the facet joint surface, which was around 45 degrees inclined to the spinal column. The forward and upward motion of the active head restraint were aligned with the direction of the joint deformation and contributed to lower strain in the joint capsules. The results indicated that the active head restraint could help reduce the neck injury risk not only by supporting the head at an early timing but also through its trajectory stopping the joint deformation.

Language: en