Biofidelity response corridors developed from post-mortem human subjects are commonly used in the design and validation of anthropomorphic test devices and computational human body models (HBMs). Typically, corridors are derived from a diverse pool of biomechanical data and later normalized to a target body habitus. The objective of this study was to use morphed computational HBMs to compare the ability of various scaling techniques to scale response data from a reference to a target anthropometry. HBMs are ideally suited for this type of study since they uphold the assumptions of equal density and modulus that are implicit in scaling method development. In total, six scaling procedures were evaluated, four from the literature (equal-stress equal-velocity, ESEV, and three variations of impulse momentum) and two which are introduced in the paper (ESEV using a ratio of effective masses, ESEV-EffMass, and a kinetic energy approach). In total, 24 simulations were performed, representing both pendulum and full body impacts for three representative HBMs. These simulations were quantitatively compared using the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) ISO-TS18571 standard. Based on these results, ESEV-EffMass achieved the highest overall similarity score (indicating that it is most proficient at scaling a reference response to a target). Additionally, ESEV was found to perform poorly for two degree-of-freedom (DOF) systems. However, the results also indicated that no single technique was clearly the most appropriate for all scenarios.
An Objective Evaluation of Mass Scaling Techniques Utilizing Computational Human Body Finite Element Models
Manuscript received February 24, 2016; final manuscript received July 15, 2016; published online August 18, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Tammy L. Haut Donahue.
- Views Icon Views
- Share Icon Share
- Search Site
Davis, M. L., and Scott Gayzik, F. (August 18, 2016). "An Objective Evaluation of Mass Scaling Techniques Utilizing Computational Human Body Finite Element Models." ASME. J Biomech Eng. October 2016; 138(10): 101003. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4034293
Download citation file: