Zellmer IIT 2010 Dummies Handout PDF

Harald Zellmer, Dummy Design and Issues , New Delhi, December 2010
Dummy Design and Issues

Harald Zellmer
Autoliv B.V. & Co. KG, Elmshorn, Germany
International Course on Transportation Planning

and Safety
New Delhi
December 2010
Introduction
Dummy terminology
Todays dummy family
Frontal impact dummies
Hybrid III & THOR comparison
Dummy issues
Comparison of rear impact dummies
AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 2 - Dummies
1
Introduction
Dummy terminology
Todays dummy family
Dummy issues
Introduction to Dummies
What is a dummy?
Dummies are mechanical surrogates of the human body.
Thus, they are also called:
ANTHROPOMORPHIC TEST DEVICES
What uses do they have?

To measure the impact loading
of different body parts
(By using a suite of
instrumentation built into
the Dummy)
To correctly load a vehicle

to assess type and severity of
injury by mimicking human
dynamic impact responses
2
Introduction
Dummy terminology
Todays dummy family
Dummy issues
Dummy Terminology
Percentile
Anthropometry
Biofidelity
Measuring capability
Repeatability
Reproducibility
Durability
Sensitivity
Simplicity and ease of use
3
Percentile
Percentile
Sizes of adult dummies
are expressed as
Percentiles
Three percentile masses

are used:
5th percentile
Example:
50th Percentile A 5th percentile indicates that 5%

of the adult population is smaller
than the Dummy
95th Percentile
4
Percentile
Hybrid III percentiles on a stature and mass scale in

comparison to the resp. distribution of the population
Source: SIMULATING THE ROAD FORWARD: THE ROLE OF COMPUTATIONAL MODELING IN

REALIZING FUTURE OPPORTUNITIES IN TRAFFIC SAFETY. Jeff Crandall, IRCOBI 2009.
Anthropometry
Dummies should have and duplicate the
following:
Have similar mass distribution to that of a living human

Have similar shape to that of a living human
I.E. ATTRIBUTED WITH HUMAN

CHARACTERISTICS
5
Biofidelity
Biofidelity
DUMMIES SHOULD:
Duplicate the biomechanical
response behaviour of a living
human exposed to the same
impact conditions
ACHIEVED BY:
Dummy matching the human
cadaver test corridor response
6
Biofidelity: Human Corridors

Force min/max envelope
Corridors
Measuring Capability
The dummy should be instrumented to

provide the following measurements:
Appropriate forces
Deflections
Accelerations
7
Repeatability & Reproducibility
Different Dummies of same design should:
Receive the same response (output) to the same

impact conditions (input)
Repeatability is assessed from responses to tests with the

same dummy, and
Reproducibility from responses to tests with different dummies

of the same design.
Durability
Durability implies that the Dummy should:
Be structurally sound (intact) following an impact
Have responses that remain repeatable
Durable Exceptions:
Deliberate designed replacement parts
8
Environmental Sensitivity
The dummy should not be sensitive to temperature

and humidity. These factors may affect its
biofedelity and repeatability.
Examples for calibration
A Hybrid II and US SID temperature limits between 18.9C and 25.6C

A Hybrid III, BIOSID temperature limits between 20.6C and 22.2C
The relative Humidity limits between 10% RH and 70%RH
Simplicity and Ease to Use

The Dummy should.
Be easy to calibrate
Require minimal external support equipment
Be readily repairable
Have parts that are easy to change and replace
9
Introduction
Dummy terminology
Todays dummy family
Dummy issues
Todays Dummy Family

Frontal Impact Side Impact
Hybrid 2
50th, 3, 6 year old US SID
BioSID
Hybrid 3
5th, 50th, 95th EuroSID
SIDIIs
THOR
50th percentile male WorldSID
Pregnant 5th% female Rear Impact
CRABI BioRID
3, 6,12, 18 month
RID2
Hybrid 3
3, 6, 10 year old Other
TNO Pedestrian
P series (P0, P3/4, P3, P10)
Q series
10
Example of Frontal Impact Dummies
Hybrid III
Example of Frontal Impact Dummies
Hybrid III cutaway
11
Example of Side Impact Dummies
WorldSID
SIDIIs
Adult Dummy Types Weights
Dummy Type Weight

HYBRID II (50TH%ILE) 74 kg
HYBRID III (5TH%ILE) 50 kg
FEDERAL OR US SID (50TH%ILE) 75 kg
EURO SID (50TH%ILE) 78 kg
BIO SID (50TH%ILE) 79 kg
TNO 10 (ECE 16 SEAT TESTING 50TH%ILE) 76 kg
12
Introduction
Dummy terminology
Todays dummy family
Dummy issues
Evolution of Adult Frontal Impact Dummies:

TNO 10
Developed as test device for ECE
regulation 16: Approval of
safety belts and restraint systems
50th%ile male in weight/size
Consists of six parts:
Head
Neck
Torso
Upper legs
One lower leg
Parts connected by joints in mid-
sagittal plane
Complies to:
EEC Directive 82/319
13

Hybrid 1
Developed in 1971 by GM and

ARL (FTSS)
Modified Sierra Engineering

Dummy/ VIP-50A Dummy
Design
Head and chest

accelerometers
Standardized design
Repeatability possible

Hybrid II
Developed in 1971
NHTSA Contract to GM & ARL (FTSS)
Improved Biomechanical Response
Based on previous VIP designs
Measurements in Head, Chest and Knee
Repeatable, durable and serviceable
Used for airbag testing 1972 to 1973
1973 - Adopted into Code of Federal Regulations
Still in use for Aircraft Seat Testing - FAA
14

Hybrid III 50th-%ile
1976-78 Developed by
General Motors & FTSS
New and improved design

measurements in:
Head
Neck
Chest acceleration
Chest deflection
Femur
Knee
Tibia
Feet
Representative 1.75 m height
Improved biofidelity and range of motion
Complies to 49 CFR, Part 572, Subpart E
Approved for FMVSS 208 in 1986
Hybrid III 50th-%ile: Calibration Corridors
FMVSS head calibration tests

15
FMVSS neck calibration test

FMVSS thorax calibration tests
16
EuroNCAP food calibration tests
FMVSS knee calibration tests

Hybrid III 50th-%ile: Instrumentation
17
Hybrid III 50th-%ile: Instrumentation

THOR
Test Device for Human Occupant Restraint

THOR 50th-%ile male originally developed by NHTSA
1994 2003, prototype Thor developed by GESAC.
The primary design objectives were as follows:
Biofidelity in mass, size, surface geometry, and

dynamic response
Incorporation of specific instrumentation relevant to

injury assessment
Repeatability of performance
Minimization of damage in severe test environments;

i.e., overload protection
Easy assembly and disassembly enabled by a modular

user-friendly design
18

THOR
As problems occurred with durability and
usability, FTSS developed THOR-FT (EU-
financed), GESAC upgraded to THOR-NT
(NHTSA financed). Now a joint working group
is established to harmonize until 2011 (?).
AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 37 - Source: Prof. Norbert Schaub, Dummies
Mercedes Benz Cars
THOR: Instrumentation
19
Introduction
Dummy terminology
Todays dummy family
Dummy issues
THOR Hybrid III : Differences

HIII THOR
same weight 78 kg
20

1. Measurements
- spine angle HIII THOR
- load cells face
- additional acceleration sensors
- 4- point deflection measurement
of the chest
- penetration measurement of the
abdominal area
2. Design
- spine
- thorax
- abdomen

Seating position and handling
THOR: tilt sensors help during

the dummy positioning.
Differences between distance of

the thorax and IP.
about 110 mm
about 35 mm
Source: Burkhard Eickhoff, Autoliv

21

Dynamic tests
Higher forward displacement with THOR (especial pelvis)
THOR: more biofidelic behaviour (especially dummy rotation z- axis )
HIII THOR
Source: Burkhard Eickhoff, Autoliv

Thorax behaviour under same loading conditions

Kent, R.; Shaw, G.; Lessley, D., Crandal, J.; Kallieris, D.; Svensson, M.:
Comparison of Hybrid III, Thor and Cadaver Thoracic Responses in Oblique
Frontal and Full Frontal Sled Tests, SAE paper 2003-01-0160
22
Introduction
Dummy terminology
Todays dummy family
Dummy issues
Dummy Issues
Example: Hybrid III dummy
Temperature sensitivity
Belt path sensitivity
Chest deflection in test and calibration
Repeatability & reproducibility
23
Temperature Sensitivity
NHTSA report DOT HS 806 722
State-of-the-art Dummy Selection
Author: Saul, R.A. - December 1984
Chest deflection temperature
sensitivity
Hybrid II
18.3C -6%
22.2C reference 25mm
26.7C +3%
Hybrid III
18.3C -15%
22.2C reference 32mm
26.7C +27%
Hybrid III chest deflection
sensitivity 5%/C
Temperature Sensitivity
NHTSA report DOT HS 806 722 State-of-

the-art Dummy Selection Author: Saul,
R.A. - December 1984
Chest acceleration temperature sensitivity
Hybrid II
18.3C +8%
22.2C reference 35G
26.7C -6%
Hybrid III
18.3C +19%
22.2C reference 16G
26.7C -16%
Hybrid III chest acceleration
sensitivity -4%/C
24
Belt Path Sensitivity

three different shoulder belt paths were realised
this way (no changes in D-ring geometry)
upper position mid position lower position

Result of static tests: lowest chest deflection for upper pos. belt path
3
Belt in upper position
Belt in mid position
Belt in lower position
Belt Force in kN
13 mm 18 mm
@ 2 kN @ 2 kN
0
0 10 20
Chest Deflection in mm
25

Result of dynamic tests: lowest chest deflection for upper pos. belt path
upper pos.: 21 mm
mid pos. : 36 mm
Chest deflection:
lower pos.: 39 mm
Chest Deflection in Test and Calibration

Calibration Corridor:
Typical chest deflections in NCAP tests are

between 20 mm and 30 mm
-> A second test with less impact velocity is

now introduced in EuroNCAP
26

EuroNCAP
small family car dummy calibration:
retractor pret., load limiter with end stop function
calibration range
passenger airbag upper limit calibration
Test Center
Comparison
DS_ches3
ASG
16.08.1999 Plot: 3
Dummy A
1910289_4G0C0001_SCHLITTEN_VOR
Chest deflection
0098 0099 (HIII 50%)
0109
35
30
25
20
lower limit calibration
calibration range
15
Unit [mm]
10 Dummy B
5
0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18
Unit []
The Influence of the individual dummy to

chest deflection in this crash test is +/- 4 mm at 30 mm i.e. +/- 15%
As a rule of thumb, reproducibility with the HIII is about

+10% for acceleration, forces and moments, and about
+20% for chest deflection and HIC.
By using always the same individual dummy and being
precise in the seating procedure and the belt path,
repeatability and reproducibility can be improved.
The best practice to rate repeatability and reproducibility
today is the Objective Rating Method (ORM).
Literature you will find on the CD:
Hovenga P.E.; Spit H.H.; Uijldert M.; Dalenoort A.M.: Improved prediction of Hybrid-III injury values using advanced multibody
techniques and objective rating. Proceedings of 2004 SAE conference.
Eriksson, L.; Zellmer, H.: Proceedings of Assessing the BioRID II Repeatability and Reproducibility by Applying the Objective
Rating Method (ORM) on Rear-End Sled Tests. Proceedings of 20th ESV Conference, Lyon, France, June 2007.
Eriksson, L.; Sundmark, H.; Zellmer, H.; Fograscher, K.; Drexl, B.; van Slagmaat, M.: Using the Objective Rating Method (ORM)
as a quality assessment tool for physical tests, test methods, and mathematical models. Proceedings of 21st ESV Conference,
Stuttgart, Germany, June 2009.
27
Introduction
Dummy terminology
Todays dummy family
Dummy issues
Performance Comparison of Rear

Impact Dummies:
Hybrid III (TRID), BioRID and RID2
Harald Zellmer1), Markus Muser 2), Michael Stamm1), Felix Walz2),

Wolfram Hell3), Klaus Langwieder3), Mat Philippens4)
1) Autoliv GmbH, Elmshorn, Germany
2) Working Group on Accident Mechanics, University/ETH Zrich, Switzerland
3) GDV Institute for Vehicle Safety, Munich, Germany
4) TNO Automotive, Delft, The Netherlands
IRCOBI Conference 2002, Munich
28
Necks of Rear Impact Dummies
HIII(TRID) BioRID RID2

29
Low Speed Rear Impact Test Procedure
T2 T1
Direction of
T3 Travel
T4
C
A Deceleration Corridor

Test Set Up
30
Investigated Injury Criteria
NIC(t) = arel(t) 0.2 + (vrel(t)),
Nkm(t) = Fx(t)/Fint + My(t)/Mint
Head Rebound Speed
Scope
Determine the influence of the dummy

on proposed injury criteria and on a
possible rating of seats
31
Comparison HIII(TRID) / BioRID
13 seats, different designs
Description Seats
Conventional seat, actual design 2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13
Conventional seat, older design (produced mid 1990th) 11, 12
Seat with neck protection system 1, 4, 9
Sports car seat 5
Bucket seat 3
Table 1: Description of the seats used for the comparison tests.
Stiff Rubber
Multiple Joints
Solid
32
NIC
40
30
NIC B ioRID
20
10
0
0 10 20 30 40
NIC HIII(TRID)
33
Head acceleration
30
BL
25 BF
ax BioRID
[g] 20
15
10 HIII(TRID)
5
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
t [ms]

Extension
40
30
BioRID [Nm]
20
10
0
0 10 20 30 40
HIII(TRID) [Nm]
34

T1 rebound speed
4
3
BioRID [m/s]
0
0 1 2 3 4
HIII (TRID) [m/s]

Conclusions
Results obtained with the TRID neck may be

transferred to the BioRID and vice versa
only with precise knowledge of details and
even then, with considerable uncertainties.
In a test specification it cannot be left open
which dummy is used.
We recommend not to use HIII(TRID) further
in low speed rear impact tests.
35
Introduction
Dummy terminology
Todays dummy family
Dummy issues
Useful Links
Governmental Information:
www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/departments/nrd-51/THORAdv/THORAdv.htm
www.eevc.org/publicdocs/WG12_THOR_workshop_report_May_2006.pdf
Dummy Manufacturers Pages:
www.gesacinc.com/
www.humaneticsatd.com
36

Zellmer IIT 2010 Dummies Handout PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Zellmer IIT 2010 Dummies Handout PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Harald Zellmer, Dummy Design and Issues , New Delhi, December 2010

Dummy Design and Issues

Autoliv B.V. & Co. KG, Elmshorn, Germany

International Course on Transportation Planning

Dummy Design and Issues

AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 2 - Dummies

Dummy Design and Issues

AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 3 - Dummies

ANTHROPOMORPHIC TEST DEVICES

What uses do they have?

To correctly load a vehicle

AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 4 - Dummies

Dummy Design and Issues

AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 5 - Dummies

AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 6 - Dummies

AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 7 - Dummies

Three percentile masses

50th Percentile A 5th percentile indicates that 5%

Hybrid III percentiles on a stature and mass scale in

Source: SIMULATING THE ROAD FORWARD: THE ROLE OF COMPUTATIONAL MODELING IN

AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 9 - Dummies

Have similar mass distribution to that of a living human

I.E. ATTRIBUTED WITH HUMAN

AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 10 - Dummies

AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 11 - Dummies

AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 12 - Dummies

Biofidelity: Human Corridors

AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 13 - Dummies

The dummy should be instrumented to

AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 14 - Dummies

Repeatability & Reproducibility

Different Dummies of same design should:

Receive the same response (output) to the same

Repeatability is assessed from responses to tests with the

Reproducibility from responses to tests with different dummies

AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 15 - Dummies

Durability implies that the Dummy should:

Be structurally sound (intact) following an impact

Have responses that remain repeatable

Deliberate designed replacement parts

AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 16 - Dummies

The dummy should not be sensitive to temperature

Examples for calibration

A Hybrid II and US SID temperature limits between 18.9C and 25.6C

AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 17 - Dummies

Simplicity and Ease to Use

Require minimal external support equipment

Have parts that are easy to change and replace

AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 18 - Dummies

Dummy Design and Issues

AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 19 - Dummies

Todays Dummy Family

Pregnant 5th% female Rear Impact

AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 20 - Dummies

Example of Frontal Impact Dummies

Example of Frontal Impact Dummies

Hybrid III cutaway

AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 22 - Dummies

Example of Side Impact Dummies

AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 23 - Dummies

Adult Dummy Types Weights

Dummy Type Weight

AUTOLIV / Dr. H. Zellmer / New Delhi 2010 - 24 - Dummies