Ghbmc presentation for lstc conference

Completion of Phase I Development of the
Global Human Body Models Consortium Mid-Sized Male
Full Body Finite Element Model

John J. Combest
Presenting on behalf of the
GHBMC1 and University Research Partners2
1. Participating Corporations and Organizations (A-Z): Chrysler, General Motors, Honda, Hyundai,
NHTSA, Nissan, Peugeot-Citroen, Renault, Takata
2. Contributing Academic Institutions: Wayne State University, University of Waterloo, University of
Virginia, IFSTTAR, Virginia Tech, University of Alabama Birmingham,
Wake Forest University School of Medicine3

LSTC INTERNATIONAL USERS CONFERENCE, June 4th 2012

Global Human Body Models Consortium (GHBMC)

• An international consortium of automakers & suppliers working
with research institutes and government agencies to advance
human body modeling (HBM) technologies for crash simulations

• OBJECTIVE: To • MISSION: To
consolidate world- develop and
wide HBM R&D maintain high
effort into a single fidelity FE human
global effort body models for
crash simulations

2

Phase I Development Team by Centers of Expertise (COE)
GHBMC Technical Committee (Chairman: J.T. Wang of GM) NHTSA (COTR: Erik Takhounts)
Full Body Model COE Head Model COE Neck Model COE

Joel Stitzel, Principal Investigator King Yang, Principal Investigator Duane Cronin, Principal Investigator
Hyung Yun Choi, Model Conversion Liying Zhang, co-Principal Investigator Jason Fice
Scott Gayzik Haojie Mao Jeff Moulton
Dan Moreno Vinay Genthikatti Naveen Chandrashekar
Nick Vavalle Steve Mattucci
Ashley Rhyne Hamid Shateri
Brad Thompson Jennifer DeWit

Jay Zhao of Takata, GHBMC FBM Guru Prakash of GM, GHBMC HM Yibing Shi of Chrysler, GHBMC NM
Subcommittee Leader Subcommittee Leader Subcommittee Leader

Thorax Model COE Abdomen Model COE Lower Ex. Model COE

Richard Kent, Principal Investigator Philippe Beillas, Principal Investigator Costin Untaroiu, Principal Investigator
Damien Subit Warren Hardy, Principal Investigator Jeff Crandall, co-Principal Investigator
Zouping Li Fabien Berthet Alan Eberhardt, co-Principal Investigator
Matt Kindig Meghan Howes Neng Yue
Stan Gregory Jaeho Shin
Young Ho Kim
Jong-Eun Kim
Palani Palaniappan of Toyota, GHBMC TM Philippe Petit of Renault, GHBMC Nataraju Vusirikala of
Subcommittee Leader AM Subcommittee Leader GM, GHBMC LEM Subcommittee
Leader

Subject Recruitment
• Used the Anthropometric Survey of U.S. • M50
Army Personnel, Natick Research, H: 68.9 in. (175 cm)
Development and Engineering Ctr. For
W: 173 lbs. (78.5 kg)
anthropometry, sizes follow dummy sizes
• M95
• All met criteria for external
anthropometry H: 74.6 in. (189.5 cm)
( 5%)1 of ANSUR study W: 225 lbs. (102 kg)
• 4 Individuals selected for the study • F05
(F05, F50, M50, M95) H: 59 in. (150 cm)
W: 106 lbs. (48 kg)
Seated height Shoulder elbow length • F50
Hip breadth Forearm hand length
H: 63.7 in. (161.8 cm)
W: 137 lbs. (62.1 kg)
Buttock knee length Waist circumference
• All subjects underwent
Knee height Hip breadth full imaging protocol
Bideltoid breadth Foot length • MRI, upright MRI
• CT
Head breadth Head length
• External Anthro.
Head circumference Chest circumference

Neck circumference Foot length
1. Gordon et al., ANSUR., 1988

CAD Development Overview
• Image data was used in the development of CAD
data for M50 model

Segment Condition Assemble NURBS (CAD)

Best image data by structure
Polygon data
Various techniques Upright MRI
Symmetry where appropriate
Manual Quasi-seated CT Apply NURBS surfaces
Remove artifacts
Semi-automated Reposition to scan CS
Literature survey
Atlas based

CAD Development Overview
M50 Skeleton: M50 Muscle CAD: M50 Organ CAD:
w/ external 52 neck muscles, and Brain and
landmarks. Outer selected muscles of substructures, thoracic
skin revised based thorax, abdomen, pelvis and abdominal organs,
on COE feedback. and lower extremity. and major vascular
components.

Head Body Model Center of Expertise
Principal Investigator: King Yang, Liying Zhang GHBMC Subcommittee Leader: Guru Prakash of GM

• Anthropomorphic details were based on the CAD
• Brain mesh with hex elements – Feature-based
multi-block technique: cerebrum, cerebellum,
corpus callosum, brainstem
• Other meshed structures: cerebrospinal fluid,
dural membranes, 11 pairs of bridging veins, skull,
facial bones, scalp/flesh and skin
• 180,000 solid, shell and beam elements

Head Model Validation Results Summary
Intracranial pressure (Nahum et al., 1977) Case 1: Zygomatic bone force
Brain Intracranial, ventricular pressure (Trosseille et al., 1992) • A 14.5-kg semi-circular rigid rod at an initial
velocity of 3.0 m/s
Brain/skull relative displacements (Hardy et al., 01, 07) • Compare force and fracture
Skull force, fracture in frontal, vertex, occipital,
Bone (Yoganandan et al., 1995) Case 2: Brain displacement (1/8 cases)
-Skull
Skull force, fracture in frontal (Hodgson et al., 1970) • Head kinematics applied at c.g. of head from
T383-T3 cadaver test
Nasal bone force, fracture (Nyquist et al., 1986)
Bone • Brain displacement at various locations
Zygomatic bone force, fracture (Allosop et al., 1988) captured by high speed x-ray
-Face
Maxillary bone force, fracture (Allosop et al., 1988)
Exemplar Case:

Crash Induced Injury
& Model Summary - Head
Acute Subdural Hematoma Injury
(bridging vein rupture)
• Ten PMHS occipital impact (Depreitere et al., 2006)
• CII: max strain >15%

Cerebral Contusion Injury (pressure)
• Six PMHS cases (Nahum et al., 1976)
• N = 1 with contusion (limitation)
• CII: intracranial pressure >270 kPa

Diffuse Axonal Injury (strain)
• Preliminary data for DAI from reconstruction
• Four accident cases with AIS 0, AIS 4, AIS %, and
AIS multiples) (Franklyn et al., 2005)
• CII: max strain >0.45 moderate DAI (AIS 4)

Neck Body Model Center of Expertise
Principal Investigator: Duane Cronin
Technical Leads: Jason Fice, Jeff Moulton, Jennifer DeWit
Additional funding support provided by: iAMi GHBMC NM Subcommittee Leader: Yibing Shi of Chrysler

• Geometry derived from CT scans of a 50th
percentile male, supplemented with lit. data
• 304,385 Elements
– 204,180 Hexahedral Solids
– 95,630 Shells
– 4,575 1D
• Musculature
– Passive 3D volume
– Active Hill-type embedded beam elements

Neck Model Validation Results Summary
Validation at segment level (flexion, extension, tension, compression, rotation)
Cervical spine/head model validation (frontal, rear, lateral impact scenarios)

15g Frontal Impact (head/neck model)

Crash Induced Injury
& Model Summary - Neck
•Crash Induced Injuries
•Whiplash injury (Fice et al.)
• Capsular ligament distraction for
lower c-spine
• Alar and apical ligament
distraction (upper c-spine)
•Soft tissue failure (DeWit and Cronin)
• Ligament failure through
progressive damage model
• Disc avulsion using a tiebreak
interface
•Hard tissue failure evaluated using
effective plastic strain criterion

•Future work includes CII refinement and
musculature modeling.
Reference:
Fice et al., 2011 Annals of Biomedical Engineering
DeWit and Cronin, 2010 IRCOBI
Mattucci et al., 2001 ASB

Thorax Model Center of Expertise
Principal Investigator: Richard W. Kent GHBMC Subcommittee Leader: Palani Palaniappan of
Technical Leads: Zuoping Li, Damien Subit, Matt Kindig Toyota

• Multi-block hex meshing approach used in
model development with consideration of
geometry symmetry
• Thorax model with total 504k elements ( 280k
solids,224k shells,~100% hex or quad)
• Hierarchical model validation
– Rib segment
– Rib ring
– Ribcage
– Global thorax model response validation
(tabletop, front, and lateral impacts)

Thorax Model Validation Results Summary
Impact force-chest deflection curves of thorax regions compared to experimental
corridors for table-top, pure lateral, and oblique lateral impacts. (Selected tests shown)

References:
Table top:
(Kent et al, 2004)

Pure lateral impact:
(Shaw et al. 2006)

Oblique lateral impact:
(Yoganandan et al., 1997)

Crash Induced Injury &
Model Summary - Thorax
 Evaluation of the rib fractures under
dynamic loading using GHBMC full body
model based on strain-based criterion
 Multiple fracture observed
 Front impact at 10 m/s
 Pure lateral impact at 4.5 m/s

 Conclusions for BRM model
development in Phase 1
 Thorax model is numerically stable
 Overall model responses comparable
to the majority of test data
 Thoracic stiffness significantly
affected by the contact parameter
(soft option)
 Kinematic joints are not validated
and may need more test data

Abdomen Model Center of Expertise
Principal Investigator: Philippe Beillas1 / Warren Hardy² GHBMC Subcommittee Leader:
Technical Leads: Fabien Berthet1 / Meghan Howes² Philippe Petit of Renault

• Joint effort: (1) Ifsttar (Lyon, France)=
Modeling , (2) Virginia Tech (Blacksburg)=
Experimental work
• Stability tested at organ level (VHP based)
• Mesh: 270k elms
• 112 Sliding or tied contacts
• Material properties mostly from literature

Abdomen Model Validation Summary /
12 validation setups successfully simulated (incl. high energy loading)
Response is ok overall but limitations:
Due to PMHS geometrical mismatch ( need scaling),
mass mismatch ( need added masses), need for rib fx simulation

Abdomen Model Validation Summary /

Lower Extremity Model Center of Expertise
Principal Investigators: Costin Untaroiu/Jeff Crandall1 GHBMC Subcommittee Leader: Nataraju
Alan Eberhardt2 Vusirikala of GM
Technical Leads: Jaeho Shin/Neng Yue1, Young-Ho Kim2

• (1) UVA  Lower Ex., (2) UAB  Pelvis
• Geometry
– Reconstructed geometry of 50th male
volunteer
– Additional data from literature for defining the
cortical bone shells with thin thickness (e.g. in
pelvis and epiphysis regions) and foot/hip
ligaments
• Meshing
– Almost 625k elements and 322k nodes
included in 285 distinct components (parts)
– More than 73% solid elements (93% hexa)
– All elements fulfill GHBMC mesh quality
criteria (Jacobian solid/shell>0.3/0.4; Tet
collapse>0.2, etc.)
– Model stable with 0.3/0.6 µs time steps
(0.4/6% mass scaling)

Reference: Untaroiu et al. 2011- LEM User ‘s Manual

Model Validation & CII Summary –
Pelvis & Lower Extremity
• FE Validation
– Good overall response
– 19 Frontal (FO) and Lateral
(SO) validation setups
successfully
simulated, including:
• 8 Lower Limb
• 8 Foot
• 3 Pelvis
– 4 regional frontal and lateral
robustness simulations
• Knee bolster
• Toe pan
• Lateral knee
• Lateral Hip

Reference: Untaroiu et al. 2011- LEM User ‘s Manual

Lower Extremity Model Validation Results
• Selected FE Validation Examples
– SO-2- Pelvic Lateral Compression Validation
• Objective: Validate the biomechanical
response of the pelvis
• Output: Force time history response +
type/location of injuries

– FO-3- Femoral Combined (Bending &
Compression) Validation
response of the femur
• Output: Axial and bending loading at
the time of mid-shaft fracture

– FO-11- Ankle Dorsiflexion Validation
response of the ankle
• Output: Moment-angle response of
ankle + type/location of injuries

Reference: Untaroiu et al. 2011- PLEX User ‘s Manual

Full Body Model Center of Expertise
Principal Investigator: Joel D. Stitzel GHBMC Subcommittee Leader: Jay Zhao of Takata
Technical Lead: F. Scott Gayzik
Medical Imaging CAD Development
• NURBS (CAD), 400+ components, G1 continuous
Upright
MRI MRI

CT External
Anthro.

Model integration Model Validation
• Model integration at 5 intersections of body region • 18 Cases run with the Full Body Model
models • 9 Frontal, 8 Lateral, 1 stability
• Examples: • Good agreement with data & robustness

Reference: Gayzik, F.S. et al., The development of full body geometrical data for finite element models: A multi-modality approach. 2011. Annals
of Biomedical Eng., Oct;39(10):2568-83. Epub 2011 Jul 23.

Full Body Model Overview
Current FBM Model
Mass, element data

Total mass
76 kg


1.95 million elements, 1.3 million nodes, 76 kg, 847 parts
FBM Validation: 18 cases, 9 frontal, 8 lateral, 1 stability


FBM Validation: 18 cases, 9 9 frontal, 8 lateral, 1 stability
FBM Validation: 18 cases, frontal, 8 lateral, 1 stability

FBM Validation Case Continued

N M:F Average Subject Average Subject Mass Scaled to Scaling mass Rib Fracture Rib Fracture
PMHS Age (years) Mass (kg) M50th? used (kg) Study Simulation
Data
5 2:3 59 59.5 Yes 77 6.6±5.4 R 7 (1)

Reference: Forman et al., 2006, Whole-body Kinematic and Dynamic Response of Restrained PMHS in Frontal Sled Tests, Stapp Car Crash Journal,
2006-22-0013

Lateral Sled Impact – 6.7 m/s
Rib Fracture

Literature

Simulation

PMHS
Age (years) Mass (kg) M50th? used (kg) Study Simulation
Data
3 3:0 51.7±23.1 79.3±8.5 Yes 76 13 R4, 5, 6, 7 (4)

Reference: Pintar, Yoganandan, Hines, Maltese, McFadden, Saul, Eppinger, Khaewpong, Klienberger, Chest band analysis of human tolerance to
impact, 1997 Stapp Car Crash Journal, SAE No. 973320

FBM Validation Case Example 1: Frontal Driver Impact – 48 kph

PMHS Age (years) Mass (kg) M50th? used (kg) Study Simulation
Data
5 2:3 59 59.5 Yes 77 6.6±5.4 R 7 (1)

CPU Time: GHBMC Model vs. Dummy/Vehicle Models
Abdominal Bar Impact 6m/s (Hardy) Thoracic Chest Impactor 6.7 m/s (Kroell) Knee bolster Impact 4.9 m/s

( 80ms simulation - 10 hrs 51 min on 36 cpus) (60ms simulation - 8 hrs 25 min on 36 cpus) (80ms simulation - 10 hrs 51 min on 36 cpus)
Full Vehicle Side Impact Frontal Sled Test
Lateral NCAP Test (3 mil elements w/ time step 0.45us) (0.6 mil elements w/ time step 0.7us)

(200ms simulation - 30 hrs 16 min on 36 cpus) (70ms simulation - 18 hrs 54 min on 36 cpus) (200ms simulation - 5 hrs 27 min on 36 cpus)

Summary & Wrap Up
• GHBMC: An international consortium of
automakers & suppliers working with research
institutes and government agencies to advance
human body modeling (HBM) technologies for
crash simulations
• The seated M50 model is first to be developed and
validated by the consortium, close of Phase I
• Final M50 model has 1.95 million elements, 1.3
million nodes, weighs 76 kg
• Extensive validation: Crash Induced Injuries in 5
body regions (Head, Neck, Thorax, Abdomen, and
Pelvis/Lower Extremities)
• Initial development in LS-Dyna, model conversion
to PamCrash and Radioss FEA solvers completed.
• Medical image data is available for F05, F50, M95
• Phase II will continue this work beginning in 2012
to continuly enhance the M50 model, and to
develop F05, M95 and F50 models

Acknowledgements
Funding & In-kind Contributions: Global Human Body Models Consortium
(GHBMC), participating corporations & organizations (A-Z),

University Contributors: Body region centers of expertise(COEs) and their partners
IFSTTAR University of Virginia
University of Waterloo Virginia Tech
University of Virginia Wayne State University
Software Contributions: LSTC (LS-Dyna), ESI Group (Pam-Crash), Altair (Radioss)
Data appearing in this document were prepared under the support of the Global Human Body Models Consortium by the
FBM and Body Region Centers of Expertise. Any opinions or recommendations expressed in this document are those of the
authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Global Human Body Models Consortium.

FOR INFORMATION ON JOINING THE CONSORTIUM

•Steering Committee
–Chairman
• Mark Torigian, 734-337-2298
mtorigian@hatci.com
• John Combest, 248-488-4507
combesj@ntcna.nissan-usa.com

•Technical Committee
–Chairman
• J.T. Wang, 586-986-0534,
jenne-tai.wang@gm.com

GHBMC: A Research Project with Global Reach

COLLEGE of ENGINEERING

Kickoff
6/20/08 GHBMC Project Timeline

Major Milestones

Final FBM
GHBMC
11/30/11 Phase II

GHBMC Organization & Work System
Relationships:
Member Committee Reporting
Working

Steering Committee

Technical Committee
LLC

FBM Subcommittee
HM LEM
Subcommittee Subcommittee

NM AM
Subcommittee TM Subcommittee
Subcommittee

FBM COE
HM COE LEM COE

NM COE AM COE COE
TM COE

Imaging Protocol
• Medical Images are the basis for model development 1
• But there is no “one size fits all”
Modality Advantage

1. Closed Bore, High resolution, pulse sequence specialization
Magnetic
Resonance 0.5 – 1 mm in plane resolution
1 – 2 mm slice thickness
2
Imaging (MRI)

Standing and seated postures, pulse sequence
specialization
2. Upright MRI
1.4 – 2 mm in plane
1.5 – 2 mm slice thickness
3
Highest resolution, fast image acquisition time
3. Computed
Tomography (CT) 0.5 – 1 mm in plane resolution
0.63 slice thickness

Direct measurement of body landmarks,
4. External external contours of the seated occupant
Anthropometry
4
7 Axis digitizer
< 1 mm

Ghbmc presentation for lstc conference

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Último

Último (20)

Ghbmc presentation for lstc conference