Virtual testing of helmets using finite element (FE) analysis can be a valuable tool during product development. Still, its usefulness is limited by the quality of the constitutive model of the energy-absorbing material, usually foam. Built-in constitutive models in commercial FE software are developed for traditional linear compression loading. However, modern oblique test methods load the foam in combined compression and shear. Therefore, we aim to evaluate to what extent built-in constitutive models in commercial FE software can represent Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) foam during combined compression and shear loading (CCSL). EPS foam is tested experimentally in a newly developed test rig for CCSL (V-test). The response is compared against the simulation using three different constitutive models available in LS-DYNA (M83, M126, and M181). The models are assessed by their ability to capture the correct response, focusing on how well the continuum models can capture the phenomenological events seen in the experiments. The results show that the models perform well in compression, as expected. However, we point out limitations in the shear response and significant limitations in the unloading response, both important for oblique helmet testing. Due to these limitations, we conclude that the existing models are inadequate for accurately simulating oblique helmet impacts. There is a clear need to develop and implement new constitutive models focused on capturing CCSL including the unloading. Additionally, frictional sliding was found to substantially influence the measured response in the V-test method. Minimizing interface sliding is therefore critical for isolating the material behavior.

The anatomy of children's heads is unique and distinct from adults, with smaller and softer skulls and unfused fontanels and sutures. Despite this, most current helmet testing standards for children use the same peak linear acceleration threshold as for adults. It is unclear whether this is reasonable and otherwise what thresholds should be. To answer these questions, helmet-protected head responses for different ages are needed which is however lacking today. In this study, we apply continuously scalable PIPER child head models of 1.5, 3, and 6 years old (YO), and an upgraded 18YO to study child helmet protection under extensive linear and oblique impacts. The results of this study reveal an age-dependence trend in both global kinematics and tissue response, with younger children experiencing higher levels of acceleration and velocity, as well as increased skull stress and brain strain. These findings indicate the need for better protection for younger children, suggesting that youth helmets should have a lower linear kinematic threshold, with a preliminary value of 150g for 1.5-year-old helmets. However, the results also show a different trend in rotational kinematics, indicating that the threshold of rotational velocity for a 1.5YO is similar to that for adults. The results also support the current use of small-sized adult headforms for testing child helmets before new child headforms are available.

Recent studies have found that alpine helmets reduce the risk of focal injuries associated with radial impacts, which is likely due to current alpine helmet standards requiring helmets to be drop-tested on flat anvils with only linear acceleration pass criteria. There is a need to evaluate the performance of alpine helmets in more realistic impacts. The current study developed a method to assess the performance of alpine helmets for radial and oblique impacts on snow surfaces in a laboratory setting. Snow samples were collected from a groomed area of a ski slope. Radial impacts were performed as drop tests onto a stationary snow sample. Oblique impacts were performed as drop tests onto a snow sample moving horizontally. For radial impacts, snow sample collection time was found to significantly (p = 0.005) influence mean peak linear headform acceleration with an increase in ambient temperature softening the snow samples. For oblique tests, the recreational alpine sports helmet with a rotation-damping system (RDS) significantly (p = 0.002) reduced mean peak angular acceleration compared to the same helmets with no RDS by approximately 44%. The ski racing helmet also significantly (p = 0.006) reduced mean peak angular acceleration compared to the recreational alpine sports helmet with no RDS by approximately 33%, which was attributed to the smooth outer shell of the ski racing helmet. The current study helps to bridge the knowledge gap between real helmet impacts on alpine snow slopes and laboratory helmet impacts on rigid surfaces.

New oblique impact methods for evaluating head injury mitigation effects of helmets are emerging, which mandate measuring both translational and rotational kinematics of the headform. These methods need headforms with biofidelic mass, moments of inertia (MoIs), and coefficient of friction (CoF). To fulfill this need, working group 11 of the European standardization head protection committee (CEN/TC158) has been working on the development of a new headform with realistic MoIs and CoF, based on recent biomechanics research on the human head. In this study, we used a version of this headform (Cellbond) to test a motorcycle helmet under the oblique impact at 8 m/s at five different locations. We also used the Hybrid III headform, which is commonly used in the helmet oblique impact. We tested whether there is a difference between the predictions of the headforms in terms of injury metrics based on head kinematics, including peak translational and rotational acceleration, peak rotational velocity, and BrIC (brain injury criterion). We also used the Imperial College finite element model of the human head to predict the strain and strain rate across the brain and tested whether there is a difference between the headforms in terms of the predicted strain and strain rate. We found that the Cellbond headform produced similar or higher peak translational accelerations depending on the impact location (−3.2% in the front-side impact to 24.3% in the rear impact). The Cellbond headform, however, produced significantly lower peak rotational acceleration (−41.8% in a rear impact to −62.7% in a side impact), peak rotational velocity (−29.5% in a side impact to −47.6% in a rear impact), and BrIC (−29% in a rear-side impact to −45.3% in a rear impact). The 90th percentile values of the maximum brain strain and strain rate were also significantly lower using this headform. Our results suggest that MoIs and CoF have significant effects on headform rotational kinematics, and consequently brain deformation, during the helmeted oblique impact. Future helmet standards and rating methods should use headforms with realistic MoIs and CoF (e.g., the Cellbond headform) to ensure more accurate representation of the head in laboratory impact tests.

Work-related traumatic brain injuries (wrTBIs) in the construction industry have been studied in North America but, to the best of our knowledge, not in Europe. This study analyzed sets of public data on head injuries occurring in the construction industry from the workers' compensation systems in Sweden and Germany, 2014 - 2018. The ratio of wrTBI varied from 11% to 61% of all head injuries, with higher ratios for more severe injuries. The average yearly incidence (per 100,000 FTE) of wrTBI resulting in more than four days absence from work was nine in Sweden and 117 in Germany, as compared to 22-212 in North American studies. A limitation of studies based on workers' compensation claims is that they underestimate the true burden of wrTBI. The most frequent events leading to wrTBI were falls, followed by loss of control, failure of material agents, and body movements without stress. Falls from a height caused 35% of all wrTBI with more than 14 days off work in Sweden and 57% of all new injury pensions granted in Germany. In North American studies, 52-78% of the wrTBI were caused by falls. This highlights the relevance of fall safety measures to reduce wrTBI in the construction industry, such as avoiding work at heights, use of safety nets, education, and etcetera. The energy absorption of safety helmets mainly protects the head excluding face of which 49-62% were wrTBI, indicating that helmet testing standards should evaluate protection against TBI as well as skull fractures.

Bicycle helmets are shown to offer protection against head injuries. Rating methods and test standards are used to evaluate different helmet designs and safety performance. Both strain-based injury criteria obtained from finite element brain injury models and metrics derived from global kinematic responses can be used to evaluate helmet safety performance. Little is known about how different injury models or injury metrics would rank and rate different helmets. The objective of this study was to determine how eight brain models and eight metrics based on global kinematics rank and rate a large number of bicycle helmets (n=17) subjected to oblique impacts. The results showed that the ranking and rating are influenced by the choice of model and metric. Kendall’s tau varied between 0.50 and 0.95 when the ranking was based on maximum principal strain from brain models. One specific helmet was rated as 2-star when using one brain model but as 4-star by another model. This could cause confusion for consumers rather than inform them of the relative safety performance of a helmet. Therefore, we suggest that the biomechanics community should create a norm or recommendation for future ranking and rating methods.

The motorcyclist is exposed to the risk of falling and impacting ground head-first at a wide range of travelling speeds - from a speed limit of less than 50 km/h on the urban road to the race circuit where speed can reach well above 200 km/h. However, motorcycle helmets today are tested at a single and much lower impact speed, i.e. 30 km/h. There is a knowledge gap in understanding the dynamics and head impact responses at high travelling speeds due to the limitation of existing laboratory rigs. This study used a finite element head model coupled with a motorcycle helmet model to simulate head-first falls at travelling speed (or tangential velocity at impact) from 0 to 216 km/h. The effect of different falling heights (1.6 m and 0.25 m) and coefficient of frictions (0.20 and 0.45) between the helmet outer shell and ground were also examined. The simulation results were analysed together with the analytical model to better comprehend rolling and/or sliding phenomena that are often observed in helmet oblique impacts. Three types of helmet-to-ground interactions are found when the helmet impacts ground from low to high tangential velocities: (1) helmet rolling without slipping; (2) a combination of sliding and rolling; and (3) continuous sliding. The tangential impulse transmitted to the head-helmet system, peak angular head kinematics and brain strain increase almost linearly with the tangential velocity when the helmet rolls but plateaus when the helmet slides. The critical tangential velocity at which the motion transit from the rolling regime to the sliding regime depends on both the falling height and friction coefficient. Typically, for a fall height of 1.63 m and a friction coefficient of 0.45, the rolling/sliding transition occurs at a tangential velocity of 10.8 m/s (38.9 km/h). Low sliding resistance in helmet design, i.e. by the means of a lower friction coefficient between the helmet outer shell and ground, has shown a higher reduction of brain tissue strain in the sliding regime than in the rolling regime. This study uncovers the underlying dynamics of rolling and sliding phenomena in high-speed oblique impacts, which largely affect head impact biomechanics. Besides, the study highlights the importance of testing helmets at speeds covering both the rolling and sliding regime since potential designs for improved head protection at high-speed impacts can be more distinguishable in the sliding regime than in the rolling regime.

Study Design: Biomechanical finite element model analysis. Objectives: Spinal fractures related to ankylosing spondylitis (AS) are often treated by long posterior stabilization. The objective of this study is to develop a finite element model (FEM) for spinal fractures related to AS and to establish a biomechanical foundation for long posterior stabilization of cervicothoracic fractures related to AS. Methods: An existing FEM (consisting of 2 separately developed models) including the cervical and thoracic spine were adapted to the conditions of AS (all discs fused, C0-C1 and C1-C2 mobile). A fracture at the level C6-C7 was simulated. Besides a normal spine (no AS, no fracture) and the uninstrumented fractured spine 4 different posterior transpedicular instrumentations were tested. Three loads (1.5g, 3.0g, 4.5g) were applied according to a specific load curve. Results: All posterior stabilization methods could normalize the axial stability at the fracture site as measured with gap distance. The maximum stress at the cranial instrumentation end (C3-C4) was slightly greater if every level was instrumented, than in the skipped level model. The skipped level instrumentation achieved similar rotatory stability as the long multilevel instrumentation. Conclusions: Skipping instrumentation levels without giving up instrumentation length reduced stresses in the ossified tissue within the range of the instrumentation and did not decrease the stability in a FEM of a cervicothoracic fracture related to AS. Considering the risks associated with every additional screw placed, the skipped level instrumentation has advantages regarding patient safety.

The impact velocity angle determined by the normal and tangential velocity has been shown to be an important description of head impact conditions but can vary in real-world accidents. The objectiv ...

Nowadays crash helmets are tested by dropping a free or unrestrained headform in Europe but a guided or restrained headform in the United States. It remains unclear whether the free fall and the guided fall produce similar impact kinematics that cause head injury. A ?nite element helmet model is developed and compared with experimental tests. The resulting head kinematics from virtual tests are input for a ?nite element head model to compute the brain tissue strain. The guided fall produces higher peak force and linear acceleration than the free fall. Eccentric impact in the free fall test induces angular head motion which directs some of the impact energy into rotational kinetic energy. Consequently, the brain tissue strain in the free fall test is up to 6.3 times more than that in the guided fall. This study recommends a supplemental procedure that records angular head motion in the free fall test.

Pedestrian protection has historically not been prioritized in the vehicle safety development, but represents a large portion of the severe and deadly injuries in vehicle accidents. One of the most ...

The present study proposes a bicycle helmet evaluation under oblique impact based on a coupled experimental versus numerical test method using two separate brain FE models. For each of the 17 helme ...

There is some controversy regarding the effectiveness of helmets in preventing head injuries among cyclists. Epidemiological, experimental and computer simulation studies have suggested that helmets do indeed have a protective effect, whereas other studies based on epidemiological data have argued that there is no evidence that the helmet protects the brain. The objective of this study was to evaluate the protective effect of a helmet in single bicycle accident reconstructions using detailed finite element simulations. Strain in the brain tissue, which is associated with brain injuries, was reduced by up to 43% for the accident cases studied when a helmet was included. This resulted in a reduction of the risk of concussion of up to 54%. The stress to the skull bone went from fracture level of 80 MPa down to 13-16 MPa when a helmet was included and the skull fracture risk was reduced by up to 98% based on linear acceleration. Even with a 10% increased riding velocity for the helmeted impacts, to take into account possible increased risk taking, the risk of concussion was still reduced by up to 46% when compared with the unhelmeted impacts with original velocity. The results of this study show that the brain injury risk and risk of skull fracture could have been reduced in these three cases if a helmet had been worn.

At present, Finite Element (FE) analyses are often used as a tool to better understand the mechanisms of head injury. Previously, these models have been compared to cadaver experiments, with the next step under development being accident reconstructions. Thus far, the main focus has been on deriving an injury threshold and little effort has been put into correlating the documented injury location with the response displayed by the FE model. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to introduce a novel image correlation method that compares the response of the FE model with medical images. The injuries shown on the medical images were compared to the strain pattern in the FE model and evaluated by two indices; the Overlap Index (OI) and the Location Index (LI). As the name suggests, OI measures the area which indicates both injury in the medical images and high strain values in the FE images. LI evaluates the difference in center of mass in the medical and FE images. A perfect match would give an OI and LI equal to 1. This method was applied to three bicycle accident reconstructions. The reconstructions gave an average OI between 0.01 and 0.19 for the three cases and between 0.39 and 0.88 for LI. Performing injury reconstructions are a challenge as the information from the accidents often is uncertain. The suggested method evaluates the response in an objective way which can be used in future injury reconstruction studies.

Traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) are a major health and socioeconomic problem throughout the world, with an estimated 10 million deaths and instances of hospitalization annually. Numerical methods such as finite element (FE) methods can be used to study head injuries and optimize the protection, which can lead to a decrease in the number of injuries. The FE head models were initially evaluated for biofidelity by comparing with donated corpses experiments. However, there are some limitations in experiments of corpses, including material degradation after death. One feasible alternative to evaluating head models with living human tissue is to use reconstruction of real accidents. However, the process of accident reconstruction entails some uncertainties since it is not a controlled experiment. Therefore, a deeper understanding of the accident reconstruction process is needed in order to be able to improve the FE human models. Thus, the aim of this thesis was to evaluate and further develop more advanced strategies for accident reconstructions involving head injuries.A FE head model was used to study head injuries in accidents. Existing bicycle accident data was used, as were hypothetical accident situations for cyclists and pedestrians. A FE bicycle helmet model having different designs was developed to study the protective effect.An objective method was developed based on the Overlap Index (OI) and Location Index (LI) to facilitate the comparison of FE model responses with injuries visible in medical images. Three bicycle accident reconstructions were performed and the proposed method evaluated. The method showed to have potential to be an objective method to compare FE model response with medical images and could be a step towards improving the evaluation of results from injury reconstructions.The simulations demonstrated the protective effect of a bicycle helmet. A decrease was seen in the injurious effect on both the brain tissue and the skull. However, the results also showed that the brain tissue strain could be further decreased by modifying the helmet design.Two different numerical pedestrian models were compared to evaluate whether the more time-efficient rigid body model could be used, instead of a FE pedestrian model, to roughly determine the initial conditions as an accident reconstruction involves some uncertainties. The difference, in terms of the head impact location, rotation and velocity, attributable to the two models was in the same range as differences due to uncertainties in some of the initial parameters, such as vehicle impact velocity.