ArticleChinese journal of traumatology = Zhonghua chuang shang za zhi2024
Investigation on vehicle occupant dummy applicability for under-foot impact loading conditions.
Article in Chinese journal of traumatology = Zhonghua chuang shang za zhi, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeUnder-foot impact loadings can cause serious lower limb injuries in many activities, such as automobile collisions and underbody explosions to military vehicles. The present study aims to compare the biomechanical responses of the mainstream vehicle occupant dummies with the human body lower limb model and analyze their robustness and applicability for assessing lower limb injury risk in under-foot impact loading environments.
methodsThe Hybrid III model, the test device for human occupant restraint (THOR) model, and a hybrid human body model with the human active lower limb model were adopted for under-foot impact analysis regarding different impact velocities and initial lower limb postures.
resultsThe results show that the 2 dummy models have larger peak tibial axial force and higher sensitivity to the impact velocities and initial postures than the human lower limb model. In particular, the Hybrid III dummy model presented extremely larger peak tibial axial forces than the human lower limb model. In the case of minimal difference in tibial axial force, Hybrid III's tibial axial force (7.5 KN) is still 312.5% that of human active lower limb's (2.4 KN). Even with closer peak tibial axial force values, the biomechanical response curve shapes of the THOR model show significant differences from the human lower limb model.
conclusionBased on the present results, the Hybrid III dummy cannot be used to evaluate the lower limb injury risk in under-foot loading environments. In contrast, potential improvement in ankle biofidelity and related soft tissues of the THOR dummy can be implemented in the future for better applicability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.