Advertisement

Development of Headform Impactor Finite Element Model Considering the Hyperelastic and Viscoelastic Responses of Rubber

  • Choong-Ryung Lee
  • Hyun-Yong Jeong
Article

Abstract

To evaluate and analyze the pedestrian injury risk of automobiles, the finite element models of headform impactors are used. In this study, a modeling method that can accurately estimate the peak of the headform impactor impact pulse and head injury criterion (HIC) was developed. The headform impactor skin has the characteristics of both hyperelasticity and viscoelasticity. Therefore, compression tests, stress relaxation tests, and rheometer tests were conducted, and the hyperelastic and viscoelastic models were developed. The models were combined and used in the finite element analysis. The new headform impactor model was verified to accurately estimate the peak of impact pulse and HIC at the certification test of the headform impactor.

Key words

HIC (Head Injury Criteria) Headform impactor Rubber modeling Hyperelasticity Viscoelasticity 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. ASTM (2012). ASTM D-575 Standard Test Methods for Rubber Properties in Compression.Google Scholar
  2. ASTM (2014). ASTM 6147-97 Test Method for Vulcanized Rubber and Thermoplastic Elastomer–Determination of Force Decay (Stress Relaxation) in Compression.Google Scholar
  3. Belingardi, G., Chiandussi, G. and Gaviglio, I. (2005). Development and Validation of a New Finite Element Model of Human Head. 19th Int. Technical Conf. Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV). Paper Number 05-0441.Google Scholar
  4. Bower, A. F. (2009). Applied Mechanics of Solids. CRC Press. Roca Raton, Florida, USA.Google Scholar
  5. Brinson, H. F. and Brinson, L. C. (2015). Polymer Engineering Science and Viscoelasticity. Springer. New York, USA.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Choi, J., Park, B. and Kim, J. (2012). Development and validation of FE adult headform impactor for pedestrian protection. Trans. Korean Society of Automotive Engineers 20, 2, 64–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Christensen, R. M. (1971). Theory of Viscoelasticity: An Introduction. Academic Press, New York. New York, USA.Google Scholar
  8. Dassault Systems (2013). ABAQUS 6.13. ABAQUS User’s Manual.Google Scholar
  9. Du Bois, P. A., Kolling, S., Koesters, M. and Frank, T. (2006). Material behaviour of polymers under impact loading. Int. J. Impact Engineering 32, 5, 725–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. EEVC WG 17 (2002). Improved Test Methods to Evaluate Pedestrian Protection Affortded By Passenger Cars. EEVC Working Group 17 Report.Google Scholar
  11. Frank, T., Kurz, A., Pitzer, M. and Sollner, M. (2003). Development and validation of numerical pedestrian impactor models. 4th European LS-DYNA Users Conf. Google Scholar
  12. Gilchrist, M. D. (2003). Modelling and accident reconstruction of head impact injuries. Key Engineering Materials, 245-246, 417–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hahmoudi, H. (2013). Modeling of Bonnet in LS-DYNA for Pedestrian Research. M. S. Thesis. Chalmers University of Technology. Gothenburg, Sweden.Google Scholar
  14. Huanga, S. and Yanga, J. (2010). Optimization of a reversible hood for protecting a pedestrian’s head during car collisions. Accident Analysisand Prevention 42, 4, 1136–1143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Humanetics (2016). http://www.humaneticsatd.com/crashtest-dummies/pedestrian/pedestrian-headformsGoogle Scholar
  16. Jarlath, M. H. (2007). Ultrasound Technique for the Dynamic Mechanical Analysis (DMA) of Polymers. Ph. D. Dissertation. Technische University Berlin. Berlin, Germany.Google Scholar
  17. Kamalakkannan, S., Guenther, D., Wiechel, J. and Stammen, J. (2005). MADYMO modeling of the IHRA head-form impactor. SAE Paper No. 2005-01-2740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Li, R. (2000). Time-temperature superposition method for glass transition temperature of plastic materials. Materials Science and Engineering: A 278, 1–2, 36-45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. LSTC Corporation (2013). LS-DYNA Keyword User’s Manual, Version 971.Google Scholar
  20. Masoumi, A., Shojaeefard, M. H. and Najibi, A. (2011). Comparison of steel, aluminum and composite bonnet in terms of pedestrian head impact. Safety Science 49, 10, 1371–1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Naci, H., Chisholm, D. and Baker, T. D. (2009). Distribution of Road Traffic Deaths by Road User Group: A Global Comparison. http://www.who.int/choice/ publications/RTI%20Distribution%20Article.pdfGoogle Scholar
  22. Nobuhiro, I. (2003). Computational simulation for head impact on vehicle hoods using the precise finite element model. Proc. 18th Int. Technical Conf. Enhanced Safety of Vehicles, Nagoya, Japan, 19–22.Google Scholar
  23. Ommaya, A. K., Thibault, L. and Bandak, F. A. (1994). Mechanisms of impact head injury. Int. J. Impact Engineering 15, 4, 535–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Qi, L., Yong, X. and Qing, Z. (2009). Friction effects in pedestrian headform impacts with engine hoods. Tsinghua Science and Technology 14, 5, 631–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Qing, Z., Huiling, D. and Fanzhong, K. (2004). Recent progress in pedestrian impact protection. Proc. China Int. Conf. Automotive Safety Technology, SAE-China, Beijing, China.Google Scholar
  26. Samaka, H. and Tarlochan, F. (2013). Finite Element (FE) human head models/literature review. Int. J. Scientific & Technology Research 2, 7, 17–31.Google Scholar
  27. Sulzer, J., Kamalakkannan, S. B., Wiechel, J. and Guenther, D. (2006). Simplified MADYMO model of the IHRA head-form impactor. SAE Paper No. 2006-01-2349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Teng, T. L. and Nguyen, T. H. (2008). Development and validation of FE models of impactor for pedestrian testing. J. Mechanical Science and Technology 22, 9, 1660–1667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Untaroiu, C., Shin, J., Crandal, J. and Crino, S. (2006). Development and validation of headform impactor finite element model with application to vehicle hood design for pedestrian protection. 9th Int. LS-DYNA Users Conf. Google Scholar
  30. UNECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe) (2007). Final Report on the Development of a Global Technical Regulation Concerning Pedestrian Protection: Proposal for a Draft Global Technical Regulation on Pedestrian Safety.Google Scholar
  31. UNECE (The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe) (2009). Global Technical Regulation No. 9: PEDESTRIAN SAFETY.Google Scholar
  32. Wason, W. L. and Smith, O. J. (2000). Injury surveillance in Victoria, Australia: Developing comprehensive injury incidence estimates. Accident Analysis & Prevention 32, 2, 277–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Williams, M. L., Landel, R. F. and Ferry, J. D. (1995). The temperature dependence of relaxation mechanisms in amorphous polymers and other glass-forming liquids. J. American Chemical Society 77, 14, 3701–3707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ye, H., Zhu, M., Hu, P. and Lu, S. (2012). FE modeling method for a headform used in pedestrian protection simulations. Int. J. Automotive Technology 13, 4, 607–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Korean Society of Automotive Engineers and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Advanced Safety Engineering TeamHyundai Mobis R&D CenterGyeonggiKorea
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical EngineeringSogang UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations