Sports Engineering

, Volume 21, Issue 4, pp 267–276 | Cite as

Protection from motorcycle neck–braces using FE modelling

  • Frank MeyerEmail author
  • Caroline Deck
  • Rémy Willinger
Original Article


In road and off-road motorcycle accidents, neck injury often has a catastrophic outcome if not fatal. To protect motorcyclists’ necks, a number of neck–braces are available on the market. The level of protection from these systems is not well reported because of the absence of an accepted neck-loading evaluation standard. The present study proposed a numerical evaluation for the neck–brace to protect the neck. Twenty-four impacts with and without the brace were simulated by changing impact angles and initial impact velocities. For each simulation, the vertical force, the extension moment, and the normalized neck injury criterion were calculated. Results showed that the risk of AIS 3 + neck injury was reduced by the neck–brace on average by 39 and 13% at 5.5 and 6.5 m/s, respectively, when the normalized neck injury criterion was considered; however, for impact velocities, above 6.5 m/s, the neck–brace was not as efficient in reducing overall neck injury risk.


Head–neck finite-element model Neck–brace Neck injury risk Motorcycle 


  1. 1.
    Hsu TP, Ahmad FMS, Nguyen XD (2008) A comparison study on motorcycle traffic development in some Asian countries—case of Taiwan. Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Study, Malaysia and Vietnam, pp 1–53Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    European Road Safety Observatory (2014) Annual Statistical ReportGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ooi SS, Wong SS, Yeap JS, Umar R (2011) Relationship between cervical spine injury and helmet use in motorcycle road crashes. Asia Pac J Public Health 23(4):608–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    De Jager M, Sauren A, Thunnissen J, Wismans J (1996) A global and a detailed mathematical model for head-neck dynamics. In: Proceeding of stapp car crash conference, paper 962430, pp 269–281Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Astori P, Raballo M, (1998) Multi-body numerical model of the human neck. In: Proceeding international journal of crash conference, pp 63––72Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nitsche S, Krabbel G, Appel H, Haug E (1996) Validation of a finite-element-model of the human neck. In: Proceeding of IRCOBI conferenceGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Happee R, Hoofman M, Van den Kroonenberger AJ, Morsink P, Wisman J (1998) A mathematical human body model for frontal and rearward seated automotive impact loading. In: Proceeding of stapp car crash conference, pp 75–88 paper 983150Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kobayashi S, Kitagawa Y (2003) Development of a finite element model of the human neck for whiplash simulation. In: Proceedings of the 18th international technical conference on the enhanced safety of vehicles, NagoyaGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Deng Y, Fu J (2002) Simulation and identification of the neck muscle activities during head and neck flexion whiplash. In: SAE technical paper 2002-01-0017Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ono K, Ejima S, Sato F, Pramudita JA, Kaneoka K, Ujihashi S (2009) Evaluation criteria for the reduction of minor neck injuries during rear-end impacts based on human volunteer experiments and accident reconstruction using human FE model simulations. In: Proceeding of IRCOBI conference 2009, YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Meyer F, Bourdet N, Deck C, Willinger R, Raul JS (2004) Human neck finite element model development and validation against original experimental data. In: Proceeding of stapp car crash conference paper 2004-22-0008, pp 177–206Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Camacho DL, Nightingale RW, Robinette JJ, Vanguri SK, Coates DJ, Myers BS (1997) Experimental flexibility measurements for the development of a computational head-neck model validated for near-vertex head impact. In: Proceeding of stapp car crash conference, paper 973345, pp 473–486Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Halldin PH, Brolin K, Kleiven S, Holst HV, Jakobsson, L, Palmertz C (2000) Investigation of conditions that affect neck compression-flexion injuries using numerical techniques. In: Proceeding of stapp car crash conference, paper 2000-01-sc10Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yang K, Zhu F, Luan F, Zhao L, Begeman P (1998) Development of a finite element model of the human neck. In: Proceeding of stapp car crash conference, paper 983157, pp 195–205Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhang QH, Teo EC, Wan HN (2005) Development and validation of a C0–C7 FE complex for biomechanical study. J Biomech Eng 127(5):729–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    White NA, Moreno DP, Gayzik FS, Stitzel JD (2015) Cross-sectional neck response of a total human body FE model during simulated frontal and side automobile impacts. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng 18(3):293–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    McElhaney J, Paver J, McCrackin H, Maxwell M (1983) Cervical spine compression responses. In: Proceeding of stapp car crash conference, paper 831615, pp 163–177Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Alem N, Nusholtz G, Melvin J (1984) Head and neck response to axial impacts. In: Proceeding of stapp car crash conference, paper 841667, pp 275–288Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nightingale R, Myers B, McElhaney J, Doherty B Richardson W (1991) The influence of end condition on human cervical spine injury mechanisms. In: Proceeding of stapp car crash conference, paper 912915, pp 391–399Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nightingale R, McElhaney J, Camacho L, Kleinberger M, Winkelstein B, Myers B (1997) The dynamic responses of the cervical spine: buckling, end condition, and tolerance in compressive impacts. In: Proceeding of stapp car crash conference, paper 973344, pp 451–471Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pintar F, Yoganandan N, Voo L, Cusick J, Maiman D, Sances A (1995) Dynamic characteristics of the human cervical spine. In: Proceeding of stapp car crash conference, paper 952722, pp 195–202Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pintar F, Voo L, Yoganandan N, Maiman D (1998) Mechanisms of hyperflexion cervical spine injury. In: Ircobi Conf, pp 249–260Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Boström O, Svensson M, Aldman B, Hansson H, Håland Y, Lövsund P, Seeman T, Suneson A, Säljö A, Örtengren T (1996) A new neck injury criterion candidate based on injury findings in the cervical spinal ganglia after experimental neck extension trauma. In: Proceeding of IRCOBI conference, pp 123–136Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schmitt KU, Muser M, Walz F, Niederer P (2002) Nkm—a proposal for a neck protection criterion for low speed rearend impacts. Traffic Injury Prevent 3(2):117–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sun J, Rojas A, Bertrand P, Petit Y, Kraenzler R, Arnoux PJ (2012) Investigation of motorcyclist cervical spine trauma using HUMOS model. Traff Inj Prev 13(5):519–528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tinard V, Deck C, Bourdet N, Willinger R (2011) Motorcyclist helmet composite outer shell characterization and modeling. Mater Des 32(5):3112–3119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Meyer F, Bourdet N, Gunzel K, Willinger R (2013) Development and validation of a coupled head-neck FEM—application to whiplash injury criteria investigation. Int J Crashworthiness 18(1):40–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Deck C, Willinger R (2008) Improved head injury criteria based on head FE model. Int J Crashworthiness 13(6):667–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ewing C, Thomas D, Beeler G, Patrick L, Gillis D (1969) Living human dynamic response to -Gx impact acceleration II—Accelerations measured on the head and neck. In: Proceeding of stapp car crash conference paper 690817, pp 400–415Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ewing C, Thomas D, Lustick L, Muzzy W, Willems G, Majewski P (1977) Dynamic response of the human head and neck to +Gy impact acceleration. In: Proceeding of stapp car crash conference, paper 770928, pp 549–586Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bourdet N, Willinger R (2005) Human neck characterization under thoracic vibration—inter-individual and gender influence. In: Proceeding international conference on the biomechanics of impacts, pp 257–267Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gunzel K, Meyer F, Bourdet N, Willinger R (2009) Multi-directional modal analysis of the head-neck system and model evaluation. In: Proceeding of IRCOBI conference, pp 419–422Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tinard V, Deck C, Willinger R (2012) Modelling and validation of motorcyclist helmet with composite shell. Int J Crashworthiness 17(2):209–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    NHTSA (2008) Title 49 code of federal regulations (CFR) Part 571 section 208, occupant crash protection. Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Post A, Clark JM, Robertson DGE, Hoshizaki TB, Gilchrist MD (2017) The effect of acceleration signal processing for head impact numeric simulations. Sports Eng 20(2):111–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Sports Engineering Association 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Strasbourg University - ICUBE UMR 7357 CNRSStrasbourgFrance

Personalised recommendations