Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Computational Seated Pedestrian Impact Design of Experiments with Ultralight Wheelchair

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Annals of Biomedical Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Pedestrians who use wheelchairs (seated pedestrians) report higher mortality rates than standing pedestrians in vehicle-to-pedestrian collisions but the cause of this mortality is poorly understood. This study investigated the cause of seated pedestrian serious injuries (AIS 3+) and the effect of various pre-collision variables using finite element (FE) simulations. An ultralight manual wheelchair model was developed and tested to meet ISO standards. The GHBMC 50th percentile male simplified occupant model and EuroNCAP family car (FCR) and sports utility vehicle (SUV) were used to simulate vehicle collisions. A full factorial design of experiments (n = 54) was run to explore the effect of pedestrian position relative to the vehicle bumper, pedestrian arm posture, and pedestrian orientation angle relative to the vehicle. The largest average injury risks were at the head (FCR: 0.48 SUV: 0.79) and brain (FCR: 0.42 SUV: 0.50). The abdomen (FCR: 0.20 SUV: 0.21), neck (FCR: 0.08 SUV: 0.14), and pelvis (FCR: 0.02 SUV: 0.02) reported smaller risks. 50/54 impacts reported no thorax injury risk, but 3 SUV impacts reported risks ≥ 0.99. Arm (gait) posture and pedestrian orientation angle had larger effects on most injury risks. The most dangerous arm posture examined was when the hand was off the wheelchair handrail after wheel propulsion and the two more dangerous orientations were when the pedestrian faced 90° and 110° away from the vehicle. Pedestrian position relative to the vehicle bumper played little role in injury outcomes. The findings of this study may inform future seated pedestrian safety testing procedures to narrow down the most concerning impact scenarios and design impact tests around them.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

AIS:

Abbreviated Injury Scale

BrIC:

Brain injury criteria

CAD:

Computer aided drawing

DOE:

Design of experiments

FCR:

Family car/roadster

FE:

Finite element

GHBMC:

Global Human Body Models Consortium

HIC:

Head injury criteria

HIT:

Head impact time

ISO:

International standards organization

M50-OS:

Male 50th percentile simplified occupant

Nij:

Neck injury criteria

PMHS:

Postmortem human surrogate

SUV:

Sports utility vehicle

References

  1. Boninger, M., A. Souza, R. Cooper, A. Fitzgerald, A. Koontz, and B. Fay. Propulsion patterns and pushrim biomechanics in manual wheelchair propulsion. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil.. 83:718–723, 2002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Chan, Y. Biostatistics 104: correlational analysis. Singapore Med. J. 44:614–619, 2003.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Chen H., L. Fu and H. Zheng. A comparative study between China and IHRA for the vehicle-pedestrian impact. SAE Int. J. Passenger Cars Mech. Syst. 2: 1108–1115, 2009.

  4. Chen H., D. Poulard, J. Crandall and M. Panzer. Pedestrian response with different initial positions during impact with a mid-sized sedan. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles. Gothenburg, Sweden, 2015.

  5. Cooper, R., M. Boninger, and A. Rentschler. Evaluation of selected ultralight manual wheelchairs using ANSI/RESNA standards. Archiv. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 80:462–467, 1999.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Cooper, R., R. Cooper, and M. Boninger. Trends and issues in wheelchair technologies. Assist. Technol. 20:61–72, 2008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Eppinger R., E. Sun, F. Bandak, M. Haffner, N. Khaewpong, M. Maltese, S. Kuppa, T. Nguyen, E. Takhounts, R. Tannous, A. Zhang and R. Saul. Development of Improved Injury Criteria for the Assessment of Advanced Automotive Restraint Systems—II, edited by N. H. T. S. Administration, 1999.

  8. Eppinger R., E. Sun, S. Kuppa and R. Saul. Supplement: Development of Improved Injury Criteria for the Assessment of Advanced Automotive Restraint Systems—II, edited by D. o. T. N. H. T. S. Administration, 2000.

  9. EURONCAP. Pedestrian Testing Protocol v8.5. https://cdn.euroncap.com/media/41769/euro-ncap-pedestrian-testing-protocol-v85.201811091256001913.pdf: Euro NCAP, 2019.

  10. Fredriksson, R., J. Shin, and C. Untaroiu. Potential of pedestrian protection systems—a parameter study using finite element models of pedestrian dummy and generic passenger vehicles. Traffic Inj. Prev. 12:398–411, 2011.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Grab-CAD. Grab-CAD: TI Lite ZRA Frame Update 1. 2022.

  12. Grindle D., A. Balubaid and C. Untaroiu. Investigation of traffic accidents involving seated pedestrians using a finite element simulation-based approach. Comput. Methods. Biomech. Biomed. Eng. 1–14, 2022.

  13. Grindle D., W. Pak, B. Guyleyupoglu, B. Koya, S. Gayzik, E. Song and C. Untaroiu. A detailed finite element model of a mid-sized male for the investigation of traffic pedestrian accidents. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. H 2020.

  14. Klug, C., F. Feist, M. Raffler, W. Sinz, P. Petit, J. Ellway and M. van Ratingen. Development of a procedure to compare kinematics of human body models for pedestrian simulations. In: IRCOBI. Antwerp, Belgium, 2017.

  15. Kraemer, J., and C. Benton. Disparities in road crash mortality among pedestrians using wheelchairs in the USA: results of a capture–recapture analysis. BMJ Open.5:e008396, 2015.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Kuppa, S. Injury Criteria for Side Impact Dummies, edited by N. H. T. S. Administration, 2004.

  17. Kwarciak, A., S. Sisto, M. Yarossi, R. Price, E. Komaroff, and M. Boninger. Redefining the manual wheelchair stroke cycle: identification and impact of nonpropulsive pushrim contact. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 90:20–26, 2009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Liu, H., R. Cooper, J. Pearlman, R. Cooper, and S. Connor. Evaluation of titanium ultralight manual wheelchairs using ANSI/RESNA standards. J. Rehabil. Res. Dev. 45:1251–1267, 2008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. MatWeb. Material property data. Automation Creations Inc., 2021.

  20. Meyer, F., J. Humm, N. Yoganandan, A. Leszczynski, N. Bourdet, C. Deck, and R. Willinger. Development of a detailed human neck finite element model and injury risk curves under lateral impact. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater.116:104318, 2021.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Mizuno Y. Summary of IHRA pedestrian safety WG activities (2005) proposed test methods to evaluate pedestrian protection afforded by passenger cars. In: Proceedings of 19th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles. Washington, DC, 2005.

  22. Organization I. S. Wheelchairs. In: Part 8: Requirements and Test Methods for Static, Impact and Fatigue Strengths, 1998.

  23. Pak W., D. Grindle and C. Untaroiu. The influence of gait stance and vehicle type on pedestrian kinematics and injury risk. J. Biomech. Eng. 143, 2021.

  24. Pak, W., Y. Meng, J. Schap, B. Koya, S.F. Gayzik, and C.D. Untaroiu. Finite element model of a high-stature male pedestrian for simulating car-to-pedestrian collisions. Int. J. Automot. Technol. 20:445–453, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12239-019-0042-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Pak, W., Y. Meng, J. Schap, B. Koya, S.F. Gayzik, and C.D. Untaroiu. Development and validation of a finite element model of a small female pedestrian. Comput. Methods Biomech. Biomed. Eng. 23(16):1336–1346, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/10255842.2020.1801652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Sahandifar, P., C. Makoundou, M. Fahlstedt, C. Sangiorgi, K. Johansson, V. Wallqvist, and S. Kleiven. A rubberized impact absorbing pavement can reduce the head injury risk in vulnerable road users: a bicycle and a pedestrian accident case study. Traffic Inj. Prev. 23:315–320, 2022.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Schwartz, D., B. Guleyupoglu, B. Koya, J. Stitzel, and S. Gayzik. Development of a computationally efficient full human body finite element model. Traffic Inj. Prev. 16(Suppl 1):S49-56, 2015.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Singh H., V. Ganesan, J. Davies, M. Paramasuwom and L. Gradischnig. Vehicle Interior and Restraints Modeling Development of Full Vehicle Finite Element Model Including Vehicle Interior and Occupant Restraints Systems for Occupant Safety Analysis Using THOR Dummies, edited by U. S. D. o. T. N. H. T. S. Administration, 2018.

  29. Steinmetz, E. Americans with Disabilities:2002. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Takhounts, E., M. Craig, K. Moorhouse, J. McFadden, and V. Hasija. Development of brain injury criteria (Br IC). Stapp Car Crash J. 57:243–266, 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Toolbox. The Engineering Toolbox. In: Friction—Friction Coefficients and Calculator, 2021.

  32. Untaroiu C.D., W. Pak, Y. Meng, J. Schap, B. Koya, and S.F. Gayzik. A finite element model of a midsize male for simulating pedestrian accidents. J. Biomech. Eng. 140(1):011003, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4037854.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. van Beek, A., and T. U. Delft. Advanced Engineering Design: Lifetime Performance and Reliability. Delft: TU Delft, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Viano, D., I. Lau, C. Asbury, A. King, and P. Begeman. Biomechanics of the human chest, abdomen, and pelvis in lateral impact. Accid. Anal. Prev. 21:553–574, 1989.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Zheng, X., Y. Qi, H. Zhou, H. Kang, Y. Tong, and L. Bi. Bone mineral density at the distal femur and proximal tibia and related factors during the first year of spinal cord injury. Int. J. Gen. Med. 14:1121–1129, 2021.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the Global Human Body Models Consortium, LLC (GHBMC) for providing their M50-OS model used in this study. All findings and views reported in this manuscript are based on the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily represent the consensus or view of the GHBMC. We would also like to thank the Advanced Research Computing organization at Virginia Tech for providing us event logs from their research computing cluster.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biomedical Engineering and Mechanics, Center for Injury Biomechanics, Virginia Tech, Collegiate Square Innovation Place (0151), 460 Turner St NW, Suite 304, Blacksburg, VA, 24060-3325, USA

    Daniel Grindle & Costin Untaroiu

Authors
  1. Daniel Grindle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Costin Untaroiu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Costin Untaroiu.

Additional information

Associate Editor Stefan M. Duma oversaw the review of this article.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

See Fig. 8 and Tables 3, 4, 5, 6.

Figure 8
figure 8

ISO tests on wheelchair model (a) lateral tipping test (b) handrail impact test (c) backrest impact test (d) castor impact test.

Full size image
Table 3 Seated pedestrian regional injury risks (AIS3 +) and HIT outcomes.
Full size table
Table 4 Linear correlation coefficients (r) between pre-impact variables and injury risks.
Full size table
Table 5 Quadratic correlation coefficients (r) between pre-impact variables and injury risks.
Full size table
Table 6 Seated pedestrian injury risk t-test results (p ≤ 0.05). Bold denotes statistically significant results.
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Grindle, D., Untaroiu, C. Computational Seated Pedestrian Impact Design of Experiments with Ultralight Wheelchair. Ann Biomed Eng 51, 1523–1534 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-023-03157-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-023-03157-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation