Evaluation of finite element human body models for use in a standardized protocol for pedestrian safety assessment

Objective: Finite element human body models (HBMs) must be certified for use within the EuroNCAP pedestrian safety assessment protocol. We demonstrate that the Global Human Body Model Consortium (GHBMC) simplified pedestrian series of HBMs meet all criteria set forth in Technical Bulletin (TB) 024 (v 1.1 Jan. 2019) for model certification. We further explore variation in head contact time (HIT) and location by HBM size and impact speed across 48 full body impact simulations.Methods: The EuroNCAP Pedestrian Protocol (v. 8.5, Oct. 2018) assesses the overall safety of adult and child pedestrians by outlining a variety of physical tests and finite element simulations using HBMs. These tests are designed to assess the efficacy of vehicle safety technology such as active bonnets. The 50th percentile male simplified pedestrian model (M50-PS, H:175 cm, W:74.5 kg), six-year-old (6YO-PS, H:117 cm, W:23.4 kg), 5th percentile female (F05-PS, H:150 cm, W:50.7 kg), and 95th percentile male (M95-PS, H:190 cm, W:102 kg) were simulated through the suite of cases totaling 48 simulations (12 each). The process gathers three kinematic trajectories and contact force data from designated anatomical locations. The impacting vehicles include a family car (FCR), multi-purpose vehicle (MPV), roadster (RDS), and sports utility vehicle (SUV), all provided by TU Graz, Vehicle Safety Institute as part of the Coherent Project, each simulated at 30 kph, 40 kph, and 50 kph. Each simulation underwent a 23-point pre-simulation check and post-simulation model response comparison. The posture of all HBMs met criteria consisting of 15 measures. All simulations were conducted in LS-Dyna R. 7.1.2.Results and Conclusions: All simulations normal terminated. For each of the simulations, sagittal plane coordinate histories of the center of the head, 12th thoracic vertebrae, and center of acetabulum were compared with standard corridors and did not exceed the tolerance of 50 mm deviation. Head contact time was also compared with the reference values and did not exceed the tolerance interval of +3.5% and -7%. Comparison of contact forces was required for monitoring purposes only. The head contact time of the models for each simulation was recorded and compared by model size, impact speed, and vehicle geometry. Head contact times varied by roughly 3-fold, were lowest for the child model, and showed the greatest sensitivity for the tallest stature model (M95-PS). As stated in the certification process, other body sizes within a model family qualify for certification if the 50th percentile male model passes, provided that model sizes meet the required posture.