During vehicle-pedestrian impact accidents, thorax injury is the second most fatal injury after head injury, and it is very important to conduct research on the mechanism and protection of pedestrian thorax injury. In this paper, the impact simulation models between vehicle model and THUMS pedestrian human body model were established. Chestbands were set in the human body model and four different methods were applied to measure chest compression. The thorax deflection and rib strain were studied during collisions with vehicles of different hood heights and hood angle, and correlation analysis was conducted between thorax deflection and rib strain. The results of different thorax deflection measurement methods was compared. The results indicate that there are significant differences in deformation and injury risk of the pedestrian thorax during collisions between vehicles with different hood heights and hood angle. For sedans, the risk of upper chest injury is higher; for SUVs, the risk of lower chest injury is higher. As the hood angle increases, chest injury also increases. The thorax deflection measurement methods 2–4 show a significant correlation between deflection and rib strain, which can better reflect the risk of chest injury.
WHO. Global status report on road safety 2018. WHO, 2018.
2.
OhlinMStrandrothJTingvallC.The combined effect of vehicle frontal design, speed reduction, autonomous emergency braking and helmet use in reducing real life bicycle injuries. Saf Sci2017; 92: 338–344.
3.
FengCDuanAQiuJ, et al. Investigation of head injuries suffered by pedestrians in traffic accidents via videos. Int J Crashworthiness2020; 25(6): 680–688.
4.
ECE. Uniform provisions concerning the approval of motor vehicles with regard to their pedestrian safety performance. United Nations, 2018.
5.
Euro-NCAP. European New Car Assessment Programme: pedestrian testing protocol. Euro-NCAP, 2018.
6.
GTR. United Nations global technical regulation on pedestrian safety. 2019.
7.
C-NCAP. C-NCAP management regulation. 2021.
8.
J-NCAP. Pedestrian head protection performance test procedure. 2018.
9.
J-NCAP. Pedestrian leg protection performance test procedure. 2018.
10.
LvXXiaoZFangJ, et al. On safety design of vehicle for protection of vulnerable road users: a review. Thin-Walled Struct2023; 182: 109990.
11.
LiuXYangJLövsundP.A study of influences of vehicle speed and front structure on pedestrian impact responses using mathematical models. Traffic Inj Prev2002; 3(1): 31–42.
12.
OtteDHaasperC.Technical parameters and mechanisms for the injury risk of the knee joint of vulnerable road users impacted by cars in road traffic accidents. In: International Research Council on the biomechanics of injury (IRCOBI) conference, Prague, Czech Republic, 4–16 September 2005, pp. 281–297.
13.
PalCOkabeTVimalathithanK, et al. Effect of vehicle’s front end profile on pedestrian’s lower extremity injury pattern in real world and verification by large male FE human model. SAE technical paper 2015-01-1467, 2015.
14.
LiGLyonsMWangB, et al. The influence of passenger car front shape on pedestrian injury risk observed from German in-depth accident data. Accid Anal Prev2017; 101: 11–21.
15.
ZanettiEMFranceschiniGAudeninoAL.Lower leg injury in relation to vehicle front end. Traffic Inj Prev2014; 15(4): 395–401.
16.
GlassonEMaistreVLaurentC.Car front end module structure development regarding pedestrian protection and other mechanical constraints. SAE technical paper 2001-01-0761, 2001.
17.
OtubushinAGreenJ.An analytical assessment of pedestrian head impact protection. In: The 16th international technical conference on the enhanced safety of vehicles (ESV), Windsor, ON, Canada, 31 May–4 June 1998, pp. 2331–2343. Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic SafetyAdministration (NHTSA).
18.
HuangJXiaYNieB, et al. Estimation of energy-absorption space for pedestrian leg protection of car front-end structures. Int J Veh Des2012; 60(1–2): 20–38.
19.
WankeTThompsonGKerkelingC.Pedestrian measures for the Opel Zafira II. In: The 19th international technical conference on the enhanced safety of vehicles (ESV), Washington, DC, USA, 6–9 June 2005, Paper no. 05-0237.
20.
ShojaeefardMHNajibiAAhmadabadiMR.Pedestrian safety investigation of the new inner structure of the hood to mitigate the impact injury of the head. Thin-Walled Struct2014; 77: 77–85.
21.
PineckiCZeitouniR.Technical solutions for enhancing the pedestrian protection. In: The 20th international technical conference on the enhanced safety of vehicles conference (ESV), Lyon, France, 18–21 June 2007. Paper no. 07-0307.
22.
TakahashiYIkedaMAsanumaH, et al. Full-scale validation of a generic buck for pedestrian impact simulation. In: Proceedings of IRCOBI conference, Berlin, Germany, 10–12 September 2014.
23.
LiGOtteDYangJ, et al. Pedestrian injury trends evaluated by comparison of the PCDS and GIDAS databases. In: Proceedings of IRCOBI conference, Seoul, South Korea, 14–16 September 2016.
24.
ShangSTeelingDMassonC, et al. Pedestrian head injuries in ground contact: a cadaver study. In: Proceedings of the IRCOBI conference, Florence, Italy, 11–13 September 2019.
25.
ShangSMassonCLlariM, et al. The predictive capacity of the MADYMO ellipsoid pedestrian model for pedestrian ground contact kinematics and injury evaluation. Accid Anal Prev2021; 149: 105803.
HanYYangJKojiM.Finite element analysis of the dynamic response and injury mechanism of chest in car-to-pedestrian collisions. Int J Crashworthiness2012; 17(2): 141–152.
28.
WatanabeRMiyazakiHKitagawaY, et al. Research of collision speed dependency of pedestrian head and chest injuries using human FE model (THUMS version 4). In: The 22nd international technical conference on the enhanced safety of vehicles conference (ESV), Washington, DC, USA, 13–16 June 2011, Paper no. 11-0043.
29.
ZanderOWischMOttJ, et al. Development and evaluation of a thorax injury prediction tool (TIPT) and possibilities for incorporation within improved test and assessment procedures - results from SENIORS. In: The 26th international technical conference on the enhanced safety of vehicles conference (ESV), Eindhoven, Netherlands, 10–13 June 2019, Paper no. 19-0014.
30.
PalCShigeruHPratap NaiduV, et al. Influence of different parameters of vehicle and pedestrian on chest kinematics using human body model (HBM). In: The 27th international technical conference on the enhanced safety of vehicles conference (ESV), Yokohama, Japan, 3–6 April 2023, Paper no. 23-0290.
31.
KingAlbert I.The biomechanics of impact injury-biomechanical response, mechanisms of injury, human tolerance and simulation. Springer, 2018.
32.
GrimalQGamaBANailiS, et al. Finite element study of high-speed blunt impact on thorax: linear elastic considerations. Int J Impact Eng2004; 30(6): 665–683.
33.
YamaguchiRMakinoYChibaF, et al. Frequency and influencing factors of cardiopulmonary resuscitation-related injuries during implementation of the American Heart Association 2010 Guidelines: a retrospective study based on autopsy and postmortem computed tomography. Int J Leg Med2017; 131(6): 1655–1663.
34.
CavanaughJMWalilkoTJMalhotraA, et al. Biomechanical response and injury tolerance of the thorax in twelve sled side impacts. In: Proceedings of the 34th Stapp car crash conference, Scottsdale, AZ, 22–26 October 1990, pp. 23–38.
35.
CrandallJRLessleyDJKerriganJR, et al. Thoracic deformation response of pedestrians resulting from vehicle impact. Int J Crashworthiness2010; 11(6): 529–539.
36.
PiquerasAIraeusJPipkornB, et al. Assessment of the sensitivity of thoracic injury criteria to subject-specific characteristics using human body models. Front Bioeng Biotechnol2023; 11: 1106554.
37.
YoganandanNPintarFAGennarelliTA, et al. Chest deflections and injuries in oblique lateral impacts. Traffic Inj Prev2008; 9: 162–167.
38.
DeckerWKoyaBPakW, et al. Evaluation of finite element human body models for use in a standardized protocol for pedestrian safety assessment. Traffic Inj Prev2019; 20: S32–S36.
