Traumatic brain injuries are among the most common severely disabling injuries in the United States. Construction helmets are considered essential personal protective equipment for reducing traumatic brain injury risks at work sites. In this study, we proposed a practical finite element modeling approach that would be suitable for engineers to optimize construction helmet design. The finite element model includes all essential anatomical structures of a human head (i.e. skin, scalp, skull, cerebrospinal fluid, brain, medulla, spinal cord, cervical vertebrae, and discs) and all major engineering components of a construction helmet (i.e. shell and suspension system). The head finite element model has been calibrated using the experimental data in the literature. It is technically difficult to precisely account for the effects of the neck and body mass on the dynamic responses, because the finite element model does not include the entire human body. An approximation approach has been developed to account for the effects of the neck and body mass on the dynamic responses of the head–brain. Using the proposed model, we have calculated the responses of the head–brain during a top impact when wearing a construction helmet. The proposed modeling approach would provide a tool to improve the helmet design on a biomechanical basis.
FaulMXuLWaldM. Traumatic brain injury in the United States: emergency department visits, hospitalizations and deaths 2002–2006. Technical Report, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, March2010.
2.
TiesmanHMKondaSBellJL. The epidemiology of fatal occupational traumatic brain injury in the U.S. Am J Prev Med2011; 41(1): 61–67.
3.
VooKKumaresanSPintarFA. Finite-element models of the human head. Med Biol Eng Comput1996; 34(5): 375–381.
4.
HardyCHMarcalPV.Elastic analysis of a skull. J Appl Mech: T ASME1973; 40: 838–842.
5.
KennerVHGoldsmithW.Dynamic loading of a fluid-filled spherical shell. Int J Mech Sci1972; 14(9): 557–568.
6.
WillingerRKangHSDiawB.Three-dimensional human head finite-element model validation against two experimental impacts. Ann Biomed Eng1999; 27(3): 403–410.
7.
KleivenSHardyWN.Correlation of an FE model of the human head with local brain motion—consequences for injury prediction. Stapp Car Crash J2002; 46: 123–144.
8.
YanWPangestuOD.A modified human head model for the study of impact head injury. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin2011; 14(12): 1049–1057.
9.
PattonDAMcIntoshASKleivenS.The biomechanical determinants of concussion: finite element simulations to investigate tissue-level predictors of injury during sporting impacts to the unprotected head. J Appl Biomech2015; 31(4): 264–268.
10.
TseKMTanLBLeeSJ. Development and validation of two subject-specific finite element models of human head against three cadaveric experiments. Int J Numer Method Biomed Eng2014; 30(3): 397–415.
11.
TseKMTanLBLeeSJ. Investigation of the relationship between facial injuries and traumatic brain injuries using a realistic subject-specific finite element head model. Accid Anal Prev2015; 79: 13–32.
12.
RuanJSKhalilTKingAI.Dynamic response of the human head to impact by three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Biomech Eng1994; 116(1): 44–50.
13.
WillingerRTalebLKoppCM.Modal and temporal analysis of head mathematical models. J Neurotrauma1995; 12(4): 743–754.
14.
AfshariARajaariSM.Finite element simulations investigating the role of the helmet in reducing head injuries. Int J Simulat Model2008; 7(1): 42–51.
15.
TengTLiangCNguyenV.Development and validation of finite element model of helmet impact test. Proc IMechE, Part L: J Materials Design and Applications2012; 227: 82–88.
16.
YangJDaiJ.Simulation-based assessment of rear effect to ballistic helmet impact. Comput Aided Des Appl2010; 7(1): 59–73.
17.
LongJYangJLeiZ. Simulation-based assessment for construction helmets. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin2015; 18(1): 24–37.
18.
GilchristAMillsNJ.Construction site workers helmets. J Occup Accid1987; 9: 199–211.
19.
MillsNGilchristA.Industrial helmet performance in impacts. Safety Sci1993; 16: 221–238.
20.
SudermanBLHooverRWChingRP. The effect of hardhats on head and neck response to vertical impacts from large construction objects. Accid Anal Prev2014; 73: 116–124.
21.
GalfordJEMcElhaneyJH.A viscoelastic study of scalp, brain, and dura. J Biomech1970; 3(2): 211–221.
22.
SchmidtHHausslerKWilkeHJ. Structural behavior of human lumbar intervertebral disc under direct shear. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater2015; 13(1): 66–71.
23.
YamadaHEvansFG.Strength of biological materials. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 1970.
24.
HendriksFMBrokkenDVan EemerenJT. A numerical-experimental method to characterize the non-linear mechanical behaviour of human skin. Skin Res Technol2003; 9(3): 274–283.
25.
HendriksFMBrokkenDOomensCW. Influence of hydration and experimental length scale on the mechanical response of human skin in vivo, using optical coherence tomography. Skin Res Technol2004; 10(4): 231–241.
26.
WuJZDongRGSmutzWP. Effects of preconditioning on the elastic behavior of skin under compressive loading. J Mech Med Biol2003; 3(3–4): 275–283.
27.
RashidBDestradeMGilchristMD.Mechanical characterization of brain tissue in simple shear at dynamic strain rates. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2013; 28: 71–85.
28.
ArbogastKBMarguliesSS.Material characterization of the brainstem from oscillatory shear tests. J Biomech1998; 31(9): 801–807.
29.
BilstonLThibaultL.The mechanical properties of the human cervical spinal cord in vitro. Ann Biomed Eng1996; 24: 67–74.
KwonHChoi1WChoiJ. Mechanical behavior analyses of plastics under environmental changes. In: Proceedings of the 18th international conference on composite materials, Jeju Island, South Korea, 21–26 August 2011.
32.
NahumASmithRWardC.Intracranial pressure dynamics during head impact. In: Proceedings of the 21st Stapp Car Crash Conference, Warrendale, PA, USA. 19–21 October 1977, pp.339–366.
33.
EppingerR.Chapter 5: A prospective view of head injury research. In: BandakFAEppingerRHOmmayaAK (eds) Traumatic brain injury: bioscience and mechanics. Larchmont, NY: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., 1996, pp.39–45.
34.
PatelAGoswamiT.Comparison of intracranial pressure by lateral and frontal impacts—validation of computational model. In: GoswamiT (ed.) Injury and skeletal biomechanics. Chapter 6, pp. 95–114. Rijeka: InTech, 2012.
35.
ShortenMHimmelsbachJ.Sports surfaces and the risk of traumatic brain injury. Calgary, AB, Canada: University of Calgary, 2003.
PrasadPMertzH.The position of the United States delegation to the ISO working group on the use of HIC in the automotive environment. Technical Report, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA, June1985.
38.
KimparaHIwamotoMWatanabeI. Effect of assumed stiffness and mass density on the impact response of the human chest using a three-dimensional FE model of the human body. J Biomech Eng2006; 128(5): 772–776.
39.
WuJZHerzogWFedericoS.Finite element modeling of finite deformable, biphasic biological tissues with transversely isotropic statistically distributed fibers: toward a practical solution. Z Angew Math Phys2016; 67: 26.
