Q6 Child dummy and FLEX PLI GTR leg model

development

5th European Hyperworks Technology Conference

Bonn, Nov. 7th and 6th, 2011

Robert Kant, Humanetics Europe GmbH

Franck NJILIE, Altair Development France

2

Contents

► Humanetics and Dummy Harmonisation

► Q6 Child Model development

► FLEX PLI GTR Model development

► Conclusion

3

Harmonisation

Combine two brands of crash test

dummies to help reduce test to test

variation.

4

The Harmonization Review Process

Each ATD is examined for regulatory compliance and multiple attribute categories to help members decide on their voting preference.

Review 2 brands of each

ATD part (or parts)

Known

Durability

Issues ?

Known

Usability

Issues ?

Known

Repeatability

Issues ?

Regulatory Compliance ?

(ex: part 572 compliance)

Consider worldwide existing

inventories

Known

Interchangeability

Issues ?

If different

If compliance is the same

Choose

compliant

brand

If different

If attributes are the same or equal

Choose

favorable

brand

Finish

Ease and of parts

meeting testing

corridors.

Recommend

FTSS Brand

Recommend

Denton Brand

Recommend continue to

manufacture both brands

Make no recommendation

(or defer to future testing)

Finish

*4 possible recommendations

review 5 attribute categories

5

Humanetics

Chrysler

TC IIHS EuroNCAP

(2) (1)

GESAC

(1)

Hyundai

(1)

GM Ford

VRTC

Toyota Nissan Mitsubishi Honda

BMW LAB Porsche

PDB

(1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1)

(1) (1) (1)

Renault

(1)

Alternately, JAMA may cast common vote worth (4)

Alternately, ACEA may cast common vote worth (4)

(guest) (guest) (guest) (guest)

The Voting

Voting Rules A simple majority voting system is used; anything over 50% carries the decision. At least ½ of voting members must be present in person, via WebEx, or phone to ratify a vote. Proxy voting appointees are accepted.

Votes by Member Organization

6

Final Group Recommendations

Segment Summary of ATD Brand Harmonization DN = Denton Brand

FTSS = FT Brand Head Neck

Upper

Torso

Lower

Torso

Legs

& Feet

Arms

& Hand Comments

HIII 10YO* DN DN FTSS DN DN DN

HIII 95th Large Male* DN DN DN DN FTSS DN

FT Clavicles, DN Ball

Sliders &Feet

HIII 50th Male* DN DN FTSS DN DN DN

HIII 5th Small Female* DN DN FTSS FTSS FTSS FTSS

Harmonized Jacket, DN

Ball Sliders, & Lower Leg

Cavity, DN Hands

EuroSID-2, ES2-RE* FTSS DN FTSS FTSS FTSS FTSS

DN Lumbar, DN Skin for

Shoulder, Ribs, Plugs

HIII 3YO Child* DN No

Pref. DN - FTSS FTSS

FTSS clavicle stop. DN

brand Urethane

*Harmonized vinyl and CAPPS brand shoes.

Q6 CHILD

8

Introduction of Q6 Child

► Euro NCAP intends to introduce dynamic tests for older children introducing Q6 in the new protocols by 2015

► Test configurations under discussion:

11/14/2011 8

Q6

Q10

HIII 5th female

HIII 50th male

Frontal offset 64 km/h; 40% overlap

EEVC ODB

Moving Deformable Barrier test 55 km/h as in JNCAP; ECE R95 barrier or

50 km/h as in ECE R95; APROSYS barrier

WS 50th male

9

Child safety, CAE and Q6 Child

9

► Q6 models are being developed in a consortium project (2010 – 2013)

– 7 OEM’s, Humanetics, TUB, VFSB

– Altair

10 10

Rib cage molding and skin:

Three layers of solid elements

Detailed mesh of

clavicle

and clavicle retainer to

capture contacts

Q6 Child

Continuous jacket mesh

Two layers of solid elements.

Front and Lateral IR-TRACC

Release position

Constraints

between thoracic

spine box

and rib cage at

screw location

11 11

Contact of rigid pin and

rubber stops to define the

lower arm joint stop angles

Q6 Model Development

Recent Q6 hardware change:

Neck cavities filled with rubber

to improve bonding area

Structural connection

modeled physically

Release position

12

Q6 Neck validation

12

Frontal

Lateral

lateral

13 13

Q6 thorax and spine validation

14

Q6 Outlook

► Side-by-Side testing to confirm new Q6 (hardware) materials

► Further validation at sled level (frontal and side)

FLEX PLI GTR

FLEX PLI GTR is a legform for pedestrian safety regulations

• intended to replace TRL-Leg (higher biofidelity of Flex-PLI-GTR)

FLEX PLI GTR

Impact

PCL (back side)

MCL

ACL (frontal side)

LCL

Source: Gray’s Anatomy

Lateral

Collateral

Ligament Medial

Collateral

Ligament

Anterior Cruciate

Ligament(front side)

Posterior Cruciate

Ligament (back side) • Flexible femur and tibia bones

• Representation of human

ligaments

• Injury prediction /

standard channels – Ligament elongation 4 channels

– Tibia (& Femur) bending moment

7 channels

– Tibia acceleration

FLEX PLI GTR

TRL Legform impactor FLEX-PLI-GTR

Flexible

bones

TRL PLI versus FLEX PLI GTR

18

Project team

• Models are being developed in 4 solver codes as part of a consortium project

since November 2008

FLEX PLI GTR FE Model Development

Humanetics Project

Team

OEM Project Team

- Definition of detailed

specification

- Review of deliverables

- Executing validation

work

- Execute the Work

Franck Njilie (RADIOSS –model)

Humantics

19

v1.9 Enhancements

11/14/2011 19

v1.1 v1.9

Knee block hole refinement

v1.1

v1.9

20

Validation Load Cases LC8

Femur

LC2

Knee LC1

Tibia

LC6

Tibia

Oblique

LC7

Tibia

8m/s 8m/s 8m/s 9m/s 8m/s

Pendulum

certification

21

355

100

10 ALL in MM

35 km/h

415

180

35 ALL in MM

35 km/h

415

180

15 ALL in MM

40 km/h

390

190

25 ALL in MM

40 km/h

Validation Load Cases LC40 LC42 LC44 LC56

22

Radioss: Pendulum

• Knee ligament elongations

23

Radioss: Pendulum

• Tibia bending moments

24

• Knee ligament elongations

LC1 Results

25

Error visualisation

11/14/2011 25

1. Peak value unit: moment in Nm; elongation in mm;

2. Percentage error = (CAE-TEST)/TEST;

Positive (+) percentage error means CAE magnitude greater than test, when both CAE and test are of the same sign.

3. Peak ∆t : in msec, positive (+) means CAE peaks earlier than test

4. All peak values errors obtained from average test curve and CAE simulation curves for all load cases.

Non-Pendulum Pendulum

Peak error Peak error >20% and reading is higher than 170 Nm

or 8 mm

If peaks do not fit into

certification corridors

Peak error 10-20% and reading is higher than 170 Nm

or 8 mm

Peak timing

difference

(msec)

Peak timing > 4ms and reading is higher than 170 Nm

or 8 mm

If peak timing > 12ms

Peak timing 2-4 ms and reading is higher than 170 Nm

or 8 mm

26

Peak (err %) Femur-1 Femur-2 Femur-3 Tibia-1 Tibia-2 Tibia-3 Tibia-4 ACL MCL PCL LCL

pendulum3 195

(+3.1%)

142

(+4%)

89

(-.2%)

258

(+2%)

205

(+.4%)

157

(+2%)

108.9

(+3.7%)

9.8

(+.7%)

25.4

(+3.5%)

5.6

(+22.7%)

-4.6

(+51%)

Peak ∆t 8.6 9.9 10.5 5.6 7 -.1 1.2 -27.8 3.8 -6.4 -.5

LC1 148

(+5.3%)

-124

(-5.7%)

-108

(-4.7%)

217

(+6%)

189

(-5.9%)

128

(-12.6%)

78.5

(-21.5%)

9.4

(-14%)

14.3

(+.7%)

3.6

(-8.6%)

2.7

(+7.24%)

Peak ∆t 2.3 .5 .9 -1.2 -.8 2.7 -1.5 -.6 1.04 +2 2.09

LC2 167

(-.1%)

111.5

(-11.8%)

72

(-7.6%)

192

(-2%)

169

(+3.7%)

120.8

(+12%)

-50

(-40%)

6

(+18%)

15.6

(+7%)

4.2

(+14.4%)

3

(+24%)

Peak ∆t .6 .4 1.2 -.6 -.5 .4 -.7 1.3 2.4 -4.2 +4

LC6 117.4

(-18%)

88.5

(-21.5%)

-65

(-36%)

203

(6.8%)

73

(1.2%)

120

(-9%)

62.7

(-30%)

9.5

(-21%)

12

(-9%)

3.8

(-.6%)

-2

(-13%)

Peak ∆t 1 2 1.2 -1.4 -.4 2.5 4.1 -.08 1.9 3 -.07

LC7 165

(+2.2%)

-137

(-4.5%)

-117

(-4.5%)

240

(+5.3%)

207

(-3.7%)

137

(-11%)

87

(-17.5%)

10.6

(-22%)

16

(-.3%)

4

(-2.2%)

3

(+13%)

Peak ∆t 1.8 -.3 .85 -1.5 -1.4 -1.2 -1.5 -1.25 .2 -.7 -.4

LC8 264

(+2.1%)

250

(+7.8%)

168

(-5%)

148

(-10%)

156

(-5%)

-125

(-2%)

-80

(-2%)

6.3

(+4.7%)

6.9

(-13.9%)

6.6

(-5.5%)

5.8

(+30%)

Peak ∆t -.7 -.7 -0.5 -3.5 .2 .5 .2 -1.2 -1 -.3 1.2

FG1584-85-86 187.5

(-7.4%)

162.7

(+.4%)

100.6

(+2.4%)

209

(+7.3%)

226

(+11.5%)

174

(+18%)

91.6

(+34%)

7.1

(+184%)

2

(-34%)

2.78

(+8%)

12.9

(+46%)

Peak ∆t 2.5 2.16 2.02 .03 .2 -.2 -.15 2.6 -.04 -1.5 1.07

FG1578-79-80 184

(-8%)

155.5

(+3%)

97.3

(+10.4%)

206.7

(+8.3%)

240.6

(+.32%)

161.7

(-1.7%)

80

(10.2%)

6.1

(111%)

-2.08

(+10.5%)

3.3

(+29.5%)

13.7

(+43%)

Peak ∆t 2.7 3.5 2.7 .33 1.2 -1.9 .9 1.9 -2.2 14.4 .04

FG1244-45 191.4

(+2.8%)

159

(+3.8%)

98

(-11.3%)

144.8

(-1.4%)

188

(-2.96%)

139

(+8.6%)

71.4

(+3.35%)

4.2

(+29%)

-2.5

(-39.5%)

3.8

(+24.6%)

13.3

(+28%)

Peak ∆t 1.2 2.7 3.3 2.07 1.2 1.15 1.2 2.2 1.2 1.25 2

F1256-1257 183

(+13.5%)

153

(+4%)

114

(+4.5%)

310

(-5.3%)

313

(+5.86%)

268

(-1.5%)

144

(-2.1%)

11.7

(+30%)

17.5

(-6.6%)

4.6

(-11.6%)

-3.4

(1.9%)

Peak ∆t -.95 .75 .74 1 .34 .85 -1.6 -7.4 1.5 .04 2.5

Peak Value and Timing Errors for v1.9

New Tests

New Tests

27

Radioss v1.9 injury signal predictability

► Injury thresholds

– MCL: 22 mm

– Tibia: 340 Nm

Pendulum LC1 LC2 LC6 LC7 LC8 FG1584-85-86 FG1578-79-80 FG1244-45 FG1256-57

MCL 25.4

(3.5%) 14.3

(0.7%) 15.6 (7%)

12 (-9%)

16 (-0.3%)

6.9 (-13.9%)

2

(-34%)

-2.08

(10.5%)

-2.5

(-39.5%)

17.5 (-6.6%)

Peak ∆t 3.8 1.04 2.4 1.9 0.2 -1 -0.04 -2.2 1.2 1.5

Highest Tibia 258 (2%)

217

(6%)

192 (-2%)

203 (6.8%)

240 (5.3%)

156 (-5%)

226

(11.5%)

240.6

(0.32%)

188

(-2.96%)

313 (5.86%)

Peak ∆t -7.6 -0.4 -0.6 -1.4 -1.5 0.2 0.2 1.2 1.2 0.34

Low (unimportant) MCL magnitude

CONCLUSION

29

► The RADIOSS model of the FLEX PLI GTR has been made more

predictive

– Peak error of injury channels within 10%

► A first RADIOSS model of the Q6 Child has been developed

Humanetics RADIOSS Models are supported and are being made

available by Altair

Conslusion

THANKS!