Numerical Tests of the Virtual Human Model Response Under Dynamic Load Conditions Defined in Federal Aviation Regulation Part 23.562 and 25.562 – Preliminary Study

Open access

Abstract

The main aim of the presented research was to check mechanical response of human body model under loads that can occur during airplane accidents and compare results of analysis with some results of experimental tests described in literature. In simulations, new multi-purpose human body model, the VIRTHUMAN, was used. The whole model, as well as its particular segments, was earlier validated based on experimental data, which proved its accuracy to simulate human body dynamic response under condition typical for car crashes, but it was not validated for loads with predominant vertical component (loads acting along spinal column), typical for airplane crashes. Due to limitation of available experimental data, the authors focused on conducting calculations for the case introduced in 14 CFR: Parts 23.562 and 25.562, paragraph (b)(1), knowing as the 60° pitch test. The analysis consists in comparison of compression load measured in lumbar section of spine of the FAA HIII Dummy (experimental model) and in the Virthuman (numerical model). The performed analyses show numerical stability of the model and satisfactory agreement between experimental data and simulated Virthuman responses. In that sense, the Virthuman model, although originally developed for automotive analyses, shows also great potential to become valuable tool for applications in aviation crashworthiness and safety analyses, as well.

[1] Improved Seats in Air Carrier Transport Category Airplanes. 14 CFR Part 121. [Docket No. FAA-2002-13464 2, Amendment No.121-315] Final Rule. Federal Register: September 27, 2005. http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgfinalrule.nfs/0/df02e83a968757e68625708a00714f48.

[2] https://www.easa.europa.eu/document-library/bilateral-agreements.

[3] T.R. Hurley and J.M. Vandenburg. Small Airplane Crashworthiness Design Guide. Simula Technologies TR-98099, Phoenix, April 2002.

[4] Dynamic Evaluation of Seat Restraint Systems and Occupant Protection on Transport Category Airplanes / with Change 1. AC 25.562-1B. Federal Aviation Administration. January 10, 2006.

[5] S.J. Hooper and M.J. Henderson. Development and Validation of an Aircraft Seat Cushion Component Test - Volume I. Report No. DOT/FAA/AR-05/5,I, March 2005.

[6] P. Bhonge. A methodology for aircraft seat certification by dynamic finite element analysis. Ph.D. Thesis, Wichita State University, 2008.

[7] Methodology for Dynamic Seat Certification by Analysis for use in Parts 23, 25, 27 and 29 Airplanes and Rotorcraft. AC 20-146. Federal Aviation Administration, May 19, 2003.

[8] G. Olivares. Dynamic Seat Certification by Analysis:Volume II - FAAHybrid IIIATDDynamic Evaluation NIAR Test Series. NIAR Technical Report FAA-002D, Wichita, KS, September 2009.

[9] MADYMO Human Body Models Manual. Release 7.5. TASS BV, Delft, The Netherlands, 2013.

[10] MADYMO Model Manual. Release 7.5. TASS BV, Delft, The Netherlands, 2013.

[11] J. Manas, L. Kovàr, J. Petrík, H. Cechová and S. Špirk S. Validation of human body model VIRTHUMAN and its implementation in crash scenarios. In Advances in Mechanisms Design: Proceedings of TMM 2012, pages 351-356, doi:

[12] L. Hyncik, H. Cechová H., L. Kovár and P. Blaha. On Scaling Virtual Human Models. SAE Technical Paper 2013-01-0074, March 2013, doi:

[13] J. Vychytil, J. Manas, H. Cechova, S. Spirk L. Hyncik and L. Kovar. Scalable multi-purpose virtual human model for future safety assessment. SAE Technical Paper 2014-01-0534, January 2014, doi:

[14] O. Oliva-Perez. Evaluation of the FAA Hybrid III 50th percentile anthropometric test dummy under the FAR 23.562 and 25.562 emergency landing conditions for the combined horizontalvertical dynamic loading. Master Thesis, Wichita State University, 2010.

[15] U.S. Department of Transportation. 49 Code of Federal Regulations Part 572, Subpart B.

[16] Emergency landing dynamic conditions. 14 CFR 23.562. Federal Aviation Administration. FAA webpage.

[17] Emergency landing dynamic conditions. 14 CFR 25.562. Federal Aviation Administration. FAA webpage.

[18] www.niar.wichita.edu/researchlabs/pdf/CDL_Facilities_Equipment_March2012.pdf.

[19] PAMCRASH Handbooks.

[20] P. Blaha. Anthropometric studies of the Czechoslovak population from 6 to 55 years. volume 1, part 2, Praha, 1987 (in Czech).

[21] L. Lindstedt. Dynamical behaviour of a composite cockpit of PW-5 glider when hitting against a ground barrier - the issue of pilot’s safety. Ph.D. Thesis, Warsaw University of Technology, 2010. (in Polish).

[22] L. Lindstedt, M. Rodzewicz, C. Rzymkowski and K. Kędzior. Experimental study of impact phenomena in case of a composite glider. Technical Soaring, 33(2):54-62, 2009.

[23] L. Lindstedt, C. Rzymkowski and K Kędzior. Experimental and numerical investigations on pilot-glider-environment system during the impact against a deformable barrier. In Proceedings of the 13thWorld Congress in Mechanism and Machine Science, pages 1-8, Guanajuato, México, 19-25 June, 2011.

[24] L. Lindstedt. Numerical simulation of glider crash against a non-deformable barrier. Archive of Mechanical Engineering, 58(2):245-265, 2011. doi:

Archive of Mechanical Engineering

The Journal of Committee on Machine Building of Polish Academy of Sciences

Journal Information


CiteScore 2016: 0.44

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.162
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.459

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 155 155 15
PDF Downloads 48 48 9