ISO/TR 19222:2021

TECHNICAL ISO/TR
REPORT 19222
First edition
2021-12
Road vehicles — Injury risk curves for
the THOR dummy
Véhicules routiers — Courbe de risques de blessures pour mannequin
THOR
Reference number
© ISO 2021
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, or required in the context of its implementation, no part of this publication may
be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, or posting on
the internet or an intranet, without prior written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO at the address below
or ISO’s member body in the country of the requester.
ISO copyright office
CP 401 • Ch. de Blandonnet 8
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva
Phone: +41 22 749 01 11
Email: copyright@iso.org
Website: www.iso.org
Published in Switzerland
ii
Contents Page
Foreword .iv
Introduction .v
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 1
3 Terms and definitions and abbreviated terms . 1
3.1 Terms and definitions . 1
3.2 Abbreviated terms . 1
4 Methodology .2
5 Injury risk curves . 3
5.1 Head . 3
5.1.1 HIC . 3
5.1.2 Rotational criterion . 6
5.2 Neck . 14
5.2.1 N – Eppinger . 14
ij
5.2.2 N – Mertz . . 16
te
5.3 Thorax . 18
5.3.1 Maximum resultant deflexion . 18
5.3.2 PC-Score . 21
5.3.3 TIC . 24
5.4 Abdomen . 28
5.4.1 Penetration .28
5.5 Knee-thigh-hip . 31
5.5.1 Femur z-force . 31
5.5.2 Acetabulum force . 33
5.5.3 Femur force versus acetabulum force . 35
Annex A (informative) HIC data .36
Annex B (informative) Brain .39
Annex C (informative) Neck .73
Annex D (informative) Thorax .76
Annex E (informative) Abdomen .79
Annex F (informative) Knee-thigh-hip .80
Annex G (informative) HIII-THOR neck transfer function .98
Annex H (informative) Repeatability and reproducibility . 100
Annex I (informative) Thorax repeatability and reproducibility . 101
Bibliography . 103
iii
Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards
bodies (ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out
through ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical
committee has been established has the right to be represented on that committee. International
organizations, governmental and non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work.
ISO collaborates closely with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of
electrotechnical standardization.
The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are
described in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular, the different approval criteria needed for the
different types of ISO documents should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the
editorial rules of the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www.iso.org/directives).
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of
patent rights. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights. Details of
any patent rights identified during the development of the document will be in the Introduction and/or
on the ISO list of patent declarations received (see www.iso.org/patents).
Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not
constitute an endorsement.
For an explanation of the voluntary nature of standards, the meaning of ISO specific terms and
expressions related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO's adherence to
the World Trade Organization (WTO) principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), see
www.iso.org/iso/foreword.html.
This document was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 22, Road vehicles, Subcommittee SC 36,
Safety aspects and impact testing.
Any feedback or questions on this document should be directed to the user’s national standards body. A
complete listing of these bodies can be found at www.iso.org/members.html.
iv
Introduction
The THOR-M 50 dummy is in its final development phase and can be used to evaluate the occupant
protection in frontal impact. US-NCAP and Euro-NCAP are currently developing test procedures using
this dummy to evaluate car performances. However, injury risk curves (IRCs) are proposed by these
organizations without a large consensus. Rules were established to develop IRCs (ISO/TS 18506).
These rules were applied to the available data to evaluate IRCs for THOR-M 50. In addition to the quality
evaluation as recommended in ISO/TS 18506, considerations on the repeatability and reproducibility of
the criteria, as well as their performance with regard to field investigations will be proposed.
v
TECHNICAL REPORT ISO/TR 19222:2021(E)
Road vehicles — Injury risk curves for the THOR dummy
1 Scope
This document provides injury risk curves to assess occupant protection in frontal impact using the
th
50 percentile THOR metric dummy (THOR-M 50).
Injury risk curves developed specifically for the THOR dummy are chosen preferably, however, when
not available, the applicability of the PMHS injury risk curve is evaluated with regard to the dummy
biofidelity.
Finally, when possible, a field evaluation is provided.
2 Normative references
There are no normative references in this document.
3 Terms and definitions and abbreviated terms
For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply.
ISO and IEC maintain terminology databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at https:// www .iso .org/ obp
— IEC Electropedia: available at https:// www .electropedia .org/
3.1 Terms and definitions
3.1.1
THOR-M 50
th
50 percentile metric dummy as defined in Reference [61]
3.1.2
injury criterion
physical parameter which correlates well with the severity of a specific injury or injuries of a body
region under consideration
3.1.3
injury risk curve
IRC
curve giving the probability, for a defined population and for a given input, to sustain a specified
severity of injury
3.1.4
injury risk function
IRF
mathematical function that relates a value of an injury criterion (3.1.2) and possible additional factors
(variables) to a risk of sustaining an injury of a certain level
3.2 Abbreviated terms
AIS abbreviate injury score
BrIC brain injury criterion
CI confidence interval
CIBIC convolution of impulse response for brain injury criterion
HIC head injury criterion
KTH knee-thigh-hip
MAIS maximum abbreviate injury score
NFR number of fractured ribs
NHP non-human primate
NSFR number of separated fractured ribs
PC-Score principal component analysis score
PDB partnership for dummy and biomechanics
PMHS post mortem human subject
RVCI rotational velocity change index
TBI traumatic brain injury
THUMS Toyota human body model
TIC thoracic injury criterion
UBrIC updated brain injury criterion
4 Methodology
The following steps were performed for each criterion:
— existing injury risk curves were collected;
— reference data were collected and verified;
— ISO/TS 18506 was applied;
— criteria quotation was calculated:
— ISO/TS 18506 rules: from 1 for full application to 0 for a different method leading to different
results, except if a rationale if provided;
— ISO/TS 18506 quality index: relative size of the confidence interval for 5 %, 25 % and 50 %
risks of injury. The relative size of the confidence interval is defined as the width of the 95 %
confidence interval at a given injury risk, relative to the value of the stimulus at this same injury
risk;
— evaluation of the repeatability and reproducibility (R&R) of the THOR-M 50 for the considered
criterion, when R&R data are available, this criterion is equal to 1-(standard deviation/mean):
— R&R data in certification tests are provided in Annex H;
— R&R data in sled tests are provided in Annex I for the thorax;
— THOR applicability: this criterion has the following values:
— THOR specific criterion: from 1 for full application to 0 for a different method leading to
different results, except if a rationale is provided;
— human IRC: biofidelity score;
— transfer function between THOR and human: coefficient of correlation;
— unknown: when the biofidelity score or the correlation coefficient are unknown;
— field data evaluation.
NHTSA is issuing a document on Injury Risk Curves for the THOR dummy (Reference [7]). This
document was developed independently. Therefore, the readers can make their own comparisons and
conclusions.
5 Injury risk curves
5.1 Head
5.1.1 HIC
5.1.1.1 HIC 15 ms / skull fracture – Mertz
— Injury target: skull fracture
— Source: ISO/TR 7861, Reference [51]
— Channels: linear accelerations (a , a , a ) measured at the head centre of gravity
x y z
— Filtration: CFC1000
25,
 
t
 2 
 1 
 
— Formula:Ht=−maxd()t at(). t
 
15 15 21
∫
 
tt−
 
t
 1 
 
where
H is the variable for the head injury criterion (HIC);
t is the beginning of the time window;
t is the end of the time window;
a is the resultant acceleration expressed in g;
t is the time expressed in milliseconds;
d is the derivative function;
max is the maximum of the function calculated between t and t , with (t -t ) not exceeding 15 ms.
15 1 2 2 1
— PH==Φ();;μσ1 500 = 488
skull_fracture 15
where
P is the injury probability for a skull fracture;
skull_fracture
Φ is the cumulative distribution function of the normal distribution;
H Is the variable for the head injury criterion (HIC);
μ is the mean of the normal distribution;
σ is the standard deviation of the normal distribution.
— Data: 65 PMHS (References [20], [21], [82], [24], [25], [59]) provided in Table A.1 of Annex A
— Statistics: modified median rank method (Reference [50])
— Version of dummy: injury risk curve developed directly from PMHS data and is applicable to
dummies with a biofidelic response to head impact response.
— Comments:
— This curve is a human injury risk curve.
— THOR biofidelity: in the corridors of head drop tests (Table 14 and Figure 4 in Reference [61]).
— Reasons for not following ISO/TS 18506 rules: the modified median rank method has a better
quality assessment than Eppinger’s curve. Reference [51] points out that Hertz’s log-normal
curve predicts a 12 % risk of AIS ≥ 2 skull fracture at HIC=400, when no cases of skull fracture
were observed at or below this value. This compares to 1 % risk predicted by Mertz’s curve.
— Curves
Key
X HIC
Y risk of skull fracture
IRF (skull fracture)
confidence interval
Figure 1 — Injury risk curves for Skull fracture as a function of HIC
— Quotation
— ISO/TS 18506 rules: 0,5
— Quality assessment
— CI at 5 % = 1,12 (marginal)
— CI at 25 % = 0,68 (fair)
— CI at 50 % = 0,54 (fair)
NOTE The quality assessment at low levels of risk is relevant when assessing today’s occupant restraint
systems.
— R&R: 95 %
— THOR applicability: 1
5.1.1.2 HIC 15ms/skull fracture – Eppinger
— Injury target: skull fracture
— Source: Reference [12], Reference [23]
— Channels: linear accelerations (a , a , a ) measured at the head centre of gravity
x y z
— Filtration: CFC1000
25,
 t2 
 
 
 
— Formula:Ht=−maxd()t at(). t
 
15 15 21
∫
tt−
 
 21 
 t1 
 
where
H is the variable for the head injury criterion (HIC);
t is the beginning of the time window;
t is the end of the time window;
a is the resultant acceleration expressed in g;
d is the derivative function;
t is the time expressed in milliseconds;
max is the maximum of the function calculated between t and t , with (t -t ) not exceeding 15 ms.
15 1 2 2 1
— PH=Φ ln ;,μσ==6960;,847
()()
skull_fracture 15
where
P is the injury probability for a skull fracture;
skull_fracture
Φ is the cumulative distribution function of the normal distribution;
H is the variable for the head injury criterion (HIC);
μ is the mean of the normal distribution;
σ is the standard deviation of the normal distribution.
— Data: 54 PMHS (References [20], [21], [82], [24] and [25]) provided in Table A.2 of Annex A
— Statistics: maximum likelihood of log-normal
— Version of dummy: injury risk curve developed directly from PMHS data and is applicable to
dummies with a biofidelic response to head impact response.
— Comments:
— Human injury risk curve
— THOR biofidelity: in the corridors of head drop tests (Table 14 and Figure 4 in Reference [61])
— Risk curve close to the survival (log-normal) curve used in ISO/TS 18506
— Curves
Key
X HIC
Y risk of skull fracture
IRF (skull fracture)
CI (skull fracture)
IRF (maximum likelihood of log-normal)
Figure 2 — Injury risk curves for Skull fracture as a function of HIC
— Quotation
— ISO/TS 18506 rules: 1
— Quality assessment
— CI at 5 % = 1,88 (unacceptable)
— CI at 25 % = 0,89 (fair)
— CI at 50 % = 0,63 (fair)
— R&R: 95 %
— THOR applicability: 1
5.1.2 Rotational criterion
Numerous brain injury metrics have been proposed to predict diffuse-type traumatic brain injuries
(TBIs) with the use of rotational response of head kinematics. Diffuse-type TBIs are hypothesized
to be caused by shear deformation of the brain tissue due to a rapid rotational motion of the head
(Reference [26]). According to the hypothesis, the following five kinematics-based brain injury metrics
derived from rotational head kinematic variables, BrIC (Reference [81]), CIBIC (Reference [80]),
DAMAGE (Reference [18]), RVCI (Reference [91]), UBrIC (Reference [16]), were selected based on
correlations with brain tissue strain response, as detailed in B.1.5.
As measurement channels for calculation of the kinematic-based brain injury metrics, angular velocities
are obtained with gyro sensors fixed at the head centre of gravity of THOR. Angular velocities are
filtered to channel frequency class (CFC) 60, and angular accelerations are obtained by differentiating
the filtered angular velocity data.
Using survival analysis with Weibull distribution, injury risk curves (IRCs) for AIS 2 and AIS 4 traumatic
brain injuries (TBIs), as given in Figure 3 to Figure 7, are formulated as the following function of the five
kinematics-based brain injury metrics, DAMAGE, UBrIC, CIBIC, BrIC and RVCI, respectively.
1 a
 
 
×+ln dy c −
()
 
 
b b
−e
 
 
 
Pe=−1
a
Where a and b are coefficients corresponding to the shape (1/b) and scale (e ) parameters in the Weibull
distribution and y is the kinematics-based brain injury metric. The coefficients and quality indexes are
provided in Table 1. P is the injury probability.
th
All IRCs given in this document for the THOR 50 percentile male were newly developed and are detailed
in Annex B. Using survival analysis with Weibull distribution, original IRCs for AIS 2+ and AIS 4+ TBIs
th
were developed based on the 95 percentile peak maximum principle strain of brain deformation
(MPS95) in the finite element (FE) reconstruction simulations of human and Non-Human Primate
(NHP) experiment data. The IRCs based on MPS95 were transferred to IRCs based on the kinematics-
based brain injury metrics according to linear correlations between MPS95 and the kinematics-based
brain injury metrics.
Table 1 — Coefficients and quality of the injury risk curves
5 % Risk
25 % Risk 50 % Risk
a
Intercept ( c )
Injury Metrics Shape (1/b) Slope ( d )
Scale (e )
(QI) (QI)
(QI)
0,205 0,330 0,418
DAMAGE 0,017 0,957
(0,41) (0,25) (0,25)
0,215 0,329 0,409
UBrIC -0,014 1,054
(0,36) (0,22) (0,23)
0,390 0,627 0,794
AIS2 CIBIC 0,459 3,875 0,016 0,505
(0,41) (0,25) (0,25)
0,527 0,726 0,867
a
BrIC -0,103 0,600
(0,26) (0,18) (0,19)
16,75 26,70 33,76
RVCI 0,012 0,012
(0,40) (0,24) (0,24)
0,395 0,531 0,617
DAMAGE 0,017 0,957
(0,45) (0,27) (0,23)
0,388 0,512 0,590
UBrIC -0,014 1,054
(0,42) (0,25) (0,22)
0,751 1,009 1,172
AIS4 CIBIC 0,646 6,051 0,016 0,505
(0,45) (0,27) (0,23)
0,830 1,048 1,185
a
BrIC -0,103 0,600
(0,35) (0,22) (0,19)
QI: Quality index and its categories based on (Reference [64]), the quality of injury risk functions can be categorized into ‘good’ (0,0 – 0,5);
‘fair’ (0,5 – 1,0); ‘marginal’ (1,0 – 1,5); and ‘unacceptable’ ( > 1,5).
a
BrIC: caution should be used with the IRCs for BrIC presented here from the original injury risk curves provided in Reference [81].
Table 1 (continued)
5 % Risk
25 % Risk 50 % Risk
a
Injury Metrics Shape (1/b) Intercept ( c )
Slope ( d )
Scale (e )
(QI) (QI)
(QI)
31,93 42,79 49,64
RVCI 0,012 0,012
(0,45) (0,27) (0,23)
QI: Quality index and its categories based on (Reference [64]), the quality of injury risk functions can be categorized into ‘good’ (0,0 – 0,5);
‘fair’ (0,5 – 1,0); ‘marginal’ (1,0 – 1,5); and ‘unacceptable’ ( > 1,5).
a
BrIC: caution should be used with the IRCs for BrIC presented here from the original injury risk curves provided in Reference [81].
5.1.2.1 DAMAGE
 
     
cc+ ++cc--c
m 00 δ δ
x x xx xy xz xy xz x
     
   
 
00m δ + --cc ++cc c δ
   
   
y y xy xy yy yz yz y
 
 
   
 
00 m δ --cc cc++c δ
   
   
 z z  xz yz xz yz zz  z 
 

kk++ kk--k  δ m 00 u
    
xx xy xz xy xz x x x
 
    

+ --kk ++kk k δ = 00m u
   
 
xy xy yy yz yz y  y  y
    
 
--kk kk++ k δ 00 m u
    
xz yz xz yz zz z z z
 

— Formula: Bt=×βδ ()t
{}
DAMAGE max
where

T
δ t
()  
= δδ()tt() δ ()t
xy z
 
β is the scale factor;
m is the mass expressed in kg;
c is the damping expressed in Ns/m;
ij
k is the stiffness expressed in N/m;
ij
 
are the acceleration, velocity and displacement respectively;
δδ,, δ
ü is the applied angular acceleration;
and the following variables have the following values:
m = 1;   m = 1;   m = 1;
x y z
k = 32 142;   k = 23 493;   k = 16 935;
xx yy zz
k = 0;   k = 0;   k = 1 636,3;
xy yz xz
λ= 5,914 8;   β = 2,990 31;
[c] = λ × [k]
— Curves
Key
X DAMAGE
Y risk of injury
IRF (AIS2)
CI (AIS2)
IRF (AIS4)
CI (AIS4)
Figure 3 — Injury risk curves for AIS 2 and AIS 4 as a function of DAMAGE
— Quotation
— ISO/TS 18506 rules: 1
— R&R: 97 % (mean of head angular rates in flexion, extension, lateral flexion and torsion neck
tests)
— THOR applicability: unknown
5.1.2.2 UBrIC
*
 22
 α 
i
−
 
 
*
 
ω
** *
i
— Formula: Be=+ωα −ω 
 () 
UBrIC ∑ ii i
 
 
i
 
 
 
 
where
B is the variable for the brain injury criterion UBrIC;
UBrIC
* *
(i = x, y, z) are directionally dependent maximum magnitudes of the head angular
ω and α
i i
velocity and angular acceleration which are each normalized by a critical value (cr);
* * * *
ωω= /ω and αα= /α . ω are expressed in rad/s and α are expressed in
ii icr ii icr i i
rad/s :
ωα==211;, 20 01× 0 ;
xcrxcr
ωα==171;, 10 31× 0 ;
ycrycr
ωα==115;, 7761× 0 .
zcrzcr
— Curves
Key
X UBrIC
Y risk of injury
IRF (AIS2)
CI (AIS2)
IRF (AIS4)
CI (AIS4)
Figure 4 — Injury risk curves for AIS 2 and AIS 4 as a function of UBrIC
— Quotation
— ISO/TS 18506 rules: 1
— R&R: 97 % (mean of head angular rates in flexion, extension, lateral flexion and torsion neck
tests)
— THOR applicability: unknown
5.1.2.3 CIBIC
 
t
 
 
 
— Formula: Bx=−maxdβτ()t ατ() τ
   
CIBIC ii i
∑
∫
   
i=1
 0 
 
where
B is the variable for the brain injury criterion CIBIC;
CIBIC
i=1, 2, 3 are x, y and z axes;
α is an angular acceleration;
i
d is the derivative function;
−−At At
12ii
xt()=−Ee eE coss()Bt +EBin()t
{}
ii11ii 2ii
k kk+ kk
3 2
2i 12ii 12ii
As=− , s : real root of s ++s s +=0 ;
1ii i i i i
c m cm
i i
k
2i
−A
1i
c
i
A = ;
2i
4 kk+ k k
1 ()
12ii 2i 2 2i
B = −+23A A − ;
i 1i 1i
2 m c
c
i
i
k
2i
A −
c
i
E = ;
1i
k ()kk+
 
2i 2 12ii
23A −−A
 1i 1i 
c m
 
i
k k ()kk+
2 2i 2i 12ii
2AA−+AA −+A
1ii1 12ii 2i
c c m
i i
E = ;
2i
kk+
 k ()
2 12ii
2i
23A − A − B
 1i 1ii  i
c m
 
i
m is the mass, expressed in kg;
c is the damping expressed in Ns/m;
i
k is the stiffness expressed in N/m;
i
β is the scaling factor expressed in 1/m;
i
kk==12760;;16390 k =17040;
11xy 1z
kk==22670;;3163170 k =4751890;
22xy 2z
cc==129,;1 120,;47c = 44,;
xy z
m = 1;
β =0,003 13, β =0,003 95,β =0,004 94.
x y z
— Curves
Key
X CIBIC
Y risk of injury
IRF (AIS2)
CI (AIS2)
IRF (AIS4)
CI (AIS4)
Figure 5 — Injury risk curves for AIS 2 and AIS 4 as a function of CIBIC
— Quotation
— ISO/TS 18506 rules: 1
— R&R: 97 % (mean of head angular rates in flexion, extension, lateral flexion and torsion neck
tests)
— THOR applicability: unknown
5.1.2.4 BrIC
2 2
 ω 
 ω   ω 
y
x z
— Formula: B = + +
 
BrIC    
 
ω ω ω
   
xcr ycr zcr
 
where
B is the variable for the brain injury criterion BrIC;
BrIC
ω i=x,y,z are directionally dependent maximum magnitudes of the head angular expressed
()
i
in rad/s;
ω ()i=x,y,z are critical values expressed in rad/s;
icr
ω =66,25, ω =56,45 , ω =42,87 .
xcr ycr zcr
— Curves
Key
X BrIC
Y risk of injury
IRF (AIS2)
CI (AIS2)
IRF (AIS4)
CI (AIS4)
Figure 6 — Injury risk curves for AIS 2 and AIS 4 as a function of BrIC
— Quotation
— ISO/TS 18506 rules: 1
— R&R: 97 % (mean of head angular rates in flexion, extension, lateral flexion and torsion neck
tests)
— THOR applicability: unknown
5.1.2.5 RVCI
2 222
t t t
 2   2   2 
     
— Formula: Bt=max,()tW αα.ddtW+ t +Wtα .d
RVCI 12 xx yy zz
∫∫ ∫
     
t t t
     
1 1 1
where
B is the variable for the brain injury criterion RVCI;
RVCI
W are weighting factors about each orthogonal axis;
i
α (i = x, y, z) are directionally dependent maximum magnitudes of the head angular acceleration
i
expressed in rad/s²;
d is the derivative function;
WW==10,,01,,00 W =11, 7 .
xy z
— Curves
Key
X RVCI
Y risk of injury
IRF (AIS2)
CI (AIS2)
IRF (AIS4)
CI (AIS4)
Figure 7 — Injury risk curves for AIS 2 and AIS 4 as a function of RVCI
— Quotation
— ISO/TS 18506 rules: 1
— R&R: 97 % (mean of head angular rates in flexion, extension, lateral flexion and torsion neck
tests)
— THOR applicability: unknown
5.2 Neck
5.2.1 N – Eppinger
ij
— Injury target: AIS3+ neck injury
— Source: Reference [12]
— Channels: upper neck force F and moment M
z y
— Filtration: forces CFC600 ; moments CFC600
M
F
y
z
— Formula: N =+
ij
F M
zc yc
where
F is the upper neck force in the z direction expressed in N;
z
M is the upper neck moment in the y direction expressed in Nm;
y
F (tension/compression) = 2 520/-3 640 N;
zc
M (flexion/extension) = 48/-72 Nm.
yc
— NHTSA Eppinger curve: P =
AIS ≥ 3
3,,227−1 969N
ij
1+e
2,142 4
 
N
 
ij
 
— Survival with Weibull: P =−1 exp −
 
AIS ≥ 3
 1,936 4 
 
 
where
P is the injury probability for an AIS3+ neck injury;
AIS ≥ 3
N is the neck injury criterion.
ij
— Data: 43 piglet tests and associated 3 years old airbag dummy (Reference [52]) provided in Table C.1
of Annex C
— Statistics: logistic for Eppinger curve; survival with Weibull for ISO curve
— Comments:
— Original curve for 3 years old airbag dummy transferred to HIII M50
— The THOR intercepts were proposed in Reference [10] and the SAE THOR evaluation task group
based on the human tolerance and the THOR biofidelity.
— PMHS critical values from literature (References [4], [56], [57] and [65]): F (tension/
zc
compression) = (2 100/-3 030) N; M (flexion/extension) = (40/-60) Nm
yc
— Scale for age (References [31], [44], [56]): factor of 1,2
— The biofidelity of the THOR was not accounted for and it is assumed that PMHS values are
conservative when used for the THOR.
— Paired sled tests were performed with HIII and THOR head neck complex. The sled
acceleration was the same for the two dummies. The results are provided in Annex G. Both
in flexion and extension, the N were much higher for the THOR compared to the HIII (0,68
ij
versus 0,29 in flexion; 0,55 versus 0,27 in extension). A factor of about 2,2 on the THOR
intercepts is needed to get the same risk with the THOR and the HIII in these simple and
controlled configurations. However, this comment just intends to demonstrate that the
proposed intercepts are not consistent with intercepts on HIII, not to propose alternative
intercepts. In addition, for extension tests, THOR exhibited neck compression, while Hybrid
III exhibited neck tension, therefore a simple scaling of the intercepts is not adequate.
— Further investigations are needed, and it is not recommended to use these curves as provided.
— Curves
Key
X N
ij
Y risk of neck AIS3+
IRF (survival Weibull)
CI (survival Weibull)
IRF (Eppinger logistic)
Figure 8 — Injury risk curves for AIS 3+ as a function of N
ij
— Quotation
— ISO/TS 18506 rules: 0,7
— Quality assessment
— CI at 5 % = 1,64 (unacceptable)
— CI at 25 % = 0,73 (fair)
— CI at 50 % = 0,48 (good)
— R&R: 96 % (mean of upper neck forces and moments in flexion, extension, lateral flexion and
torsion neck calibration tests)
— THOR applicability: 0
5.2.2 N – Mertz
te
— Injury target: AIS3+ neck injury
— Source: Reference [53]
— Channels: Upper neck force F and moment M
z y
— Filtration: Forces CFC600 ; Moments CFC600
F M
t e
— Formula: N =+
te
F M
tc ec
where
F is the upper neck force in the z direction expressed in N;
z
M is the upper neck moment in the y direction expressed in Nm;
y
F is the portion of F when the neck is in tension (positive values);
t z
M is the portion of M when the neck is in extension (negative values);
e y
F (tension) = 6 200 N;
tc
M (extension) = -122 Nm.
ec
— PN==ϕμ;, 1 480;,σ = 0 235
()
AIS ≥ t3 e
where
P is the injury probability for an AIS3+ neck injury;
AIS ≥ 3
Φ is the cumulative distribution function of the normal distribution;
N is the neck injury criterion;
te
μ is the mean of the normal distribution;
σ is the standard deviation of the normal distribution.
— Data: 43 piglet tests and associated 3 years old airbag dummy (Reference [53]) provided in Table C.2
of Annex C
— Statistics: Modified median rank method (Reference [50])
— Comments:
— Original curve for 3 years old airbag dummy transferred to HIII M50
— The THOR intercepts were proposed by Reference [10] and the SAE THOR evaluation task group
based on the human tolerance and the THOR biofidelity.
— PMHS Critical values from literature (References [4], [56], [57] and [65]): F (tension/
zc
compression) = (2100/-3030) N; M (flexion/extension) = (40/-60) Nm
yc
— Scale for age (References [31], [44], [56]): factor of 1,2
— The biofidelity of the THOR was not accounted for and it is assumed that PMHS values are
conservative when used for the THOR
— Paired sled tests were performed with HIII and THOR head neck complex. The sled
acceleration was the same for the two dummies. The results are provided in Annex G. Both
in flexion and extension, the N were much higher for the THOR compared to the HIII (0,68
ij
versus 0,29 in flexion; 0,55 versus 0,27 in extension). A factor of about 2,2 on the THOR
intercepts is needed to get the same risk with the THOR and the HIII in these simple and
controlled configurations.
— Further investigations are needed, and it is not recommended to use these curves as provided.
— Curves
Key
X N
te
Y risk of neck AIS3+
IRF (Mertz-Weber)
CI (Mertz-Weber)
Figure 9 — Injury risk curves for AIS 3+ as a function of Nte
— Quotation
— ISO/TS 18506 rules: 0
— Quality assessment
— CI at 5 % = 0,33 (good)
— CI at 25 % = 0,27 (good)
— CI at 50 % = 0,24 (good)
— R&R: 95 % (mean of upper neck forces and moments in extension neck calibration tests)
— THOR applicability: 0
5.3 Thorax
According to the AIS definition, several rib fractures NFS (Non-Further Specified) correspond to AIS2.
The definition of an AIS3 in the thorax corresponds to 3 fractured ribs. Nevertheless, several studies
have shown that this definition cannot be applied directly to the PMHS. On the one hand they are more
fragile than living subjects of the same age, and on the other hand there is a detection bias. On living
subjects, the detection is performed by X-ray, which only detects displaced fractures with a gap between
the fractured edges. Non-displaced fractures cannot be detected and are therefore not counted. If a
practitioner detects several rib fractures without being able to identify them with X-rays, he will
therefore indicate NFS and rate AIS2. On a PMHS, the detection is usually performed by autopsy and
all fractures can be detected, whether displaced or not. To take this bias into account, Reference [87]
defined AIS3 as 6 fractured ribs, Reference [40] as 7 fractured ribs. More recently, Reference [85]
recommended to count only displaced fractured ribs to assess the clinical risk. The following curves
are defined for 3 and 7 fractured ribs for deflection, PC-score and TIC_NFR and for 3 separate fractured
ribs for TIC_NSFR.
5.3.1 Maximum resultant deflexion
— Injury target: AIS3+ chest injury (3 fractured ribs)
— Source: Reference [66]
— Channels: 4 3D rib deflections (D , D , D , D , D , D , D , D , D , D , D , D )
ulx uly ulz urx ury urz llx lly llz lrx lry lrz
— Data: 40 PMHS sled— Filtration: CFC180
— Formula:
RD= max,() DD,, D
maxulmax urmax llmax lrmax
where
22 2
DD=+max DD+ ;
ulmaxulx ulyulz )
(
22 2
DD=+max DD+ ;
urmaxu( rx uryurz )
22 2
DD=+max DD+ ;
llmax llx lly llz )
(
22 2
DD=+max DD+ ;
lrmaxl( rx lrylrz )
D is the deflection measured at the ij position in the k direction and expressed in mm:
ijk
i = (u, l) for upper and lower positions;
j = (l, r) for left and right positions;
k = (x, y, z) for the direction.
33,356
—
 
 
R
max
 
Pe=−1 xp −
  
NFR ≥ |3AR,
  
max
exp 4,,477 75 − 0 017 1A
  () 
 
 
2,,547 6
—
 
 R 
max
 
Pe=−1 xp −
 

NFR ≥ |7AR,

 
max
exp 4,,470 10− 007 6A
()
   
 
 
where
P is the injury probability;

is the age;
A
R is the chest injury criterion.
max
tests (28 belt only; 7 3-point belt+AB; 2 lap belt+AB; 3 inflatable belt) provided in Table D.1 of Annex D
— Statistics: Survival (Weibull)
— Dummy version: THOR mod-kit 2013
— Comments:
— No impactor tests
— Curves
a) 35 years old b) 45 years old
c) 55 years old d) 65 years old
Key
X R (mm)
max
Y risk of NFR3+
IRF (NFR3+)
CI (NFR3+)
Figure 10 — Injury risk curves for NFR3+ as a function of Rmax
a) 35 years old b) 45 years old
c) 55 years old d) 65 years old
Key
X R (mm)
max
Y risk of NFR7+
IRF (NFR7+)
CI (NFR7+)
Figure 11 — Injury risk curves for NFR7+ as a function of R
max
— Quotation
— ISO/TS 18506 rules: 1
— Quality assessment (Table 2)
Table 2 — Quality assessment of R
max
Age 35 years old 45 years old 55 years old years old
NFR3+
5 % CI 1,24 1,18 1,21 1,34
25 % CI 0,83 0,64 0,57 0,66
50 % CI 0,80 0,53 0,35 0,39
NFR7+
5 % CI 2,07 1,94 1,94 2,04
25 % CI 1,13 0,83 0,67 0,73
50 % CI 1,12 0,74 0,45 0,42
NFR3+ calculated with enlarged database of TIC
5 % CI 1,75 1,85 2,02 2,24
25 % CI 0,90 0,83 0,87 1,01
50 % CI 0,80 0,59 0,48 0,53
Quotation: 0 < good < 0,5 — R&R: 94 %
— THOR applicability: 1
5.3.2 PC-Score
— Injury target: AIS3+ chest injury (3 fractured ribs)
— Source: Reference [66]
— Channels: 4 3D rib deflections (D , D , D , D , D , D , D , D , D , D , D , D )
ulx uly ulz urx ury urz llx lly llz lrx lry lrz
— Filtration: CFC180
D D
  D   D
uptot updif
   
lowtot lowdif
— Formula: S =0,486 +0,492 +04, 966 +0,526
   
pca    
17,439 14,735 9,672 12,384
   
   
where
22 22 22
DD=+maxmDD+ ++ax DD + D ;
uptotu( lx ulyulz ) ( urxury urz )

22 22 22
DD=+max DD+− DD++ D ;
updifu( lx ulyulz urxury urz )

22 22 22
DD=+maxmDD+ ++ax DD + D ;
lowtot ( llx lly llz ) ( lrxlry lrz )

22 22 22
DD=+max DD+− DD++ D ;
lowdif ( llx lly llz lrxlry lrz )
D is the deflection measured at the ij position in the k direction and expressed in mm:
ijk
i = (u, l) for upper and lower positions;
j = (l, r) for left and right positions;
k = (x, y, z) for the direction;
S is the variable for chest injury criterion PC-Score.
pca
3,,311 8
 
 S 
pca
 
— P =−1 exp −  

NFR ≥ |3AS,
 

pca
exp,2 867 70− , 018 1A
 ()
 
 
 
2,,470 8
 
 S 
pca
 
— P =−1 exp −  

NFR ≥ |7 AS,  

pca
exp,2 533 70− , 007 9A
 ()
 
 
 
where
P is the injury probability;

A is the age;
S is the variable for the chest injury criterion PC-Score.
pca
— Data: 40 PMHS sled tests (28 belt only; 7 3-point belt+AB; 2 lap belt+AB; 3 inflatable belt) provided
in Table D.1 of Annex D
— Statistics: PCA then survival (Weibull)
— Dummy version: THOR mod-kit 2013
— Comments:
— No impactor tests
— Curves
a) 35 years old b) 45 years old
c) 55 years old d) 65 years old
Key
X PC-Score
Y risk of NFR3+
IRF (NFR3+)
CI (NFR3+)
Figure 12 — Injury risk curves for NFR3+ as a function of PC-Score
a) 35 years old b) 45 years old
c) 55 years old d) 65 years old
Key
X PC-Score
Y risk of NFR7+
IRF (NFR7+)
CI (NFR7+)
Figure 13 — Injury risk curves for NFR7+ as a function of PC-Score
— Quotation
— ISO/TS 18506 rules: 1
— Quality assessment (Table 3)
Table 3 — Quality assessment of PC-Score
Age 35 years old 45 years old 55 years old 65 years old
NFR3+
5 % CI 1,28 1,22 1,26 1,39
25 % CI 0,85 0,65 0,59 0,69
50 % CI 0,81 0,53 0,35 0,41
NFR7+
5 % CI 2,17 2,05 2,04 2,15
25 % CI 1,17 0,86 0,70 0,76
50 % CI 1,14 0,75 0,46 0,43
NFR3+ calculated with enlarged database of TIC
5 % CI 1,26 1,30 1,37 1,48
25 % CI 0,70 0,64 0,64 0,71
50 % CI 0,61 0,46 0,38 0,40
Quotation: 0 < good < 0,5 — R&R: 94 %
— THOR applicability: 1
5.3.3 TIC
— Injury target: AIS3+ chest injury (3 fractured ribs or 3 displaced fractured ribs)
— Source: Reference [85]
— Channels: 4 3D rib deflections (D , D , D , D , D , D , D , D , D , D , D , D )
ulx uly ulz urx ury urz llx lly llz lrx lry lrz
— Filtration: CFC180
— Formula:
TR=+16, 6 D
NRFmax updif
TR=+3 D
NSRF maxupdif
where
RD= max,() DD,, D ;
maxulmax urmax llmax lrmax
22 2
DD=+max DD+ ;
ulmaxulx ulyulz )
(
22 2
DD=+max DD+ ;
urmaxu( rx uryurz )
22 2
DD=+max DD+ ;
llmax llx lly llz )
(
22 2
DD=+max DD+ ;
lrmaxl( rx lrylrz )
22 22 22
DD=+max DD+− DD++ D ;
updifulx ulyulz urxury urz )
(
D is the deflection measured at the ij position in the k direction and expressed in mm:
ijk
i = (u, l) for upper and lower positions;
j = (l, r) for left and right positions;
k = (x, y, z) for the direction;
T is the variable for the chest injury criterion TIC ;
NFR NFR
T is the variable for the chest injury criterion TIC .
NSFR NSFR
γ
 
 
T
NFR
 
— Pe=−1 xp −
  
NFR ≥ |3AT,
NFR 
 
exp 5,,2675−0 0135A
 ()
 
 
— With
— γ =

0,,093 25+ 0 004 75 A
()
γ
 
 
T
NSFR
 
— Pe=−1 xp −
  
NSFR ≥ 3|AT,

NSFR
 
exp 6,,125−0 015A
()
 
 
 
— With
— γ =

0,,025 25+ 0 004 15 A
()
— Data: 71PMHS sled tests (58 belt only; 7 3-point belt+AB; 3 lap belt+AB; 3 inflatable belt and 9 PMHS
static AB tests) provided in Table D.2 of Annex D
— Statistics: survival (Weibull)
— Dummy version: THOR mod-kit 2013
— Comments:
— No impactor tests
— Enlarged test sample including airbag only loading and a larger range of deflections. Tests
consisting of the deployment of unfolded airbags were included because they were carried out
in such a way as to generate only a membrane effect close to the loading of a subject in a crash
test
— Meaningful gauss like distribution of age (median 68,5 years), mass (median 70,5 kg) and height
(median 175 cm)
— A principal component analysis of this sample indicated that a good criterion describing
the chest deflection needs two components: one describing the extent of the deflection; one
describing the left-right asymmetry of the deflection
— For the development of TIC, different THORs have been used and it is
...