IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/gcmbxx/v17y2014i2p137-148.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validation of a full body finite element model (THUMS) for running-type impacts to the lower extremity

Author

Listed:
  • Alison Schinkel-Ivy
  • William J. Altenhof
  • David M. Andrews

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine whether modifying an existing, highly biofidelic full body finite element model [total human model for safety (THUMS)] would produce valid amplitude and temporal shock wave characteristics as it travels proximally through the lower extremity. Modifying an existing model may be more feasible than developing a new model, in terms of cost, labour and expertise. The THUMS shoe was modified to more closely simulate the material properties of a heel pad. Relative errors in force and acceleration data from experimental human pendulum impacts and simulated THUMS impacts were 22% and 54%, respectively, across the time history studied. The THUMS peak acceleration was attenuated by 57.5% and took 19.7 ms to travel proximally along the lower extremity. Although refinements may be necessary to improve force and acceleration timing, the modified THUMS represented, to a certain extent, shock wave propagation and attenuation demonstrated by living humans under controlled impact conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Alison Schinkel-Ivy & William J. Altenhof & David M. Andrews, 2014. "Validation of a full body finite element model (THUMS) for running-type impacts to the lower extremity," Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(2), pages 137-148, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:gcmbxx:v:17:y:2014:i:2:p:137-148
    DOI: 10.1080/10255842.2012.672562
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10255842.2012.672562
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10255842.2012.672562?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:gcmbxx:v:17:y:2014:i:2:p:137-148. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/gcmb .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.