Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBruneau, David
dc.contributor.authorCronin, Duane
dc.date.accessioned2023-03-13 19:49:07 (GMT)
dc.date.available2023-03-13 19:49:07 (GMT)
dc.date.issued2021-03
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.104299
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10012/19200
dc.descriptionThis preprint has not undergone peer review or any post-submission improvements or corrections. The Version of Record of this article is published in the Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials, and is available online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.104299en
dc.description.abstractComputational human body models (HBM) present a novel approach to predict brain response 3 in football impact scenarios, with prescribed kinematic boundary conditions for the HBM skull 4 typically used at present. However, computational optimization of helmets requires simulation 5 of the coupled helmet and HBM model; which is much more complex and has not been assessed 6 in the context of brain deformation and existing simplified approaches. In the current study, two 7 boundary conditions and the resulting brain deformations were compared using a HBM head 8 model: (1) a prescribed skull kinematics (PK) boundary condition using measured head kinematics 9 from experimental impacts; and (2) a novel detailed simulation of a HBM head and neck, helmet 10 and linear impactor (HBM‐S). While lateral and rear impacts exhibited similar levels of maximum 11 principal strain (MPS) in the brain tissue using both boundary conditions, differences were noted 12 in the frontal orientation (at 9.3 m/s, MPS was 0.39 for PK, 0.54 for HBM‐S). Importantly, both PK 13 and HBM‐S boundary conditions produced a similar distribution of MPS throughout the brain for 14 each impact orientation considered. Within the corpus callosum and thalamus, high MPS was 15 associated with lateral impacts and lower values with frontal and rear impacts. The good 16 correspondence of both boundary conditions is encouraging for future optimization of helmet 17 designs. A limitation of the PK approach is the need for experimental head kinematics data, while 18 the HBM‐S can predict brain response for varying impact conditions and helmet configurations, 19 with potential as a tool to improve helmet protection performance.en
dc.description.sponsorshipThe research presented was made possible by a grant from Football Research, Inc. (FRI), the National Football League (NFL), and Biomechanical Consulting and Research, LLC (Biocore) in the USA.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherElsevier ScienceDirecten
dc.relation.ispartofseriesJournal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials;104299
dc.subjecthelmet protectionen
dc.subjecthuman body modelen
dc.subjectbrain deformationen
dc.subjectanthropometric testing deviceen
dc.subject3 impact biomechanicsen
dc.subjectconcussionen
dc.subjectamerican footballen
dc.titleBrain Response of a Computational Head Model for Prescribed Skull Kinematics and Simulated 3 Football Helmet Impact Boundary Conditionsen
dc.typeArticleen
dcterms.bibliographicCitationBruneau, D. A., & Cronin, D. S. (2021). Brain response of a computational head model for prescribed skull kinematics and simulated football helmet impact boundary conditions. Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials, 115, 104299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.104299en
uws.contributor.affiliation1Faculty of Engineeringen
uws.contributor.affiliation2Mechanical and Mechatronics Engineeringen
uws.typeOfResourceTexten
uws.peerReviewStatusRevieweden
uws.scholarLevelFacultyen


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


UWSpace

University of Waterloo Library
200 University Avenue West
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1
519 888 4883

All items in UWSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

DSpace software

Service outages