The objective of this study is to use finite element (FE) models to understand the differences in response between human body model (HBM) and THOR-50M dummy in reclined seating scenarios that may become more common in automated vehicles. The Total Human Model for Safety (THUMS) v4.01 and Humanetics THOR-50M Anthropomorphic Test Device (ATD) FE model were used in both frontal- and rear-impact scenarios. The seating postures were based on data from a recent volunteer study. Front and rear impacts with seatback angles of 23, 33, and 43 degrees were simulated for a total of six test conditions. A US NCAP midsize sedan pulse was selected for the analysis. A publicly available seat model based on a 2012 Toyota Camry driver seat and a model of a ZF seatbelt system with pre-tensioner and load limiter were used in the study.
Both dynamic and kinematic data were analyzed and compared between the THUMS and THOR models, including motion, load measurements and displacements at numerous anatomical positons and sensor measurement locations. In addition, the seat cushion and seatback contact forces were compared. Due to the anthropometry discrepancies between the two models, the sensor measurement locations in THOR 50M do not necessarily coincide with THUMS anatomical locations. In such case, the anatomical location in THUMS was selected. The responses between the two FE models were similar in some parameters and quite different in others. The study could not determine which FE model has better biofidelity because no biofidelity specifications from Post Mortem Human Subject (PMHS) testing are available for such assessment.