Comparison of Kriging and Moving Least Square Methods to Change the Geometry of Human Body Models.

Q2 Medicine Stapp car crash journal Pub Date : 2015-11-09 DOI:10.4271/2015-22-0013
E. Jolivet, Y. Lafon, P. Petit, P. Beillas
{"title":"Comparison of Kriging and Moving Least Square Methods to Change the Geometry of Human Body Models.","authors":"E. Jolivet, Y. Lafon, P. Petit, P. Beillas","doi":"10.4271/2015-22-0013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Finite Element Human Body Models (HBM) have become powerful tools to study the response to impact. However, they are typically only developed for a limited number of sizes and ages. Various approaches driven by control points have been reported in the literature for the non-linear scaling of these HBM into models with different geometrical characteristics. The purpose of this study is to compare the performances of commonly used control points based interpolation methods in different usage scenarios. Performance metrics include the respect of target, the mesh quality and the runability. For this study, the Kriging and Moving Least square interpolation approaches were compared in three test cases. The first two cases correspond to changes of anthropometric dimensions of (1) a child model (from 6 to 1.5 years old) and (2) the GHBMC M50 model (Global Human Body Models Consortium, from 50th to 5th percentile female). For the third case, the GHBMC M50 ribcage was scaled to match the rib cage geometry derived from a CT-scan. In the first two test cases, all tested methods provided similar shapes with acceptable results in terms of time needed for the deformation (a few minutes at most), overall respect of the targets, element quality distribution and time step for explicit simulation. The personalization of rib cage proved to be much more challenging. None of the methods tested provided fully satisfactory results at the level of the rib trajectory and section. There were corrugated local deformations unless using a smooth regression through relaxation. Overall, the results highlight the importance of the target definition over the interpolation method.","PeriodicalId":35289,"journal":{"name":"Stapp car crash journal","volume":"59 1","pages":"337-57"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"27","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Stapp car crash journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4271/2015-22-0013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 27

Abstract

Finite Element Human Body Models (HBM) have become powerful tools to study the response to impact. However, they are typically only developed for a limited number of sizes and ages. Various approaches driven by control points have been reported in the literature for the non-linear scaling of these HBM into models with different geometrical characteristics. The purpose of this study is to compare the performances of commonly used control points based interpolation methods in different usage scenarios. Performance metrics include the respect of target, the mesh quality and the runability. For this study, the Kriging and Moving Least square interpolation approaches were compared in three test cases. The first two cases correspond to changes of anthropometric dimensions of (1) a child model (from 6 to 1.5 years old) and (2) the GHBMC M50 model (Global Human Body Models Consortium, from 50th to 5th percentile female). For the third case, the GHBMC M50 ribcage was scaled to match the rib cage geometry derived from a CT-scan. In the first two test cases, all tested methods provided similar shapes with acceptable results in terms of time needed for the deformation (a few minutes at most), overall respect of the targets, element quality distribution and time step for explicit simulation. The personalization of rib cage proved to be much more challenging. None of the methods tested provided fully satisfactory results at the level of the rib trajectory and section. There were corrugated local deformations unless using a smooth regression through relaxation. Overall, the results highlight the importance of the target definition over the interpolation method.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Kriging与移动最小二乘法在人体模型几何变化中的比较。
有限元人体模型(HBM)已成为研究人体对冲击反应的有力工具。然而,它们通常只针对有限数量的尺寸和年龄开发。文献中已经报道了由控制点驱动的各种方法,用于将这些HBM非线性缩放成具有不同几何特征的模型。本研究的目的是比较常用的基于控制点的插值方法在不同使用场景下的性能。性能指标包括目标相关度、网格质量和可运行性。在本研究中,在三个测试用例中比较了Kriging和移动最小二乘插值方法。前两个病例对应于(1)儿童模型(从6岁到1.5岁)和(2)GHBMC M50模型(全球人体模型联盟,从第50到第5百分位女性)的人体尺寸变化。对于第三例患者,将GHBMC M50胸腔进行缩放,以匹配ct扫描得出的胸腔几何形状。在前两个测试用例中,所有测试方法都提供了类似的形状,并且在变形所需的时间(最多几分钟)、对目标的总体尊重、单元质量分布和显式模拟的时间步长方面都得到了可接受的结果。事实证明,胸廓的个性化更具挑战性。没有一种测试方法在肋骨轨迹和截面水平上提供完全令人满意的结果。除非通过松弛进行平滑回归,否则存在波纹状局部变形。总的来说,结果突出了目标定义比插值方法的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Stapp car crash journal
Stapp car crash journal Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of Child Anthropometries in Relation to Modern Vehicle Seat and Booster Dimensions. Isolated Rib Response and Fracture Prediction for Young Mid-Size Male, Enabled by Population Specific Material Models and Rib Cross-Sectional Geometry. Effects of head restraint (HR) interference on child restraint system (CRS) performance in frontal and far-side impacts. Effect of A-Pillar Blind Spots on a Driver's Pedestrian Visibility during Vehicle Turns at an Intersection. Standardized Assessment of Gravity Settling Human Body Models for Virtual Testing.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1