Abstract
Energy-absorbing floor (EAF) has been proposed as one of several biomechanically effective strategies to mitigate the risk of fall-related injuries by decreasing peak loads and enhancing system energy absorption. This study aims to compare the protective capacity of four commercially available EAF products (Igelkott Floor, Kradal, SmartCells, and OmniSports) in terms of head impacts using the finite element (FE) method. The stress–strain curves acquired from mechanical tests were applied to material models in LS-Dyna. The established FE models were then validated using Hybrid III or hemispheric drop tests to compare the acceleration–time curves between experiments and simulations. Finally, the validated FE models were utilized to simulate a typical pedestrian fall accident scenario. It was demonstrated that EAFs can substantially reduce the peak forces, acceleration, and velocity changes during fall-related head impacts. Specifically, in the accident reconstruction scenario, SmartCells provided the largest reduction in peak linear acceleration and skull fracture risk, while Igelkott Floor provided the largest reduction in peak angular velocity and concussion risk. This performance was caused by different energy absorption mechanisms. Consequently, the results can contribute to supporting the implementation of EAFs and determine the effectiveness of various protective strategies for fall-related head injury prevention.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.