A: We do not use MADYMO but we have been hired to evaluate MADYMO applications used in litigation. In one case in particular, from a few years ago, we evaluated an expert report who used the MADYMO occupant simulation program to evaluate injury potential in a low speed collision.
This post is to demonstrate that ANY and ALL occupant simulation needs to be carefully evaluated.
EVERY HUMAN is different!
- For any case specific application of ANY occupant simulation approach:
- Use and/or evaluate with extreme caution!
- What is ATB?
- Explanation of the origins of the ATB with links to papers on it including two papers we wrote in response to 'experts' using ATB to 'reconstruct occupant movements in a crash' and then trying to sell simple silly changes in the inputs as 'design changes' to prove that their proposed design changes produced 'mitigation' of the injuries. Total garbage. And to generalize our main quote
- "Any results or conclusions drawn from arbitrary and speculative occupant simulations related to individual crashes which experts claim produce detailed occupant kinematics involve so many approximations, estimates, and assumptions that they must be recognized as not being compatible with sound engineering practices and principles and, therefore, not scientifically supportable.
- Explanation of the origins of the ATB with links to papers on it including two papers we wrote in response to 'experts' using ATB to 'reconstruct occupant movements in a crash' and then trying to sell simple silly changes in the inputs as 'design changes' to prove that their proposed design changes produced 'mitigation' of the injuries. Total garbage. And to generalize our main quote
- MADYMO program:
- Includes important research which has improved vehicle safety however not applicable to individual crash reconstructions
- pc-crash Multi_body option
- this is a version of the ATB hidden as the 'multi-body' option, the references they cite are NOT for occupant simulation programs
- These are advanced classroom textbooks which do not address the actual coding and implementation into a computer simulation program, as if, it might be easy work?!
- See What is ATB where we present and discuss the brilliant pioneering work by Dr. John Fleck which included extremely efficient integration routines for economical execution of the program and the addition of many extensions and refinements to move the mathematical model from 2 dimensions to 3 dimensions
- For some reason the pc-crash folks pretend it is NOT ATB.
IT IS ATB!- and therefore NOT applicable to individual crash reconstruction
- For additional information see pc-crash multi-body option IS the ATB program
- pc-crash simplified MADYMO option
- This is such a stripped down version of MADYMO it doesn't have ability to customize the interior to match and/or other severe limitations and of course NOT applicable to individual crash reconstruction
- GATB
- this is simply a version of the ATB that works in the HVE environment and NOT applicable to individual crash reconstruction
- Virtual CRASH
- They use a version of the ATB for their pedestrian and passenger simulations
From the Virtual Crash Ver 3/4/5 User's Guide:- p 345: "Most biomechanics-type simulation tools, such as ATB, will treat the occupant model as essentially a flaccid body, with no active muscle control – Virtual CRASH is no different"
- "Virtual CRASH includes the ability to simulate an “optimized” human model that will hold its pre-impact pose until it comes into contact with a surface within the environment, at which time the pose is “released” and the human model is treated as a flaccid body (the user can control joint rigidity)."
- p621 "As in other biomechanics-type simulation programs, such as Articulated Total Body(27), the Virtual CRASH human model is a multi-ellipsoid system connected by joints."
- reference 27: "See SAE 950131"
- which is SAE Paper "Using ATB in collision reconstruction" by Wesley Grimes, author of GATB which is ATB working in the HVE environment. see GATB above
- NOTE: to simply Hold the pre-positioned ATB model until arbitrarily released by user choice is not a creation of a 'human model' and it does not improve or change the lack of fidelity of ATB for individual case reconstructions.
It merely provides a way to try to hide the fact that ATB does NOT model active human muscles or responses it is as they say ATB is "essentially a flaccid body, with no active muscle control"
- They use a version of the ATB for their pedestrian and passenger simulations
- Summary and Conclusions
In summary, the authors of the EXPERT report did not properly perform a scientific investigation or reconstruction of the subject accident. They provided arbitrary and speculative opinions based on limited and incomplete information, they did not use or reference any current techniques to reconstruct a collision like the subject accident, they included arbitrary calculations of impact duration and range of speed with no scientific basis.
The authors of the EXPERT report then used their opinions as the basis to perform a 3D occupant simulation of OCCUPANT in the subject collision.
The authors of the EXPERT report utilized the MADYMO 3D simulation model with the following deficiencies:- They did not properly create an acceleration substantially similar to the acceleration in the subject accident.
- They did not properly create and include any provisions for the interior of the Jeep with seat, floor, dash, center console, B pillar and side glass substantially similar to the vehicle at the time of the collision.
- They did not properly create a 3-point restraint system substantially similar to the belt in the vehicle at the time of the accident.
- They did not properly create inputs to model OCCUPANT and place her in a position and orientation for their MADYMO simulation that was substantially similar to the position and orientation of OCCUPANT at the time of the impact (i.e., turned to left in preparation for making a right turn).
For additional related information Please see:
- What is the ATB?
- Same B.M.I., Very Different Beach Body
- pc-crash: Man rightfully Wins New Trial in Car-Accident Trial
- The report from the case, filed with the court which includes the following important conclusions:
- After over 55 years of research on occupant simulation there is no model in existence today which has been validated as a generally predictive model for detailed occupant kinematics in any type of real-world accidents.
- Accident reconstruction programs and occupant simulation models are subject to limitations imposed by the mathematical idealizations and the simplifying assumptions inherent in any mathematical model of the physical world.
- The report from the case, filed with the court which includes the following important conclusions:
- Validation for Occupant Simulation?