Neck postural stabilization, motion comfort, and impact simulation

Happee, Riender; Bruijn, Edo de; Forbes, Patrick A.; Drunen, Paul van; Dieën, Jaap H. van; Helm, F.C.T. van der

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-816713-7.00019-2

Cited by 7 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 65 publications

(86 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These models were primarily designed for high-severity road accident loading and/or captured only few motion directions. To address these limitations, we adopted a three-dimensional (3D) multisegment non-linear neck model (66)(67)(68) extended with a postural controller stabilizing the head-neck system in the presence of gravity and trunk motion [ (15,39); Figure 1].…”

Section: Biomechanical Head-neck Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Validation for other directions, including frontal impact, is presented in ref. (39). Feedback loops were added for head lateral motion and yaw, equivalent to the anterior-posterior loops.…”

Section: Biomechanical Head-neck Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1 We evaluate this hypothesis in an analysis of head-neck stabilization in seated healthy humans, which matches conditions where sensory integration models were validated for motion sickness and self-motion perception. We adopt a biomechanical neck model presented and validated for anterior/posterior stabilization (15) and other directions including frontal impact (39). These articles combined vestibular and visual feedback with joined loops and assumed perfect 3D perception of head orientation in space including verticality and yaw.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Neck stabilization through sensory integration of vestibular and visual motion cues

Happee,

Kotian,

De Winkel

2023

Front. Neurol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundTo counteract gravity, trunk motion, and other perturbations, the human head–neck system requires continuous muscular stabilization. In this study, we combine a musculoskeletal neck model with models of sensory integration (SI) to unravel the role of vestibular, visual, and muscle sensory cues in head–neck stabilization and relate SI conflicts and postural instability to motion sickness.MethodA 3D multisegment neck model with 258 Hill-type muscle elements was extended with postural stabilization using SI of vestibular (semicircular and otolith) and visual (rotation rate, verticality, and yaw) cues using the multisensory observer model (MSOM) and the subjective vertical conflict model (SVC). Dynamic head–neck stabilization was studied using empirical datasets, including 6D trunk perturbations and a 4 m/s2 slalom drive inducing motion sickness.ResultsRecorded head translation and rotation are well matched when using all feedback loops with MSOM or SVC or assuming perfect perception. A basic version of the model, including muscle, but omitting vestibular and visual perception, shows that muscular feedback can stabilize the neck in all conditions. However, this model predicts excessive head rotations in conditions with trunk rotation and in the slalom. Adding feedback of head rotational velocity sensed by the semicircular canals effectively reduces head rotations at mid-frequencies. Realistic head rotations at low frequencies are obtained by adding vestibular and visual feedback of head rotation based on the MSOM or SVC model or assuming perfect perception. The MSOM with full vision well captures all conditions, whereas the MSOM excluding vision well captures all conditions without vision. The SVC provides two estimates of verticality, with a vestibular estimate SVCvest, which is highly effective in controlling head verticality, and an integrated vestibular/visual estimate SVCint which can complement SVCvest in conditions with vision. As expected, in the sickening drive, SI models imprecisely estimate verticality, resulting in sensory conflict and postural instability.ConclusionThe results support the validity of SI models in postural stabilization, where both MSOM and SVC provide credible results. The results in the sickening drive show imprecise sensory integration to enlarge head motion. This uniquely links the sensory conflict theory and the postural instability theory in motion sickness causation.

show abstract

Section: Biomechanical Head-neck Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Biomechanical Head-neck Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Neck stabilization through sensory integration of vestibular and visual motion cues

Happee,

Kotian,

De Winkel

2023

Front. Neurol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The head control objectives are suggested to be partly conflicting, as head motion can be controlled relative to trunk or space, dependent on motion conditions and task. Previously, an advanced neck model that included the vestibulocollic reflex (VCR), the cervicocollic reflex (CCR) and neck muscle co-contraction was validated [20,21]. Visuo-vestibular and muscle spindle feedback mechanisms were shown to be essential, in particular, for head-neck stabilization.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simulating 3D Human Postural Stabilization in Vibration and Dynamic Driving

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In future automated vehicles we will often engage in non-driving tasks and will not watch the road. This will affect postural stabilization and may elicit discomfort or even motion sickness in dynamic driving. Future vehicles will accommodate this with properly designed seats and interiors, whereas comfortable vehicle motion will be achieved with smooth driving styles and well-designed (active) suspensions. To support research and development in dynamic comfort, this paper presents the validation of a multi-segment full-body human model, including visuo-vestibular and muscle spindle feedback, for postural stabilization. Dynamic driving is evaluated using a “sickening drive”, including a 0.2 Hz 4 m/s2 slalom. Vibration transmission is evaluated with compliant automotive seats, applying 3D platform motion and evaluating 3D translation and rotation of pelvis, trunk and head. The model matches human motion in dynamic driving and reproduces fore–aft, lateral and vertical oscillations. Visuo-vestibular and muscle spindle feedback are shown to be essential, in particular, for head–neck stabilization. Active leg muscle control at the hips and knees is shown to be essential to stabilize the trunk in the high-amplitude slalom condition but not with low-amplitude horizontal vibrations. However, active leg muscle control can strongly affect 4–6 Hz vertical vibration transmission. Compared to the vibration tests, the dynamic driving tests show enlarged postural control gains to minimize trunk and head roll and pitch and to align head yaw with driving direction. Human modelling can enable the insights required to achieve breakthrough comfort enhancements, while enabling efficient developments for a wide range of driving conditions, body sizes and other factors. Hence, modelling human postural control can accelerate the innovation of seats and vehicle motion-control strategies for (automated) vehicles.

show abstract

“…They also help in the understanding of how the body moves and allows anticipation of the consequences of motion on human health, comfort or performance. [13][14][15][16] Such reasonable applications have governed various forms of models being developed. These comprise lumped parameter models, [17][18][19] matrix models, 20,21 multibody models [22][23][24][25][26][27][28] and finite element models.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An appropriate biomechanical model of seated human subjects exposed to whole-body vibration

Desai

Guha

Seshu

2021

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part K:

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Long duration automobile-induced vibration is the cause of many ailments to humans. Predicting and mitigating these vibrations through seat requires a good model of seated human body. A good model is the one that strikes the right balance between modelling difficulty and simulation results accuracy. Increasing the number of body parts which have been separately modelled and increasing the number of ways these parts are connected to each other increase the number of degrees of freedom of the entire model. A number of such models have been reported in the literature. These range from simple lumped parameter models with limited accuracy to advanced models with high computational cost. However, a systematic comparison of these models has not been reported till date. This work creates eight such models ranging from 8 to 26 degrees of freedom and tries to identify the model which strikes the right balance between modelling complexity and results accuracy. A comparison of the models’ prediction with experimental data published in the literature allows the identification of a 12 degree of freedom backrest supported model as optimum for modelling complexity and prediction accuracy.

show abstract

Neck postural stabilization, motion comfort, and impact simulation

Cited by 7 publications

References 65 publications

Neck stabilization through sensory integration of vestibular and visual motion cues

Neck stabilization through sensory integration of vestibular and visual motion cues

Simulating 3D Human Postural Stabilization in Vibration and Dynamic Driving

An appropriate biomechanical model of seated human subjects exposed to whole-body vibration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About