EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

A minimum area discrepancy method (MADM) for force displacement response correlation

Jeremie Peres, Christophe Bastien, Jesper Christensen and Zahra Asgharpour

Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering, 2019, vol. 22, issue 11, 981-996

Abstract: With the increasing use of Computer Aided Engineering, it has become vital to be able to evaluate the accuracy of numerical models. Specific methods such as CORA were developed to objectively evaluate the correlation between a physical test and a numerical simulation results in terms of parameter vs time. However, no metric has so far been developed for Force Vs Deflection (FvD) signals often used in crashworthiness and biomechanics. A unique method called the Minimum Area Discrepancy Method, or MADM, is proposed to address this deficiency. This new method initially calculates a parameter ‘R’ which represents the area between numerical model and the average physical test response and then divides it by the average area generated by the upper and lower test corridors, based on the same standard deviation. The parameter ‘R’ is then normalized between 0 (no correlation) and 1 (perfect correlation) to become the MADM correlation rating. The MADM method was then validated by comparing a one dimensional Finite Element (FE) model of a chest model, under 2 impact velocities, against reference Post Mortem Human Subject (PMHS) data. The MADM method was further used to improve the correlation of this thorax model, by varying model parameters and generating 81 model variations. Based on the MADM ratings, a set parameter values leading to the best fit was identified. The best fit exhibits a response significantly better than the original chest model. MADM is novel, unique, easy to use and fulfills an important gap in objectively evaluating FVD correlation responses. AbbreviationsMADMCorrelation rating value (Minimum Area Discrepancy Method)MADMn,mMADM correlation rating using a specific scaling value of ‘n’ and power rating ‘m’FvDForce versus DisplacementFvTForce versus TimeDvTDisplacement versus TimeNMNumerical modelPEPhysical ExperimentAmodelArea under the average signal and the Numerical ModelAupperArea under the average signal +1 standard deviationAlowerArea under the average signal -1 standard deviationRRatio between Amodel and the average of Aupper and Alower

Date: 2019
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10255842.2019.1610745 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:gcmbxx:v:22:y:2019:i:11:p:981-996

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/gcmb20

DOI: 10.1080/10255842.2019.1610745

Access Statistics for this article

Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering is currently edited by Director of Biomaterials John Middleton

More articles in Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().

 
Page updated 2025-03-20
Handle: RePEc:taf:gcmbxx:v:22:y:2019:i:11:p:981-996