310 Int. J. Experimental and Computational Biomechanics, Vol. 2, No.

4, 2014

Evaluation of bio-dynamic responses of human body

subjected to impacts due to speed humps

M.C. Kiran
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Kalpataru Institute of Technology,
Tiptur, 572202, KA, India
Email: 20.kiranmc@gmail.com

S.N. Omkar* and B. Vadiraj

Department of Aerospace Engineering,
Indian Institute of Science,
Bangalore, 560012, KA, India
Email: omkar@aero.iisc.ernet.in
Email: vadirajb@aero.iisc.ernet.in
*Corresponding author

Abstract: Bio-dynamics of seated human subjects exposed to whole body

vibration has been a topic of interest over the years. Most of the motorcycle
riders are exposed to health risks, due to repeated exposure of mechanical
shock when frequently riding over traffic speed humps. The present study
describes a novel method to assess the acceleration transmissibility through
the body and the apparent mass of the subject while riding a motorised
two-wheeler over a speed hump. Sensitivity of human subjects to whole body
vibration under low-frequency excitation in seated posture is also addressed by
driving point mechanical impedance. Experiment methodology involves use of
body mounted accelerometer as motion sensors to track these shocks for
four healthy subjects. A four-degree of freedom lumped parameter model is
simulated to quantify the instantaneous effects of mechanical shocks. This
understanding is likely to aid the driving community, in general, and the
motorcycle manufactures to incorporate better suspension and appropriate
ergonomics considerations.
Keywords: lumped parameter model; seated human models; biodynamic
responses; mechanical shock; speed hump.
Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Kiran, M.C., Omkar, S.N.
and Vadiraj, B. (2014) Evaluation of bio-dynamic responses of human body
subjected to impacts due to speed humps, Int. J. Experimental and
Computational Biomechanics, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp.310323.
Biographical notes: M.C. Kiran received his BE in Mechanical Engineering
from Jawaharlal Nehru National College of Engineering, Shivamogga,
Karnataka in 2011 and MTech in Machine Design from Viswesvaraya
Technological University, Belgaum, Karnataka. Currently, he is working as an
Assistant Professor at the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Kalpataru
Institute of Technology, Tiptur. He was a research intern in Department
of Aerospace Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore during
July 2012July 2013. His research interests include biomechanics and solid
mechanics.

Copyright 2014 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

 Evaluation of bio-dynamic responses of human body subjected to impacts 311

S.N. Omkar received his BE in Mechanical Engineering from the University

Viswesvarayya College of Engineering in 1985, MSc (Eng.) in Aerospace
Engineering from Indian Institute of Science in 1992 and PhD in Aerospace
Engineering from the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore in 1999. Currently,
he is working as a Principal Research Scientist at the Department of Aerospace
Engineering at the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore. His research interests
include biomechanics, helicopter dynamics, biologically inspired computational
techniques, fuzzy logic and satellite image processor.

B. Vadiraj received his BE in Mechanical Engineering from Vijayanagar

Engineering College, Bellary, Karnataka in 2006 and MTech in Machine from
B.M.S. College of Engineering, Bangalore, Karnataka in 2008. Currently, he is
working as a research scholar at the Department of Aerospace Engineering
at the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore. His research interests include
biomechanics, structural mechanics, vibration control and aerospace structures.

1 Introduction

The term shock is inferred differently in biology and medicine than in engineering; in its
engineering sense, shock is defined as a non-periodic excitation characterised by
suddenness and severity. Engineering shocks are often experienced by vehicle riders
when their vehicle negotiates speed control hump even at moderate speed. Some
researchers have shown that speed control humps effectively reduce vehicle speed and
accident frequency (Webster and Mackie, 1996). However, they are the most effective
traffic calming devices currently available and are likely to be in common use for some
time (Kjemtrup, 1990).
In the past few decades, plenty of experimental methods and mathematical models
have been developed on the basis of diverse field measurements to describe the
biodynamic responses of human being. The biodynamic response of the human body
exposed to vibration have been invariably characterised by measurement of force motion
relationship at the point of entry of vibration to-the-body response function and
transmission of vibration to different body segments through-the body response
function. Considering that the human body is a complex biological system,
to-the-body response function is conveniently characterised through non-invasive
measurements at the driving point alone (Liang and Chiang, 2006). Levison and Harrah
(1971) conducted experiment on 12 human subjects to study biodynamic responses for
both harmonic, random vibration incentives of magnitude below 4 m/s2 and vibration
environment was supplied by a large amplitude multi-degree of freedom (DOF) hydraulic
vibration platform. Studies of Griffin (1990) describe methods to measure and evaluate
human responses exposed to whole-body vibration and shock in terms of seat
transmissibility and seat effective amplitude transmissibility using accelerometer.
Experiments conducted on seven male subjects by Boileau and Rakheja (1998) using
whole body vehicular vibration simulator for three levels of sinusoidal and random
excitations respectively swept in the frequency range of 0.62510 Hz evaluated
biodynamic responses such as seat to head transmissibility (STHT), driving point
mechanical impedance (DPMI) and apparent mass (APMS). Ji et al. (2008) experimented
312 M.C. Kiran et al.

on five male subjects to evaluate random road incentive and acceleration at different
body segments using random vibration experimental table SA30-S802/ST. Simulations
were carried out to validate experimental results using ADAMS/LIFEMOD.
Mandapuram et al. (2012) investigated for APMS and STHT response functions of the
seated human body under whole-body vibration exposed to fore-aft (x), lateral (y) and
vertical (z) applied individually and simultaneously. The experiments were performed
with nine adult male subjects over a rigid seat and a steering column installed on a
six-DOF whole-body vibration simulator. A tri-axial force plate (Kistler 9281C) served
as the seat pan and another force plate, fabricated using three three-axis force sensors
(Kistler 9317B), to measure the biodynamic responses to single and uncorrelated
three-axis vibration with and without hands and back support under different magnitudes
of random vibration in the 0.520 Hz frequency range.
Various mathematical biodynamic models have been developed to depict human
motion from single-DOF to multi-DOF. These models can be divided as distributed
(finite element) models (Alphin and Sankaranarayanasamy, 2011), lumped parameter
models and multi-body models (Tan and Przekwas, 2011). The lumped parameter models
consider the human body as several rigid bodies and spring-dampers. This type of model
is simple to analyse and easy to validate with experiments (Liang and Chiang, 2006).
However, limitation to one-directional analysis makes this system both advantageous and
disadvantageous depending on the purpose of investigation. Coermann (1962) measured
the driving-point impedance of the human body and suggested one-DOF model. Suggs
et al. (1969) developed a two-DOF human body as a damped spring-mass system to build
a standardised vehicle seat testing procedure. Boileau and Rakheja (1998) used an
optimisation procedure to establish a four-DOF human model based on test data.
From the literature, it can be seen that most of the researchers devoted their
study over harmonic and random vehicular vibration by performing experiments and
simulation. These studies indicate that most of the experiments performed for whole body
vibration are in laboratory conditions. The focus of this paper is to extend these studies
for real-life impact condition and also establish the validity of mathematical model for
impact condition. A standard speed control hump has been utilised in this experimental
study, over which a motorcycle rider negotiates. It is intended to assess the acceleration at
seat-buttock interface and head of the subject due to the impact force experienced
negotiating standard speed control hump using Shimmer accelerometer. To compare
obtained experimental results, a four-DOF lumped parameter model is simulated using
Dirac delta as input function in MATLAB/SIMULINK to quantify the instantaneous
effects of mechanical shocks in terms of bio-dynamic response. Transmissibility of
acceleration through the body, APMS and DPMI responses are also computed.

2 Experiment

Experimental flow of the present study involves selection of healthy subjects for the
experiment followed by measuring device selection and mounting. Procedure to perform
experiments and data acquisition is also explained in this section.
 Evaluation of bio-dynamic responses of human body subjected to impacts 313

2.1 Subjects
Four healthy human subjects (mean SD; age: 23 2 years and weight: 55 5 Kg) took
part in the experiment. Detailed instructions were given to the subjects prior to the
experiment. Subjects with valid driving license participated in the study and were asked
to wear safety helmets during the task. All the subjects gave their written consent to
participate in the experiment.

2.2 Accelerometer mounting

The accelerometers mounted on to the subject are shown in Figure 1. One accelerometer
is mounted on the back of the neck and the other accelerometer at the subjects
seat-buttock interface respectively.

Figure 1 Position of accelerometers (see online version for colours)

2.3 Procedure

Prior to data collection, subjects were given a practice trial to become familiar with the
task to be performed in the experiment. In this task, the subject was asked to ride a
motorcycle over a speed hump (LSS RHL-65) at approximately 20 kilometres per hour
and to maintain a comfortable riding posture. The speed hump was located at a distance
of approximately 100 metres from the starting point. After effective number of trails,
subjects were made to ride a motorcycle negotiating standard speed control hump and
data were recorded using Shimmer accelerometer.
314 M.C. Kiran et al.

2.4 Data acquisition

The readings were taken using the accelerometer at a sampling rate of 51.2 Hz and stored
into a computer using the lab view software provided along with accelerometer for
offline analysis. For data acquisition Lab View program from Shimmer was utilised.
The program is very flexible to vary the various parameters like sampling frequency,
G-values and also convenient to start and stop the data streaming whenever necessary.
The data was transmitted to a nearby computer in real time via a Bluetooth link
established between the computer and the sensor. The real time data from all the three
axes with the respective time stamp was saved to an excel sheet for the data analysis.

3 Simulation

Simulation of four-DOF biodynamic human model is carried out with input/base

excitation function as Dirac delta using MATLAB/SIMULINK, whose magnitude is
approximately same as that of the peak acceleration observed at seat during experiments.

3.1 Biodynamic model

The lumped-parameter model is probably one of the most popular analytical methods in
the study of biodynamic responses of seated human subjects. The human body in a sitting
posture is modelled as a mechanical system that is composed of several rigid bodies
interconnected by springs and dampers. In this paper, Boileau and Rakhejas (1998)
four-DOF model is considered for the study. This model consists of four mass segments
interconnected by four sets of springs and dampers with a total mass of 55.2 kg. The four
masses represent the following four body segments: the head and neck (m1), the chest and
upper torso (m2), the lower torso (m3), and the thighs and pelvis in contact with the seat
(m4). The mass due to lower legs and the feet is not included in this representation,
assuming their negligible contributions to the biodynamic response of the seated body.
The stiffness and damping properties of thighs and pelvis are (k5) and (c5), the lower torso
are (k4) and (c4), upper torso are (k2, k3) and (c2, c3), and head are (k1) and (c1). x1, x1 , 
x1
are the displacement, velocity and acceleration of head and x2, x2 ,  x2 for upper torso,
x3, x3 , 
x3 for lower torso, x4, x4 , 
x4 for thighs, xse , xse for seat. The schematic
representation of the model is shown in Figure 2 and the biomechanical parameters of the
lumped parameter model are listed in Table 1. Equations of motion for Boileau and
Rakhejas four-DOF model
x1 = c1 ( x1 x2 ) k1 ( x1 x2 )
m1  (1)

x2 = c1 ( x1 x2 ) + k1 ( x1 x2 ) c2 ( x2 x3 ) k2 ( x2 x3 )

m2  (2)

x3 = c2 ( x2 x3 ) + k2 ( x2 x3 ) c3 ( x3 x4 ) k3 ( x3 x4 )

m3  (3)

x4 = c3 ( x3 x4 ) + k3 ( x3 x4 ) c4 ( x4 xse ) k4 ( x4 xse )

m4  (4)
 Evaluation of bio-dynamic responses of human body subjected to impacts 315

Figure 2 Boileau and Rakhejas four-DOF model

Table 1 Parameters for Boileau and Rakhejas four-DOF model

Mass (kg) Damping (N.s/m) Stiffness (N/m)

m1 = 5.31 c1 =460 k1 = 356,370
m2 = 28.49 c2 = 5,400 k2 = 208,570
m3 = 8.62 c3 = 5,190 k3 = 18,760
m4 = 12.78 c4 = 2,370 k4 = 103,480

3.2 Dirac delta function

The impact forces or the shocks are the non-periodic functions which are experienced
while traversing over speed hump. Similar non-periodic forcing environment is
created to simulate four-DOF bio-dynamic human model using unit impulse function.
The unit impulse, also known as the Dirac delta function and is defined mathematically
as,

(t a ) = 0 for t a (5)

(t a)dt = 1

(6)
316 M.C. Kiran et al.

4 Biodynamic responses

4.1 Apparent mass

The APMS is defined by the International Standard ISO/DIS 5982 (2000) (Ji et al., 2008)
as: the complex ratio of applied excitation force F(f) at frequency f, to the resulting
vibration acceleration a(f), measured at the same point and in the same direction as the
applied force. Hence, the APMS is formulated as
F( f )
Z( f ) = (7)
a( f )

When an upward/downward force is acting on a subject then its apparent mass is

equivalent to the reactive force which prevents the supported subject from falling and can
be theoretically calculated as,
Fnet = Fg + Fnor (8)

M nor = mass of the human body due to normal force.

Therefore,
APMS = M + M nor (9)

Fg = downward force acting on the body due to gravity.

Fnor = force acting on the body due to normal force.

M = mass of the human body.

4.2 Acceleration transmissibility

Transmissibility is defined by the International Standard ISO/DIS 5982 (2000) (Ji et al.,
2008) as a complex non-dimensional ratio of response motion of the various segments to
the forced vibration motion at the seat-body interface. The ratio may be one of
displacements, velocities or accelerations. It is expressed as:
ai ( j)
H ( j) = (10)
a( j)

where H(j) is the complex STHT or seat to upper torso transmissibility (STUTT) or seat
to lower torso transmissibility (STLTT) or seat to thigh transmissibility (STTT), the
response acceleration ai(j) measured at the head or upper torso or lower torso or thighs
of seated occupant, and a(j) is the acceleration response at the driving point.

4.3 Driving point mechanical impedance

The DPMI is defined by the International Standard ISO/DIS 5982 (2000) (Ji et al., 2008)]
as: the complex ratio of applied excitation force F(f) at frequency f, to the resulting
vibration velocity v(f), measured at the same point and in the same direction as the
applied force, i.e.:
 Evaluation of bio-dynamic responses of human body subjected to impacts 317

F( f )
Z( f ) = (11)
v( f )

where Z(f) is the impedance defined as resistance to motion to input excitation from
different source when a structure is subjected to excitation, in this case it is due to rider
negotiating a standard speed control hump.

5 Results and discussion

5.1 Peak acceleration responses

The acceleration data recorded according to experimental procedure is plotted and shown
in Figure 3 for head region, which infers the variation of acceleration at the head
negotiating a speed control hump. Further, from the acceleration plot it can be observed
that the peak accelerations are achieved just when the subject is riding over the mid
section of the standard speed control hump. Similar procedure is followed for the
remaining subjects to obtain peak acceleration. Peak acceleration at the head and
seat-buttock interface along with their averages are tabulated in Table 2.

Figure 3 Traces produced at head as motorcycle rider negotiates speed control hump (see online
version for colours)
318 M.C. Kiran et al.

Table 2 Experimental peak acceleration at different body segments

Peak acceleration in m/s2

Subjects
Head Seat-buttock interface
1 30.1347 35.1398
2 33.5285 39.0602
3 31.2539 36.6596
4 28.4528 34.8506
Average 30.8425 36.4275

Simulation of four-DOF model is carried out using MATLAB/SIMULINK with an

input/base excitation function, as Dirac delta whose magnitude is approximately same as
that of the average peak acceleration observed at seat during experiments. From
experimental and simulation results tabulated in Table 3. From tabulated results it can be
inferred that the experimental values of peak acceleration are in line with the peak
acceleration obtained from simulation and they agree with an accuracy of 94.4%.
Table 3 Comparison of experimental and simulation peak acceleration values

Peak acceleration in m/s2

Body segment Percentage error
Experimental Simulation
Head 30.8425 33.5215 7.99%
Seat-body interface 36.4275 36.5106 0.22%

This agreement between simulated and experimental results allows us to proceed for the
evaluation of biodynamic responses from Boileau and Rakhejas four-DOF model for the
impact force experienced negotiating standard speed control hump.

5.2 Apparent mass

Apparent mass is evaluated as per equation (8) and equation (9) analytically and
simulation results are plotted and evaluated according to equation (7) is shown in the
Figure 4. it can also be inferred from the plot that human model behaves as a pure mass at
lower frequencies (below 2 Hz) and in the vicinity of resonant frequency, APMS reaches
its peak value and is due to the dampening effect exhibited by the four-DOF human
model; Also this biodynamic human model exhibit stiffening effect at frequencies higher
than resonant frequency which leads to decrease in apparent mass in higher frequency
zone.

5.3 Acceleration transmissibility

Transmissibility of acceleration at different segments of the body is evaluated according
to equation (10). Transmissibility measured at head, upper, lower torso and pelvic is
shown in Figures 5(a), 5(b), 5(c) and 5(d) respectively. These transmissibility results
infer acceleration amplitude transmitting through the body and it can be observed that
peak transmissibility ratio is high at head region indicating maximum transmissibility.
From the plots it can be observed that transmissibility ratios achieve its peak values at
56 Hz defining the resonant frequency of the system.
 Evaluation of bio-dynamic responses of human body subjected to impacts 319

Figure 4 Frequency response plot of APMS obtained from simulation (see online version
for colours)

Figure 5 Transmissibility obtained from simulation, (a) seat to head transmissibility (b) seat to
upper torso transmissibility (c) seat to lower torso transmissibility (d) seat to thigh
transmissibility (see online version for colours)

(a)
320 M.C. Kiran et al.

Figure 5 Transmissibility obtained from simulation, (a) seat to head transmissibility (b) seat to
upper torso transmissibility (c) seat to lower torso transmissibility (d) seat to thigh
transmissibility (continued) (see online version for colours)

(b)

(c)
 Evaluation of bio-dynamic responses of human body subjected to impacts 321

Figure 5 Transmissibility obtained from simulation, (a) seat to head transmissibility (b) seat to
upper torso transmissibility (c) seat to lower torso transmissibility (d) seat to thigh
transmissibility (continued) (see online version for colours)

(d)

Figure 6 Frequency response plot of DPMI obtained from simulation (see online version
for colours)
322 M.C. Kiran et al.

5.4 Driving point mechanical impedance

DPMI plotted as per equation (11) is shown in Figure 6. and it can be observed that,
human body is very sensitive in a frequency range of 57 Hz, i.e., resonant frequency.
From Figure 6, it can also be inferred that human body behaves like a pure mass at lower
frequencies (below 2 Hz) and in the vicinity of resonant frequency (57 Hz), DPMI
reaches its peak value.

6 Conclusions

A study on the biodynamic responses of seated human subjects exposed impacts due to
speed humps was carried out experimentally using Shimmer accelerometer and
simulation using four-DOF human model. Peak accelerations from experiments and
simulation studies are in good agreement, which infer the validity of mathematical
model for impact conditions. Human body segments can absorb certain amount of
acceleration and in present study acceleration absorbed by the human body is in a range
of 5 to 7 m/s2. High sensitivity of the human body is observed over a frequency range of
5 to 7 Hz.

References
Alphin, M.S. and Sankaranarayanasamy, K. (2011) Finite element analysis to predict the dynamic
characteristics of human trunk-neck-head for whole body vibration, International Journal
Human Factors Modelling and Simulation, Vol. 2, Nos. 1/2, pp.1425.
Boileau, P.E. and Rakheja, S. (1998) Whole-body vertical biodynamic response characteristics of
the seated vehicle driver: measurement and model development, International Journal of
Industrial Ergonomics, Vol. 22, No. 6, pp.449472.
Coermann, R.R. (1962) The mechanical impedance of the human body in sitting and standing
position at low frequencies, Human Factors, October, Vol. 4, No. 5, pp.227253.
Griffin, M.J. (1990) Measurement and evaluation of whole-body vibration at work, International
Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp.4554.
Ji, Z., Zhang, E., Liu, Z., Jia, J. and Zhang, F. (2008) Simulation and experiment research on
human riding comforts for vehicle vibration in dynamic environment, 9th International
Conference on CAID/CD 2008, IEEE, pp.175181, doi: 10.1109/CAIDCD.2008.4730546.
Kjemtrup, K. (1990) Speed reducing measures, Conference on Speed Management in Urban
Areas, Danish Road Directorate, Copenhagen.
Levison, W.H. and Harrah, C.B. (1971) Biomechanical and Performance Response of Man in Six
Different Directional Axis Vibration Environments, Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory
Technical Report, AMRL-TR-77-71.
Liang, C-C. and Chiang, C-F. (2006) A study on biodynamic models of seated human subjects
exposed to vertical vibration, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, Vol. 36,
No. 10, pp.869890.
Mandapuram, S., Rakheja, S., Boileau, P-. and Maeda, S. (2012) Apparent mass and head
vibration transmission responses of seated body to three translational axis vibration,
International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, Vol. 42, No. 3, pp.268277.
Suggs, C.W., Abrams, C.F. and Stikeleather, L.F. (1969) Application of a damped spring-mass
human vibration simulator in vibration testing of vehicle seats, Ergonomics, Vol. 12, No. 1,
pp.7990.
 Evaluation of bio-dynamic responses of human body subjected to impacts 323

Tan, X.G. and Przekwas, A.J. (2011) A computational model for articulated human body
dynamics, International Journal Human Factors Modelling and Simulation, Vol. 2, Nos. 1/2,
pp.85110.
Webster, D.C. and Mackie, D.M. (1996) Review of Traffic Calming Schemes in 20 mph Zones, TRL
Report TRL215, Crowthorne, TRL Limited.