T. C.

Gupta
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Malaviya National Institute of Technology, Jaipur 302 017, India e-mail: tcgmnit@indiatimes.com

Identication and Experimental Validation of Damping Ratios of Different Human Body Segments Through Anthropometric Vibratory Model in Standing Posture
A 15 degrees of freedom lumped parameter vibratory model of human body is developed, for vertical mode vibrations, using anthropometric data of the 50th percentile US male. The mass and stiffness of various segments are determined from the elastic modulii of bones and tissues and from the anthropometric data available, assuming the shape of all the segments is ellipsoidal. The damping ratio of each segment is estimated on the basis of the physical structure of the body in a particular posture. Damping constants of various segments are calculated from these damping ratios. The human body is modeled as a linear spring-mass-damper system. The optimal values of the damping ratios of the body segments are estimated, for the 15 degrees of freedom model of the 50th percentile US male, by comparing the response of the model with the experimental response. Formulating a similar vibratory model of the 50th percentile Indian male and comparing the frequency response of the model with the experimental response of the same group of subjects validate the modeling procedure. A range of damping ratios has been considered to develop a vibratory model, which can predict the vertical harmonic response of the human body. DOI: 10.1115/1.2720917

Introduction

Frequent and prolonged exposure of human beings to dynamic environment may cause physical and physiological disorders, or tissue degeneration 1 . Due to the lack of an accurate numerical model to describe human body dynamics for various postures and vibration axes, the design of vehicle seats, orthopedic aids, etc., is based on experimental techniques, which require extensive data analysis. To have a better understanding of the human body dynamics, both continuous and lumped parameter models have been formulated with different degrees of complexity. These models are based on anatomical/anthropometrical analysis, apparent mass, and transmissibility measurements. An appropriate human body model should resemble human anatomy and reproduce measured human response, especially the magnitude and the location of resonance peaks under harmonic loads. The estimation of damping is of great importance to establish an accurate mechanical model of the human body to predict the dynamic response and energy absorbed in different parts of the human body in different postures. Muskian and Nash 2 have established the possibility of a frequency dependent damping coefcient in agreement with the frequency dependent muscle forces. Garg and Ross 3 developed a 16 degrees of freedom vibratory model based on their experimental results. The damping values for various joints in the human body were obtained indirectly in this study. Fairley and Grifn 4 provided comprehensive experimental data on the driving point frequency response of a seated human body and by tting the response of a lumped parameter model at a natural frequency of 5 Hz, obtained the damping ratio of the upper part of the body as 0.475. Pankoke and Woelfel 5 obtained the stiffness and damping ratio of the pelvis and the tissues between the pelvis and ground by tting natural
Contributed by the Bioengineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURBIOMECHANICAL ENGINEERING. Manuscript received June 30, 2005; nal manuscript received December 12, 2006. Review conducted by David FitzPatrick.

NAL OF

frequency predominant resonance of human response and the magnitudes of impedance/transfer functions from the seat to the head. Kitazaki and Grifn 6 extracted the vibration mode shapes of the body in mid saggital plane by using experimental modal analysis. They developed a biomechanical model by comparing the vibration mode shapes of the model with the experimental ones and determined the modal damping ratios by comparing the driving point apparent mass of the model with the experimental values without damping estimates. Kitazaki and Grifn 6 presented a model without any damping estimates since no reliable data were found. Matsumoto and Grifn 7 identied damping ratios and other model parameters by minimizing the error between the measured apparent mass and the calculated apparent mass. The number of degrees of freedom considered by theory was less compared to the number of natural frequencies reported experimentally by the earlier investigators. It has been observed that a lumped parameter model based on one experimental study does not reproduce results of other experimental studies. In almost all the studies, investigators have estimated the damping of the upper part of the human body or of the legs as a whole. To estimate the energy absorbed in different parts and joints of the human body during vibration, the estimation of damping of individual segments is needed. A modeling procedure based on anthropometric data would always be preferred since this can be applied to any individual. The purpose of this study is to estimate the damping ratio for the individual segments of the human body by extension of the undamped human body vibratory model developed by Nigam and Malik 8 . This model is based on the anthropometric data for the 50th percentile US male and the observed natural frequencies in the standing posture. Computed natural frequencies for this model were found to be close to the available experimental values. In the present work, the mass and stiffness values of body segments are determined by the method proposed by Nigam and Malik 8 . However, some renement is incorporated in the basic model 8 Transactions of the ASME

566 / Vol. 129, AUGUST 2007

Copyright 2007 by ASME

Downloaded 08 Jan 2013 to 115.248.20.13. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

assumed to be contributed by bones and tissues only and the axial elastic modulus E of the segment is approximated as a geometric mean of their elastic modulii Eb and Et of bones and tissues, which differ by an order of 106. It is presumed that the geometric mean is a more realistic value of the segment elastic modulus rather than the one based on series or parallel combination of bones and tissues. However, this assumption may not be realistic. If the elastic modulus of tissue can be measured considering the active nature of the live muscles, then the global elastic modulus dened by series or parallel combination may give quite realistic value. The extension L of the body segment under axial tensile force F is given by
+ci

L=
ci

F dz EA z

This yields the axial stiffness Si of the segment Si = F Eaibi = L ci ln ci + z / ci z

+ci ci

Fig. 1 An elipsoidal segment

by using a nonuniform elastic modulus for the bony structure of the backbone and for the voids in the central torso instead of using a uniform elastic modulus for all the segments. The damping ratio of each segment is estimated on the basis of the physical structure of the segment and then the damping constants are calculated. The human body is modeled as a discrete linear spring-mass-dashpot system and its harmonic response is predicted. The estimated damping ratios are validated by comparing the response of the model with the available experimental response of American males measured by Garg and Ross 4 . It is assumed that experimental response is for the 50th percentile US male. Since the experimental results may not be for the 50th percentile US male, in order to validate the present modeling procedure further, a model of the 50th percentile Indian male is framed. The frequency response of this model is compared with the experimental response of 50th percentile Indian males and a set of damping ratios for different segments of the human body vibratory model is arrived at by a parametric study.

with E = EbEt 1/2 and A z = aibi 1 z2 / c2 . i Si cannot be computed using Eq. 1 , since the term becomes singular at z = ci. Therefore, the ellipsoids are assumed to be truncated at the two ends with truncated length 2di, i.e., di = 0.95ci. This assumption agrees with the physical state in which replacing ci by di in Eq. 1 yields an area contact. Si = Eaibi ci log ci + di / ci di 2

Lumped Model

The damping constant ci of an individual body segment is obtained through its mass, stiffness, and an estimated damping ratio i. The damping ratio of any segment depends primarily on its structure, i.e., proportion of bones and tissues and the posture. The damping ratio is selected as per the following guidelines. a In a standing posture, the legs and the lower torso offer maximum damping. b The central torso offers a minimum amount of damping since it is a tissue structure with a considerable number of voids. c If the hands are resting against an extended frame attached to the vibrating platform, those would offer as much damping as the legs. However, in the standing posture, the hands are assumed to be hanging free and they do not dissipate energy when excitation propagates from the feet to the head. Hence their contribution to damping is taken as negligible. The damping constants Bi of the ith segment with mass M i and stiffness Si are obtained as Bi = 2
i

The anthropometric model by Bartz and Gianotti 9 consisting of 15 body segments with 14 joints is adopted in this study. The linear model is based on the following assumptions. The mechanical behavior of bones and tissues of a living body is not linear, yet, for small displacements and velocities, the behavior can be approximated as linear. i Restricting to the case of vertical excitation from the base to the feet of a person, standing in an erect state, the vertical displacements of various parts are predominant. Thus the body is modeled as discrete masses in vertical translation, with axial stiffness and viscous dissipation modeled as spring and dashpot elements. ii As reported in various anthropomorphic models in the literature 10 including Bartz and Gianotti 9 , for computing mass and dimensional properties, the body segments are modeled as ellipsoid Fig. 1 . iii The density of each segment is taken equal to the average density of the whole body since densities of different body segments are almost equal. The volume Vi of the ith segment of the body, modeled as an ellipsoid of 4 semi-axes ai, bi, ci, is Vi = 3 aibici and its mass M i is modeled as n M i = MVi / i=1Vi where M is the total mass of the body. iv The various segments are assumed to be linearly elastic homogeneous bodies with linear viscous dissipation. The spring and dashpots are modeled as linear. v The axial deformation in the segments is Journal of Biomechanical Engineering

Si M i

1/2

The distinct segments of the body are identied and, for vibrations in the standing posture, the vibratory model is developed as shown in Fig. 2. The stiffness and damping of the various spring and dashpot elements of the vibratory model are obtained using series combination of the stiffness and damping of the body segments comprising those elements. These formulas are given in Table 1 with the notations. The equations of motion of the vibratory model, with the excitation applied at the feet, are M X + C X + K X = F 4

where M , C , and K are, respectively, the inertia, damping, and stiffness matrices of the order 15 15. X is the displacement vector. The load vector F has nonzero values only at the bottom degrees of freedom 14 and 15 where the excitation is given. The steady state harmonic response under harmonic loads has been obtained by the impedance method.

Experiments on Human Body Response

The schematic of the setup developed to measure vertical vibration response of the human body in standing posture is shown AUGUST 2007, Vol. 129 / 567

Downloaded 08 Jan 2013 to 115.248.20.13. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Table 1 Stiffness and damping constants of spring and damper elements in the vibratory model: H: head, N: neck, UT: upper torso, CT: central torso, LT: lower torso, RF: right foot, LF: left foot, RUA: right upper arm, LUA: left upper arm, RLA: right lower arm, LLA: left lower arm, RUL: right upper leg, LUL: left upper leg, RLL: right lower leg, LLL: left lower leg i 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Fig. 2 Vibratory model of human body Segments H 1 N 2 , UT 3 UT 3 , CT 8 UT 3 , RUA 4 UT 3 , LUA 5 RLA 6 LLA 7 CT 8 , LT 9 LT 9 , RUL 10 LT 9 , LUL 11 RUL 10 , RLL 12 LUL 11 , LLL 13 RF 14 LF 15 Ki S1 S 2S 3 / S 2 + S 3 S 3S 8 / S 3 + S 8 S 3S 4 / S 3 + S 4 S 3S 5 / S 3 + S 5 S6 S7 S 8S 9 / S 8 + S 9 S9S10 / S9 + S10 S9S11 / S9 + S11 S10S12 / S10 + S12 S11S13 / S11 + S13 S14 S15 Ci B1 B 2B 3 / B 2 + B 3 B 3B 8 / B 3 + B 8 B 3B 4 / B 3 + B 4 B 3B 5 / B 3 + B 5 B6 B7 B 8B 9 / B 8 + B 9 B9B10 / B9 + B10 B9B11 / B9 + B11 B10B12 / B10 + B12 B11B13 / B11 + B13 B14 B15

in Fig. 3. An electrodynamics shaker vibrates the test table in this setup. A four to one lever arm ratio has been used for the platform on which the test subject rests, to increase the mass supporting capacity of the platform though at the cost of the amplitude. The automatic vibration exciter control feeds the shaker table via a power amplier and the frequency of excitation is altered by means of a builtin drive. The signals measuring the motion of the shaker table fed back to an automatic vibration exciter control via a conditioning amplier accelerometer preamplier . However, owing to uneven frequency response of the test subject, the power required to vibrate the test subject at a given level is dependent on frequency. To keep the vibration level constant, the power output to the exciter head is regulated manually by changing the voltage output to the automatic vibration exciter control. Either an accelerometer or a velocity pick-up may be used as a transducer. The vibration derivation section of the exciter control contains all the

integrator and differentiator networks necessary for deriving acceleration, velocity, or displacement from either input. It is possible to keep any of these properties constant on the shaker table. The test subject stands on the table with feet strapped to the table. An accelerometer is bolted to a plexiglass frame, which is strapped to the head of the subject. The subject is subjected to vibrations at a particular frequency for a sufcient time interval, so that there is steady state response but the time interval is not so large as to cause any fatigue in the subject. At each frequency, the acceleration amplitudes at the feet and the head are measured. During the experiments, the maximum acceleration at the feet of the subject is maintained at a constant level for all forcing frequencies.

Results

The anthropometric data for the 50th percentile US males given by Bartz and Gianotti 9 and used by Nigam and Malik 8 for

Fig. 3 Schematic representation of setup for frequency response experiment

568 / Vol. 129, AUGUST 2007

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded 08 Jan 2013 to 115.248.20.13. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Table 2 Anthropometric measurements cm Dimensional data L1 Standing height L2 Shoulder height L3 Armpit height L4 Waist height L5 Seated height L6 Head length L7 Head breadth L8 Head to chin height L9 Neck circumference L10 Shoulder breadth L11 Chest depth L12 Chest breadth L13 Waist depth L14 Waist breadth L15 Buttock depth L16 Hip breadth standing L17 Shoulder to elbow length L18 Forearm hand length L19 Biceps circumference L20 Elbow circumference L21 Forearm circumference L22 Wrist circumference L23 Knee height seated L24 Thigh circumference L25 Upper leg circumference L26 Knee circumference L27 Calf circumference L28 Ankle circumference L29 Ankle height outside L30 Foot breadth L31 Foot length 50th US male m = 74.9 kg 168.67 146.33 136.02 108.38 92.96 19.86 15.57 23.24 37.95 46.20 23.32 32.89 21.51 28.22 23.19 35.43 37.54 48.69 32.92 31.42 29.08 17.86 53.14 50.52 37.24 36.20 33.32 21.06 6.91 9.35 25.40 50th Indian male m = 58.2 kg 170.28 164.75 133.75 103.75 89.178 19.85 16.95 24.41 34.43 42.6 20.03 30.64 18.0 28.93 20.92 34.09 35.75 48.93 25.0 24.27 24.39 16.65 53.69 47.4 37.9 35.92 31.87 22.09 10.01 10.7 25.95 Indian subject m = 54.0 kg 169.5 144.0 125.0 98.5 89.0 21.0 18.0 21.0 33.0 42.0 22.0 30.5 21.0 28.0 22.5 32.0 31.5 47.5 23.5 23.5 23.0 16.0 47.0 48.0 36.5 3.0 32.0 23.5 9.7 10.5 26.0

the evaluation of mass and stiffness are reproduced in Table 2. The data are used in formulating the present vibratory model. The dimensions of the ellipsoidal model of various body segments are given in Table 3. 4.1 Vibratory Model as a Basic Spring-Mass System. In stiffness calculations, Nigram and Malik 8 have used the same value of elastic modulus for all the segments. This is plausible for the bony parts like legs, limbs, and upper and lower torsos, but not plausible for the central torso, which is basically a tissue structure with a considerable number of voids. The vibratory model of Nigam and Malik 8 differs from the vibratory model of the other authors in which the backbone is represented as a separate spring and dashpot combination. In the present study, the model of NiTable 3 Formulas for statistical dimensions of the ellipsoids representing body segments Formulas Body segment Head Neck Upper torso Central torso Lower torso Upper arms Lower arms Upper legs Lower legs Feet Mass elements M1 M2 M3 M8 M9 M 4, M 5 M 6, M 7 M 10, M 11 M 12, M 13 M 14, M 15 ai L7 / 2 L9 / 2 L12 / 2 L14 / 2 L16 / 2 L19 / 2 L27 / 2 L25 / 2 L27 / 2 L30 / 2 bi L7 / 2 L9 / 2 L11 / 2 L13 / 2 L15 / 2 L19 / 2 L21 / 2 L25 / 2 L27 / 2 L31 / 2 ci L6 / 2 L1 L2 L6 / 2 L17 / 2 L17 + L18 / 4 L18 / 4 L17 / 2 L18 / 2 L2 L17 L23 / 2 L23 + L29 / 2 L29 / 2

gam and Malik 8 , called here model 1, and its variation based on the above discussion, called model 2, have been analyzed to check which model represents more closely the actual vibratory response of the human body. With Eb = 22.6 GN/ m2 and Et = 7.5 KN/ m2, the elastic modulus of all segments is taken as E = EbEt 1/2 = 13.02 MN2 in model 1 Ref. 1 . In model 2, the stiffness of the central torso is taken as the sum of the stiffness of the complete torso as one ellipsoidal segment with E = 13.02 MN/ m2 and the stiffness of the central torso with Et = 7.5 KN/ m2. This is based on the fact that the central torso gets its support mainly from the backbone and these two elements make a parallel combination. Moreover, the backbone is a bony part with many joints supported by muscle forces so that its stiffness is calculated on the basis of the global elastic modulus
Table 4 Mass and stiffness values of the ellipsoidal segments for 50th percentile US male Semi-axes of ellipsoids as computed from Table 3 Segment Segment no. designation 1 2 3 4,5 6,7 8 9 10, 11 12, 13 14, 15 H N UT RUA LUA RLA LLA CT LT RUL LUL RLL LLL RF LF ai 7.785 6.02 16.43 5.239 4.629 14.11 17.72 3.926 3.304 4.674 bi 7.785 6.02 11.66 5.239 4.629 10.76 11.6 3.926 5.304 12.7 ci 9.931 1.13 9.385 18.77 24.33 21.33 12.11 27.93 23.11 6.909 Mi kg 3.044 0.207 9.105 2.322 1.91 16.33 12.59 7.827 3.443 1.198 Si KN/m 680.5 3576.0 2279.0 163.0 98.1 783.3 1893.0 140.2 135.7 938.0

Journal of Biomechanical Engineering

AUGUST 2007, Vol. 129 / 569

Downloaded 08 Jan 2013 to 115.248.20.13. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Table 5 Stiffness of the elements of the vibratory model Model no. 1 2 K1 680.5 680.5 K2 1392.0 1392.0 K3 584.2 295.02 K4,, K5 152.1 152.1 K6,, K7 98.1 98.1 K8 555.1 287.44 K9,, K10 130.5 130.5 K11, K12 68.9 68.9 K13,, K14 958.0 958.0

instead of the elastic modulus of the bone only. Using the anthropometric data of Table 2, the formulas from Table 3, and Eq. 2 , the mass and stiffness values of various segments are calculated and listed in Table 4. The present model is based on such anthropometric data, which can be measured conveniently. Except for the formula for height ci of ellipsoids representing the upper, central, and lower torso in Table 3, all the formulas are based on the resemblance of the body parts with the corresponding ellipsoidal segment. To dene the dimensions of the ellipsoids representing the torso, the heights of the upper, central, and lower torso cannot be measured explicitly. As the total length of the arm is very close to the height of the complete torso, it seems reasonable to use lengths of upper and lower parts of the arm to dene the vertical dimensions of the ellipsoids representing the torso. The stiffness values of the spring elements of the two models are obtained from the formulas of Table 1 and are listed in Table 5. The two models are compared on the basis of the experimental stiffness data reported by McMohan and Green 11 and Mizrahi and Susak 12 . McMohan and Green 11 reported leg stiffness of ve subjects varying from 19.7 to 55.3 KN/ m, with an average value of 37.6 KN/ m. Mizrahi and Susak 12 reported the stiffness of the leg and the stiffness of the remaining part of the body for two subjects, which are listed in Table 6. For the present models, the leg stiffness is estimated by taking the springs K9, K11, and K13 in series, and the stiffness of the upper part of the body is estimated by taking K1, K2, K3, and K8 in series. The computed values of the stiffness of the leg and of the remaining part of the body, for models 1 and 2, are given in Table
Table 6 Stiffness values KN/m reported by Mizrahi and Susak 12 Subject A B Leg 8.45 5.32 Remaining part of the body 45.2 42.3

7. The leg stiffness of model 1 is comparable to the average leg stiffness reported by McMohan and Green 11 . Considering the difference in the leg stiffness reported in Refs. 11,12 , the stiffness of the trunk of the body as estimated in 12 seems to be on the lower side. Thus the stiffness of the trunk estimated by the present models 1 and 2 is reasonable. But, taking into account the physical structure of human body, the improved model 2 is analyzed further to identify the damping ratios. 4.2 Development of Damped Vibratory Model of Human Body. The basic model is developed for a 50th percentile US male, for which experimental response data are not available in the literature. Garg and Ross 3 conducted the experiments on young males of 20 25 years of age. Assuming that the subjects of their work belong to the 50th percentile group, a comparison of the response of the vibratory model of the 50th percentile US male with the experimental response of Garg and Ross 3 provides a basis for adjusting the damping ratios of the segments assumed in the model. Garg and Ross 3 performed experiments for eight subjects and gave the response plots of the extreme cases and an average response plot for all the subjects. Looking at the structure of the human body and its vibratory response in the standing posture, it is apparent that most signicant body parts are feet, legs, central torso, lower torso, and upper torso. In a freely standing posture, the presence of hands, which do not rest against any support, cannot be expected to change the response of the body signicantly. In a similar manner, the head being free, though with stout skull, is also not as effective. Keeping this physical structure in mind, the response of model 2 has been obtained by changing the damping ratios of the various body segments. The results of some of these trial computations applied are shown in Table 8, in which the peak values of the amplitude ratio and the corresponding natural frequencies are given for each set of the damping ratios. Peaks for different natural frequencies, which depend on the mode shape for that natural frequency, are observed to be governed by damping of certain parts of the body. This observation can be used to design the seats. The peaks at 6 Hz and around 40 Hz are essentially governed by the damping of the feet and the legs. For larger damping of the feet and the legs, the peak around 40 Hz is spontaneously raised and a mild peak at 30 Hz appears. The damping ratio of the lower torso also affects the two peaks, although not as signicantly as the feet and the leg. The damping

Table 7 Stiffness values calculated from the present modeling Stiffness Leg Trunk Model 1 43.06 175.04 Model 2 43.6 110.41

Table 8 Effect of the damping ratio

of a particular segment on the resonant peaks of the response of model 2 I II AR 4.70 3.11 3.03 3.03 3.03 2.65 2.57 2.54 2.54 2.54 2.56 2.08 2.77 f Hz AR f Hz III AR F Hz 42 38 38 40 38 38 38 40 40 40 34 38 36 IV AR 0.36 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.51 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.61 0.61 0.95 0.86 0.44

H 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004

N 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015

UT 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.008 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.020 0.040 0.015 0.002

UA/LA 0.040 0.040 0.040 0.010 0.010 0.040 0.040 0.040 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.001 0.001

CT 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.01

LT 0.50 0.50 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.50 0.80 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.80 1.00

UL/LL 0.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25

F 0.70 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50

f HZ 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6

21 0.450 20 0.47 20 0.47 21 0.47 20 0.47 21 0.49 20 0.50 20 0.50 20 0.50 Suppressed 21 0.58 21 0.58 21 0.58

570 / Vol. 129, AUGUST 2007

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded 08 Jan 2013 to 115.248.20.13. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Table 9 Set of estimated damping ratios Body segments Zeta H 0.004 N 0.015 UT 0.002 ARMS 0.001 CT 0.05 LT 1.0 LEGS 1.5 F 1.5

of the central torso has a quite signicant effect on the peak value around 40 Hz, with increase in damping suppressing the peak. The damping of the upper torso affects the response around 20 Hz. The damping ratios of the arms, head, and neck have no signicant effect on the peak values. This observation is in agreement with the intuitive feeling that the damping of the hands should not affect the response at the head, as the hands are not in the way of the transmission of energy from the feet to the head. With an equal damping ratio of all the body segments, the response shows only a single peak at 6 Hz with a continuous decay

in amplitude ratio with increasing frequency. Based on the trial computation summarized in Table 8, the most appropriate set of damping ratios obtained is shown in Table 9. The theoretical response obtained, with the set of damping ratios given in Table 9, is plotted in Figs. 4 and 5. In most of the frequency range, the response of the present vibratory model for the 50th percentile US male is within the experimental response envelope of Garg and Ross 3 . The difference lies mainly in the frequency range of 18 to 28 Hz. The theoretical response shows a valley at 25 Hz, while the experimental response shows a clear peak at 20 Hz. The theoretical response in the range 18 to 28 Hz could not be brought within the experimental envelope by any combination of the damping ratios. Also, the peak at 1.6 Hz, observed in the experimental response, could not be obtained from the theoretical model. Although in most regions the theoretical response is quite satisfactory, the discrepancy of the response in the range 18 to 28 Hz points to the need for some modication in the basic model itself.

Fig. 4 Comparison of vibratory model response 50th percentile US male with experimental response of two extreme limits 3

Fig. 5 Comparison of vibratory model response 50th percentile US male with average experimental response 3

Journal of Biomechanical Engineering

AUGUST 2007, Vol. 129 / 571

Downloaded 08 Jan 2013 to 115.248.20.13. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Table 10 Mass and stiffness values of the ellipsoidal segments for 50th percentile Indian male Semi-axes of ellipsoids as computed from Table 3 Segment Segment no. designation 1 2 3 4,5 6,7 8 9 10, 11 12, 13 14, 15 H N UT RUA, LUA RLA, LLA CT LT RUL, LUL RLL, LLL RF, LF ai 8.475 5.48 15.32 3.98 3.88 14.46 17.05 6.03 5.07 5.35 bi 8.475 5.48 15.02 3.98 3.88 9.0 15.46 6.03 5.07 13.97 ci 9.925 1.84 17.87 17.87 24.46 21.47 12.23 28.65 21.84 5.005 Mi kg 2.543 0.917 14.67 1.01 1.32 9.83 11.49 3.72 2.0 1.33 Si KN/m 807.94 1822.1 1437.18 98.94 68.69 686.55 2706.23 141.665 131.39 1667.75

Evaluating the damping ratio of the leg and of the remaining part of the body and comparing these with the values reported in the literature can further establish the validity of the damping ratios estimated. The damping constant of a single leg can be evaluated by taking series combination of C9, C11, and C13. The damping ratio of the leg leg is given by:
leg =

Cleg 2 KlegM leg

1/2

For the damping ratio data for the theoretical response of Fig. 4, the leg-damping ratio is obtained as 0.443. This value is comparable to the damping ratios reported in the literature: 0.55 by McMohan and Greene 11 , 0.52 and 0.67 by Mizrahi and Susak 12 , and 0.475 by Fairley and Grifn 4 . The damping ratio for the model seems to be on the lower side. However, in the investigations 11,12 , the experiments were conducted on bounding and jumping modes when the body takes the support on the toes rather than the whole feet. The damping ratio computed for the present modeling considering the feet and lower leg is 0.82, and for the upper and lower leg combination is 0.57. The three values, 0.443, 0.57, and 0.82, of the damping ratio of the present model bracket the data of the leg damping ratio of the previous experimental works. 4.3 Vibratory Model of Indian Male. The comparison of the response of the 50th percentile US male vibratory model with the

experimental response measured by Garg and Ross 3 for the males of 20 25 years of age provided a guideline for prescribing the damping ratios to various body segments and developing the complete vibratory model. However, this comparison was on the assumption that the subjects of Garg and Ross 3 belonged to the 50th percentile US male group. In order to have a more meaningful comparison, it is necessary to develop the vibratory model of Indian subjects and perform experiments on the same. For a response study program and development of generalized model, it is useful to categorize the subject population into some groups. In the present work, the anthropometric data of 100 young university students of 18 24 years of age were collected. From these data, the anthropometric measurements of the 50th percentile were evaluated. These are given in Table 10. Using the anthropometric data for the 50th percentile Indian male, models 1 and 2 have been developed. It is to be noted that the calculation of the damping constant of the central torso involves the stiffness, so the concept of the parallel combination of damper elements, as used in the computation of stiffness for model 2, has not been adopted for model 2 to avoid multifold effects. Using the anthropometric data of the 50th percentile Indian male from Table 2, the formulas from Table 3, and Eq. 2 , the mass and stiffness values of all the segments are calculated and shown in Table 10. The damping constants of different body segments are obtained by using the set of damping ratios of individual body segments from Table 9 and Eq. 3 . The mass, stiffness, and damping constants of the segments are used to compute stiffness and damping constants of spring and dashpot elements using formulas from Table 1. Models 1 and 2 for the 50th percentile Indian male are developed and the theoretical response is predicted. The experiments have been conducted on seven subjects of the 50th percentile Indian male group to obtain the frequency response. The theoretical responses of the two models are compared in Fig. 6 and 7 respectively, with the experimental response for the extreme cases. In Fig. 8, the theoretical response of the models is compared with an average response of the seven subjects. In the development of the vibratory model of the 50th percentile Indian male, some adjustments were required to be made in the estimated values of damping ratios used for the 50th percentile US male. The modied damping values used for these models are given in Figs. 68 and it may be seen that these values are in the same order as for the 50th percentile US male. It is observed from Figs. 68 that the agreement between the

Fig. 6 Comparison of vibratory response of model 1 with experimental response of two extreme cases for 50th percentile Indian male

572 / Vol. 129, AUGUST 2007

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded 08 Jan 2013 to 115.248.20.13. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Fig. 7 Comparison of vibratory response of model 2 with experimental response of two extreme cases for 50th percentile Indian male

theoretical and experimental response of Indian males is better than that for the US males. Moreover, the theoretical response of model 2 appears to be closer to the experimental response than that of model 1. In fact, except for two peaks at 6.0 and 18.0 Hz, the theoretical response matches very well with the experimental one. The theoretical values of the acceleration ratios at 6.0 and 18.0 Hz are higher than the experimental values. The difference may possibly be reduced by further adjustment of the damping ratio of the body segments. However, this was not pursued, as the experimental peak values could have possible measurement error. During the experiments the acceleration level at input to the feet was kept constant throughout the frequency range. The exciter can provide a maximum constant acceleration level of 0.3 g at the feet for the complete frequency sweep. Even this maximum acceleration level 0.3 g at the input seems to be insufcient, especially at the higher frequency side, as the signals at the head become weaker with increasing frequencies. In fact, inherent damping of the platform itself decreased the displacement amplitude at the position of the subject. The lower value of the acceleration ratio at the rst two peaks in experimental response seems to be the result

of the limited magnitude of the displacement allowed by the exciter head. However, with all these limitations, all possible care was taken to ascertain the reproducibility of the experimental results. The experimental response of an Indian male subject is compared in Fig. 9 with the theoretical response of the vibratory model developed on the basis of anthropometric data Table 11 of the subject itself. Except for some peak values, the theoretical response for the subject compares very well with its experimental response.

Conclusions

This work has presented a 15 degrees of freedom lumped parameter model for vertical vibration of a human body in standing posture. The undamped spring mass model of the human body is formed through anthropometric data and the elastic properties of the bones and tissues. Damping constants of the various segments are computed from the estimated damping ratios. Appropriate series combinations of these constants yield the damping constants

Fig. 8 Comparison of vibratory models 1 and 2 with average experimental response 50th percentile Indian male

Journal of Biomechanical Engineering

AUGUST 2007, Vol. 129 / 573

Downloaded 08 Jan 2013 to 115.248.20.13. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm

Fig. 9 Comparison of vibratory model model 2 response of Indian male subject with its experimental response

of the dampers to be incorporated in the basic spring-mass model to obtain the spring-mass-dashpot model. The damping ratios of various segments are identied on the basis of the comparison of the response of the developed models with the actual experimental response under harmonic excitation. The response of the models is found to be in better agreement with the experimental response, if the anthropometric data used to develop models belong to the same group of subjects on which the experiments are conducted. In this work, the human body vibratory models have been developed for the standing posture only. However, the posture is not a restriction for the modeling procedure adopted. Signicant variation is known to exist among the considerable quantity of data published on driving point mechanical impedance, apparent mass and seat to head transmissibility magnitude, and phase characteristics of seated subjects under vertical whole body vibration. The present study indicates that identication of the damping ratio for the various body segments, through experimental validation of the modeling procedure based on the anthropometric data, can be used to develop a more generalized approach for mathematical modeling, to study the mechanism of dissipation/absorption in different parts of the body.
Table 11 Mass and stiffness values of the ellipsoidal segments of Indian male subject Semi-axes of ellipsoids as computed from Table 3 Segment Segment no. designation 1 2 3 4,5 6,7 8 9 10, 11 12, 13 14, 15 H N UT RUA, LUA RLA, LLA CT LT RUL, LUL RLL, LLL RF, LF ai 9.0 5.3 15.25 3.74 3.66 14.0 16.0 5.88 5.09 5.25 bi 9.0 5.3 11.0 3.74 3.66 10.5 11.25 5.31 5.09 13.0 ci 10.5 2.25 15.75 15.75 23.75 19.75 11.87 32.75 19.0 4.5 Mi kg 3.41 0.25 10.58 0.88 1.274 11.63 8.56 4.43 1.97 1.23 Si KN/m 861.25 1393.09 1189.08 99.15 62.97 830.96 1692.2 115.07 152.23 1693.25

The present experimental work can be extended to the determination of the mode shapes experimentally. The knowledge of mode shapes will help in predicting the range of frequencies, which induce erosion of orthopedic joints of specic parts of the human body. The present model 2 is able to predict reasonably accurate overall response to harmonic excitation. However, the theoretical response of the model shows some deviations from the experimental response and hence further renement of the model is required. It is emphasized that the theoretical model is developed to predict the response of the actual system with a certain level of condence and not really to duplicate the response of that system.

References
1 Bovenzi, M., and Hulshof, C. T. J., 1998, An Updated Review of Epidemiologic Studies on the Relationships Between Exposure to Whole Body Vibration and Low Back Pain, J. Sound Vib., 215 4 , pp. 595611. 2 Muskian, R., and Nash, C. D., 1976, On Frequency Dependent Damping Coefcients in Lumped Parameter Model of Human Beings, J. Biomech., 9, pp. 339342. 3 Garg, P. D., and Ross, M. A., 1976, Vertical Mode Human Body Vibration Transmissibility, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern., SMC-6 2 , pp. 102113. 4 Fairley, T. E., and Grifn, M. J., 1989, The Apparent Mass of the Seated Human Body: Vertical Vibration, J. Biomech., 22 2 , pp. 8194. 5 Pankoke, B. B., and Woelfel, H. P., 1998, Dynamic FE Model of Sitting Man Adjustable to Body Height, Body Mass and Posture Used for Calculating Internal Forces in the Lumbar Vertebral Disks, J. Sound Vib., 215 4 , pp. 827839. 6 Kitazaki, S., and Grifn, M. J., 1997, A Modal Analysis of Whole-Body Vertical Vibration, Using a Finite Element Model of the Human Body, J. Sound Vib., 200 1 , pp. 83103. 7 Matsumoto, Y., and Grifn, M. J., 2003, Mathematical Models for the Apparent Masses of Standing Subjects Exposed to Vertical Whole-Body Vibration, J. Sound Vib., 260, pp. 431451. 8 Nigam, S. P., and Malik, M., 1987, A Study on a Vibratory Model of Human Body, ASME J. Biomech. Eng., 109 2 , pp. 148153. 9 Bartz, J. A., and Gianotti, C. R., 1975, Computer Program to Generate Dimensional and Inertial Properties of the Human Body, ASME J. Eng. Ind., 97, pp. 4957. 10 Goldman, D. E., and Von-Gierke, H. E., 1961, Effects of Shock and Vibration on Man, Chap. 44 of Shock and Vibration Handbook, Vol. 3, 2nd ed., C. M. Harris and C. E. Crede, eds., McGraw Hill, New York. 11 McMohan, T. A., and Green Petek, R., 1979, The Inuence of Track Compliance on Running, J. Biomech., 12, pp. 893904. 12 Mizrahi, J., and Susak, Z., 1982, In-vivo Elastic and Damping Response of the Human Leg to Impact Forces, ASME J. Biomech. Eng., 104, pp. 6366.

574 / Vol. 129, AUGUST 2007

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded 08 Jan 2013 to 115.248.20.13. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm