This literature review discusses the development of anthropomorphic test dummies used for evaluating safety systems and the effects of vibration on the human body. It describes several dummies developed from the 1950s to present day, including Dynamic Dan, the supermorphic dummy, and Hybrid III dummies. Each new dummy aimed to improve on limitations of previous models by increasing biofidelity, incorporating flexibility in joints, and allowing for measurement of forces through added sensors. However, challenges remained regarding durability, accuracy in mimicking the human form, and ability to capture data in various testing environments such as marine travel. Overall, test dummies provide useful but imperfect representations of the human body for safety testing purposes.

1. Literature Review 1
Test Dummies for Human Whole Body Vibration
Name
Institution
Date

2. Literature Review 2
Test Dummies for Human Whole Body Vibration
Anthropomorphic test gadgets commonly referred to as “dummies” have been the most
widely used devices for testing safety systems (David, Viano & Parenteau, 2012). Applied as
subjects for evaluating the possible damages to human travelers in airplane, automobiles and
marine aircraft, dummies have formed the subject for construction and development of safety
gadgets in the travels industry (Mullin, 2007; Peters & Peters, 2002; Freeman, 2007). According
to Freeman (2007) earlier dummies only focused on the determination of potential hazards or
stresses associated with mechanical forces impacted on human beings during travelling. To him
the design of these dummies approximated human kinematics with failure to focus on the
stresses imposed on human beings (Freeman, 2007). The deficiency led to development of more
biofidelity test dummies that are available commercially today. Peters & Peters (2002) also posit
that the development of general purpose dummies between the years 1956 and 1963 did not
effectively achieved the human kinematics desired. They stated that Mark 1 for instance, a 95th
percentile dummy developed during the period attained the design of a typical human being. The
assembly consisted of all parts that are observed in human skeleton. However, the joints of the
ankle, elbow, knee and neck were too stiff hence calling for future adjustments to obtain a real
representation of human being skeleton.
In 1972, Dynamic Dan was developed as an analog approach for obtaining an improved
version of the previous dummies. Willinger et al., (2005) states that the development process of
this dummy put into consideration the flexible nature of human beings. The assembly
corresponded to that of humans with the use of more improved materials to produce a more
realistic dummy. In his study of whole body response to dynamic loads Van Niekerk et al.,
(1999) notes that Dynamic Dan was designed for aircraft ejection seat testing. They say that the

3. Literature Review 3
incorporation of a flexible joint through the use of springs and the use of fiberglass for bone
composition, allow for effective determination of vertical vibration effect on humans. Michael et
al., (2001) also supports this observation by pointing out that the inclusion of a ball socket as a
representation of hip and shoulder joints allowed for universal movement that is a critical
requirement on the determination of vertical impact on human body. However, Nicola, Luca,
Fausto & Bruno (2010) argues that this dummy did not achieve all the requirements for its
consideration in the development of safe and reliable ejection belts. They say that the dummy
was only capable of determining the visible external impact of vertical vibration on human body
without consideration of the possible cause of the observed damages (Nicola, Luca, Fausto &
Bruno, 2010). They therefore suggested on the inclusion of joints capable of incorporating
motion-limiting stops that when calibrated will provide the amount of energy absorbed. Research
shows that this improvement have since been made with the introduction of adjustable friction
dumping at all the joints for simulation of motion resistance from relaxation to rigidity that
allowed for energy absorbed during the ejection process to be obtained (Willinger, Bourdet,
Fischer & Le Gall, 2005).
Supermorphic dummy developed after the aforementioned dummies formed the most
sophisticated human structure imitation. Willinger, Bourdet, Fischer & Le Gall, (2005) argues
that this is one of the most realistic dummies that were made after 1970 in the field of human
imitation for hazardous forces. They noted that the full articulation of neck, head and limbs
observed in this dummy allowed for it to assume any posture of human being. As such was
reliable for the determination of potential effects of hazardous mechanical impacts on humans at
whatever position (Willinger, Bourdet, Fischer & Le Gall, 2005). In addition, Arthur, Croft &
Mathieu, (2007) posited that the incorporation of motion, pressure and vibration measurement

4. Literature Review 4
devices on the skeleton of the dummy made it more advanced compared his previous
counterparts. For instance, the inclusion of potentiometers and accelerometers for motion and
pressure monitoring allowed for evaluation of the value of potential forces that are likely to incur
human damages. Research also shows that this dummy had a power supply source mounted on
its head that allowed for independent measurements to be attained. As Nicola, Francesca
&Tommaso (2010) notes, this was considered one of the most reliable dummies for ejection
vibration testing. Regardless of the desirable designs of the dummy posited by various
researchers Van Niekerk et al., (1999) however, argues that the design material adopted and the
structure of the dummy were of much quality. In fact, they say that the dummy is of lower
quality as compared to the previous developed ejection testing dummies. they base their
arguments on the fragility of the design material that posses a chance of damages during the
ejection process. According to Mullins (2007) various cases of dummy damages have been
recorded in areas where the supermorphic dummy was adopted for testing. He suggested that
unless the durable design materials are used in the development of the dummy, then the accuracy
and reliability of the vibration data would not be possible. In his study on dummy design and
testing he came to a conclusion that supermorphic dummy was too fragile and unreliable for
airplane seat ejection quality testing (Mullins, 2007).
With further advancement on the dummy design, Hybrid III consisting of large male and
small female dummies was developed. According to literature, this dummy had the most
improved shoulders, neck, spine and knees as compared to the previous dummies (Nicola, Luca,
Fausto & Bruno, 2010). Further advancement was made on this dummy by General Motors that
allowed for more extensive and transducers data to be obtained during the testing procedures. As
posited by Michael et al., (2001) hybrid III dummy is developed in a way that it imitates the real

5. Literature Review 5
human body structure. Literature shows that the dummy was developed by the use of human
skeleton structures as opposed to the artificial materials adopted in the previous dummies. As
indicated by Willinger, Bourdet, Fischer & Le Gall, (2005) the dummy allowed for reliable and
quantified data to be obtained from the vibration impact testing. Research conducted by
Freeman, (2007) on the dummy design and anatomy indicated that this dummy had a detailed
description of the main human bone structure, the density of the bones used correspondent to that
of real human being. In addition, flexibility of the dummy joints was assured by the
incorporation of flexible and spherical connecters allowing for universal movement (Freeman,
2007). Over the years, hybrid dummy III have been improving over the years (Mullins, 2007).
Today, this dummy are developed with high level of biofedility and consisted of quantification
devices that allowed for reliability and validity of the vibration impact data quantification. It is
evident from literature that this dummy is available commercially and still adopted in automobile
testing (Nicola, Luca, Fausto & Bruno, 2010). However, dummy constructions projects team and
organizations are still enhancing the quality and structure of the hybrid III type dummy for
effectiveness and reliability during the testing process.
From literature, it is evident that hybrid II and hybrid III are the most adopted dummies
for aero craft testing. According to, Nicola, Luca, Fausto & Bruno (2010), these dummies are
designed to determine the probable effects occurring on aircraft seat in case of survivable plane
crash. As indicated by Freeman, 2007 these dummies have flexible appendages that allow them
adapt to the sitting posture of human while in plane. The inclusion of a full imitation of human
weight and density makes them effective in the quantification of the possible outcome of
hazardous impact on humans (Freeman, 2007). Mullins, (2007) posits that these dummies have
contributed to the development of safety ejection devices as well as air plane seats for travelers

6. Literature Review 6
for purposes of security. As indicated by Nicola, Luca, Fausto & Bruno, (2010) the dummies
have also contributed to the vast knowledge experienced in the development of cars and tractors
that are available today. Minimal research has been conducted on the safety dummies applicable
in marine travelling. According to Willinger et al., 2005) increase in number of marine ship and
aircraft calls for development of suitable seats and suspension devices that will provide some
safety in case of the accidents. Nicola, Luca, Fausto & Bruno (2010) also argues that the
vibration of sea waves are critical to human travelers and should be managed effectively to
achieve vast levels of safety. Research on the design of suspension seats indicate that they
require non-linear operation such that their performance can be determined by prevailing
conditions (Huang, Yeh, Wu & Dai, 2007). The continuity of vibration due to the moving sea
waves makes durability a prerequisite in the development of suspension seats (Huang, Yeh, Wu
& Dai, 2007). Moreover, Arthur, Croft & Mathieu, (2007) argues that suspension seat
manufactures should focus on the design and dynamic nature of potential hazards in the
formulation of suspension seat dummies. Durability, high biofidelity, flexibility and human
posture imitation are some of the fundamental aspects of design that should be put in place prior
to the assembly of the dummy skeleton for high efficiency suspension seat dummy (Arthur, Croft
& Mathieu, 2007).
Advantages and Disadvantages of the Test Dummies
From the review of literature it is evident that no studies or researchers have established
generally applicable merits or demerits of test dummies (Willinger et al., 2005). However,
particularistic significances have been posited by a wide range of studies testing distinct test
dummies contexts (Willinger et al. 2005; Freeman, 2007; Arthur, Croft & Mathieu, 2007; Nicola,
Francesca & Tommaso, 2010). Mullins, (2007) while studying the Dynamic Dan dummy noted

7. Literature Review 7
that while this dummy had the advantage of universal movement of appendages that could ensure
determination of the mechanical impact as crash or vibration, the quantification of the
mechanical impact remained indeterminable since it lacked the devices that could measure
pressure and motion leaving a measurement gap. Although other studies (Van Niekerk et al.,
1999; Willinger et al., 2005) showed that this disadvantage of quantification could not be of a
great consideration in the practical application of this impacts on humans, David, Viano &
Parenteau, (2012) warned that the failure to measure exact synergic impact of the vibration or
crash could result in a false assumption of positive results.
As an improvement to the dynamic Dan dummy, researchers sort to solve this
quantification dilemma (Mullins, 2007). The result was the supermorphic dummy which took
into account all the measurement parameters which could allow the quantification of the impacts
(crash or vibration). Moreover, this dummy had more improved and flexible appendages
compared its predecessor Dynamic Dan (Arthur, Croft & Mathieu, 2007). However, two
fundamental disadvantages still ruined its fruitfulness in providing completely or near realistic
results. As Freeman, (2007) later noted, this dummy did not splendidly embody the human body
in terms of weight and body part flexibility. In addition, the supermorphic dummy was too
fragile, taking into consideration that it was for the testing of ejection devices’ vertical force
impacts, to an extent that even the quantification considered as their advantage could not be
measured on the course of the testing (Freeman, 2007).
Later development of dummies such as hybrid II and hybrid III model brought several
advantages to the safety testing of mechanical objects (David, Viano & Parenteau, 2012).
According to Peters & Peters (2002) hybrid III was more advanced and provided full
representation of human biofidelity. The inclusion of motion, vibration and pressure measuring

8. Literature Review 8
devices in this dummy allowed for quantification of safety data applicable to automobile and
plane safety device construction. Research also shows that in addition to the flexible nature and
the exact imitation of human in terms of weight and posture of the dummy allow for achievement
of practicality of the possible impact and damages of hazardous forces on human beings
(Mullins, 2007; Freeman, 2007).
Literature shows that durability and flexibility are some 0f the fundamentals aspect of
design that must be incorporated in the development of the dummies (Willinger, Bourdet,
Fischer & Le Gall, 2005). According to David, Viano & Parenteau, (2012) high weight dummies
are more applicable in air plane and automobile as compared to marine aircrafts. The need for
suspension as opposed to movement along gravity requires the adoption of a light weight device
that will effect floatation. Justin, (2007) noted that automobile and airplane dummies requires
additional advancement and improvement to provide informed decision and data on the effects of
vibration on humans travelers in the sea. Further research also indicated that previous dummies
had a disadvantage of focusing on the typical shape and posture of human being with no regards
to the required shape during movements in water. According to Mullins, (2007) a major
disadvantage is also obtained in the quantification of the motion, vibration and pressure data due
to the negative influence of water on measurement devices such as potentiometers and
accelerometer.
As much as the dummies discussed were of benefits to the safety device testing systems,
literature shows that each and every dummy adopted had cert6ain drawbacks requiring
amendments for perfection of the testing system (David, Viano & Parenteau, 2012). Nicola,
Luca, Fausto & Bruno (2010) indicated that the achievement of the biofedility by the recent and
current dummies is not a final indication of their success in the safety device testing systems. He

9. Literature Review 9
argues that adjustments are necessary for the dummies to fit the test requirement for efficient and
reliable data to be obtained.

10. Literature Review 10
References
Arthur, C., Croft, & Mathieu, M (2007).The RID2 biofidelic rear impact dummy: A pilot study
using human subjects in low speed rear impact full scale crash tests Original Research
Article. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 39 (2) pp.340-346
David, C., Viano, S. Parenteau, R (2012).Influence of standing or seated pelvis on dummy
responses in rear impacts Original Research Article. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 45,
pp. 423-431
Freeman, M 2007, ‘Crash Test Dummy’, The New Scientist, vol.194, no.2609, pp.22-23.
Huang, T., Yeh, C., Wu, C., & Dai, Y 2007. ‘Impact Analysis and Simulation of Crash Test
Dummy Ribcage Mechanism’, Journal of Biomechanics, vol.40, pp.656-656.
Justin, M (2007).The human crash test dummy. New Scientist, 194 (2602), pp. 50-51
Michael, J., Rory, A., Thomas, J., Michael, L., & Shirley G (2001). Kinematic comparison of
Hybrid II test dummy to wheelchair user Original Research Article. Medical Engineering
& Physics, 23(4) pp. 239-247
Mullins, J 2007. ‘The Human Crash Test Dummy’, The New Scientist, vol.194, no.2602, pp.50-
51.
Narayan, Y & Frank A (2005). Responses of side impact dummies in sled tests Original
Research Article. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 37(3), pp. 495-503
Nicola, P., Francesca, C &Tommaso, M (2010).Full scale impact testing of ski safety barriers
using an instrumented anthropomorphic dummy Original Research Article. Procedia
Engineering, 2 (2), pp. 2593-2598

11. Literature Review 11
Nicola, P., Luca, T., Fausto, P & Bruno, A (2010).Development of an instrumented
anthropomorphic dummy for the study of impacts and falls in skiing Original Research
Article. Procedia Engineering, 2(2), pp. 2587-2592
Peters, G. A., & Peters, B. J 2002. Automotive vehicle safety.Taylor & Francis. London.
Van Niekerk, J.L., Heyns, P.S., Heyns, M., and Hassall, J.R 1999. ‘Human vibration levels in the
South African mining industry’. Kingdom Meeting on Human Response to Vibration, vol.
4, no. 21
Willinger, R., Bourdet, N., Fischer, R., & Legall, F 2005. ‘Modal Analysis of the Human Neck
in Vivo as A Criterion for Crash Test Dummy Evaluation’, Journal of Sound and
Vibration, vol.12, p. 13.