A major role for the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is to provide effective damping against sudden intracranial brain motions during dynamic head impact. This paper examines the roles of CSF properties on human brain responses under certain impact loadings. The brain is assumed to have a hyperviscoelastic material behaviour, while CSF is considered to be fluid-like elastic, viscoelastic, and nearly incompressible elastic with a low shear modulus and a high bulk modulus. A finite element parametric investigation on a head model under different scenarios of impact is conducted. In the study, the CSF material parameters are varied within the expected range of change, while other components of the head model are kept constant. The results indicate that the solutions from the modelling of CSF by a fluid-like medium are more realistic and support the findings of the experiment. The results also indicate that varying CSF properties did not have a major impact on the peak intracranial pressures but the impact on brain principal and shear strains are relatively significant. A sizeable impact on the relative motion of the brain, with respect to the skull, can also be observed.
PudenzR.SheldenC.‘The lucite calvarium — a method for direct observation of the brain.’J. Neurosurg.3 (1946): 487–505
2.
GurdjianE. S.WebsterJ. E.LissnerH. R.‘Observations on the mechanics of brain concussion, contusion and laceration.’Surg. Gynecol. Obstet.101 (1955): 680–690
3.
GurdjianE. S.GurdjianE. S.‘Acute head injuries.’J.Trauma-Injury Infection Crit. Care18 (1978): 747
4.
WardC. C.ThompsonR. B.‘The development of a detailed finite element brain model.’ In Proceedings of the 19th Stapp Car Crash Conference, 1975, SAE paper 751163, pp. 641–674 (SAE International, Warrendale, Pennsylvania).
5.
RuanJ. S.KhalilT. B.KingA. I.‘Finite element modeling of direct head impact.’ In Proceedings of the 37th Stapp Car Crash Conference, 1993, SAE paper 933114, pp. 69–81 (SAE International, Warrendale, Pennsylvania).
6.
WillingerR.TaledL.PradoreP.‘Head biomechanics: from the finite element model to the physical model.’ In Proceedings of the IRCOBI Conference, Brunnen, Switzerland, 1995, pp. 245–260 (International Research Council on the Biomechanics of Impact, Bron).
7.
TurquierF.KangH. S.TrosseilleX.WillingerR.LavasteF.TarriereC.DomontA.‘Validation study of 3D finite element head model against experimental data.’ In Proceedings of 40th Stapp Car Crash Conference, 1996, SAE paper 962431, pp. 283–294 (SAE International, Warrendale, Pennsylvania).
8.
ZhouC.KhalilT. B.KingA. I.‘A new model comparing impact responses of the homogeneous and inhomogeneous human brain.’ In Proceedings of the 39th Stapp Car Crash Conference, 1995, SAE paper 952714, pp. 121–137 (SAE International, Warrendale, Pennsylvania).
9.
ZhangL.YangK. H.KingA. I.‘Comparison of brain responses between frontal and lateral impacts by finite element modeling.’J. Neurotrauma18 (2001): 21–30
10.
WatanabeD.YugeK.NishimotoT.MurakamiS.TakaoH.‘Impact injury analysis of the human head.’Auto Technol.7 (2007): 34–37
11.
KleivenS.HardyW. N.‘Correlation of an FE model of the human head with local brain motion — consequences for injury prediction.’ In Proceedings of the 46th Stapp Car Crash Conference, 2002, SAE paper 2002-22-0007, pp. 123–143 (SAE International, Warrendale, Pennsylvania).
12.
HorganT.GilchristM.‘Influence of FE model variability in predicting brain motion and intracranial pressure changes in head impact simulations.’Int. J. Crashworthiness9 (2004): 401–418
13.
WillingerR.BaumgartnerD.‘Human head tolerance limits to specific injury mechanisms.’Int. J. Crashworthiness6 (2003): 605–617
14.
HardyW. N.MasonM. J.FosterC. D.ShahC. S.KopaczJ. M.YangK. H.KingA. I.BishopJ.BeyM.AnderstW.TashmanS.‘A study of the response of the human cadaver head to impact.’ In Proceedings of the 51st Stapp Car Crash Conference, 2007, SAE paper 2007-22-0002, pp. 17–80 (SAE International, Warrendale, Pennsylvania).
15.
LS-DYNA keyword user manual, version 971 (Livermore Software Technology Corporation2006)
16.
KleivenS.von HolstH.‘Consequences of head size following trauma to the human head.’J. Biomech.35 (2002): 153–160
17.
WillingerR.KangH.DiawB.‘Three-dimensional human head finite-element model validation against two experimental impacts.’Ann. Biomed. Engng27 (1999): 403–410
18.
NahumA. M.SmithR.WardC. C.‘Intracranial pressure dynamics during head impact.’ In Proceedings of the 21st Stapp Car Crash Conference, 1977, SAE paper 770922, pp. 337–366 (SAE International, Warrendale, Pennsylvania).
19.
AmitG.MarguliesS. S.‘Are in vivo and in situ brain tissues mechanically similar?’J. Biomech.37 (2004): 1339–1352
20.
PrangeM. T.MarguliesS. S.‘Regional, directional, and age-dependent properties of the brain undergoing large deformation.’J. Biomech. Engng124 (2002): 244–252
21.
TakhountsE. G.CrandallJ. R.DarvishK. K.‘On the importance of nonlinearity of brain tissue under large deformations.’ In Proceedings of the 47th Stapp Car Crash Conference, 2003, SAE paper 2003-22-0005, pp. 107–134 (SAE International, Warrendale, Pennsylvania).
22.
ShuckL.AdvaniS.‘Rheological response of human brain tissue in shear.’Trans. ASME, J. Basic Engng94 (1972): 905–911
23.
MendisK. K.StalnakerR. K.AdvaniS. H.‘A constitutive relationship for large deformation finite element modeling of brain tissue.’Trans. ASME, J. Biomech. Engng117 (1995): 279–285
24.
HorganT. J.GilchristM. D.‘The creation of three-dimensional finite element models for simulating head impact biomechanics.’Int. J. Crashworthiness8 (4) (2003): 353–366
25.
MillerR. T.MarguliesS. S.LeoniM.NonakaM.ChenX.SmithD. H.MeaneyD. F.‘Finite element modeling approaches for predicting injury in an experimental model of severe diffuse axonal injury.’ In Proceedings of the 42nd Stapp Car Crash Conference, 1998, SAE paper 983154, pp. 155–166 (SAE International, Warrendale, Pennsylvania).
26.
ShreiberD. I.BainA. C.MeaneyD. F.‘In vivo thresholds for mechanical injury to the blood—brain barrier.’ In Proceedings of the 41st Stapp Car Crash Conference, Lake Buena Vista, Florida, USA, 1997, SAE paper 973335, pp. 277–291 (SAE International, Warrendale, Pennsylvania).
27.
ChafiM. S.DirisalaV.KaramiG.ZiejewskiM.‘Biomechanical examination of brain—skull relative motion and brain strain, and intracranial pressure under kinematical impact loadings.’Comput. Math. Meth. Med. (2009): (submitted)
