TABLE 5.
Comparison of the Mathematical Model Estimates Vs. the Experimentally
Measured Moments of Inertia on the Body Segments of the
3- and 6-Year-Old-Child Masterbody Forms*

3-Year-Old-Child

6-Year-Old-Child

®t at @ % @ ty @ i, @
Head =148.4 - 56,9 62,9 - 58.8 - 38.5 34.5
Neck - 69.2 - 63.6 - 27.6 - 27.6

Upper Torso + 17,1 + 17,3 + 6.5 + 21.0

Lower Torso + 42,9 + 58.4 + 19,2 + 44,5

Upper Arm 4185.5 +155,2 +139,1 +114,3

Lower Arm + 57,1 +57,1 + 40.6 +45,2
Hand + 36.4 +444 + 20,0 +16,7
Upper Leg + 13,5 +10.1 + 28.2 +24.4
Lower Leg + 49.8 + 65.0 + 38.8 + 36.8

Foot +167.6 +175.8 +159.0 +153.4

*Compared as a percentage deviation from the experimentally measured moments of inertia.

observations are suggested to account for the poor
estimates derived from the model. The model is
deterministic, requiring a single number to de-
scribe an absolute dimension. Obviously, the
geometric forms used in the model do not per-
fectly describe the shape of the segment speci-
mens, but the referenced studies indicate greater
comparability than the present data.

One of the main problems lies in the deter-
ministic nature of the model. For example, the
upper arm is defined in the model as a right
elliptical cylinder described by upper arm length,
upper arm breadth, and upper arm depth. This
model has a finite, absolute length measured be-
tween two parallel surfaces. However, as can
be seen by reference to Figures 11 and 12, the
actual segment was cut in such a manner as to
produce two nonparallel surfaces, neither of
which is perpendicualr to the long axis of the
limb. This shape presents a distinct and easily
identifiable problem for the mathematical mod-
eler. What is the finite length of the segment?
In the two previously mentioned studies on ba-
boons and cadavers, the length used in the model
was a proximal joint centroid to distal joint cen-

Frctre 11.—Exploded view of 3-year-old-child stone body
segments.


a"

REFERENCES

. Backaitis, S. H.: Sensitivity Study of Occupant Re-

sponse in Simulated CCrash Environment. Paper
presented at the Society of Automotive Engineers’
Congress, Detroit, Michigan, 1974.

, Bowman, B. M., and D, H. Robbins: Parameter Study

of Biomechanical Qualities in Analytical Neck
Models. Proceedings of the Sieteenth Stapp Car
Crash Conference, SAE Paper No. 720956, Detroit,
Michigan, 1972.

. Burdi, A. R., D. F, Huelke, R, G, Snyder, and G. H.

Lowrey: Infants and Children in the Adult World
of Automobile Safety Design: Pediatric and Anatom-
ical Considerations for Design of Child Restraints.
American Society of Mechanical Engineers Paper
No. 69-BHF-10 New York, 1969.

. Chandler, R. F., C, E. Clauser, J. T. McConville,

H. M. Reynolds, and J. W. Young: Investigation of
Inertial Properties of the Human Body. Final Re-
port No, DOT HS-801 480, U.S. Department of
‘Transportation, National Highway ‘Traffic Safety
Administration, Washington, D.C., 1975.

5. Clauser, C. E., J. T. McConville, and J. W. Young:

n

~

10.

1.

Weight, Volume and Center of Mass of Segments of
the Human Body. Aerospace Medical Research Lab-
oratory Report No. TR-69-70, Wright-Patterson Air
Force Base, Ohio, 1969.

. Dempster, W. 'T.: Space Requirements of the Seated

Operator. Wright Air Development Center Report
No. TR-55-159, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base,
Ohio, 1955,

. Eshbach, O. W.: Handbook of Engineering Funda-

mentals. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, New York, 1986.

. Hamill, P. V., F. E. Johnston, and M. A. Grams:

Height and Weight of Children—United States.
Public Health Publication No. 1000, Series 11, No.
104, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.,
1970.

. Hathaway, M. L.: Heights and Weights of Children

and Youths in the United States. Home Economics
Research Report No. 2, U.S. Department of Agricul-
ture, Washington, D.C., 1957.

Jones, H. E., and N, Bayley: The Berkeley Growth
Study, Child Development, 12:167-178, 1941.

Malina, R, M., P. V. Hamill, 8. Lemeshow: Selected
Body Measurements of Children 6 to 11, United
States. Vital and Health Statistics, Series 11, No.
128, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
Publication No. (HSM) 73-1605, Government Print-
ing Office, Washington, D.C., 1973.

12, Martin, W. E.: Basic Body Measurments of School
Age Children. U.S. Department of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare, Washington, D.C., 1953.

Martin, W. E.: Functional Measurements of School
Age Children, National School Service Institute,
Chicago, 1954.

Martin, W. E.: Children’s Body Mcasurements for
Planning and Equipping Schools. Special Publication
No. 4, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare, Washington, D.C. 1955.

McConville, J. 'T., and E, Churchill: Source Data for
the Design of Simulated Children’s Body Forms.
Report to Division of Accident Prevention, Bureau
of State Services, U.S. Department of Health, Edu-
cation, and Welfare, Washington, D.C., 1964.
Meredith, H. V.: The Rhythm of Physical Growth.
A Study of 18 Anthropometric Measurements on Towa
City White Males Ranging in Age Between Birth and
+18 Years, University of Iowa Studies in Child Wel-
fare, Vol. 11, No. 3, 1985.

Meredith, H. V., and B. Boynton: The Transverse
Growth of the Extremities. An Analysis of Girth
Measurements for Arm, Forearm, Thigh and Leg
Taken on Iowa City Children, Human Biology, 9:366-
408, 1987.

National Center for Health Statistics: Plan and Op-
eration of a Health Exxaminaton Survey of Youths
12-17 Years of Age. Vital and Health Statistics,
Public Health Service Publication No, 1000, Series 11,
No. 35, Public Health Service, Washngton, D.C., 1969.

O’Brien, R., M. A. Girshick, and E. P, Hunt: Body
Measurements of American Boys and Girls for Gar-
ment and Pattern Construction. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Misc, Publication No, 306, Washington,
D.C., 1941.

Reynolds, H. M.: Measurement of the Inertial Prop-
erties of the Segmented Savannah Baboon. Unpub-
lished Doctoral Dissertation, Southern Methodist
University, University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michi-
gan, 1974,

. Reynolds, H. M.: Personal communication, 1974.

22, Snyder, R. G., D. B. Chaffin, and R. K. Schutz: Link
System of the Human Torso, Aerospace Medical
Research Laboratory Report No. TR-71-88, Wright
Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, 1972.

Snyder, R. G, M. Spencer, C. Owings, and P. Van
Eeh: Source Data of Infant and Child Measurements
Interim Data, 1972. Biomedical Department, High-
way Safety Research Institute, University of Michi-
gan, Ann Arbor, 1972.

13.

14,

15.

16.

17.

18.

19,

20.

23.



TABLE B-13. Three-Dimensional-Point Locations of 3-Year-Old-Child Hand Landmarks

Number Code of X Axis Y Axis Z Axis
Surface Landmarks cm in cm in cm in
1 - 4.3 - 1.7 + 0.3 + 0.1 + 2,3 + 0.9
2 - 4.3 - 1.7 + 1.3 + 0.5 0.0 0.0
3 - 4.3 - 17 - 1.3 - 0.5 0.0 0.0
7 + 0,3 + 0.1 + 0.3 + 0.1 + 3.8 +165
8 - 0.3 - 0.1 - 0.5 - 0.2 - 3.3 - 1.3
9 +005 + 0.2 - 1.5 - 0.6 + 0.3 + 0.1
10 - 0.3 - 0.1 + 0.5 + 0.2 - 0.3 - 0.1
i - 4.3 - 1.7 - 0.3 - 0.1 0.0 0.0
49 + 2,5 + 1.0 + 0.3 + 0.1 + 3.0 + 1.2

TABLE 3-14. Three-Dimensional-Point Locations of 6-Year-Old-Child Hand Landmarks

Number Code of X Axis ¥ Axis Z Axis
Surface Landmarks cm in cm in cm in

1 - 5.6 - 2.2 + 0.3 + 0.1 + 2.0 + 6.8
2 - 5.6 - 2.2 + 1.8 + 0.7 - 1.0 - 0.4
3 - 5.6 = 2.2 - 1,3 - 0.5 - 1.8 - 0.7
7 - 0.3 - 0.1 + 0.3 + 0.1 + 3.3 + 1.3
8 + 0.3 +01 - 0.3 - 0.1 - 3.6 - 14
9 0.0 0.0 - 1.8 - 0.7 0.0 0.0
10 0.0 0.0 + 0.8 + 0.3 0.0 0.0
Mt - 5.8 - 2.3 0.0 0.0 - 0.3 - 0.1
49 + 3.0 +12 + 0.3 + 0.1 + 2.8 +11

31



Fieure 4-

‘ont view of 8-year-old-child stone model

Ficure 5.—Side view of 3-year-old-child stone model.

Ficure 6.—Rear view of 3-year-old-child stone model.

7

Ficure #.—-Front view

of 6-year-old-child stone model.


APPENDIX A
Anthropometry

|. Anthorpometric Definitions.

1, Weight: Measure nude body weight on a scale.

2. Stature: Subject stands erect in bare feet with head
in Frankfort Plane, Measure with an anthropometer
the perpendicular distance from floor to vertex.

8. Sitting Height: Subject sits erect with head in the
Frankfort Plane. Measure with an anthropometer the
perpendicular distance from the seat pan to vertex.

4. Eye Height: Subject sits erect with head in the
Frankfort Plane. Measure with an anthropometer the
perpendicular distance from the seat pan to the
ectocanthus.

5. Tragion Height: Subject sits erect with head in the
Frankfort Plane. Measure with an anthropometer the
perpendicular distance from the seat pan to tragion.

6. Cervicale Height: Subject sits erect with head in
the Frankfort Plane, Measure with an anthropometer
the perpendicular distance from the seat pan to cervicale.

7. Acromion Height: Subject sits erect, upper arms
relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward hori-
zontally. Measure with an anthropometer the perpen-
dicular distance from the seat pan to acromion.

8. Biacromial Breadth: Subject sits erect, upper arms
relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward hori-
zontally. Measure with an anthropometer the horizontal
breadth between the right and left acromion landmarks.

9. Suprasternale Height: Subject sits erect, upper arms
relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward hort-
zontally. Measure with an anthropometer the perpen-
dicular distance from the seat pan to suprasternale.

10. Substernale Height: Subject sits erect, upper arms
relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward hori-
zontally. Measure with an anthropometer the perpen-
dicular distance from the seat pan to substernale.

11. Torso Height, Axilla: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally. From the subject’s back, measure with an
anthropometer the perpendicular distance from the seat
pan to the most superior point in the axilla.

12. Torso Breadth, Axilla: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally, Measure with an anthropometer the hori-
zontal breadth of the torso at the level of the axilla.

18. Torso Depth, Axilla: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally, Measure with an anthropometer the hori-
zontal depth (antero-posterior) of the torso at the level
of the axilla.

18

14, Torso Height, Nipple: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally. Measure with an anthropometer the per-
pendicular distance from the seat pan to the nipple.

15. Torso Breadth, Nipple: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally, Measure with an anthropometer the. hori-
zontal breadth of the chest at the nipple level.

16, Torso Depth, Nipple: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontal, Measure with an anthropometer the hori-
zontal (antero-posterior) depth of the chest at the nipple
level.

17. Torso Circumference, ple: Subject sits erect,
upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended for-
ward horizontally, Measure with a flexible steel tape
during normal breathing the horizontal circumference
of the chest at the nipple level.

18. Internipple Distance: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally. Measure with an anthropometer the dis-
tance between the nipples.

19. Torso Depth, Substernale: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally. Measure with an anthropometer the hori-
zontal depth (antero-posterior) of the torso at the level
of substernale during normal breathing.

20. Torso Height, 10th Rib: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally, Measure with an anthropometer the per-
pendicular distance from the seat pan to the inferior
margin of the 10th Rib,

21. Torso Breadth, 10th Rib: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally. Measure with an anthropometer the hori-
zontal breadth of the chest at the lowest level of the
inferior margin of the 10th Rib.

22, Torso Height, Waist: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally. Measure with an anthropometer the per-
pendicular distance from the seat pan to the waist.

23. Torso Breadth, Waist: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally. Measure with an anthropometer the hori-
zontal breadth of the waist.

24. Torso Depth, Waist. Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally. Measure with an anthropometer the hori-
zontal (antero-posterior) depth of the waist.



24, Snyner, R. G., and B. O’Neill: Are 1974-1975 Auto-
motive Belt Systems Hazardous to Children? Am-
erican Journal of Diseases of Children (in press)
1975.

25. Snyder, R. G., M. 1. Spencer, C. 1.. Owings, and L. W.
Schneider: Physical Characteristics of Children as
Related to Death and Injury for Consumer Product
Safety Design. Final Report on Contract FDA-72-
70, 1975, Consumer Product Safety Commission.

26. Snyder, R. G., M. L, Spencer, C. L, Owings, and L. W.
Schneider: Anthropometry of U.S. Infants and Chil-
dren. Society of Automotive Engineers Paper No.
750428, SP-394, 1975.

36

29.

. Stoudt, H. W.: Anthropometry for Child Restraints.

Guggenheim Center for Aerospace Health and Safety,

Harvard University School of Public Health, Boston,
1971.

. Stoudt, H. W., A. Damon, and R. A. McFarland:

Heights and Weights of White Americans. American
Rocket Society Technical Paper No. 1351-60, New
York, 1960.

Young, J. W.: Selected Facial Measurements of Chil-
dren for Oxygen Mask Design. FAA Office of Avia-
tion Medicine Report No. AM-66-69, 1966.

. Zook, D. E.: The Physical Growth of Boys: A Study

by Means of Water Displacement. American Journal
of Diseases of Children, 43 :1847-1432, 1932.


LIST OF TABLES—Continued

Table Page
B-17. Three-dimensional-point locations of 3-year-old-child lower leg
Jandmarks 36
B-18. Three-dimensional-point locations of 6-year-old-child lower leg
landmarks —__..--.-.----------------------~-------------- 36
B-19. Three-dimensional-point locations of 3-year-old-child foot land-
marks 3T

B-20. Three-dimensional-point locations of 6-year-old-child foot land-
marks ~--__---------------------------------------------- 37



Three-Dimensional-Point Locations of 3-Year-Old-Child Upper Arm Landmarks

TABLE B-9.

X Axis Y Axis Z Axis

Number Code of
Surface Landmarks

in

cm

in

cm

in

cm

WOMAOMOOHAMAMONRGA

Nddddddcddddmaad
tet ree rtee

wns aoroOoNNwAATING

Pet utesei

Ca leRekela ts lolekel-teleksh-tel

daidddddicddcddndd
bette eet rte tet

Mamamnmamnnoenmmann

AASNSSOMANSSSCSSOANG
teeter ret Feet

AaANATeANCAMANANS
SdoddHdddiddddddH
Pe

Sdidddidddnddodnda
+e rte eee rteetrgie

AAMTNORDAS

ll
12
29
32
34
48

Three-Dimensional-Point Locations of 6-Year-Old-Child Upper Arm Landmarks

ABLE R-10.

X Axis Y Axis Z Axis

Number Code of

in

cm

in

cm

in

cm

Surface Landmarks

wertdinddeoorwere

CHmmNnonecommannHe

AFonnoOsndddcoseS
++ ite +1 reit

HéccAcdccHddddddH
ee ae

yr NoAnAAANAAaH

Perret iti tte ret

AAMT NOR®ADO

il
12

29
32
34
48

29



Frovre 12—Exploded view of 6-year-old-child stone body
segments.

troid, which provided an averaged segment length
corresponding to its approximate link length.
This approach reduces the error as a function of
the square of the difference in distance between
the surface length (shoulder-elbow length) and
the internal link length (centroid-centroid
length). Since there are no bony landmarks on
or in a stone model, centroid distance was not
used. It is assumed that this approach has pro-
duced most of the errors in the models reported
in Table 4.

To reduce these errors, future models should
consider an anthropometric description of the sub-
ject that accurately reflects the linkage system
of the human body.

V. Discussion.

This study was undertaken to define, construct,
measure, and evaluate the size, shape, and mass
distribution of masterbody forms representative
of 3- and 6-year-old U.S. children.

Based on the authors’ collective judgment of
available data, a list of 98 anthropometric dimen-
sions was selected and used to develop full-scale

15

masterbody forms for reproduction in dental
stone. The stone models were segmented into
10 body segments representing the head, neck,
upper torso, lower torso, upper arm, lower arm,
hand, upper leg, lower leg, and foot. Weight,
volume, center of mass, and mass moments of
inertia measured on each body segment have been
presented in preceding sections of this report.

These data were assembled and measured to
provide a state-of-the-art estimate of the size,
shape, and mass distribution of representative 3-
and 6-year-old U.S. children. The need for these
data has long been recognized, but the lack of
certain types of anthropometric data presents
several limitations on the use of the data given.

While many of the initial shape dimensions
are based on what is presumed to be representa-
tive U.S. population data or estimates inter-
polated from such data, these were necessarily
supplemented by a large number of dimensional
values based on the collective judgment of the
team or measurements from personal data. The
data available in the literature often provided
sound guidelines but, in numerous instances, these
forms represent a judgment of the authors rather
than empirically derived U.S. population data.

These manikins and their associated anthro-
pometric data base do not contain any informa-
tion on the biokinematic properties of the two
ages represented. The planes of segmentation,
and thus the mass distribution data on dental
stone casts, have been measured by making several
assumptions regarding a body linkage system
and the homogenous nature of the human body.
The planes of segmentation that produced the
10 segments were theoretically designed to pass
through estimated link endpoints or joint centers
of rotation. As has been pointed out: previously,
little information exists on adult joint centers
of rotation and no information exists on linkage
system of children. Thus, the required data base
on linkage systems relies solely on estimates rather
than measured data from the living. The planes
of segmentation provide segments that approxi-
mate the linkage defined in adults (Dempster,
1955). Qualitatively, the authors have the most
confidence in the limb segments and the least
confidence in the torso segments.

The torso presents unique problems. The best
current data available on the adult male torso
linkage system are found in Snyder et al. (1972).



63, Shoulder-Elbow Length: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally. Measure with an anthropometer the dis-
tance parallel to the long axis of the upper arm from
acromion to the inferior tip of the olecranon process.

64, Upper Arm Circumference, Axilla: Subject sits
erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended
forward horizontally. Measure with a flexible steel tape,
perpendicular to the long axis of the arm, the circumfer-
ence of the arm at the axilla.

65. Upper Arm Depth, Axilla: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hand extended forward
horizontally. Measure with sliding calipers the hori-
zontal (anteroposterior) depth of the upper arm in the
axilla.

66. Upper Arm Circumference, Mid-Arm: Subject sits
erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended
forward horizontally. Measured with a flexible steel
tape, perpendicular to the long axis of the upper arm,
the circumference of the arm midway between acromion
and the olecranon process.

67, Upper Arm Depth, Mid-Arm: Subject sits erect,
upper arms relaxed, forearms and hand extended for-
ward horizontally. Measure with sliding calipers the
horizontal (anteroposterior) depth of the upper arm
midway between acromion and the olecranon process.

68. Upper Arm Circumference, Antecubital: Subject
sits erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands ex-
tended forward horizontally. Measure with a flexible
steel tape, perpendicular to the long axis of the upper
arm, the circumference of the arm at the antecubital
level.

69. Upper Arm Depth, Antecubital: Subject sits erect,
upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended for-
ward horizontally. Measure with sliding calipers the
horizontal (anteroposterior) depth of the upper arm at
the antecubital level.

70. Elbow Breadth: Subject sits erect, upper arms
relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward hori-
zontally. Measure with sliding calipers the breadth
between the medial and lateral humeral condyles.

71. Elbow Circumference: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally. Measure with a flexible steel tape the dia-
gonal circumference around the elbow.

72. Forearm-Hand Length: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally. Measure with an anthropometer the dis-
tance parallel to the long axis of the limb from the
posterior tip of the olecranon process to dactylion,

78. Forearm Circumference, Maximum: Subject sits
erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended
forward horizontally. Measure with a flexible steel tape,
perpendicular to the long axis of the forearm, the maxl-
mum circumference of the forearm just below the ante-
cubital level.

74, Worearm Depth, Maximum Circumference: Subject
sits erect, upper arms extended, forearms and hands
extended forward horizontally. Measure with sliding

21

calipers the vertical (superoinferior) depth of the fore-
arm at the level of the maximum circumference.

75, Wrist Circumference, Minimum: Subject sits erect,
upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended for-
ward horizontally. Measure with a flexible steel tape,
perpendicular to the long axis of the forearm, the mini-
mum circumference of the wrist.

76. Wrist Breadth, Minimum Circumference: Subject
sits erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands ex-
tended forward horizontally. Measure with sliding cali-
pers the horizontal (mediolateral) breadth of the fore-
arm at the level of the minimum circumference of the
wrist.

77. Wrist Depth, Minimum Circumference: Subject
erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended
forward horizontally. Measure with sliding calipers the
vertical (superoinferior) depth of the forearm at the
level of the minimum circumference of the wrist.

78, Hand Length: Subject sits erect, upper arms re-
laxed, forearms and hands extended forward horizontally.
Measure with sliding calipers the distance parallel to
the long axis of the hand from the distal wrist crease
to dactylion.

79, Hand Breadth, Metacarpale IIT: Subject sits ereet,
upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended for-
ward horizontally. Measure with sliding calipers the
breadth at the level of Metacarpale IIT.

80. Hand Depth, Metacarpale III: Subject sits erect,
upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended for-
ward horizontally. Measure with spreading calipers the
depth of the hand at Metacarpale IIT.

81. Palm Length: Subject sits erect, upper arms re-
Jaxed, forearms and hands extended forward horizontally.
Measure with sliding calipers the length parallel to the
Jong axis of the hand from the distal wrist crease to the
crease at the base of the third digit.

82. Head Length: Subject sits erect with head in the
Frankfort Plane. Measure with sliding calipers the
maximum length in the midsagittal plane from glabella
to the back of the head on the occiput.

88, Head Breadth: Subject sits erect with head in the
Frankfort Plane. Measuring with spreading calipers the
maximum breadth of the head parallel to the midcoronal
plane,

84, Head Circumference: Subject sits erect with head
in the Frankfort Plane. Measure with a flexible steel
tape the maximum circumference of the head just above
glabella.

85. Tragion-to-Vertex-Distance: Subject sits erect with
head in the Frankfort Plane, Measure with an anthro-
pometer the vertical distance from tragion to vertex.

86. Tragion-to-Wall Distance: Subject sits erect with
head in the Frankfort Plane. Measure with an anthro-
pometer the horizontal distance from tragion to the most
posterior projection of the head that would contact the
wall.

87. Menton-to-Vertex Distance: Subject sits erect with
head in the Frankfort Plane, Measure with an anthro-
pometer the vertical distance from menton to vertex.



axes that are appropriate to the observed geo-
metrical shape of the head. The same approach
was used on each of the other body segments.
Two transverse axes were located through the
center of mass of the segment and oriented in a
functionally useful direction. The data given
in this report, therefore, represent, appropriate
values for calculating body kinetics but are not
principal moments of inertia. These data should
be interpreted not as biological population
parameters, but as approximations that ean be
used to design and construct anthorpomorphic
test devices or be useful in mathematical calcu-
lations.

VI Conclusions.

On the basis of this research, the following
conclusions are drawn:

A. The proportional segmental volumes and/
or weights adequately reflect the mass distribution
of the two age groups. As more segmental in-
formation on biological specimens, particularly
relating to segment densities, becomes available,
the estimates of segment weight should be re-
examined.

B. Use of the data on segmental center of
mass should consider the manner in which the
data are reported in the present study. There
are several possibilities for arriving at dimen-
sional location of the center of mass. The data
can be used as they are in Table 3, but the user
is reminded that the total segment length in-
cludes part of the segmentation plane flap in its
dimension. Alternately, the three-dimensional

17

data in Appendix B provide the user with several
alternatives for describing the location of the
center of mass relative to body landmarks or link
lengtlis, These data are expressed as three-dimen-
sional points in the axis reference system for
each segment, relative to an indicated center of
mass with coordinate values of 0, 0, and 0. In
any event, the user must keep in mind that these
data are from dental stone casts and have no
demonstrated relationship to living subjects at
this time.

C. For future research, data on segmental
volume, link lengths and locations, and anthro-
pometric shape dimensions (height, breadth,
width, and circumference) should be collected on
living subjects.

D. For future research, data on segment mass,
segmental volume, segmental center of mass, link
lengths and locations, and segmental mass
moments of inertia should be collected on fresh
cadaver specimens.

E, As an immediate problem, more informa-
tion is urgently needed on the anthropometric
descriptions of link lengths and the torso/neck
linkage system with its associated mass distribu-
tion.

F. The available anthropometric data base
(size, shape, linkage, and mass distribution) was
found to be deficient for the purpose of develop-
ing anthropomorphic test devices. Although
available resources prohibited significant data
collection efforts in this study, this research should
be encouraged.



TABLE B-11. Three-Dimensional-Point Locations of 3-Year-Old-Child Lower Arm Landmarks

Number Code of X Axis Y Axis Z Axis
Surface Landmarks cm in cm in cm in

1 - 2.8 - 1a 0.0 0.0 + 3.0, + 1.2
2 - 4.8 - 1.9 + 2.3 + 0.9 +15 + 0.6
3 - 6.4 - 2.5 - 2.0 - 0.8 - 0.3 - 0.1
4 + 6.4 + 2.5 0.0 0.0 +245 + 1.0
5 + 6.4 + 2.5 + 1.3 + 0.5 + 0.3 + 0.1
6 + 6.9 + 2,7 - 1.3 - 0.5 0.0 0.0
7 0,0 0.0 - 0.3 - 0.1 + 3.0 + 1.2
8 0.0 0.0 + 0,3 + 0.1 - 2.3 - 0.9
9 0.0 0.0 - 2.5 - 1,0 - 0.3 - 0.1
10 0.0 0.0 + 2.3 + 0.9 + 0.3 + 0.1
ll - 5.1 - 2,0 + 0.3 +01 + 1.0 + 0.4
12 + 6.6 + 2.6 0.0 0.0 + 0.3 + 0.1

TABLE B-12. Three-Dimensional-Point Locations of 6-Year-Old-Child Lower Arm Landmarks

Number Code of X Axis Y Axis Z Axis
Surface Landmarks cm in cm in cm in

1 - 2.5 - 1.0 0.0 0.0 + 3.6 + 1.4
2 - 5.3 - 2.1 + 2.5 + 1.0, + 1.3 + 0.5
3 - 6.1 - 2.4 - 2.3 - 0.9 0.0 0.0
4 + 8.4 + 3.3 0.0 0.0 + 2.3 + 0.9
5 + 8.1 + 3.2 + 1.8 + 0.7 » = 0.3 - 0.1
6 + 8.4 + 3.3 - 1.0 - 0.4 - 1.5 - 0.6
7 + 0.3 + 0.21 0.0 0.0 + 3.3 + 1.3
8 ~ 0.3 - 0,1 0.0 0.0 - 2.8 - 1a
9 0.0 0.0 - 2.5 - 1.0 ~ 0.5 - 0.2
10 0,0 0.0 + 2.5 + 1.0 + 0.5 + 0.1
dl - 5.6 - 2.2 + 0.3 + 0.1 + 0.5 + 0.1
12 + 8.1 + 3.2 + 0.5 + 0.2 0.0 0.0


TABLE 3,
Measured Moments of Inertia About Transverse Axes of 3~ and
6-Year-Old-Child Body Segments of Masterbody Forms

3-Year-Old-Child 6-Year-Old-Child

Segment *
Ty ty Tz Tx ty Ty

Head 61,607 80, 524 76,331 110,073

Neck 2,558 2,190 2,918 2,902

Upper Torso 177,105 150,544 372,238 282,663

Lower Torso 105,196 91,228 232,173 166,455
Upper Arm 5,490 5,806 15,090 16,080

Lower Arm 2,826 2,757 6,403 6,178
Hand 1,118 926 2,837 1,964
Upper Leg 83,677 86,268 128,719 132,621
Lower Leg 22,670 20,613 61,409 62,256

Foot 3,415 3,299 6,073 5,842

*All measurements in g/cm?, adjusted to a specimen density equal to 1 g/cm.

spatial location and shape. The data are pre-
sented in Appendix B with a discussion of their
possible use and interpretation.

IV. Mathematical Model Estimates of Weight

Right Circular Cylinder
Neck: Neck circumference

Anterior neck length*
Posterior neck length*

L iF -hand length
and Moments of Inertia of the 3- and 6- ‘ower arm Hand len eth ene
Year-Old-Child Materbody Segments. Forearm circumference

The modeling effort in the present study was Wrist circumference
undertaken to determine how well a simple geo- Upper leg: Buttock-knee length

metric mathematical model could predict mass
and mass moments of inertia from masterbody
segment data. It was anticipated that the model
would perform satisfactorily because the seg-
ments modeled were homogenous, rigid bodies
and the measured data were adjusted for a mass
with density equal to unity. The models chosen
and the anthropometric variables used to de-
scribe the geometric figure are as follows:

Ellipsoid

Head: Maximum menton-occiput distance*
Bitragion breadth
Crinion-mastoid distance*

* Dimensions taken directly from the body form. All
other dimensions are listed in Table 1.

Lower leg:

Trochanterion-to-seat back dis-
tance

Thigh circumference, thigh-
abdominal junction

Thigh circumference, popliteal
knee height

Sphyrion height

Lower leg circumference, maxi-
mum

Lower leg circumference, mini-
mum

Right Elliptical Cylinder
Upper torso: Cervicale height

Torso height, 10th rib
Torso breadth, nipple
Torso depth, nipple


Ficure 2.

Six-year-old-child clay masterbody form.

III. Mass Distribution Properties of the 3-
and 6-Year-Old-Child Masterbody Seg-
ments,

In addition to determining the sizes and shapes
of the 8- and 6-year-old-child masterbody forms,
it was necessary to determine their segmental
mass distribution characteristics. Dental stone
reproductions of the clay masterbody forms were
made and segmented at approximated joint loca-
tions. Mass, volume, center of mass, and mass
moments of inertia of the resulting segments
were then experimentally determined. The fol-
lowing discussion describes the technique used
with the resultant data from the stone reproduc-
tions.

Surfaces of sculptured clay masterbody forms
were smoothed prior to preparing the mold sec-
tions for casting the dental stone. Figure 3 illus-
trates one of the clay masterbody forms in the
process of constructing the molds, These molds
were made in keyed sections by overlaying sev-
eral thicknesses of orthopedic plaster on the clay

masterforms. After each section had cured, it
was keyed and the next appropriate section was
cast with a slight overlap to prevent any under-
cutting in the positive. A rigid 34- to 14-inch-
thick composite wall resulted in the mold.

For casting the dental stone model, the com-
posite mold was assembled and held in position
by glass fiber tape. The tape stabilized the keyed
sections in position and prevented distortion from
internal forces while pouring and curing took
place. The whole-body cast was made of dental
stone (Coe Laboratories, Chicago, Illinois) with
a measured density of 1.7. The casting material
was poured continuously into the mold, which
was gently vibrated to insure a homogenous cast
free of faults and trapped air bubbles.

After curing for 24 hours, the mold was re-
moved and the stone model examined for any
imperfections observable on the cast. surface, All
porous areas on the model surface were removed
and filled with dental stone, and all excess stone
(between the upper arm and torso and at the
site of adjoining section seams) was removed.
During this repair and smoothing procedure, all
Jandmarks and most of the other body dimensions

ue Ye
Ficure 8.—Six-year-old-child masterbody form in the
process of mold casting.


Z Axis
in

cm

X Axis Y Axis
in cm in

cm

Surface Landmarks

TABLE B-5. Three-Dimensional~Point Locations of 3-Year-Old-Child Upper Torso Landmarks
Number Code of

HHRAMONMIWOOANRMATTANMIONSTH

MNNDODOOHAMAMORTARTONAANANH
AAAAgsoOdSSnG AG AMANO

eg] «oeandggdddddennddndddddddood
Dette tert ttt eet eee eee tte a
+ « Prete tibet teeetgeeeeee
5
AATHANNANMAATAAIHOCOMAMADOM
PALANAN LUATAAATTOLNT I Nn | aeKRaNoonQaanavetqQeimeonne
SAATSSSSSdAGSAN GEA AAMAAASA PTAA IIS 2a atte
Pere eee ie tee PEt eee eee e te g) Sigeddddddddadvadnedgdnndsd
ene nes HVE Fe eee eeeeteg
Carona doonnenntsemdde
Parent 22S SearanoonggorumaqenoNnmynace
SAKSHASSHNSSSSHS SHAG AAAS 2 : 2PAQSSAIMMQ eT yNNIIIES
gl SGdmcuadonddddddussedadnds
tio tteitite es 4

tied +1 terete etre res

CHAOMANMTANMOOCARATACON HANS
SHXSeHddddddddSsosddddaanuS

tro etter te THT rb ete et

Y Axis

CAHAMODOOANDOMANARATARANAOIS

EL SaaceuHSSadcddSdAASOSGatSHNS

3) I SoS ea
tits +7 HT ET TET ETE st

AA edoetatRaAansoornoarans a

4 SCOMANNARTAATTANOCTNNHRDOTOADS
SSSAdSdASdS SSH SS SNA SOA

Three-Dimensional-Point Locations of 6-Year-Old-Child Upper Torso Landmarks

veoh hrrdea bt ttee bidet £ $SdcHddSddSSSoSOnAS SHAHN SOA
ag | t otete HEH e EE FEET FHS
3
anmenoweimomnenonoeonmomeda
4 4 peoUMeM|it x | rnomaaneanmoonoomanmeinosse
SodeddSSdAAdsatddddhssiask STANTS EI MEITIIO TS
rr g) goosodKSddAAddddassshconn en
Foe eter cette Fete FFF
a
&
4H
|
re rm 3
eB ee vs 84 2 2 2
Gm om Go ee se oh
oa 8a aa » 99 «SS SS ES
St an au 3s ba aa 3s 3a
eee .H Pea Sh aE At
AA Aa CCR OMTAIROAQHAMDTNON DAS a 8 yy ees a
AARRSRASRARABABRS a BB adda SSnwaananeaonansnen ead
Bg *a ASRRIARARARRSAAS
2
a

27



6. Lateral Distal Tick Mark: A point at the distal
cut plane intersect with the lateral skin surface,

7. Anterior Center of Mass: Considering the body in
a standing position, a point that defines the location of
the center of mass on the anterior surface of the skin,
in the sagittal or parasagittal plane, of each segment.
This point is located on the dorsal surface of the foot
and in the frontal area of the head.

8. Posterior Center of Mass: Considering the body in
a standing position, a point that defines the center of
mass location on the posterior surface of the skin, in
the sagittal or parasagittal plane, of each segment. This
point is located on the plantar surface of the foot and
in the inferior occipital area of the head.

9. Lateral Center of Mass: A point that defines the
location of the center of mass on the lateral surface of
the skin in a plane approximately perpendicular to the
sagittal plane.

10. Medial Center of Mass: A point that defines the
location of the center of mass on the medial surface of
the skin in a plane approximately perpendicular to the
sagittal plane,

11. Proximal Centroid: A point that defines the ap-
proximate center of the proximal cut plane surface.

12. Distal Centroid: A point that defines the approxi-
mate center of the distal cut plane surface,

18. CN1: A point (tick mark) that defines the cut
plane at the chin/neck separation,

14. CN2: Same as CN1.

15. CN8: Same as CN1.

16, F4: A point (tick mark) that defines the cut plane
at the occiput/neck separation paprallel to the Frank-
fort Plane.

17. F5: Same as F4,
18. F6: Same as F4.
19. A7: A point (tick mark) that defines the inter-

section of the two cut planes separating the head and
neck.

20, A8: Same as AT.

21. Right Tragion: See Landmark Definitions, Appen-
dix A.

22. Left Tragion: See Landmark Definitions, Appen-
dix A,

23, Right Ectocanthus: See Landmark Definitions Ap-
pendix A.

24, Left Ectocanthus: See Landmark Definitions, Ap-
pendix A.

25, Glabella: See Landmark Definitions, Appendix A.
26. Menton: See Landmark Definitions, Appendix A.

27. Suprasternale: See Landmark Definitions, Appen-
dix A.

28, Cervicale: See Landmark Definitions, Appendix
AL

29. Right Acromion: See Landmark Definitions, Appen-
dix A.

30. Left Acromion: See Landmark Definitions, Appen-
dix A.

31, Right Shoulder Sagittal Tick Mark: A point on
the right shoulder separation plane corresponding to the
sagittal proximal tick mark on the upper arm.

32, Right Axilla Anterior: See Landmark Definitions,
Appendix A,

38, Left Axilla Anterior: See Landmark Definitions,
Appendix A.

84, Right Axilla Posterior: See Landmark Definitions,
Appendix A.

35, Left Axilla Posterior: See Landmark Definitions,
Appendix A.

36. Right Shoulder Centroid: A point that defines the
appropriate center of the right shoulder segmentation
cut plane on the upper torso.

37. Left Shoulder Centroid: A point that defines the
appropriate center of the right shoulder segmentation
cut plane on the upper torso.

88. Right Nipple: A point used in measurements 14,
15, and 16,

39, Left Nipple: A point used in measurements 14,
15, and 16.

40, Substernale:
A.

41, Omphalion : A point that defines the location on the
living of umbilicus.

42, Right Anterior Superior Iliac Spine: See Landmark
Definitions, Appendix A.

48, Left Anterior Superior Iliac Spine: See Landmark
Definitions, Appendix A.

44, Right Iiocristale: See Landmark Definitions, Ap-
pendix A,

45, Left Iiocristale: See Landmark Definitions, Ap-
pendix A.

46, Right Trochanterion: See Landmark Definitions,
Appendix A.

47, Left Trochanterion: See Landmark Definitions,
Appendix A.

48, Right Midbiceps: A point on the lateral surface of
the upper arm that defines the level of upper arm cirt-
cumference (measurement 66).

49, Right Thumb Tip: A point on the right thumb that
defines the most anterior point.

See Landmark Definitions, Appendix

50. Right Knee Point: A point on the superior sur-
face of the right knee that defines the location of knee
height (measurement 44).

51. Right Lateral Knee Point: A point on the lateral
surface of the right knee that defines the location of
knee breadth (measurement 47).

52. Right Midcalf: A point on the lateral surface of
the calf that defines the level of lower leg circumference,
maximum (measurement 50).

58, Right Sphyrion: See Landmark Definitions, Appen-
dix A.

54. Right Minimum Ankle: A point on the lateral sur-
face of the lower leg that defines the level of the mini-
mum circumference and other measurements (54, 55, 56,
and 57),


DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF MASTERBODY FORMS
FOR 3- AND 6-YEAR-OLD-CHILD DUMMIES

I. Introduction.

A significant problem in biokinematic research
with humans is the potential for injury to test
subjects during experimentation. A consequence
of this inherent danger has been the limiting of
the experimental research with humans in both
its intensity and its scope. One method of cir-
cumventing the problem of possible subject in-
jury has been to substitute anthropomorphic
dummies for human subjects in high-stress ex-
periments.

During its 1968 meeting, the Crash Test
Dummy Task Force of the Society of Automotive
Engineers decided to standardize certain test-
dummy body forms (external shapes) to improve
comparability of research results among investi-
gators. This resulted in the development of
master models of seated human body forms repre-
senting 95th- and 50th-percentile-size males and
a 5th-percentile-size female as standard shapes
depicting United States adults. The need for a
comparable standard representative of infants
and children at various age levels was also
recognized. There has never been a study specif-
ically designed to collect the types of informa-
tion necessary to develop infant and child body
forms.

In 1971, Stoudt undertook a research program
under a National Highway Traflic Safety Ad-
ministration (NHTSA) contract to review the
available state-of-the-art anthropometric data for
the design of child restraint systems. His ‘pri-
mary objective was to determine how much in-
formation existed in this field and if these data
were available, He believed that because future
restraint systems could require unique anthopo-
metric information, an enumeration of the desired
dimensions would be necessary but tenuous. He
cited 44 dimensions as the minimal number
needed for the construction of manikin and math-
ematical models and 196 dimensions as a com-
prehensive list. In his investigation he noted the

Jack of accurate and comprehensive anthrometric
data available for the task. .

The deficiencies that Stoudt pointed out in
existing data were also noted in a 1972 study on
infant and child measurements compiled by
Snyder et al. for the Children’s Hazards Division,
Bureau of Product Safety, Food and Drug Ad-
ministration. Although this study was an at-
tempt to bring together data useful to designers
of children’s products and for Federal standards,
the authors concluded, for a number of reasons,
that child measurement data available at that
time were of limited value.

To follow that work, this four-phase study was
undertaken to develop 8- and 6-year-old-child
standard seated body forms. Phase I established
the anthropometric criteria and constructed clay
masterbody forms that were considered repre-
sentative of unisexual 3- and 6-year-old United
States children. A list of measurements neces-
sary for the construction of seated child manikins
was selected, and a review of the available an-
thropometric literature on 3- and 6-year-old
children in the United States was accomplished.

Phase II consisted of a mathematical modeling
task using available mathematical modeling pro-
grams. The anthropometry required for the
mathematical model was measured on the 3- and
6-year-old-child clay forms, and the model was
then used to estimate the mass and the principal
moments of inertia of the body segments.

Phase ITT developed a composite casting mold
of the 3- and 6-year-old-child clay master forms
of orthopedic plaster and duplicated the body
forms in dental stone of known density.

In Phase IV, each stone body form was seg-
mented and the mass, center of mass, and prin-
cipal moments of inertia were experimentally
determined for each body segment.

This report describes the conduct of this re-
search and the result obtained.





Lower torso: Torso height, 10th rib
Torso breadth, iliocristale
Torso depth, iliocristale

Upper arm: Shoulder-elbow length
Upper arm breadth, mid-arm*
Upper arm depth, mid-arm
Parallelepiped

Hand: Hand length
Hand breadth
Hand depth
Foot length
Foot breadth
Foot depth

The standard mathematical equations for de-
termination of volume and mass moment of
inertia of the geometric elements are found in
Eshbach (1936). In these computations, volume
equaled mass in magnitude, the anthropometric
circumferences and diameters were averaged when
necessary and converted to radii, and the anthro-

Foot:

* Dimensions taken directly from the body form. All

other dimensions are listed in Table 1.

pometric lengths were entered directly or sub-
tracted to determine the appropriate segment
length.

A comparison of the model segment weight
estimates with the measured segment weight is
presented in Table 4. Most of the segments’
weights were estimated with a reasonable error,
as shown in the percentage differences between
the estimated and measured body segment
weights. The head, neck, upper arm, and foot
are, however, poorly modeled for both the 3-year-
old and 6-year-old masterbody forms.

Table 5 presents the mathematical model esti-
mates of the principal moments of inertia as a
percentage deviation from the measured moments
of inertia. The model does not perform as well
for these data as it does for the mass estimates.
The poorest model estimates are for the head,
neck, upper arm, and foot, which are also the
segments having the poorest mass estimates.

On careful examination of these data and on
the basis of past modeling experience with
baboons (Reynolds, 1974) and adult male ca-
davers (Chandler et al., 1975), the following

TABLE 4.
Mathematical Model Estimates of Body Segment Weights for
3- and 6-Year-Old-Child Masterbody Forms

3-Year-Old-Child Masterbody Form

Body Segment Weight in Grams Percent Total Body Weight
Segment Estimated _ Measured Estimated Measured %
dead 1,624 2,305 =29.5 10.3 15.9 =35,2
Neck 123 280 -56.1 0.8 1.9 -57.9
Upper Torso 3,731 3,524 + 5.9 23.8 24.3 ~ 2.1
Lower Torso 3,564 2,816 +26.6 22.7 19.4 +17.0
Upper Arm 495 304 462.8 3.2 2.1 +52.4
Lower Arm 230 217 + 6.0 1.5 1.5 0.0
Hand 11s 110 + 4.5 0.7 0.8 -12.5
Upper Leg 1,470 1,406 + 4.6 9.4 9.7 - 3.1
Lower Leg 627 546 +14.8 4.0 3.8 + 5.3
Foot 382 208 +83.7 2.4 1.4 441.7
TOTAL 15,700 14,507 + 8.2 100.0 100.1 = 0.1

6-Year-Old-Child Masterbody Form

Body Segment Weight in Grams Percent Total Body Weight

Segment Estimated Measured Estimated Measured %
Head 1,919 2,765 30.6 8.6 13.1 =34.4
Neck 216 329 -34.3 1.0 1.6 -37.5
Upper Torso 5,364 5,342 + 0.4 24.0 25.3 - 5.1
Lower Torso 4,982 4,176 +19.3 22.3 19.8 412.6
Upper Arm 731 524 +39.5 3.3 2.5 +32.0
Lower Arm 363 343 + 5.8 1.6 1.6 0.0
Hand 155 168 - 747 0.7 0.8 -12.5
Upper Leg 2,170 2,009 + 8.0 9.7 9.5 +21
Lower Leg 988 931 + 6.1 44 4h 0.0
Foot 524 273 491.9 2.3 1,3 +76.9
TOTAL 22,343 21,088 + 6.0 99.9 100.0 = 0.1



1973) and used as part of this anthropometric
design data base.

Martin’s (1954, 1955) data are 20 years old and
measurements were made on fully clothed school
children in southern Michigan. More recently,
Stoudt’s 1971 compilation, which is the most com-
plete, reports data on 2.5- and 6.8-year-old
children; these data had to be adjusted to con-
form with 3-year and 6-year age dimensions for
the masterbody forms. The data reported by
Malina (1973) are on a nationwide sample but
include no data on 38-year-old children. Further-
more, they reported dimensions on 21 measure-
ments that were selected primarily “ to define a
normal pattern of growth and development in
children in the United States in the middle
1960's.”

The most recent comprehensive study of
children’s measurements is by Snyder et al.
(1975). Forty-one body measurements were
taken on 4,027 infants and children representing
the U.S. population, ranging in age from 2 weeks
to 13 years. While these data represent a number
of functional measurements particularly useful
for product designers and Federal standards for
children’s products, no attempt was made to ob-
tain all of the measurements needed to construct
a child anthropomorphic dummy.*

Thus, the anthropometric requirements for de-
fining the morphology of child manikins are not
met in any of the preceding documents nor in
any of the others noted in the list of references.
The data that do exist in the literature provide
limited information on heights, breadths, cireum-
ferences, and body proportions of 3- and 6-year-
old children.

Most of the missing data in the anthropometric
literature are unique to the requirements of sculp-
turing a masterbody form. For example, the
shape of the torso at the nipples is described by
circumference, breadth, depth, and height from
seat pan. Chest circumference and depth are
available in the literature but the additional in-
formation is not. Two children, ages 3.5 and
years, were measured during this study to obtain
the additional data the team used as guidelines
for estimating the desired dimensions.

*The data from this survey were not available for
use at the time the body sizes of the 8- and 6-year-old
children were being determined. .

In summary, 30 dimensions on the list are
based on data in the literature whereas 68 dimen-
sions are either estimated by the team or based
on adjusted values derived from measurements of
the two children. The complete list of anthro-
pometric variables with selected dimensions is
given in Table 1. Landmark definitions and
measurement descriptions can be found in
Appendix A.

Clay masterbody forms were sculptured to meet
the design values within +2 mm of all established
dimensions. During the course of sculpturing the
masterbody forms, every effort was made to ad-

Figure 1,—Three-year-old-child clay masterbody form.

just the shape of the segments to conform to the
breadth, depth, and circumference within the de-
sired tolerance. In some instances, however,
where the three dimensions had apparently ir-
reconcilable differences, breadth and depth were
given a higher design priority than circumference.
The completed clay masterbody forms for the
3- and 6-year-old child respectively are shown in
Figures 1 and 2.



25. Torso Circumference, Waist: Subject sits erect,
upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended for-
ward horizontally. Measure with a flexible steel tape the
horizontal circumference of the waist.

26. Torso Height, Iliocristale: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally. Measure with an anthropometer the per-
pendicular distance from the seat pan to iliocristale.

27. Torso Breadth, Hocristale : Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally. Measure with an anthropometer the hori-
zontal breadth of the torso at iliocristale level.

28. Toros Depth, Miocristale: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally. Measure with an anthropometer the horl-
zontal (antero-posterior) depth of the torso at iliocristale
level.

Torso Circumference, Iliccristale: Subject sits
erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended
forward horizontally. Measure with a flexible steel tape
the horizontal circumference of the torso at iliocristale
level.

80. Anterior Superior Iliac Spine Height: Subject sits
erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended
forward horizontally, Measure with an anthropometer
the perpendicular distance from the seat pan to the most
anterior projection of the anterior superior iliac spine.

31. Bispinous Breadth: Subject sits erect, upper arms
relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward hori-
zontally. Measure with an anthropometer the horizontal
breadth between the right and left anterior superior iliac
spines.

82. Trochanterion Height: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally. Measure with an anthropometer the per-
pendicular distance from the seat pan to trochanterion,

33. Torso Breadth, Trochanterion: Subject sits erect,
upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended for-
ward horizontally. Measure with an anthropometer the
horizontal breadth of the torso at trochanterion.

84. Trocanterion-to-Seat Back Distance: Subject sits
erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended
forward horizontally, Measure with an anthropometer
the horizontal distance from the seat back to trochan-
terion.

35. Maximum Hip Breadth: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally, thighs parallel and resting completely on
the seat pan, Measure with an anthropometer the mas
mum breadth of the hip.

36. Sitting Hip Circumference : Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally, thighs parallel and resting completely on
the seat pan. Measure with a flexible stecl tape the
diagonal circumference around the hip, laying the tape
over the thigh-abdominal junction and just superior to
the resting portion of the buttocks,

87. Thigh-Abdominal Junction Height: Subject sits
erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended
forward horizontally, thighs parallel and resting com-

19

pletely on the seat pan. Measure with an anthropometer
the perpendicular distance from the seat pan to the thigh-
abdominal junction.

88, Thigh-Abdominal Junction-to-Seat Back Distance:
Subject sits erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms and
hands extended forward horizontally, thighs parallel and
resting completely on the seat pan. Measure with an
anthropometer the horizontal distance from the seat back
to the thigh-abdominal junction.

39. Thigh Circumference, Thigh-Abdominal Junction:
Subject sits erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms and
hands extended forward horizontally, thighs parallel and
resting completely on the seat pan. Measure with a
flexible steel tape the circumference perpendicular to the
Jong axis of thigh at the level of the thigh-abdominal
junction.

40. Thigh Circumference, Popliteal:; Subject sits erect,
upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended for-
ward horizontally, thighs parallel and resting completely
on the seat pan, lower leg perpendicular to floor, feet
resting on a horizontal platform. Measure with a flexible
steel tape the circumference perpendicular to the long
axis of the thigh at the popliteal level.

41. Thigh Depth, Popliteal: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally, thighs parallel and resting completely on
the seat pan, lower leg perpendicular to the floor, feet
resting on a horizontal platform. Measure with an
anthropometer the perpendicular depth (superoinferior)
of the high at the popliteal level.

42, Buttock-Knee Length: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally, thighs parallel and resting completely on
the seat pan, lower leg perpendicular to the floor, feet
resting on a horizontal platform. Measure with an
anthropometer the horizontal distance from the most
posterior plane of the buttock to the most anterior point
on the knee.

48, Buttock-Popliteal Length: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally, thighs parallel and resting completely on
the seat pan, lower leg perpendicular to the floor, feet
resting on a horizontal platform. Measure with an
anthropometer the horizontal distance from the most
posterior portion of the buttocks to the popliteal region
at the back of the calf.

44, Knee Height: Subject sits erect, uperr arms re-
laxed, forearms and hands extended forward horizontally,
thighs parallel and resting completely on the seat pan,
lower leg perpendicular to the floor, feet resting on a
horizontal platform. Measure with an anthropometer the
perpendicular distance from the footrest platform to the
top of the knee,

45. Popliteal Height: Subject sits erect, upper arms
relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward hori-
zontally, thighs parallel and resting completely on the
seat pan, lower leg perpendicular to the floor, feet resting
on a horizontal platform. Measure with an anthro-
pometer the perpendicular distance from the footrest
platform to the popliteal region at the back of the knee.



Technical Report Documentation Page

T. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No.
FAA-AM~76-9

‘4. Title and Subtitle 3, Report Date
Development and Evaluation of Masterbody Forms for July/1976

3- and 6- Year-Old-Child Dummies 6. Performing Organization Code

=]

” Performing Organization Report No.

Jost e"W. Young, Herbert M. Reynolds, John T.
McConville, Richard G.Snyder and Richard F. Chandler

9, Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)
FAA Civil Aeromedical Institute
P.O. Box 25082 11. Contract or Grant No.

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73125

13. Type of Report and Period Covered

12. Sponsoring Agency Name ond Address
Office of Aviation Medicine
Federal Aviation Administration
800 Independence Ave., S.W. 14. Sponsoring Agency Code
Washington, D.C. 20591
15. Supplementary Notes
Research Leading to preparation of this report was performed under Task
AM-B-75-PRS-25 in cooperation with the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
16. Abstract

This study defines and evaluates the size, shape, and mass distribution
characteristics of masterbody forms representative of 3-year-old and 6-year-old
U.S. children,

Based on the author's collective judgment of available data, 98
anthropometric dimensions were selected and used to develop full-scale clay
masterbody forms for reproduction in casting stone. The stone models were
segmented into 10 primary body components representing the head, neck, upper torso,
lower torso, upper arm, lower arm, hand, upper leg, lower leg, and foot. Weight,
volume, center of mass, and mass moments of inertia measured on each body
segment are presented in this report.

17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement
Anthropometry, human body models, human Document is available to the public
mass distribution through the National Technical Information
Service,
Springfield, Virginia 22151
19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages | 22. Price
Unclassified unclassified

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized



54

55

56

57

58
59

60
61
62
63
64

65
66

67
68

69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76

77

Variable
Name

Buttock-knee length

Buttock-popliteal length

Knee height

Popliteal height

Knee circumference

Knee breadth

Lower leg circumference,
popliteal

Lower leg depth, popliteal

Lower leg circumference,
maximum

Lower leg height, maximum
circumference

Lower leg depth, maximum
circumference

Lower leg breadth, maximum
circumference

Lower leg circumference,
minimum

Lower leg height, minimum
circumference

Lower leg depth, minimum
circumference

Lower leg breadth, minimum
circumference

Ankle breadth

Sphyrion height

Foot length

Foot breadth

Heel breadth

Shoulder-elbow length

Upper arm circumference,
axilla

Upper arm depth, axilla

Upper arm circumference,
mid~arm

Upper arm depth, mid-arm

Upper arm circumference,
antecubital

Upper arm depth, antecubital

Elbow breadth

Elbow circumference

Forearm-hand length

Forearm circumference,
maximum

Forearm depth, maximum
circumference

Wrist circumference,
minimum

Wrist breadth, minimum
circumference

Wrist depth, minimum
circumference

Dimension Source Dimension Source

3-yr-old S-yrrold

su in ca in
34.4 13.5 (10) 38.1 15.0 (2,3,4,9)
27.1 10.7. (10) 30.2 11.9 (10)
28.4 11.2 (3,9) 35.8 14.1 (2,3,9)
20.6 8.1 (3,9) 27.7. 10.9 (3,449)
25.8 10.2 (9,10) 26.6 10.5 (9,10)

6.6 2.6 (7,9) 7.5 3.0 (4,749)
21.2 8.3 (9) 22.1 8.7 (9)

6.4 2.6 (9,10) 6.9 2.7 (9,10)
21. 8.3 (2,3,9) 23.5 9.3 (2,3,9)
18.4 7.2 (9) 21.6 8.5 (9)

6.8 2.7 (9) 7.6 3.0 (9)

6.3 2.5 (9) 7.4 2.9 (9)
14.9 5.9 (9,10) 16.1 6.3 (4,9,10)

6.2 2.4 (9) 7 2.8 (9)

5.1 2.0 (9) 5.8 2.3 (9)

4.2 1.7 (9) 4.5 1.8 (9)

4,7 1.9 (9,10) 5.7 2.2 (9,10)

3.6 1.4 (9) 4.1 1.6 (9)
15.8 6.2 (3,9) 17.8 7.0 (2,3,4)

5.9 2.3 (3,9) 6.7 2.6  (2,3,4)

3.8 1.5 (9) 3.8 1.5 (9)
18.5 7.3 (3,9) 23.4 9.2 (2,3,4)
17.8 7.0 (9) 20.8 8.2 (9)

Tel 2.8 (9) 7.8 3.1 (9)
17.5 6.9 (2,3,9) 21.1 8.3 (2,3,4,9)

6.1 2.4 (9) 7.5 3.0 (9)
16.8 6.6 (9) 19.2 7.6 (9)

5.9 2.3 (9) 6.9 2.7 (9)
4.4 1.7 (9) 4.8 1.9 (9)
18.5 7.3 (9) 21.4 8.4 (9)
26.0 10.2 (3,9) 31.0 12.2  (2,3,9)
17.0 6.7 (3,9) 19.9 7.8 (3,4,9)
5.1 2.0 (9) 6.4 2.5 (9)
11.2 4.4 (9) 13.3 5.2 (3,9)
4.0 1.6 (2,3,9) 4.8 1.9 (9)

2.7 1.1 (9) 3.3 1.3 (9)

*Numbers in parentheses refer to references at end of table,


TABLE 1,
Anthropometric Data for Design of 3- and
6-Year-Old-Child Masterbody Forms

Variable Source Dimension Source
Now Name 6-yr-old
1 Weight (10)* 46 lb qo)
cm in cm in
2 Stature 96.5 38,0 (10)* 116.8 46.0 (10)
3 Sitting height 55.9 22,0 (1, 2,3) 63.5 25.0 (1,2,3)
4 Eye height 45.5 17.9 (10) 51.8 20.4 (10)
5 Tragion height 45.0 17.7 (9,10) 51.3 20.2 (9,10)
6 Cervical height 38,3 15,1 (3,10) 44,2 17.4 (3,10)
7 Acromion height 34.6 13.6 (3,10) 39.4 15.5 (3,10)
8 Biacromial breadth 21.8 8.6 (2) 25.4 10.0 (2,4)
9 Suprasternale height 35.2 13,9 (4,10) 40.1 15.8 (4,10)
10 Substernale height 25.2 9.9 (4,10) 27.3 10.7 (4,10)
11 Torso height, axilla 29,9 11.8 (9) 34.0 13.4 (9)
12 Torso breadth, axilla 17,6 6.9 (9) 20.3 8.0 (9)
13. Torso depth, axilla 12,1 4,8 (9) 13.2 5.2 (9)
14 Torso height, nipple 27,2 10.7 (10) 31.0 12.2 (10)
15 Torso breadth, nipple 17.4 6.9 (10) 19,2 7.6 (4,10)
16 Torso depth, nipple 12.9 5.1 (3,6) 14.3 5.6 (3,4,7)
17. Torso circumference, nipple 51.0 20.1 (2) 59.4 23.4 (2,4)
18 Internipple distance 11.4 45 (9,10) 11.4 4.5 (9,10)
19 Torso depth, substernale 12.9 5.1 (9,10) 14,3 5.6 (9)
20 Torso height, 10th rib 17.3 6.8 (9) 19.3 7.6 (9)
21 Torso breadth, 10th rib 15.2 6.0 (9) 19.5 7.7 (10)
22 Torso height, waist 15.5 6.1 (10) 17.5 6.9 (9)
23 Torso breadth, waist 16.1 6.3 (2.9) 19.4 7.6 (2,9)
24 Torso depth, waist 16.4 6.5 (10) 16.7 6.6 (9)
25 Torso circumference, waist 52.7 20.7 (10) 57.2 22.5 (4,10)
26 Torso height, iliocristale 13.2 5.2 (3,9) 15.7 6.2 (3,9)
27 Torso breadth, iliocristale 16.5 6.5 (9,10) 19.8 7.8 (4,9, 10)
28 Torso depth, iliocristale 15.8 6.2 (10) 16.6 6.5 (10)
29 Torso circumference,
iliocristale 53.7 21.1 (10) 58.0 22.8 (10)
30 Anterior superior iliac spine
height 11.9 4.7 (9) 12.4 4.9 (9)
31 Bispinous breadth 13.7 5.4 (10) 15.0 5.9 (9)
32 ‘rochanterion height 5.2 2.0 (9) 5.6 2.2 (9)
33 Torso breadth, trochanterion 20.8 8.2 (10) 23.5 9.3 (10)
34 Trochanterion-to-seat back
distance 7.5 3.0 (10) 9.1 3.6 (9)
35 Maximum hip breadth 20.2 8.0 G9) 23.1 9.1 (3,4,9)
36 Sitting hip circumference 59.2 23.3 (9) 68.0 26.8 (10)
37 Thigh-abdominal junction height 8.0 3.1 G,9) 10.2 4.0 (2,3,4,9)
38 Thigh-abdominal junction-to-
seat back distance 14.4 5.7 (9) 15.2 6.0 (9)
39 Thigh circumference, thigh-
abdominal junction 28.4 11,2 (2,9) 34.5 13.6 (2,9)
40 Thigh circumference, popliteal 24,0 9.4 (9) 26.8 10.6 (9)
41 Thigh depth, popliteal 7.8 3.1 (9,10) 8.5 3.3 (6,9)

*Numbers in parentheses refer to references at end of table,



Three-Dimensional-Point Locations of 3-Year-Old-Child Neck Landmarks

TABLE B-3.

X Axis Y Axis Z Axis

Number Code of
Surface Landmarks

in

cm

in

cm

in

cm

Pruitt tebe tee tee

i

ADMAAIANANTONACIAARAN

SHASSHAHOSNSAASdAN ASS
ee

FU tHe HELL HEHE LET

teehee eeee cree

eonanamanandwadanmos

Hann SSOdMH AK RAS
Ce

9, left
9, right

ll
12

anNene@

14, mid-sagittal

15, left

16, left
17, mid~sagittal

13, right
18, right
19, left
20, right

27
28

Three-Dimensional~Point Locations of 6-Year-Old-Child Neck Landmarks

TABLE B-4,

X Axis Y Axis Z Axis

Number Code of
Surface Landmarks

in

cn

in,

cm

in

cm

Pe reeh teeter ittette

DHOMANNHOMMaANMANANNA|IN

taddidcaincddaddddsd
Prviee ere rteetee

Been FARA TONNA AQAA

WCOCDOMMOMMOMAHMNOOM

AAonuddSo¥sahnSNHAAS
+i FEL Het ET eH ET

14, mid-sagittal

15, left

16, left
17, mid-sagittal

13, right
18, right
19, left
20, right

27
28

26


TABLE B-1. Three-Dimensional-Point Locations of 3-Year-Old-Child Head Landmarks

Y Axis Z Axis

X Axis

Number Code of
Surface Landmarks

in

cm

in

cm

in

cm

waoonNnnonanaNaansean

addddnanddadndnaddad
+1 berartcrrerrrane

HwecoEHALDVONVYNNONNS

SUSSHGARKHHHHAAAASA
+1 porrrrerre re reae

AmMNATORNREwHaANMNCOS

Sonn onodddtdndnddidad
eter Fe Peer t

wotrTMoOMaCrMOLNONCS

Sovsddiddysosssudasds
erect te Perret

anaatorRmnadaedoeses

ANS SonnSaNASSSSaAAA
beret bee etree Pet et

wmoMONVaNADMNONe TLS

BUSCHAMANSESSSSRAR OR

treet teeter ee Leet
4 a
s S
s 5
Py 2
4 a
ey oy
g s
you Su 2
ee Brus igves
Gi Sy GG -y oa "oo
G2 ead ena
Sh Read eta
Ronndngnsraonsanagsas
Bas Asn SAR aANaANN

Three-Dimensional-Point Locations of 6-Year-Old-Child Head Landmarks

TABLE B-2.

X Axis Y Axis Z Axis

Number Code of
Surface Landmarks

in

cm

in

cm

in

cm

enaannannnnaaanaqgqad

aan stontersesoonNast

BsSdcsndassdsEnanadcs

ereterTrrrrrrrrerrsee

BAORATOM|AN SHANNA TIA

SdoanGtddadodntinnddod
ret ete Fe ererreete

AMoAnweeMmennaoangeony

SoSSdddonaosssuKnenoS
ree pte Ferrer reise

addoGnnanAdddoodaad
Bite teeter crete eeeeet

HAMANN OAOAMNAMAGHES
SSdddangansrndccosnan

Pte et te eee
oI 4
3S S
s S
a 2
a a
0 0
g g
woo ae ou
wk 2P ov aues
Go Wy Ge y we oo
Cae Aa DOaA od
Su Rea BER
RaoncansncNnaacnagsys
BASSAS 5Sasandaan

25



Il. Anthropometric Basis for 3- and 6-Year-
Old-Child Masterbody Forms.

In 1964 a comprehensive literature search with
an objective of bringing together all of the child
data then available was initiated by the Division
of Accident Prevention, U.S. Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare, “. . . to meet
the urgent need for accumulations of statistical
data on child measurements to be used in testing
dummies” (McConville and Churchill, 1964).
The resulting survey attempted to collect design
data that. would describe the circumference,
breadth, and depth of the body at specific levels;
the lengths of body segments; and the location
of primary hinge points for the infant at birth
and 6 months, the unisexual child at 3, 6, 8, and
12 years, and males and females at age 18 years.
Of 87 proposed anthropometric dimensions de-
termined to be necessary for manikin design,
they found that 22 major dimensions were com-
pletely unavailable in the literature. McConville
and Churchill observed: “This lack of detailed
anthropometric information is somewhat  sur-
prising in view of the number of such studies
which have been carried out in the past few
decades.” They found few studies provided all
the desired statistics and they had to take “cer-
tain liberties” in the treatment of those that were
available.

The most recent comprehensive review of the
anthropometric literature for children was con-
ducted for the Children’s Hazards Division,
Bureau of Product Safety, Food and Drug Ad-
ministration. The resulting publication, “Source
Data of Infant and Child Measurements, Interim
Data, 1972” (Snyder et al., 1972), provided a
handbook of 23 measurements from 35 studies
and references for more than 800 worldwide
studies.

In using data from this publication, one must
consider several limitations. Many growth stud-
ies indicate that the secular trend in size is ob-
servable in children as well as in adults. In this
regard, only one-third of the studies reported in
the Snyder et al., 1972, collation were conducted
in the past decade. Some studies may not be
representative of the U.S. population but describe
highly selected populations, such as White school
children in Philadelphia. Furthermore, many of
these studies report data that were collected by
inexperienced measurers using nonstandard meas-

urement techniques. The measurements are often
not reproducible and are poorly or inaccurately
defined (e.g., bitrochanteric diameter defined as
hip width). In addition to these technical prob-
lems, past studies have been orientated either
toward longitudinal or cross-sectional means of
assessing the anthropometric characteristics of
children. These two approaches have different
methods of data presentation that result in in-
comparable data sets. Similarly, age values are
reported in different ways in the literature. For
example, age 6 in one study many mean exactly
6 years past birth but more often includes sub-
jects 5.5 to 6.5 years old; other studies may in-
clude those 6 to 7 years. All these considerations
make it difficult to evaluate and compare data
that may appear in the literature and often are
not known or are not obvious to the user. A
further problem with the limited numbers of
measurements available in the literature is that
these are generally traditional measurements de-
veloped for growth studies or population descrip-
tion and provide insufficient basis for the design
of children’s body forms.

In 1956 the National Center for Health Sta-
tistics (NCHS) was authorized to conduct a
nationwide Health Examination Survey (HES).
As part of the first cycle conducted between 1959
and 1962, individuals aged 18 to 79 years were
measured. A second cycle conducted from 1963
through 1965 was directed at measurements of
6- to 11-year-old children. A third cycle was
conducted between 1966 and 1970 with youths
aged 12 to 17 years. As part of this third survey,
body measurements were included but, unlike the
body measurements selected in Cycles I and II,
human engineering-type measures were excluded
because “it was decided for Cycle IIT that ac-
curate biologie data on growth and development
in US. children had a higher priority than hu-
muan-engineering data, so the battery of body
measurements is basically the traditional anthro-
pometry used in the longitudinal studies of
growth and development conducted in this
country over the past 40 years.” (NCHS, Series
1, No. 8, 1969, pp. 5-6.)

Because phyiscal measurements were accessory
information in the HES study, the time per sub-
ject restricted the number of measurements that
could be taken. Nevertheless, 88 measurements
were obtained (Hamill et al., 1970; Malina et al.,


TABLE 6.
COMPARISON OF BODY SEGMENT WEIGHTS OF MASTERBODY FORMS,
ADULT MALE CADAVERS, AND ADULT FEMALE BABOONS

Present Stud)

3-yr-old-child 6-yr-old-child Six Adult
3-yr-old- Density 6-yr-old~ Density Adult Male Female
Child Adjusted child Adjusted Cadavers Baboons
Head* 15.9% 16.0% 13.1% 13.2% 6.1% 8.3%
Torso 45.6 45.2 46.7 46.2 52.2 53.2
Upper Arm 2.1 21 2.5 2.5 2.9 3.1
Lower Arm 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 2.5
Hand 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.7
Upper Leg 97 9.8 9.5 9.6 10.2 8.4
Lower Leg 3.8 3,8 44 44 41 2.8
Foot 1.4 1.4 1,3 1.3 1,3 ll
Tail - - - 11
Sum of Parts 100,1% 100,0% 100.0% 99.8% 99.9% 99.8%

*Segment weight as a ratio of total body weight.

Their data suggest a multilinkage model of the
torso that would not have been practical for the
present study segmentation plan. Therefore, it
was decided that the torso and neck would be
segmented according to a rationale based on
anatomy and anthropometry. The segmentation
planes must be anthropometrically identifiable in
the living and they must reflect anatomical dif-
ferences that indicate different mass properties.
The torso was segmented into neck, thorax, and
abdominal-pelvie regions whose segmentation
planes were described previously. Any attempt
at this time to infer a torso linkage system from
this plan of segmentation is unfounded and pos-
sibly misleading.

Table 6 gives the weight distributions for the
3- and 6-year-old-child stone casts of this study
and for the data of this study adjusted to
empirically selected densities of 0.9 in the upper
and lower torso segments and 1.1 in all other
segments, six adult male cadavers (Chandler et
al., 1975), and adult female baboons (Reynolds,
1974). No data for torso weights correspond-
ing to the segmentation plan are used in the pre-
sent study; therefore, the torso weight as a per-
centage of total body weight is given for the
whole torso including the neck. Differences

16

among the groups are particularly observable in
the head and torso weights. One should consider
differences when examining data based on ba-
boons as child or adult surrogates, particularly
because mathematical models of vehicle crash
dynamics indicate that the mass of a rigid body
more significantly affects the results than does
moment of inertia (Bowman and Robbins, 1972).

The inertia data given for the dental stone
segments are not the principal moments of inertia.
These data report two transverse moments of
inertia (three for the head) measured about de-
fined axes that pass through the measured center
of mass of the segment. The principal moments
were not measured because, after a comparison
of the inertial data in the two previously noted
reports (Reynolds, 1974; Chandler et al., 1975)
was made, it was found that the principal axis
is approximately equal to an observed anatomical
axis. The only exception is the head segment ;
the principal moments of inertia for the adult
male head indicate that the mass is distributed
approximately in the shape of a sphere. As a
result, minor variations in shape and tissue dis-
tribution cause great variations in the location
of the principal axis. Therefore, the head
moments of inertia were measured about three


TABLE B-17. Three-Dimensional-Point Locations of 3-Year-Old-Child Lower Leg Landmarks

Number Code of X Axis Y Axis Z Axis
Surface Landmarks cm in cm in cm in
1 + 3.6 + 1.4 + 0.3 + 0.1 +11.4 + 4.5
2 0.0 0.0 + 3.6 + 1.4 + 8.1 + 3.2
3 0.0 0.0 - 2.8 - il + 7.9 + 3.1
4 + 3,3 + 14.3 + 0.3 + 0.1 11.2 - 4.4
5 - 0.3 - 0.1 + 2.3 + 0.9 -11,7 - 4.6
6 + 3.3 + 1,3 - 2.3 - 0.9 -11.9 - 47
7 + 3,0 + 1,2 + 0.3 + 0.1 - 0,3 - 0.1
8 7 3.3 - 1.3 - 0.3 - 0.1 + 0.3 + 0.1
9 - 0.5 - 0,2 - 2.8 -1. + 0.3 + 0.1
10 + 0.5 + 0.2 + 2.8 + 1,1 - 0.3 - 0.1
il + 0,3 + 0.1 + 0.3 + 0.1 + 7.9 + 3.1
12 - 0.5 - 0,2 + 0.3 + 0.1 11.7 - 4.6
53 - 0.3 - 0,1 + 2.3 + 0.9 -11.7 ~ 4.6

TABLE B+18. Three-Dimensional-Point Locations of 6-Year-Old-Child Lower Leg Landmarks

Number Code of X Axis Y Axis Z Axis
Surface Landmarks cm in cm in cm in
1 + 3.0 + 1,2 + 0.3 + 0.1 +15.2 + 6.0
2 - 0.1 - 0.4 + 3.6 + 1.4 +10.9 + 4.3
3 - 1.3 - 0.5 - 3.6 - 144 +11.2 + 4.4
4 + 4,6 + 1,8 + 0.3 + 0.1 -15.5 - 6.1
5 + 0.3 + 0.1 + 2.8 + 1.1 -15.5 - 6.1
6 - 1,0 - 0.4 - 2.5 - 1.0 -16.3 - 6.4
7 + 3.0 + 1,2 - 0.3 - 0.1 + 0.3 + 0.1
8 7 4,3 - 17 + 0.3 + 0.1 - 0.3 - 0.1
9 - 1.0 - 0,4 - 41 - 1.6 - 0.8 - 0.3
10 + 0.5 + 0,2 + 2.8 +11 + 0.5 + 0.2
11 - 0.5 - 0.2 0.0 0.0 411.4 + 4.5
12 0.0 0.0 + 0.3 + 0.1 -16.0 - 6.3
53 + 0.3 + 0,1 + 2.8 + 1.1 -15.5 - 6.1
54 - 1,0 - 0.4 - 2,0 - 0.8 -12.4 - 49

33



TABLE B-19. Three-Dimensional-Point Locations of 3-Year-Old-Child Foot Landmarks

Number Code of X Axis Y Axis Z Axis
Surface Landmarks cm in cm in cm in

1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 + 2.8 +11
2 - 3.6 - 1.4 + 2.3 + 0.9 + 2.3 + 0.9
3 - 4.3 - 1.7 - 2.0 - 0.8 + 2.0 + 0.8
7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 + 2.8 + 1.1
8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 1.8 - 0.7
9 + 0.3 + 0,1 - 2.0 - 0.8 + 0.8 + 0.3
10 - 0.3 - 0,1 + 1,5 + 0.6 - 0.8 - 0.3
i - 3.8 - 1.5 0.0 0.0 + 2.3 + 0.9
46 - 3.6 - 1.4 + 2,3 + 0.9 + 2.3 + 0.9

TABLE B-20. Three-Dimensional-Point Locations of 6-Year-Old-Child Foot Landmarks

Number Code of X Axis Y Axis Z Axis
Surface Landmarks cm in cm in cm in
1 +13 + 0.5 + 0.3 + 0.1 + 2.8 +11
2 - 3.6 - 1.4 + 2.8 + 1.1 + 2.5 + 1.0
3 - 4.6 - 1.8 - 2.5 - 1.0 + 2.0 + 0.8
7 + 0.5 + 0,2 0.0 0.0 + 2.8 +11
8 - 0.5 - 0.2 0.0 0.0 - 1.3 - 0.5
9 + 0.3 + 0.1 - 2.5 - 1.0 + 0.5 + 0.2
10 - 0.3 - 0.1 + 2.3 + 0.9 - 0.3 - 0.1
ll ~ 3.3 - 1.3 + 0.3 + 0.1 + 2.5 + 1.0
46 - 3.6 - 1.4 + 2.8 + 1.1 + 2.5 + 1.0

34


88. Menton-to-Wall Distance: Subject sits erect with
head in the Frankfort Plane. Measure with an anthro-
pometer the horizontal distance trom menton to the most
posterior projection of the head that would contact the
wall.

89, Glabella-to-Vertex Distance: Subject sits erect with
head in the Frankfort Plane. Measure with an anthro-
pometer the vertical distance from glabella to vertex,

90. Bitragion Breadth: Subject sits erect with head
in the Frankfort Plane, Measure with spreading calipers
the breadth between right and left tragions.

91. Bitragion-Coronal Are: Subject sits erect with head
in the Frankfort Plane. Measure with a flexible steel
tape the length of the are formed by passing the tape
from right to left tragion over the top of the head in the
coronal plane.

92. Bitragion-Glabella Are; Subject sits erect with head
in the Frankfort Plane. Measure with a flexible steel
tape the length of the are formed by passing the tape
from right to left tragion over glabella.

93, Bitragion-Menton Are; Subject sits erect with head
in the Frankfort Plane. Measure with a flexible steel
tape the length of the are formed by passing the tape
from right to left tragion over menton.

94, Bigonial Breadth: Subject sits erect with head in
the Frankfort Plane. Measure with spreading calipers
the breadth between the right and left gonial angles of
the mandible.

95, Neck Circumference: Subject sits erect with head
in the Frankfort Plane. Measure with a flexible steel
tape the horizontal circumference of the middle of the
neck.

96. Neck Breadth: Subject sits erect with head in the
Frankfort Plane. Measure with an antropometer the
horizontal breadth of the middle of the neck.

97. Neck Depth: Subject sits erect with head in the
Frankfort Plane. Measure with an anthropometer the
horizontal (anteroposterior) depth of the middle of the
neck,

98. Suprasternale-Cervicale Distance : Subject sits erect
with head in the Frankfort Plane. Measure with spread-
ing calipers the distance from suprasternale to cervicale,

Il, Body Landmarks.

1. Acromion: The most lateral point on the lateral
edge of the acromial process of the scapula.

2. Antecubital Region: A region formed at the junc-
tion of the forearm and upper arm on the anterior sur-
face when the arm is in the anatomical position,

8. Anterior Superior Iliac Spine: A spinous process
on the pelvis located at the most anterior projection of
the superior spine on the iliae portion of the pelvis.

4, Axilla: The armpit.

5. Calcaneous: The posterior bone in the heel of the
foot.

6. Cervicale: The most posterior projection
dorsal spine of the seventh cervical vertebra.

7. Dactylion: The distal tip of the third digit.

8. Ectocanthus: The point at the lateral margin of the
eye where the eyelids meet,

9, Femoral Condyles: The most lateral and medial
bony projections on the distal end of the femur.

10. Frankfort Plane: A plane formed by aligning the
head along an axis through tragion and infraorbitale
lowest point on the inferior margin of the bony eye
orbit) perpendicular to the gravity vector.

11, Glabella: The most anterior point on the forehead
that lies between the brow ridges in the midsagittal
plane.

12, Humeral Condyles: The mos lateral and medial
bony projections on the distal end of the humerus.

13. Mioeristale: The most superior point on the iliac
crest of the pelvis.

14, Malleoli: The most medial and lateral projections
on the distal ends of the tibia and fibula respectively.

15. Menton: The most anteroinferior point on the chin
in the midsagittal plane.

16. Metacarpale III: The knuckle of the third meta-
carpal bone in the hand (often the largest knuckle on
the hand).

17, Oceiput: The bone at the posterior and inferior
surfaces of the skull.

18. Olecranon Process: The proximal portion of the
ulna that forms the bony projection in the posterior
projection of the elbow.

19. Popliteal Region: The region at the back of the
knee formed by the junction of the thigh and lower leg.

20, Sphyrion: The distal tip of the tibia below the
medial malleolus.

21, Substernale: The lowest bony projection of the
sternum at the tip of the xiphoid process,

22, Suprasternale: A point on the most inferior margin
of the sternal notch at the top of the manubrium.

23, Tenth Rib: The lowest point on the inferior margin
of the lowest rib on the lateral surface of the rib cage
to fully articulate with the sternum.

24, Thigh-Abdominal Junction: The junction of the
upper leg with the torso.

of the

25. Tragion: The notch in the cartilage of the ear at
the superior margin of the tragus.

26. Trochanterion: The most lateral projection of the
greater trochanter of the femur.

27, Vertex: The most superior point in the midsagittal
plane on the head.

28. Waist: Level on the torso located midway between
the 10th rib and iliocristale heights.


Table

B-2.
B-3.

BA.

B-6.
B-7.

B-8.

B-12.

B-13.

B-14.

B-16.

LIST OF TABLES

Anthropometric data for design of 3- and 6-year-old-child
masterbody forms ~------.------------------------+-------
Segmental weights of 3- and 6-year-old-child masterbody forms _
Measured moments of inertia about. transverse axes of 3- and
6-year-old-child body segments of masterbody forms —--------
Mathematical model estimates of body segments’ weights for 3-
and 6-year-old-child masterbody forms ~---------~---------
Comparison of the mathematical model estimates vs. the experi-
mentally measured moments of inertia on the body segments
of the 3- and 6-year-old-child masterbody forms ~.-----.----
Comparison of body segment weights of masterbody forms, adult
male cadavers, and adult female baboons -_-----------------

Three-dimensiona]-point locations of 3-year-old-child head land-
marks

Three-dimensional-point locations of 6-year-old-child head land-
marks

Three-dimensional-point locations of 3-year-old-child neck land-
marks -

Three-dimensional-point locations of 6-year-old-child neck land-
marks ~----------------------------. -

Three-dimensional-point locations of 3-year-old-child upper torso
landmarks

Three-dimensional-point locations of 6-year-old-child upper torso
landmarks

Three-dimensional-point locations of 3-year-old-child lower torso
landmarks _--

Three-dimensional-point locations of 6-year-old-child lower torso
landmarks -.-_--__-__------------------------------------

Three-dimensional-point locations of 3-year-old-child upper arm
landmarks ~.._-------------------------------------------

. Three-dimensional-point locations of 6-year-old-child upper arm

landmarks ~___-------------------------------------------

. Three-dimensional-point locations of 3-year-old-child lower arm

landmarks -

Three-dimensional-point locations of 6-year-old-child lower arm
landmarks ~...-------------------------------------------
Three-dimensional-point locations of 3-year-old-child hand land-
marks ~_.----_--------------------------~----------------

Three-dimensional-point locations of 6-year-old-child hand land-
marks

. Three-dimensional-point locations of 3-year-old-child upper leg

landmarks

Three-dimensional-point locations of 6-year-old-child upper leg
landmarks ~~--.--~------------------------~--~-----------

Page

14

15

16

17

19

28

28

29

29

380

30

31

31

32

32

33.

33

34


Freure 8.—Side view of 6-year-old-child stone model.

(circumferences, heights, breadths, and depths)
were remeasured to insure that a precise duplica-
tion of the master models was achieved. The
dental stone cast duplicated the master model
with less than 1 mm distortion.

The dental stone model was then marked in
preparation for segmentation. First, all an-
thropometric landmarks were marked with an
indelible pen. Second, an axis system was estab-
lished and drawn on the segments to define the
principal anatomical planes (sagittal, transverse,
and horizontal) for the seated position of the
models, Third, three tick marks were made on
each cut plane of segmentation (see Chandler
et al., 1975, for details of this marking technique)
to establish these planes in three-dimensional
space,

The model cured under room environmental
conditions for 144 hours while it was being pre-
pared for segmentation. The total weight for
each of the stone models at the time of segmenta-
tion was 38.266 kg for the 6-year-old-child model
and 24.460 kg for the 3-year-old-child model.

The cut planes of the segments are illustrated
in Figures 4 through 9. The cut planes were

Ficure 9.—Rear view of 6-year-old-child stone model.

established to pass through an estimated joint
center to keep the segments as anatomically dis-
tinct as possible. The location of these cut planes
resulted in head, neck, upper torso, lower torso,
right upper arm, right lower arm, right hand,
right upper leg, right lower leg, and right foot
body segments for both the 3- and 6-year-old-
child stone models. The cut planes were located
on the dental stone models in the approximate
equivalent locations of the following anatomical
planes:

Head. S compound cut separated the head and
neck. The cut passed along the base of the
skull to the ear and then continued to an ante-
rior-inferior direction to pass approximately
tangent to the gonial angles of the mandible.

Neck. The superior cut was as described for
the head/neck separation. The inferior cut
passed along an anteriorly depressed horizontal
plane at the approximate posterior level of cer-
vicale and the anterior level of suprasternale.

Upper Torso. The superior cut was the neck
inferior cut. The inferior cut was a horizontal
plane that passed through the torso at the level
of the 10th rib.



TABLE 2.

Segmental Weights of

3- and 6-Year-Old-Child

Masterbody Forms

3-Year-Old-Child

6-Year-Old-Child

Segment Weight (g)

Segment Weight (g)

Segment or sw/BW* (%) or sw/BW* (%)
Segment Volume (cm?) Segment Volume (cm3)
Head 2,305 15.9 2,765 13.1
Neck 280 19 329 1.6
Upper Torso 3,524 24.3 5,342 25.3
Lower Torso 2,816 19.4 4,176 19.8
Upper Arm 304 2.1 524 2.5
Lower Arm 217 1.5 343 1.6
Hand 110 0.8 168 0.8
Upper Leg 1,406 9.7 2,009 9.5
Lower Leg 546 3.8 931 4.4
Foot 208 14 273 1.3
Total Body Weight 14,507 100.1 21,088 100.0

*SW/BW is the ratio of segment weight to

The center of mass for each body segment was
determined by a suspension technique. Segments
were suspended in each of the three axes of the
three-dimensional axis system (defined in Figure
10) and then were marked on opposite segment
surfaces at points along a vertical line intersect-
ing the suspension axis. The locations of the
center of mass marked on the surfaces of each
model were used in measuring the mass moments
of inertia about axes passing through these
marks. The locations of these marks on each
segment, relative to other landmarks, are shown
in Appendix B.

After location of the center of mass, two trans-
verse moments of inertia (three for the head)
were measured on each specimen. The moments
of inertia were measured on a torsional pen-
dulum* This instrument has a maximum test
weight of 113.6 kg (250 Ib) with an accuracy
(which does not include alignment or gravity
errors) of £0.25 percent of total moment of
inertia. The instrument was locally calibrated
and found to perform within factory specifica-
tion. The moment of inertia was measured for
the specimen and a specimen holder about an

* Model XR250, Space Electronics, Inc., Wallingford,
Conn,

ll

total body weight.

estimated center of mass of the combination.
The moment of inertia of the specimen holder
was then measured and subtracted from the total
to provide the moment of inertia for the speci-
men in Ib/in?, This unit of measurement was
converted to g/cm? and adjusted for the differ-
ence in density of the actual specimen relative
to a density equal to 1 g/cm’. The adjustment
divided the measured moment of inertia by the
measured density of the segment. The corrected
moments of inertia, relative to an axis system
approximately through the center of mass parallel
to the axis system shown in Figure 10, are pre-
sented in Table 3.

The final set of data was taken by locating the
cut plane tick marks, centers of mass, cut plane
centroids,* and anthropometric landmarks in
three-dimensional space. The measurement tech-
nique consisted of transferring each point to a
horizontal plane (recorded as a point on a sheet
of paper) and measuring its elevation above the
plane. These data, in combination with the estab-
lished anthropometric data base, provide a means
of mathematically reassembling the specimen in

* These were approximated as the center of cut plane
surface and should not be construed as centers of joint
rotation, :



I. Introduction _______------------------------------------------

Il. Anthropometric Basis for 3- and 6-Year-Old-Child Masterbody
Forms ~---------------------------------------------------

III. Mass Distribution Properties of the 3- and 6-Year-Old-Child
Masterbody Segments ---~----------------------------------

IV. Mathematical Model Estimates of Weight and Moments of Inertia
of the 3- and 6-Year-Old-Child Masterbody Segments --------

V. Discussion _...----------------------------------------------
VI. Conelusions -_-----------------------------------------------

Appendix A. Anthropometry
Anthropometric Dimensions ~
Body Landmarks

Appendix B. Three-Dimensional-Point Locations of Anthropo-
metrical Landmarks and Segment Center of Mass

References ~-----------------------------------------------

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure

1. Three-year-old-child clay masterbody form ~-.------------------
. Six-year-old-child clay masterbody form ~----------------------
. Six-year-old-child masterbody form in the process of mold casting

- pe

. Front view of 3-year-old-child stone model ---

. Side view of 3-year-old child stone model —_

. Rear view of 3-year-old-child stone model —~
. Front view of 6-year-old-child stone model ~-.------------------

. Side view of 6-year-old-child stone model ~---------------------

pPnrarx

. Rear view of 6-year-old-child stone model ~---------------------

10. Three-dimensional axis system of the 8- and 6-year-old-child
masterbody forms

11. Exploded view of 3-year-old-child stone body segments

12, Exploded view of 6-year-old-child stone body segments -

20

21



TABLE B-15. Three-Dimensional-Point Locations of 3-Year-Old-Child Upper Leg Landmarks

Number Code of X Axis Y Axis Z Axis
Surface Landmarks cm in cm in cm in

1 - 2.5 - 1.0 + 0.3 + 0.1 +48 +19
3 - 8.9 - 3.5 - 5.1 - 2.0 + 1.3 + 0.5
4 +16,5 + 6,5 + 0.3 + 0.1 + 2.8 +11
5 +13,2 + 5.2 + 3,0 + 1.2 - 0.5 - 0.2
6 +12,7 + 5.0 - 3.3 - 1.3 - 1.0 ~ 0.4
7 + 0.3 + 0.1 0.0 0.0 + 4.6 + 1.8
8 - 0.3 - 0.1 0.0 0.0 - 3.3 - 1.3
9 0.0 0.0 - 4.8 - 1.9 + 0.8 + 0.3
10 0.0 0.0 +43 +17 - 0.8 - 0.3
ll - 9.1 - 3.6 0.0 0.0 +143 +005
12 +13.0 + 5.1 0.0 0.0 - 0.5 - 0.2
46 - 8.9 - 3.5 - 5.1 - 2.0 + 1,3 + 0.5
50 +15,0 + 5.9 + 0.3 + 0.1 +41 + 1.6

TABLE B-16. Three-Dimensional-Point Locations of 6-Year-Old-Child Upper Leg Landmarks

Number Code of X Axis ¥ Axis Z Axis
Surface Landmarks cm in cm in cm in
1 - 5.6 = 2.2 + 0.3 + 0.1 + 5.8 + 2.3
3 -10.2 - 4.0 - 5.3 - 2.1 + 1.0 + 0.4
4 417.5 + 6.9 + 0.3 + 0.1 + 1.8 + 0.7
5 413.5 + 5.3 + 6.6 + 2.6 - 2.3 - 0.9
6 413.7 + 5.4 - 3.3 - 1.3 - 2.5 - 1.0
7 + 0.3 + 0.1 - 0.3 - 0.1 + 5.1 + 2.0
8 - 0.3 - 0.1 + 0.3 + 0.1 - 4.6 - 1.8
9 0.0 0.0 - 4.8 - 1.9 0.0 0.0
10 0.0 0.0 + 5.1 + 2.0 0.0 0.0
Wd -10.4 - al - 0.5 - 0.2 +143 + 0.5
12 414.5 + 5,7 + 0.3 + 0.1 - 165 - 0.6
46 -10.2 - 4.0 = 5.3 - 2.1 + 1.0 + 0.4
50 +16.3 + 6.4 + 0.3 + 0.1 +23 + 0.9
51 414.2 + 5.6 - 3.8 1.5 - 1.3 - 0.5



46. Knee Circumference: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally, thighs parallel and resting completely on
the seat pan, lower leg perpendicular to the floor, feet
resting on a horizontal platform. Measure with a flexible
steel tape the diagonal circumference around the flexed
knee,

47. Knee Breadth: Subject sits erect, upper arms
relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward hori-
zontally, thighs parallel and resting completely on the
seat pan, feet resting on a horizontal platform. Measure
with sliding calipers the horizontal breadth between the
femoral condyles of the knee,

48. Lower Leg Circumference, Popliteal: Subject sits
erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended
forward horizontally, thighs parallel and resting com-
pletely on the seat pan, lower leg perpendicular to floor,
feet resting on a horizontal platform. Measure with a
flexible steel tape the horizontal circumference of the
lower leg at the popliteal level.

49. Lower Leg Depth, Popliteal: Subject sits erect,
upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended for-
ward horizontally, thighs parallel and resting completely
on the seat pan, lower leg perpendicular to the floor,
feet resting on a horizontal platform. Measure with
sliding calipers the horizontal depth of the lower leg
at the popliteal level.

50. Lower Leg Circumference, Maximum ; Subject sits
erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended
forward horizontally, thighs parallel and resting com-
pletely on the seat pan, lower leg perpendicular to the
floor, feet resting on a horizontal platform. Measure
with a flexible steel tape the maximum horizontal cir-
cumference of the calf.

51. Lower Leg Height, Maximum Circumference: Sub-
Ject sits erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands
extended forward horizontally, thighs parallel and rest-
ing completely on the seat pan, lower leg perpendicular
to the floor, feet resting on a horizontal platform.
Measure with an anthropometer the perpendicular dis-
tance from the footrest platform to the level of the
maximum circumference of the calf.

52. Lower Leg Depth, Maximum Circumference: Sub-
Ject sits erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands
extended forward horizontally, thighs parallel and rest-
ing completely on the seat pan, lower leg perpendicular
to the floor, feet resting on a horizontal platform.
Meaure with sliding calipers the horizontal depth at the
level of the maximum circumference of the calf.

58. Lower Leg Breadth, Maxximum Circumference:
Subject sits erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms and
hands extended forward horizontally, thighs parallel and
resting completely on seat pan, lower legs perpendicular
to the floor, feet resting on a horizontal platform,
Measure with sliding calipers the horizontal breadth at
the level of the maximum circumference of the calf.

54, Lower Leg Circumference, Minimum: Subject sits
erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended
forward horizontally, thighs parallel and resting com-
pletely on seat pan, lower legs perpendicular to the floor,

feet resting on a horizontal platform. Measure with a
flexible steel tape the minimum horizontal cireumference
of the ankle above the malleoli.

55. Lower Leg Height, Minimum Circumference:
Subject sits erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms and
hands extended forward horizontally, thighs parallel and
resting completely on seat pan, lower legs perpendicular
to the floor, feet resting on a horizontal platform.
Measure with an anthropometer the perpendicular dis-
tance from the footrest platform to the level of the
minimum circumference of the ankle.

56. Lower Leg Depth, Minimum Circumference:
Subject sits erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms and
hands extended forward horizontally, thighs parallel and
resting completely on seat pan, lower legs perpendicular
to the floor, feet resting on a horizontal platform.
Measure with sliding calipers the horizontal breadth at
the level of the minimum circumference of the ankle.

57. Lower Leg Breadth, Minimum Circumference:
Subject sits erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms and
hands extended forward horizontally, thighs parallel and
resting completely on seat pan, lower legs perpendicular
to the floor, feet resting on a horizontal platform.
Measure with sliding calipers the horizontal breadth at
the level of the minimum circumference of the ankle.

58. Bimalleolar Breadth: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally, thighs parallel and resting completely on
seat pan, lower legs perpendicular to the floor, feet rest-
ing on a horizontal platform. Measure with sliding
calipers the breadth between the lateral and medial
malleoli of the ankle.

59, Sphyrion Height: Subject sits erect, upper
arms relaxed, forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally, thighs parallel and resting completely on
seat pan, lower legs perpendicular to the floor, feet rest-
ing on a horizontal platform. Measure with an anthro-
pometer the perpendicular distance from the footrest
platform to sphyrion,

60. Foot Length: Subjects sits rect, upper arms re-
laxed, forearms and hands extended forward horizontally,
thighs parallel and resting completely on seat pan, lower
legs perpendicular to the floor, feet resting on a hori-
zontal platform. Measure with sliding calipers the maxi-
mum horizontal length parallel to the long axis of the
foot from heel to toe,

61. Foot Breadth: Subject sits erect, upper arms re-
laxed, forearms and hands extended forward horizontally,
thighs parallel and resting completely on the seat pan,
lower legs perpendicular to the floor, feet resting on a
horizontal platform. Measure with sliding calipers the
maximum breadth across the distal ends of the meta-
tarsals.

62. Heel Breadth: Subject sits erect, upper arms re-
Jaxed, forearms and hands extended forward horizontally,
thighs parallel and resting completely on the seat pan,
lower legs perpendicular to the floor, feet resting on a
horizontal platform, Measure with sliding calipers the
breadth of the heel across the superior portion of the
caleaneous.


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Ms. Sue Pinski
and Ms. Marsha Penn, Protection and Survival Laboratory, CAMI, during
data collection procedures. Special acknowledgement is given to Ms. Betty
P. Gatliff, Medical Illustration Section, CAMI, for sculpturing the initial
clay child body forms; the late Mr. Charles E, Gassaway, Chief, Technical
Section, CAMI, for designing and fabricating the model framework and
holding devices; Ms. Jean McConville, who prepared the illustrations and
graphic layouts; and to Ms. LaNelle Murcko, CAMI, who edited the final
manuscript.


Three-Dimensional-Point Locations of 3-Year~Old-Child Lower Torso Landmarks

TABLE B-7.

X Axis Y Axis 2 Axis

Number Code of
Surface Landmarks

in

cm

in

cm

in

cm

WAMDDIMONMMOEMDROONG
COHNSKHSSSSSOOHAANASH
Fee cere rte treetere

FUE Ht HL teeter eee

Nanenocrannowsrnaoan

AdHaodisasscdccHssdddH

FUE t ete tee eet
2 2 4
ve ve ve
am ob Pra)
Cee Oo
an at an
Ada OCnNONTHNAIN THER
° ASSSssss

Three-Dimensional-Point Locations of 6-Year-Old-Child Lower Torso Landmarks

TABLE B-8,

X Axis Y Axis Z Axis

Number Code of
Surface Landmarks

in

cm

in

cm

in

cm

TAN CHMENMANMATNR AME

AaiAcGdncdsddddddddaT
ttt e ere e rete teeegira

CII Senenncconaaae

HOGA HASSSOKAHS SHS
teeter rer ret reeegr

enneerocenaaoenaavec

Siancesdcdsddddaads
+144 ee

Nadeonenorsayvnnano
ASdSHaAnddddodddd SHA
FUEL CHEE HE LEH

TINMIDNEAAOMONMF AMMAN
aAdcaddaddcdddndddd
FUP ttt e tl Lette cee

3, left
3, right
6, left
6, right
9, left
9, right

11
12
42
43
44
45
46
47

28


APPENDIX B

Three-Dimensional-Point Locations of Anthropometrical Landmarks
and Segment Center of Mass

The collection of three-dimensional-point an-
thropometric data presents interesting problems
for both the measurer and the user of such data.
First, they must be measured within a defined
orthogonal axis system. Second, the measure-
ment technique must be precise both in the iden-
tification of the point and in the coordinate
location of the point. Third, these data must be
presented in a format that allows the user free-
dom to interpret the data according to his needs.
These problems were resolved in the following
manner in the present study.

First, a three-dimensional, inertial-axis system
was defined external of the specimen. All points
were located relative to a plane parallel to the
floor that establishes the “i” and “j” axes. Eleva-
tion from the plane provides coordinate data for
the “k” axis. Thus, the paper on which the
points were reproduced served as the reference
plane and the elevation from that plane was
given for each point. All segments were
measured in positions and orientations selected
for convenience and accessibility of points in the
measurement device described in two previous
studies (Reynolds, 1974; Chandler et al., 1975).
These measured values were then converted into
correct coordinate values to reorient and reposi-
tion each segment relative to the original un-
segmented body form, the external axis system
(Figure 12), and the indicated center of mass.

The three-dimensional-point data can be used
directly, and coordinates for each point can be
determined for an external axis system. Any
axis system can be constructed by using four of
these points and the data translated into the new
axis system. The data were intentionally left
in their present format so that the user would
have the freedom to use and interpret the data
as his needs arise. The reader and/or user is
urged to interpret these data carefully. These
points are located on dental stone model surfaces

23

that do not have an associated internal skeleton
on which they could have been based. The sur-
face locations of these ponts are based on the
anthropometric data, and team estimates have
been previously discussed. Furthermore, the lo-
cation of a cut surface centroid reflects only the
center of a dental stone model cut surface and
may not have any meaning relative to a human
linkage system. There are no data available in
the literature that define the linkage system for
children, yet these three-dimensional-point data
appear to reflect such a linkage system. Similar
caution must be exercised in using the location
of the center of mass data. Because there are no
standard definitions to determine the proximal
and distal relationships of a composite or seg-
mented torso, the authors have assumed that ab-
solute proximal is coincident with the cut plane
separating the upper and lower torso segments.

These data are provided to aid the users in
reconstructing the shape, size, and location of the
segments. They present a geometric description
of the cut plane relative to each segment and
define the locations of the anthropometric and
anatomical landmarks in three dimensions. The
user should not be misled into utilizing these data
as if they were collected on living 3- and 6-year-
old children, These data remain to be collected.

Number Code of Surface Landmarks for
Three-Dimensional-Point Locations

1. Sagittal Proximal Tick Mark: A point that lies in
the midsagittal or parasagittal plane at the proximal
cut plane intersect with the anterior skin surface,

2, Medial Proximal Tick Mark: A point at the proximal
cut plane intersect with the medial skin surface.

3. Lateral Proximal Tick Mark: A point at the proxi-
mal cut plane intersect with the lateral skin surface.

4, Sagittal Distal Tick Mark: A point that lies in the
midsagittal or parasagittal plane at the distal cut plane
intersect with the anterior skin surface.

5. Medial Distal Tick Mark: A point at the distal cut
plane intersect with the medial skin surface.



Variable Dimension Source Dimension Source

No. Name 6-yr-old
cm in

78 Hand length 11.4 4.5 (2,3) 13.4 5.3 (2,3,4)
79 Hand breadth, metacarpale III 5.3 2.1 (3.9) 6.1 2.4 (3,5,9)
80 Hand depth, metacarpale IIT 1.9 0.7 (9) 1.9 0.7 (9)
81 Palm length 6.4 2.5 (9) ie! 2.8 (9)
82 Head length 17.9 7.0  (3,7,9) 18.1 7.1 (2,3,8,9)
83 Head breadth 13.5 5.3 (3,7,9) 14.1 5.6  (2,3,8,9)
84 Head circumference 50.8 20.0 (2,3,9) 52.2 20.6 = (3,5,9)
85 Tragion-to-vertex distance 11.0 4.3 (9,10) 12.2 4.8 (9,10)
86 Tragion-to-wall distance 9.0 3.5 (9,10) 9.8 3.9 (9,10)
87 Menton-to-vertex distance 17.5 6.9 (9) 20.4 8.0 (10)
88 Menton-to-wall distance 16.0 6.3 (9) 17.0 6.7 (9)
89 Glabella-to-vertex distance 7.9 3.1 9) 9.2 3.6 (9)
90 Bitragion breadth 10.7 4.2 (9) 11.7 4.6 (9,10)
91 Bitragion-coronal are 31.7. 12.5 (9,10) 32.9 13.0 (9,10)
92 Bitragion-glabella arc 25.6 10.1 (9,10) 24.2 9.5 (9,10)
93 Bitragion-menton arc 25.0 9.8 (9,10) 25.4 10.0 (9,10)
94 Bigonial breadth 8.1 3.2 (9) 9.4 3.7 (8,9)
95 Neck circumference 23.3 9.2 (3,9) 27.5 10.8 (23,9)
96 Neck breadth 7.0 2.8 (9) 8.0 3.1 (9)
97 Neck depth 6.7 2.6 (9,10) 8.9 3.5 (9,10)
98 Suprasternale-cervicale

distance 8.2 3.2 (9) 8.7 3.4 (9)

Sources: The references cited here are those from which the anthropometric data for the
3-_and 6-year-old-child body forms were obtained. In many instances the design

value for a particular dimension is not the value reported in these references but, instead,
is one adjusted to the average stature and weight of a hypothetical 3- or 6-year-

old child.

(1) McConville and Churchill, 1964.
(2) Snyder et al., 1972.

(3) Stoudt, 1971.

(4) Malina et al.. 1973.

(5) Martin, 1954,

(6) Martin, 1955.

(7) Meredith and Boynton, 1937,

(8) Young, 1966.

(9) Reynolds, personal communication.
(10) Team estimate.



Lower Torso. The superior cut was the upper
torso inferior cut. The inferior cut passed
through the hip as a plane defined by the right
trochanterion, left trochanterion, and thigh-
abdominal junction landmarks. This cut passed
along an estimated hip joint center of rotation
as defined by an axis passing through the right
and left trochanterion landmarks.

Upper Arm. The superior cut passed from the
most superior point in the axilla through acro-
mion. The inferior cut bisected the elbow at
approximately 45°, passing through the olecranon
process and the antecubital region of the elbow.

Lower Arm. The superior cut was the upper
arm inferior cut. The inferior cut passed
through the distal wrist crease approximately
perpendicular to the long axis of the segment.

Hand. The cut was the inferior cut for the
lower arm.

Upper Leg. The superior cut was the lower
torso inferior cut. The inferior cut bisected the
knee at approximately 45°, passing through the
patella and the popliteal region of the knee.

Lower Leg. The superior cut was the upper
leg inferior cut. The inferior cut passed tangent
to sphyrion and bisected the ankle with the least
amount of foot possible attached to the lower
leg.

Foot. The cut was the inferior cut for the
lower leg.

The resulting body segments are illustrated in
Figures 10 and 11, The cuts were made by using
a Biro electric saw. The total kerf loss by weight
of dental stone for the 6-year-old-child model was
552 g (14 percent of its total body weight) and
for the 3-year-old-child model was 319 g (1.2
percent of its total body weight).

The weight of each segment was recorded from
either of two scales.* These weights were used
in adjusting the mass moments of inertia equiv-
alent to those of a segmental mass with density
equal to 1 g/cm* (Zook, 1932) and have, there-
fore, not been reported.

Volume was measured on each segment by us-
ing the water displacement technique (Clauser

* Mettler P10N/7 Mettler Instrument Corporation,
Heightstown, New Jersey. Howe Richardson Scale Com-
pany Model 3305, Rutland, Vermont.

10

et al., 1969; Chandler et al., 1975). Volume was
measured by lowering each segment into a tank
and displacing water equal to the volume of the
specimen, then weighing the displaced water and
correcting for temperature. This corrected weight
is equal in magnitude to the volume of the speci-
men with a density of unity (1 g/em*). The com-
bined weight of the 3-year-old-child model was
14.507 kg (31.98 lb) and for the 6-year-old-child
model was 21.108 kg (46.57 Ib). These values
compare very well with the design values of
15 kg (33 Ib) for the 3-year-old-child model and
20.9 kg (46 lb) for the 6-year-old-child model.
The measured data do not include the kerf loss,
which would raise the values to approximately
14.682 kg (34.8 lb) for the 3-year-old-child model
and 21.515 kg (47.3 Ib) for the 6-year-old-child
model.

Y

Frecre 10.—Three-dimensional axis system of the 3- and
6-year-old-child masterbody forms.

The segment volume and adjusted weight of
the 3- and 6-year-old-child body forms, along
with the ratio of the segment’s measurement to
that of the total body, are given in Table 2.