G force calculation of hitting the head

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on calculating the g-force experienced by an individual who hit their head against a solid metal object. The individual, weighing 8.8 lbs, accelerated at 1 m/s or 1.5 m/s before impact, with a collision distance of 0.5 mm. Calculations suggest that the deceleration could be around 2.22 m/s², translating to approximately 20 g's, which is significant enough to potentially cause a concussion. However, the complexity of accurately determining g-forces in such scenarios is acknowledged, and the discussion emphasizes the importance of seeking medical advice for head injuries.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of basic physics concepts, particularly acceleration and force.
  • Familiarity with g-force calculations and their implications on human health.
  • Knowledge of head injury mechanics and the effects of blunt force trauma.
  • Awareness of the limitations of online forums for medical advice.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research "Newton's Second Law of Motion" for a deeper understanding of force and acceleration.
  • Study "Head Injury Biomechanics" to comprehend the effects of g-forces on the human brain.
  • Learn about "Concussion Assessment Protocols" to understand how medical professionals evaluate head injuries.
  • Explore "Physics of Impact" to gain insights into how different materials affect injury outcomes during collisions.
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for individuals interested in biomechanics, medical professionals assessing head injuries, and anyone seeking to understand the physics behind impacts and their potential consequences on health.

freexd
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
Hello,
Could you guys please do me a favor and calc the g force of a 8.8lbs head that accelerates with 1m/s or 1.5m/s and than hits a solid metal objebt with the back of the head which moves 0.5 mm.

This is no homework. It happened to me.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
http://arxiv.org/pdf/0711.3804v1.pdf

Here's a paper we wrote on the subject of head impacts.

Hitting stuff hard that moves very little is a bad plan.

There is some give in the scalp and some bending in the skull, but not much.

Accelerations can be high.
 
This looks very interessting but way to complicated for me.

I don't know how to do it
 
freexd said:
Hello,
Could you guys please do me a favor and calc the g force of a 8.8lbs head that accelerates with 1m/s or 1.5m/s and than hits a solid metal objebt with the back of the head which moves 0.5 mm.

This is no homework. It happened to me.

Without knowing the velocity of your head at the moment of impact or how long you were accelerating, there's little we can do. Can you put this in context for us? Were you in an automobile accident? The details may help us figure out some approximation.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: freexd
Drakkith said:
Without knowing the velocity of your head at the moment of impact or how long you were accelerating, there's little we can do. Can you put this in context for us? Were you in an automobile accident? The details may help us figure out some approximation.
No I wasnt in a car accident. I wanted to look through a window and pulled the curtains back(not to the side). I ve overseen this big metal bar attached on the wall and leand my body and head back until it collided. The impact was moderate hard.

The velocity while hitting the object has to be 1 or 1,5 m/s. I think I did not decelerate before the impact. The distance when I started to move backwords was 30 cm. I cannot tell how long I was accelerating,
 
I'm not sure it's possible to get an accurate number then.
 
Drakkith said:
I'm not sure it's possible to get an accurate number then.
So the only thing that would be needed is how long I accelearated?

I calculated 0.6s
 
freexd said:
So the only thing that would be needed is how long I accelearated?

Even with that I'm not sure what we could really do. It's a complicated problem. But honestly I don't expect that the g-forces exerted on your head were very high. There's no way you were moving that fast.
 
Drakkith said:
Even with that I'm not sure what we could really do. It's a complicated problem. But honestly I don't expect that the g-forces exerted on your head were very high. There's no way you were moving that fast.

After rethinking this I would say youre right.

I needed approximately 0.5 s for a 30cm distance. So my velovity was 0.6m/s.

Now it should be doable? It os no problem when the calc is not 100% correct.
 
  • #10
Now it depends on how fast your head decelerated. And that I don't really know how to find out. If we assume that it takes 0.27 seconds (the time of the collision in the paper linked in the 2nd post) then the deceleration is only 2.22 m/s2, which is less than 1/4 g. I expect that the time taken to come to a stop is different than 0.27 seconds, but I don't know by how much. Still, that should give you a decent estimate.
 
  • #11
Drakkith said:
Now it depends on how fast your head decelerated. And that I don't really know how to find out. If we assume that it takes 0.27 seconds (the time of the collision in the paper linked in the 2nd post) then the deceleration is only 2.22 m/s2, which is less than 1/4 g. I expect that the time taken to come to a stop is different than 0.27 seconds, but I don't know by how much. Still, that should give you a decent estimate.
0.27s is far too long. It was a rapid stop as metal give not much room. I would drop this number down to 0.1s

About 50-60g would be requird for a concussion,
10-20g is a subconcuasive impact.

I am sure it is around 20g
 
  • #12
freexd said:
0.27s is far too long. It was a rapid stop as metal give not much room.

But your skull does. :wink:

freexd said:
I would drop this number down to 0.1s

That puts the acceleration at 6 m/s2, or just under two-thirds of a g.
 
  • #13
Note that you can sustain an injury at much lower g-forces than commonly stated if the force is concentrated in a small area, such as when you hit your head on an metal bar.
 
  • #14
Yes I only hit a small part of my head(more the edge of this thing)

So in summary we end up that it cannot be calculated.

At least an assumtion?
 
  • #16
freexd said:
http://neurotalk.psychcentral.com/thread215450-4.html

Drakkith look here please. They calculated much higher fores.

If you're referring to post #33, then it appears they've made a mistake with the units. Converting everything to meters (which is what you have to do) gives me 9.16 g's, not 91.6 g's. The calculated values in post #35 are also wrong. For the 0.5 mm deflection, the g-force is 0.19 g's, not 1.9.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: freexd
  • #17
Ah ok. You know certainly more like this users about physics.

So what is a reasonable value for my incident yesterday? I know physicians don't like estimations
 
  • #18
Assuming your head is a rigid object, a velocity of 0.6 m/s, and that the bar deflects 0.5 mm, I get 3.7 g's.
 
  • #19
That looks so little. The bump was mediocre intense. Now think how hard you have to hit your head to get 20-60g. Why did you take 0.5mm? How high are the gs when we reduce this to 0.1mm??

The nfl does reasearch on head to head collisions. Most of thestart at twenty and go up to 50 and more.
 
  • #20
Drakkith said:
Note that you can sustain an injury at much lower g-forces than commonly stated if the force is concentrated in a small area, such as when you hit your head on an metal bar.

Where do you have this info from? Imagine the bar to be 4m long, 10cm wide and high. It hit me almost with the edge in the area where the ear ends a bit above.
 
  • #21
Drakkith said:
Note that you can sustain an injury at much lower g-forces than commonly stated if the force is concentrated in a small area, such as when you hit your head on an metal bar.

With respect to brain injury, this is only true if the skull itself is compromised. More focussed forces are more likely to compromise the skull.

But with respect to brain injuries that occur without skull injury, it is the translational and rotational accelerations that matter, without regard for how concentrated the external forces and torques are on the head.

A Physics Forum is a poor place to attempt to diagnose a head injury. Google up the common symptoms and if you still think you may be injured, seek a medical diagnosis from a medical professional.
 
  • #22
Dr. Courtney said:
With respect to brain injury, this is only true if the skull itself is compromised. More focussed forces are more likely to compromise the skull.

I was under the assumption that a blow to the head was able to cause injury without compromising the skull.

Dr. Courtney said:
A Physics Forum is a poor place to attempt to diagnose a head injury. Google up the common symptoms and if you still think you may be injured, seek a medical diagnosis from a medical professional.

That I agree with.
 
  • #23
Drakkith said:
I was under the assumption that a blow to the head was able to cause injury without compromising the skull.

No doubt, but with closed head, blunt force traumatic brain injuries, it is the net rotational and translational accelerations that matter. The area of impact generating the acceleration is not relevant. These injuries occur because of movement of the brain inside of the skull and are essentially due to inertial issues. The skull is acting like a rigid body, and the brain and brain stem are a not-so-rigid body moving around inside the skull and getting damaged.
 
Last edited:
  • #24
Dr. Courtney said:
No doublt, but with closed head, blunt force traumatic brain injuries, it is the net rotational and translational accelerations that matter. The area of impact generating the acceleration is not relevant.

I don't agree that the area of impact isn't relevant, but I'm not going to argue it here, as it would be off topic.
 
  • #25
I think my skull was not injured, so the rotational and translational forces matter. With the provided data, where they high enough for an injury?
 
  • #26
We can't diagnose injuries here at PF, sorry. If you're worried that hitting your head caused you injury, then please see a doctor. Thread locked.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 66 ·
3
Replies
66
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K