Limits...
Injury risk assessment of non-lethal projectile head impacts.

Oukara A, Nsiampa N, Robbe C, Papy A - Open Biomed Eng J (2014)

Bottom Line: Based on the principle that equal rigid wall maximal impact forces will produce equal damage on the head, these limits can be determined for any other projectile.This paper proposes a comparison between the "force wall approach" and two different head models.The first one is a numerical model (Strasbourg University Finite Element Head Model-SUFEHM) from Strasbourg University; the second one is a mechanical surrogate (Ballistics Load Sensing Headform-BLSH) from Biokinetics.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Royal Military Academy-Department of Weapon Systems and Ballistics-30 Avenue de la Renaissance, 1000 Brussels, Belgium ; Polytechnic Military School, 17 Bordj El-Bahri, Algiers, Algeria ; University of Liège (ULg)-Aerospace & Mechanical Engineering Department (LTAS) - 1, Chemin des Chevreuils, 4000 Liège, Belgium.

ABSTRACT
Kinetic energy non-lethal projectiles are used to impart sufficient effect onto a person in order to deter uncivil or hazardous behavior with a low probability of permanent injury. Since their first use, real cases indicate that the injuries inflicted by such projectiles may be irreversible and sometimes lead to death, especially for the head impacts. Given the high velocities and the low masses involved in such impacts, the assessment approaches proposed in automotive crash tests and sports may not be appropriate. Therefore, there is a need of a specific approach to assess the lethality of these projectiles. In this framework, some recent research data referred in this article as "force wall approach" suggest the use of three lesional thresholds (unconsciousness, meningeal damages and bone damages) that depend on the intracranial pressure. Three corresponding critical impact forces are determined for a reference projectile. Based on the principle that equal rigid wall maximal impact forces will produce equal damage on the head, these limits can be determined for any other projectile. In order to validate the consistence of this innovative method, it is necessary to compare the results with other existing assessment methods. This paper proposes a comparison between the "force wall approach" and two different head models. The first one is a numerical model (Strasbourg University Finite Element Head Model-SUFEHM) from Strasbourg University; the second one is a mechanical surrogate (Ballistics Load Sensing Headform-BLSH) from Biokinetics.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

XM1006 rigid wall maximum force.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4231376&req=5

Figure 10: XM1006 rigid wall maximum force.

Mentions: The results of the maximum force measurements on the rigid wall setup are presented in Fig. (10) and Fig. (11) for the XM1006 and the FN303, respectively. For each projectile, the relation of the maximum force and impact velocity is interpolated by a power curve. About 20 shots for each configuration should be performed to ensure statistically significant results. For technical limitations, only five shots were performed with XM1006. However, more than 20 shots were performed with the FN303, which improve the statistical reliability of the results. Table 4 gives the parameters of equation (2) for the FN303 and the parameters of equation (3) for the XM1006. The dispersions in terms of standard deviation (σ) are also presented, using a non-linear least squares regression. The correlation coefficients of the XM1006 test and the FN303 test are 0.980 and 0.995, respectively.


Injury risk assessment of non-lethal projectile head impacts.

Oukara A, Nsiampa N, Robbe C, Papy A - Open Biomed Eng J (2014)

XM1006 rigid wall maximum force.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4231376&req=5

Figure 10: XM1006 rigid wall maximum force.
Mentions: The results of the maximum force measurements on the rigid wall setup are presented in Fig. (10) and Fig. (11) for the XM1006 and the FN303, respectively. For each projectile, the relation of the maximum force and impact velocity is interpolated by a power curve. About 20 shots for each configuration should be performed to ensure statistically significant results. For technical limitations, only five shots were performed with XM1006. However, more than 20 shots were performed with the FN303, which improve the statistical reliability of the results. Table 4 gives the parameters of equation (2) for the FN303 and the parameters of equation (3) for the XM1006. The dispersions in terms of standard deviation (σ) are also presented, using a non-linear least squares regression. The correlation coefficients of the XM1006 test and the FN303 test are 0.980 and 0.995, respectively.

Bottom Line: Based on the principle that equal rigid wall maximal impact forces will produce equal damage on the head, these limits can be determined for any other projectile.This paper proposes a comparison between the "force wall approach" and two different head models.The first one is a numerical model (Strasbourg University Finite Element Head Model-SUFEHM) from Strasbourg University; the second one is a mechanical surrogate (Ballistics Load Sensing Headform-BLSH) from Biokinetics.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Royal Military Academy-Department of Weapon Systems and Ballistics-30 Avenue de la Renaissance, 1000 Brussels, Belgium ; Polytechnic Military School, 17 Bordj El-Bahri, Algiers, Algeria ; University of Liège (ULg)-Aerospace & Mechanical Engineering Department (LTAS) - 1, Chemin des Chevreuils, 4000 Liège, Belgium.

ABSTRACT
Kinetic energy non-lethal projectiles are used to impart sufficient effect onto a person in order to deter uncivil or hazardous behavior with a low probability of permanent injury. Since their first use, real cases indicate that the injuries inflicted by such projectiles may be irreversible and sometimes lead to death, especially for the head impacts. Given the high velocities and the low masses involved in such impacts, the assessment approaches proposed in automotive crash tests and sports may not be appropriate. Therefore, there is a need of a specific approach to assess the lethality of these projectiles. In this framework, some recent research data referred in this article as "force wall approach" suggest the use of three lesional thresholds (unconsciousness, meningeal damages and bone damages) that depend on the intracranial pressure. Three corresponding critical impact forces are determined for a reference projectile. Based on the principle that equal rigid wall maximal impact forces will produce equal damage on the head, these limits can be determined for any other projectile. In order to validate the consistence of this innovative method, it is necessary to compare the results with other existing assessment methods. This paper proposes a comparison between the "force wall approach" and two different head models. The first one is a numerical model (Strasbourg University Finite Element Head Model-SUFEHM) from Strasbourg University; the second one is a mechanical surrogate (Ballistics Load Sensing Headform-BLSH) from Biokinetics.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus