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

Ballistics load sensing headform.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

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

Figure 5: Ballistics load sensing headform.

Mentions: The head mechanical surrogate used in the current study is the BLSH developed at Biokinetics and Associates, Ltd (Fig. 5). The BLSH enables a direct measurement of the dynamic loads imparted to the skull due to non-penetrating projectiles impacts. The BLSH is equipped with seven Kistler cells in order to measure the contact force. It allows assessing the temporal (two sides) and frontal impacts. The skull substructure is made of magnesium [2, 8]. A silicon rubber pad is used as a skin surrogate to cover the load cell array. This BLSH was originally developed to evaluate the risk of skull fracture caused by back face deformation of military helmets undergoing bullet impacts (Behind Armour Blunt Trauma). Raymond compared the forces measured on PMHS and those measured with the BLSH and other surrogates and concluded that the BLSH is the most suitable one for evaluating non-lethal projectile head impacts [2].


Injury risk assessment of non-lethal projectile head impacts.

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

Ballistics load sensing headform.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

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

Figure 5: Ballistics load sensing headform.
Mentions: The head mechanical surrogate used in the current study is the BLSH developed at Biokinetics and Associates, Ltd (Fig. 5). The BLSH enables a direct measurement of the dynamic loads imparted to the skull due to non-penetrating projectiles impacts. The BLSH is equipped with seven Kistler cells in order to measure the contact force. It allows assessing the temporal (two sides) and frontal impacts. The skull substructure is made of magnesium [2, 8]. A silicon rubber pad is used as a skin surrogate to cover the load cell array. This BLSH was originally developed to evaluate the risk of skull fracture caused by back face deformation of military helmets undergoing bullet impacts (Behind Armour Blunt Trauma). Raymond compared the forces measured on PMHS and those measured with the BLSH and other surrogates and concluded that the BLSH is the most suitable one for evaluating non-lethal projectile head impacts [2].

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