RESUMEN
Introduction: Shock wave overpressure exposures can result in blast-induced traumatic brain injury (bTBI) in warfighters. Although combat helmets provide protection against blunt impacts, the protection against blast waves is limited due to the observed high overpressures occurring underneath the helmet. One route to enhance these helmets is by incorporating viscoelastic materials into the helmet designs, reducing pressures imposed on the head. This study aims to further investigate this mitigation technique against under-helmet overpressures by adding a viscoelastic liner to the inside of a combat helmet. Methods: The liner's effectiveness was evaluated by exposing it to free-field blasts of Composition C-4 at overpressures ranging from 27.5 to 165 kPa (4 - 24 psi) and comparing shock waveform parameters to an unlined helmet. Blasts were conducted using an instrumented manikin equipped with and without a helmet and then with a helmet modified to incorporate a viscoelastic liner. Evaluation of blast exposure results focused on the waveform parameters of peak pressure, impulse and positive phase duration. Results: The results show that peak overpressure was higher when wearing a helmet compared to not wearing a helmet. However, the helmet with the viscoelastic liner reduced the average peak overpressures compared to the helmet alone. For the lowest overpressure tested, 27.5 kPa, the helmet liner decreased the overpressure on the top of the head by 37.6%, with reduction reaching 26% at the highest overpressure exposure of 165 kPa. Additionally, the inclusion of the viscoelastic material extended the shock waveforms' duration, reducing the rate the shock wave was applied to the head. The results of this study show the role a helmet and helmet design play in the level of blast exposure imposed on a wearer. The testing and evaluation of these materials hold promise for enhancing helmet design to better protect against bTBI.
RESUMEN
Vortex ring collisions have attracted intense interest in both water and air studies (Baird in Proc R Soc Lond Ser Math Phys Sci 409:59-65, 1987, Poudel et al. in Phys Fluids 33:096105, 2021, Lim and Nickels in Nature 357:225, 1992, New et al. in Exp Fluids 57:109, 2016, Suzuki et al. in Geophys Res Lett 34, 2007, Yan et al. in J Fluids Eng 140:054502, 2018, New et al. in J Fluid Mech 899, 2020, Cheng et al. in Phys Fluids 31:067107, 2019, Hernández and Reyes in 29:103604, 2017, Mishra et al. in Phys Rev Fluids, 2021, Zednikova et al. in Chem Eng Technol 42:843-850, 2019, Kwon et al. in Nature 600:64-69, 2021). These toroidal structures spin around a central axis and travel in the original direction of impulse while spinning around the core until inertial forces become predominant causing the vortex flow to spontaneously decay to turbulence (Vortex Rings, https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/smrlab/vortex-rings ). Previous studies have shown the collision of subsonic vortex rings resulting in reconnected vortex rings, but the production of a shock wave from the collision has not been demonstrated visibly (Lim and Nickels in Nature 357:225, 1992, Cheng et al. in Phys Fluids 31:067107, 2019). Here we present the formation of a shock wave due to the collision of explosively formed subsonic vortex rings. As the vortex rings travel at Mach 0.66 toward the collision point, they begin to trap high pressure air between them. Upon collision, high pressure air was imploded and released radially away from the axis of the collision, generating a visible shock wave traveling through and away from the colliding vortices at Mach 1.22. Our results demonstrate a pressure gradient with high pressure release creating a shock wave. We anticipate our study to be a starting point for more explosively formed vortex collisions. For example, explosives with different velocities of detonation could be tested to produce vortex rings of varying velocities.