RESUMO
To reduce human casualties associated with explosive ordnance disposal, a wide range of protective wear has been designed to shield against the blast effects of improvised explosive devices and munitions. In this study, 4 commercially available bomb suits, representing a range of materials and armor masses, were evaluated against 0.227 and 0.567 kg of spherical C-4 explosives to determine the level of protection offered to the head, neck, and thorax. A Hybrid III dummy, an instrumented human surrogate [1], was tested with and without protection from the 4 commercially available bomb suits. 20 tests with the dummy torso mounted to simulate a kneeling position were performed to confirm repeatability and robustness of the dummies, as well as to evaluate the 4 suits. Correlations between injury risk assessments based on past human or animal injury model data and various parameters such as bomb suit mass, projected area, and dummy coverage area were drawn.
Assuntos
Traumatismos por Explosões/prevenção & controle , Explosões , Manequins , Roupa de Proteção , Traumatismos Craniocerebrais/prevenção & controle , Armas de Fogo , Dispositivos de Proteção da Cabeça , Humanos , Masculino , Militares , Lesões do Pescoço/prevenção & controle , Saúde Ocupacional , Simulação de Paciente , Equipamentos de Proteção , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Terrorismo , Traumatismos TorácicosRESUMO
Modern ballistic helmets defeat penetrating bullets by energy transfer from the projectile to the helmet, producing helmet deformation. This deformation may cause severe injuries without completely perforating the helmet, termed "behind armor blunt trauma" (BABT). As helmets become lighter, the likelihood of larger helmet backface deformation under ballistic impact increases. To characterize the potential for BABT, seven postmortem human head/neck specimens wearing a ballistic protective helmet were exposed to nonperforating impact, using a 9 mm, full metal jacket, 124 grain bullet with velocities of 400-460 m/s. An increasing trend of injury severity was observed, ranging from simple linear fractures to combinations of linear and depressed fractures. Overall, the ability to identify skull fractures resulting from BABT can be used in forensic investigations. Our results demonstrate a high risk of skull fracture due to BABT and necessitate the prevention of BABT as a design factor in future generations of protective gear.