...
首页> 外文期刊>The Open Biomedical Engineering Journal >Injury Risk Assessment of Non-Lethal Projectile Head Impacts
【24h】

Injury Risk Assessment of Non-Lethal Projectile Head Impacts

机译:非致命弹丸头部撞击的伤害风险评估

获取原文

摘要

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.
机译:动能非致命性弹丸用于对人施加足够的作用,从而以较低的永久性伤害威慑不文明或危险行为。自首次使用以来,实际案例表明,此类射弹造成的伤害可能是不可逆转的,有时甚至导致死亡,尤其是头部撞击。考虑到此类冲击涉及的速度高,质量低,汽车碰撞试验和运动中提出的评估方法可能不合适。因此,需要一种特定的方法来评估这些弹丸的致死性。在这种框架下,本文中称为“力墙法”的一些最新研究数据建议根据颅内压使用三个病变阈值(无意识,脑膜损伤和骨损伤)。确定了参考弹丸的三个相应的临界冲击力。基于相等的刚性壁最大冲击力将对头部产生相同损伤的原理,可以为任何其他弹丸确定这些限制。为了验证这种创新方法的一致性,有必要将结果与其他现有评估方法进行比较。本文提出了“力墙法”和两种不同头部模型之间的比较。第一个是斯特拉斯堡大学的数值模型(斯特拉斯堡大学有限元模型-SUFEHM)。第二个是来自Biokinetics的机械替代产品(Ballistics负载传感头模BLSH)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号