Helmet liner evaluation to mitigate head response from primary blast exposure

Head injury resulting from blast loading, including mild traumatic brain injury, has been identified as an important blast-related injury in modern conflict zones. A study was undertaken to investigate potential protective ballistic helmet liner materials to mitigate primary blast injury using a det...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Computer methods in biomechanics and biomedical engineering 2015-04, Vol.18 (6), p.635-645
Main Authors: Lockhart, Philip A., Cronin, Duane S.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Acceleration
Aluminum - chemistry
Biomechanical Phenomena
Blast Injuries - prevention & control
Brain - physiology
Brain Concussion
Brain Injuries
Computer Simulation
Craniocerebral Trauma - prevention & control
Equipment Design
Explosions
Head
head blast injury
head finite element model
Head Protective Devices
Humans
Intracranial Pressure
Male
Materials Testing
mild traumatic brain injury
protective foam
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Head injury resulting from blast loading, including mild traumatic brain injury, has been identified as an important blast-related injury in modern conflict zones. A study was undertaken to investigate potential protective ballistic helmet liner materials to mitigate primary blast injury using a detailed sagittal plane head finite element model, developed and validated against previous studies of head kinematics resulting from blast exposure. Five measures reflecting the potential for brain injury that were investigated included intracranial pressure, brain tissue strain, head acceleration (linear and rotational) and the head injury criterion. In simulations, these measures provided consistent predictions for typical blast loading scenarios. Considering mitigation, various characteristics of foam material response were investigated and a factor analysis was performed which showed that the four most significant were the interaction effects between modulus and hysteretic response, stress-strain response, damping factor and density. Candidate materials were then identified using the predicted optimal material values. Polymeric foam was found to meet the density and modulus requirements; however, for all significant parameters, higher strength foams, such as aluminum foam, were found to provide the highest reduction in the potential for injury when compared against the unprotected head.
ISSN:1025-5842
1476-8259
DOI:10.1080/10255842.2013.829460