Injury Tolerance Criteria for Short-Duration Axial Impulse Loading of the Isolated Tibia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Impulse loading of the lower leg during events such as ejection seat landings or in-vehicle land mine blasts may result in devastating injuries. These impacts achieve higher forces over shorter durations than car crashes, from which experimental results have formed the current basis for protective measures of an axial force limit of 5.4 kN, as registered by an anthropomorphic test device (ATD). The hypotheses of this study were that the injury tolerance of the isolated tibia to short-duration axial loading is higher than that previously reported and that secondary parameters such as momentum or kinetic energy are significant for fracture tolerance, in addition to force. METHODS: Seven pairs of cadaveric tibias were impacted using a pneumatic testing apparatus, replicating short-duration axial impulse events. One specimen from each pair was impacted with a light mass and the contralateral impacted with a heavy mass, to investigate the effects of momentum and kinetic energy, as well as force, on injury. Impacts were applied incrementally until failure. RESULTS: Force, kinetic energy, age, and height were shown to be significant factors in the probability of fracture. A 10% risk of injury corresponded to an impact force of 7.9 kN, with an average kinetic energy of 240 J. In comparison, this same impact level applied to an ATD would register a force of 16.2 kN because of the higher stiffness of the ATD. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the current injury standard may be too conservative for the tibia during high-speed impacts such as in-vehicle land mine blasts and that factors in addition to force should be taken into consideration.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".