MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2268211583

Primary Blast Injury of the Head: Numerical Prediction and Evaluation of Protection

2010· dissertation· en· W2268211583 on OpenAlex
Philip A. Lockhart

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2010
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutomotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHead (geology)Primary (astronomy)MedicineEngineeringGeologyPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The prevalence of injuries sustained from blast have been increasing over the past few decades due to the increasing use of Improvised Explosive Devices in areas where peacekeepers are deployed, as well as terrorist bombing incidents. The scope of this project was to evaluate the potential for head injury from primary effects in blast environments and to investigate protective aspects of protective equipment and new potential protective designs to mitigate or reduce the likelihood of Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI). 
\n
\nIn order to meet these goals, methods of blast loading as well as the kinematic response of the head when subjected to blast loading were investigated numerically and validated against experimental data. This was done for both low and mid heights of burst at varying standoff distances. The methods of loading considered were the basic spherical air burst formulation of the CONventional WEaPons algorithm (CONWEP), an advanced version of the algorithm that included ground reflection and mach stem formation, and a hemispherical surface burst which included ground reflection. The method that produced the most consistent results compared to the experiments was the enhanced version of CONWEP for mid level heights of burst; however, for low heights of burst, a novel “mirrored charge” setup provided the most accurate predictions.
\n
\nThe kinematic response of the GEBOD numerical human body model, a rigid body representation of a 50th percentile male, was validated against experimental tests conducted by Defense Research and Development Canada (DRDC) for a range of standoff distances and Heights of Burst. It was found the response of the GEBOD was in good agreement with the DRDC experiments for peak acceleration, impulse and the Head Injury Criterion.
\n
\n
\nThe kinematic response of the head was investigated for various charge locations to study the effects of height of burst, lateral distance and standoff distance to the charge using the GEBOD numerical human body model. It was found that the standoff and height of burst had the largest influence on the acceleration experienced by the head. The height of burst study showed a large jump in the HIC15 injury criterion and head acceleration values when the charge was detonated within the region where a mach stem would form. As would be expected for the standoff distance from the charge, the closer the charge was to the body, the higher the accelerations experienced. 
\n
\nA quasi two dimensional model of the human head at the mid-sagittal plane was developed in order to evaluate response at the tissue level, and the effect of protection. The sagittal head model was used to examine wave interactions in the fluid flow around the head during a blast event. This was achieved by utilizing an Arbitrary Langrangian-Eulerian formulation to model the blast loading. This model was also validated against experimental data such that it demonstrated the same kinematic response as the experimental tests under identical blast loading conditions. 
\n
\nA helmet model was coupled to the sagittal head model using a layer of foam, and a statistical study was performed to determine the main effects and any interaction effects for the parameters of the numerical foam model. By analyzing these parameters and combining the best values for the effects, an optimum foam model was determined. This foam model was compared to actual foam materials and aluminum foam was found to have the closest properties to the idealized model. The aluminum foam material model was placed into the existing sagittal model and was found to have decreased the acceleration seen by the head under all the different loading cases considered. The maximum principal strain in the brain and the maximum intracranial pressure were also examined and compared to proposed injury criterion. For implementation in a helmet, an additional layer of comfort foam or some other soft material would have to be added between the head and the aluminum foam to prevent it from cutting or injuring the person. Some of the polymeric foams investigated could be used instead of aluminum foam; however, more data is required to properly define the material response at high strain rate loading.
\n
\nThis study has shown that blast loading to the head can result in significant accelerations which could result in injury. By using common materials in the existing form of head protection, this potential for injury can be reduced.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.691
Threshold uncertainty score0.482

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it