DID YOU KNOW? DTIC has over 3.5 million final reports on DoD funded research, development, test, and evaluation activities available to our registered users. Click
HERE to register or log in.
Accession Number:
ADA585970
Title:
Methodologies for Blunt Trauma Assessment in Military Helmets
Descriptive Note:
Conference paper
Corporate Author:
PROJECT MANAGER SOLDIER PROTECTION AND INDIVIDUAL EQUIPMENT HAYMARKET VA
Report Date:
2010-09-13
Pagination or Media Count:
12.0
Abstract:
Since World War II, U.S. military combat helmets have provided various degrees of protection against ballistic threats, including fragments and bullets. Only recently, however, have combat helmets been specified to provide blunt impact protection. This study assesses the current generation of combat helmets and four commercial off the shelf COTS pad suspension systems denoted A, B, C, and D for blunt impact protection against realistic blunt impact threats including falls, parachute drops, and motor vehicle crashes using a drop test methodology based upon the Advanced Combat Helmet ACH Purchase Description COPD-05-04 and the U.S. Department of Transportation DOT Laboratory Test Procedure for Motorcycle Helmets TP-218-06. Three variant headforms DOT, NOCSAE, and ISO and three independent testing laboratories were used to examine 549 helmet samples with a total of 7,686 impacts. A single ballistic shell manufacturer was used to reduce potential variability. All five fielded helmet sizes S, M, L, XL, and XXL were included in the study, and impacts were conducted at three temperature conditions 263 5 K, 295 4 K, and 327 5 K as well as at three impact velocities 3.0 0.1ms, 4.3 0.1ms, and 5.3 0.2ms. For the DOT headform tests, hot temperature conditions showed substantially greater peak acceleration than the cold or ambient conditions 60g across all tests. Peak acceleration values from the first DOT headform impact averaged 30g less than those measured during a repeat impact. On average, the peak impact accelerations measured in the NOCSAE headform were 48g less than those measured in the DOT headform and 74g less than those measured in the ISO headform, across all velocities. As the impact velocities increased, this effect became more pronounced. Careful consideration should be given to advantages and disadvantages of each test headform for future testing. Detailed headform anthropometry may be an issue for assessment of higher perfo
Distribution Statement:
APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
