Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of the Whole Body Spine Response to Sub-Injurious Vertical Loading

  • WIAMan Biomechanics
  • Published:
Annals of Biomedical Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

It is critical to understand the relationship between under-body blast (UBB) loading and occupant response to provide optimal protection to the warfighter from serious injuries, many of which affect the spine. Previous studies have examined component and whole body response to accelerative based UBB loading. While these studies both informed injury prediction efforts and examined the shortcomings of traditional anthropomorphic test devices in the evaluation of human injury, few studies provide response data against which future models could be compared and evaluated. The current study examines four different loading conditions on a seated occupant that demonstrate the effects of changes in the floor, seat, personal protective equipment (PPE), and reclined posture on whole body post-mortem human surrogate (PMHS) spinal response in a sub-injurious loading range. Twelve PMHS were tested across floor velocities and time-to-peak (TTP) that ranged from 4.0 to 8.0 m/s and 2 to 5 ms, respectively. To focus on sub-injurious response, seat velocities were kept at 4.0 m/s and TTP ranged from 5 to 35 ms. Results demonstrated that spine response is sensitive to changes in TTP and the presence of PPE. However, spine response is largely insensitive to changes in floor loading. Data from these experiments have also served to develop response corridors that can be used to assess the performance and predictive capability of new test models used as human surrogates in high-rate vertical loading experiments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Figure 11
Figure 12
Figure 13
Figure 14
Figure 15

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alvarez, J. Epidemiology of Blast Injuries in Current Operations: A Survey of Blast Injury across the Full Landscape of Military Science. Halifax: NATO Science and Technology Organization, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Arepally S., D. Gorsich, K. Hope, S. Gentner and K. Dotleff. Application of mathematical modeling in potentially survivable blast threats in military vehicles. DTIC Document, 2008.

  3. Bailey A. M., J. J. Christopher, K. Henderson, F. Brozoski and R. S. Salzar. Comparison of Hybrid-III and PMHS Response to Simulated Underbody Blast Loading Conditions. In: IRCOBI Conference. Gothenburg, Sweden.

  4. Cormier J. M., S. J. Manoogian, J. Bisplinghoff, C. McNally and S. Duma. The use of acoustic emission in facial fracture detection. Biomedical sciences instrumentation 44: 147–152, 2008.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Draeger, R. H., J. S. Barr, and W. Sager. Blast injury. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 132:762–767, 1946.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Eppinger R. H., J. H. Marcus and R. M. Morgan. Development of dummy and injury index for NHTSA’s thoracic side impact protection research program. SAE Technical Paper, 1984.

  7. Funk J. R., J. R. Crandall, L. J. Tourret, C. B. MacMahon, C. R. Bass, J. T. Patrie, N. Khaewpong and R. H. Eppinger. The axial injury tolerance of the human foot/ankle complex and the effect of Achilles tension. J Biomech Eng 124: 750–757, 2002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Gayzik F., I. Marcus, K. Danelson, J. Rupp, C. Bass, N. Yoganandan and J. Zhang. A point-wise normalization method for development of biofidelity response corridors. J. Biomech. 48: 4173–4177, 2015.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Gondusky, J. S., MC USN, M. P. Reiter, and MC USNR. Protecting military convoys in Iraq: an examination of battle injuries sustained by a mechanized battalion during operation Iraqi Freedom II. Military Med. 170:546–549, 2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Michaelson J., J. Forman, R. Kent and S. Kuppa. Rear seat occupant safety: kinematics and injury of PMHS restrained by a standard 3-point belt in frontal crashes. SAE Technical Paper, 2008.

  11. Ott, K., D. Drewry, III, M. E. Luongo, J. Andrist, R. S. Armiger, J. Titus, and C. Demetropoulos. Comparison of human surrogate responses in underbody blast loading conditions. J. Biomech. Eng. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4046638.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Owens, B. D., J. F. Kragh, Jr, J. Macaitis, S. J. Svoboda, and J. C. Wenke. Characterization of extremity wounds in operation Iraqi freedom and operation enduring freedom. J. Orthop. Trauma 21:254–257, 2007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Paquette S., C. Gordon and B. Bradtmiller. Anthropometric survey (ANSUR) II pilot study: methods and summary statistics. DTIC Document, 2009.

  14. Petitjean A., M. Lebarbe, P. Potier, X. Trosseille and J.-P. Lassau. Laboratory reconstructions of real world frontal crash configurations using the Hybrid III and THOR dummies and PMHS. SAE Technical Paper, 2002.

  15. Pietsch, H. A., K. E. Bosch, D. R. Weyland, E. M. Spratley, K. A. Henderson, R. S. Salzar, T. A. Smith, B. M. Sagara, C. K. Demetropoulos, and C. J. Dooley. Evaluation of WIAMan technology demonstrator biofidelity relative to sub-injurious PMHS response in simulated under-body blast events. Stapp Car Crash J. 60:199–246, 2016.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Pintar F. A., N. Yoganandan, B. D. Stemper, O. Bostrom, S. W. Rouhana, K. H. Digges and B. N. Fildes. Comparison of PMHS, WorldSID, and THOR-NT responses in simulated far side impact. SAE Technical Paper, 2007.

  17. Ragel, B. T., C. D. Allred, S. Brevard, R. T. Davis, and E. H. Frank. Fractures of the thoracolumbar spine sustained by soldiers in vehicles attacked by improvised explosive devices. Spine 34:2400–2405, 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ramasamy, A., S. E. Harrisson, J. C. Clasper, and M. P. Stewart. Injuries from roadside improvised explosive devices. J. Trauma-Injury Infect. Crit. Care 65:910–914, 2008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Reed M. P. and S. M. Ebert. The seated soldier study: posture and body shape in vehicle seats. 2013.

  20. Robinson, D. L., K. M. Tse, M. Franklyn, J. Zhang, D. Ackland, and P. V. S. Lee. Cortical and trabecular bone fracture characterisation in the vertebral body using acoustic emission. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 47:2384–2401, 2019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Salzar, R. S., J. R. Bolton, J. R. Crandall, G. R. Paskoff, and B. S. Shender. Ejection injury to the spine in small aviators: sled tests of manikins vs. post mortem specimens. Aviation Space Environ Med. 80:621–628, 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Slykhouse, L., L. W. Zaseck, C. Miller, J. R. Humm, A. Alai, Y. S. Kang, C. Dooley, D. Sherman, B. Bigler, and C. K. Demetropoulos. Anatomically-based skeletal coordinate systems for use with impact biomechanics data intended for anthropomorphic test device development. J. Biomech. 92:162–168, 2019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Spink, R. J. A Simple Method for Processing Measurements of Vehicle Response to Underbody Blast During Live Fire Test and Evaluation. Aberdeen Proving Ground: Army Research Lab, 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Spurrier, E., I. Gibb, S. Masouros, and J. Clasper. Identifying spinal injury patterns in underbody blast to develop mechanistic hypotheses. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 41:E268–E275, 2016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Stemper, B. D., S. G. Storvik, N. Yoganandan, J. L. Baisden, R. J. Fijalkowski, F. A. Pintar, B. S. Shender, and G. R. Paskoff. A new PMHS model for lumbar spine injuries during vertical acceleration. J. Biomech. Eng. 133:081002, 2011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Stemper B., J. M. Baisden, N. Yoganandan, D. J. Maiman and F. A. Pintar. Loading rate dependency of thoraco-lumbar spine fracture location: an investigation of trauma in military scenarios. In: Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves. Orlando, FL, 2012.

  27. Van Toen C., J. Street, T. Oxland and P. Cripton. Acoustic emission signals can discriminate between compressive bone fractures and tensile ligament injuries in the spine during dynamic loading. J. Biomech. 45: 1643–1649, 2012.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Yoganandan, N., M. W. Arun, B. D. Stemper, F. A. Pintar, and D. J. Maiman. Biomechanics of human thoracolumbar spinal column trauma from vertical impact loading. Ann. Adv. Automot. Med. 57:155, 2013.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Yoganandan, N., N. DeVogel, J. Moore, F. Pintar, A. Banerjee, and J. Zhang. Human lumbar spine responses from vertical loading: ranking of forces via Brier score metrics and injury risk curves. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 48:79–91, 2020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Yoganandan, N., F. A. Pintar, J. R. Humm, D. J. Maiman, L. Voo, and A. Merkle. Cervical spine injuries, mechanisms, stability and AIS scores from vertical loading applied to military environments. Eur. Spine J. 25:2193–2201, 2016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Zaseck L. W., A. C. Bonifas, C. S. Miller, N. R. Orton, M. P. Reed, C. K. Demetropoulos, K. A. Ott, C. J. Dooley, N. P. Kuo, and L. M. Strohsnitter. Kinematic and biomechanical response of post-mortem human subjects under various pre-impact postures to high-rate vertical loading conditions. SAE Technical Paper, 2020.

Download references

Acknowledgments

This effort was funded by Contract #N00024-13-D-6400, U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command (Warrior Injury Assessment Manikin study). The views expressed in this presentation are those of the authors and do not reflect official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense or US Government.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, 11100 Johns Hopkins Road, Laurel, MD, 20723-6099, USA

    Kyle A. Ott, Constantine K. Demetropoulos, Mary E. Luongo, Andrew C. Merkle & David G. Drewry III

  2. Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, 900 West Baltimore Street, Baltimore, MD, 21223, USA

    Jack M. Titus

Authors
  1. Kyle A. Ott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Constantine K. Demetropoulos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mary E. Luongo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jack M. Titus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Andrew C. Merkle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. David G. Drewry III
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kyle A. Ott.

Additional information

Associate Editor Stefan M Duma oversaw the review of this article.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Supplemental PMHS data has been provided below to assist with model validation. Note that the input force was only recorded for test condition IV (see Figs. 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20).

Figure 16
figure 16

Average vertical floor force input response and one standard deviation corridor for test condition IV. Floor loads were divided up into heel and toe for both left and right foot.

Full size image
Figure 17
figure 17

Average vertical seat force input response and one standard deviation corridor for test condition IV. The seat included five load cells, three posterior (left and right ischium and sacrum) and two anterior (left and right thigh).

Full size image
Figure 18
figure 18

Average sacrum rotational response around the Y-axis and one standard deviation corridor for each of the four test conditions.

Full size image
Figure 19
figure 19

Average sacrum rotational response around the Y-axis for each of the four test conditions.

Full size image
Figure 20
figure 20

Individual input curves for the vertical T1 response for each of the four test conditions.

Full size image

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ott, K.A., Demetropoulos, C.K., Luongo, M.E. et al. Evaluation of the Whole Body Spine Response to Sub-Injurious Vertical Loading. Ann Biomed Eng 49, 3099–3117 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-020-02656-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-020-02656-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation