Tissue simulants are typically used in ballistic testing as substitutes for biological tissues. Many simulants have been used, with gelatine amongst the most common. While two concentrations of gelatine (10 and 20 %) have been used extensively, no agreed standard exists for the preparation of either. Comparison of ballistic damage produced in both concentrations is lacking. The damage produced in gelatine is also questioned, with regards to what it would mean for specific areas of living tissue. The aim of the work discussed in this paper was to consider how damage caused by selected pistol and rifle ammunition varied in different simulants. Damage to gelatine blocks 10 and 20 % in concentration were tested with 9 mm Luger (9 × 19 full metal jacket; FMJ) rounds, while damage produced by .223 Remington (5.56 × 45 Federal Premium® Tactical® Bonded®) rounds to porcine thorax sections (skin, underlying tissue, ribs, lungs, ribs, underlying tissue, skin; backed by a block of 10 % gelatine) were compared to 10 and 20 % gelatine blocks. Results from the .223 Remington rifle round, which is one that typically expands on impact, revealed depths of penetration in the thorax arrangement were significantly different to 20 % gelatine, but not 10 % gelatine. The level of damage produced in the simulated thoraxes was smaller in scale to that witnessed in both gelatine concentrations, though greater debris was produced in the thoraxes.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00414-015-1309-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
IntroductionBehind armour blunt trauma (BABT) has been defined as a non-penetrating injury caused by the rapid deformation of body armour. There has been an increasing awareness of BABT as an injury mechanism in both the military and civilian worlds; whether BABT results in serious injuries is debatable.MethodA systematic review of the openly accessible literature was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses method to investigate those injuries classified as BABT and their severity.Results50 sources were identified that included pertinent information relevant to this systematic review on BABT injuries. Typical injuries reported included skin contusion, laceration and penetration, rib fracture and contusions to lungs, kidneys, spleen and (rarely) the heart. No evidence of fatal injuries due to BABT was identified.ConclusionsWhether BABT can lead to life-threatening injuries when small-arms ammunition impacts body armour components designed to stop that ammunition is debatable. It should be emphasised that other data may be available in government reports that are not openly available. Further research should be considered that investigates developments in body armour, including initiatives that involve reducing burden, and how they affect BABT.
Within the Police service of England and Wales the wearing of ballistic and stab resistant body armour is common, with most police forces mandating its usage when away from the police station. Of all the serving police officers in England and Wales 29.1% are female (Hargreaves et al., 2017). A survey was developed and then distributed by the Police Federation of England and Wales to all servicing police officers up to the rank of Inspector. The survey returned 2633 responses after cleaning of the data. From the responses it was seen that the predominant bra type worn is underwired (71%) and the predominant UK bra size is 34B (9%). It was also determined that the predominant areas where the body armour either rubbed or caused discomfort were the left and right anterior mammary regions and the posterior lateral sacral region. By understanding the distribution of bra size, type of bra worn and areas of discomfort or rubbing it helps further understand the issues faced by female police officers and how body armour design could be improved.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.