Protective equipment for small-scale laboratory explosive hazards. Part 2. Shielding materials, eye and face protection

Murray, Chris; Jenkins, Peter E.; Miller, Stephen

doi:10.1016/j.jchas.2014.11.004

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The face shield presented in case 2 was a conventional PC face shield of an inner diameter of 240 mm, a vertical coverage of 170 mm and thickness of 3 mm, as shown in Table 1. 6,14,[23][24][25] The face shield was arced for an angle of 180°from end to end and provides coverage for the front of the face. In cases 3 and 4, the face shields used were of 3-layered sandwiched structure, with a 1.2 mm aerogel layer in between two 0.9 mm PC layers.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cases 2, 3, and 4 represented the cases with helmet and face shields. The face shield presented in case 2 was a conventional PC face shield of an inner diameter of 240 mm, a vertical coverage of 170 mm and thickness of 3 mm, as shown in Table . The face shield was arced for an angle of 180° from end to end and provides coverage for the front of the face.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another study conducted by Courtney et al 13 demonstrated that different materials such as PC and laminated glass absorb and reflect the blast wave away to reduce transmission to the face. Murray et al, 14 through small-scale explosive tests, found that thicker shields are able to withstand heavier charges. More recently, Sarvghad-Moghaddam et al 15 examined the effect of blast directionality on the brain response and the protection capability of the helmet and face shield.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Face shield design against blast‐induced head injuries

Tan

Tse

Tan

et al. 2017

Numer Methods Biomed Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Blast-induced traumatic brain injury has been on the rise in recent years because of the increasing use of improvised explosive devices in conflict zones. Our study investigates the response of a helmeted human head subjected to a blast of 1 atm peak overpressure, for cases with and without a standard polycarbonate (PC) face shield and for face shields comprising of composite PC and aerogel materials and with lateral edge extension. The novel introduction of aerogel into the laminate face shield is explored and its wave-structure interaction mechanics and performance in blast mitigation is analysed. Our numerical results show that the face shield prevented direct exposure of the blast wave to the face and help delays the transmission of the blast to reduce the intracranial pressures (ICPs) at the parietal lobe. However, the blast wave can diffract and enter the midface region at the bottom and side edges of the face shield, resulting in traumatic brain injury. This suggests that the bottom and sides of the face shield are important regions to focus on to reduce wave ingress. The laminated PC/aerogel/PC face shield yielded higher peak positive and negative ICPs at the frontal lobe, than the original PC one. For the occipital and temporal brain regions, the laminated face shield performed better than the original. The composite face shield with extended edges reduced ICP at the temporal lobe but increases ICP significantly at the parietal lobe, which suggests that a greater coverage may not lead to better mitigating effects.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Face shield design against blast‐induced head injuries

Tan

Tse

Tan

et al. 2017

Numer Methods Biomed Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…He found that double-glove combination provides sufficient protection, but a wider test series must be carried out to elaborate standardized testing protocol [13]. Murray et al [14,15] also performed such tests for hand, eye, face and body protection and found that in the relative vicinity between the operator and explosive material, even small quantities of the latter (0.3 g) can lead to serious injuries. For ballistic eyewear, however, these norms already exist and according 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 them, the eyewear must be resistant to a 0.15 caliber T37 shaped projectile at a velocity of 640-660 ft/s [16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Algorithm for Evaluation of Potential Hazards in Research and Development of New Energetic Materials in Terms of their Detonation and Ballistic Profiles

Bondarchuk

Yefimenko

2018

Propellants Explo Pyrotec

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present paper we report recommendations for safe handling with unknown explosive materials and compositions. These are based on quantum‐chemical evaluations of the detonation and ballistic profiles of newly synthesized explosives and their comparison with the known reference compounds. The proposed methodology is rather simple, fast and does not require special skills. Meanwhile, it allows an effective quenching of the potential risk associated with injuries caused by accidental explosions. Additionally, we have developed two utilities, which significantly simplify the calculation process. The proposed algorithm was found to be more successful in estimation of detonation velocity of several common explosives in comparison with commercially available software EMDB, EXPLO5 and Cheetah 8.0. The reported results will be useful for scientific personnel working in the field of development and testing of explosives.

show abstract

Protective equipment for small-scale laboratory explosive hazards. Part 2. Shielding materials, eye and face protection

Cited by 2 publications

References 2 publications

Face shield design against blast‐induced head injuries

Face shield design against blast‐induced head injuries

An Algorithm for Evaluation of Potential Hazards in Research and Development of New Energetic Materials in Terms of their Detonation and Ballistic Profiles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About