基于人体解剖结构的防护装备性能及武器杀伤效能评估

doi:10.12382/bgxb.2023.0540

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为评估防护装备性能以及杀伤元冲击有防护人体时的杀伤效能,考虑到人体结构的复杂性,构建了基于中国可视化人体数据集、含有402种解剖结构的虚拟人体体素模型,提出基于解剖学结构的装备防护性能及武器杀伤效能评估算法,在易损性软件中开发了装备防护性能评估模块和武器杀伤效能评估模块,得到了5.8×42mm步枪弹以不同速度冲击NIJ Ⅲ级防护时的杀伤特征量变化,以及9mm手枪弹冲击MICH型头盔时不同头-盔间隙与人员生存率之间的关系。研究结果表明:5.8×42mm步枪弹以850m/s冲击人体时,穿戴防护前后的致死率分别为80%和4%,弹丸杀伤能力随着靶速度的提升而提高,950m/s时致死率超50%(未击穿);9mm手枪弹冲击头部的情况下,无头盔时生存率约为40%,当佩戴头盔且头-盔间隙为25mm时生存率约为84%,较大的头-盔间隙能更有效的保护头部;研究结果可为典型杀伤元(弹丸、破片)的杀伤效能评估和防护装备性能评估提供依据,并为武器弹药设计和防护装备研制提供参考。

关键词: 人员易损性, 防护性能, 杀伤效能, 体素模型, 评估软件

Abstract:

Considering the complexity of the human body structure, the human voxel model with 402 anatomical structures based on the Chinese Visible Human dataset was proposed to assess the performance of the protective equipment and the effectiveness of the killing element when it impacts on the protected body; An algorithm for assessing the performance of protective equipment and the lethal effectiveness of weapons based on anatomical structures was proposed. A module for assessing the performance of protective equipment and the lethality of weapons have been developed in the vulnerability software. Obtained killing characteristic quantity changes when 5.8×42mm rifle bullet impacts NIJ Ⅲ protection at different velocity; Obtained the relationship between different head-helmet gaps and human survival rate when 9mm pistol bullet impacts the MICH helmet. The results of the study show that the lethality of a 5.8×42mm rifle bullet impacting on the human body at 850m/s was 80% (protected) and 4% (unprotected). The lethality of the bullet improves with target velocity (lethality rate >50% at a speed of 950m/s); The survival rate is 40% when a 9mm pistol bullet impacts the head (without a helmet), and 84% when wearing a helmet with 25mm head-helmet interval. Therefore, a wider head-helmet interval provides more effective head protection. The study can provide the basis for the assessment of the effectiveness of typical killing element (bullet and fragment) and the performance of protective equipment, as well as a reference for the weapon design and the protective equipment development.

Key words: human vulnerability, protective performance, kill efficiency, voxel model, assessment software

中图分类号:

TJ012.4

贾益宁, 温垚珂, 董方栋, 覃彬, 李子轩, 郑浩. 基于人体解剖结构的防护装备性能及武器杀伤效能评估[J]. 兵工学报, 2024, 45(8): 2774-2783.

JIA Yining, WEN Yaoke, DONG Fangdong, QIN Bin, LI Zixuan, ZHENG Hao. Assessment of Protective Equipment Performance and Weapon Lethality Based on Human Anatomical Structure[J]. Acta Armamentarii, 2024, 45(8): 2774-2783.

图/表 18

图1 人体切面与细化图像

Fig.1 Human horizontal section and refined images

表1 组织器官名称及其代码与RGB值之间的关系

Table 1 Organization's name and code versus RGB

组织器官名称	RGB值	组织代码
脊髓	10,10,10	1
颈部皮肤	210,0,0	2
椎间盘	90,10,90	3
…	…	…
颅骨外板	135,240,250	6
颅骨内板	255,255,127	7
…	…	…
板障	135,10,200	8
…	…	…
舌骨	125,100,40	11
牙齿	5,200,200	12
…	…	…
面部肌肉	0,200,75	21
头皮	127,127,0	22
大脑髓质	0,255,255	23
大脑皮质	255,127,127	24
…	…	…
左胫后静脉	21,11,255	381
右胫后静脉	60,150,80	382
左腓静脉	31,11,255	383
右腓静脉	60,200,50	384
…	…	…
右小腿肌肉	20,90,220	399
左脚部肌肉	105,105,150	400
右脚部肌肉	20,50,130	401
软组织	210,80,0	402

图2 基于RGB值占比的图像域压缩

Fig.2 Image domain compression based on RGB occupancy

图3 虚拟人体体素模型

Fig.3 Virtual human voxel model

图4 MICH型头盔的数字化处理

Fig.4 Digital process of MICH helmets

图5 NIJ Ⅲ级防弹衣的数字化处理

Fig.5 Digital process of NIJ Ⅲ body armor

图6 带防护装备的数字化单兵模型

Fig.6 Digital soldier model with protective equipment

表2 各AIS分值对应的损伤严重程度

Table 2 The AIS score corresponds to the severity of the injury

AIS分值	1	2	3	4	5	6
描述	轻度	中度	较重	重度	危重	死亡

图7 武器杀伤效能和防护装备性能评估

Fig.7 Weapon lethality and protective equipment performance assessment

图8 API与带防护人员生存率的关系

Fig.8 API versus personnel survival rate

图9 AKI与人员死亡率的关系

Fig.9 AKI versus personnel mortality

图10 武器杀伤效能评估模块和防护装备性能评估模块

Fig.10 Weapon lethality assessment module and protective equipment performance assessment module

图11 简化后的明胶空腔模型示意图

Fig.11 Schematic diagram of the simplified gelatin cavity model

表3 人体穿防弹衣前/后遭受不同着靶速度的5.8×42mm步枪弹射击时武器杀伤效能评估

Table 3 Assessment of weapon lethality of 5.8×42mm rifle bullet impacting a protected human body at different target velocity

着靶速度/ (m·s^-1)	防护状态	NISS	致死率	RKI	AKI
850	无	56	0.80	1.44	2.24
	有	15	0.04	0.38	0.60
870	无	58	0.82	1.45	2.32
	有	21	0.08	0.53	0.84
890	无	58	0.84	1.45	2.32
	有	30	0.18	0.75	1.20
910	无	59	0.84	1.48	2.36
	有	34	0.25	0.85	1.36
930	无	59	0.85	1.44	2.36
	有	42	0.44	1.02	1.68
950	无	59	0.85	1.44	2.36
	有	45	0.54	1.10	1.80

图12 5.8×42mm步枪弹在不同着靶速度下的杀伤特征量

Fig.12 Killing index and average lethality of 5.8×42mm rifle bullet at different target velocities

图13 不同头-盔间隙时RPI

Fig.13 RPI versus different head-helmet interval

表4 不同头-盔间隙的MICH型头盔遭受9mm手枪弹射击时防护装备性能评估

Table 4 Assessment of the protective equipment performance of MICH helmets with different head-helmet's interval when subjected to 9mm pistol bullet

头-盔间隙/mm	防护前		防护后		RPI	API
头-盔间隙/mm	NISS	平均生存率	NISS	平均生存率	RPI	API
1	46	0.427	40	0.615	0.130	1.40
5	46	0.427	39	0.638	0.152	1.44
10	46	0.427	33	0.759	0.283	1.68
15	46	0.427	32	0.793	0.304	1.72
20	46	0.427	30	0.825	0.348	1.80
25	46	0.427	29	0.839	0.370	1.84
30	46	0.427	28	0.848	0.391	1.88
35	46	0.427	28	0.851	0.391	1.88
40	46	0.427	24	0.901	0.478	2.04

图14 模型与经验公式拟合结果对比

Fig.14 Model compared to empirical formula results

参考文献 42

[1]	REINARD B E. Target vulnerability to air defense weapons. Master's thesis[J]. Target Vulnerability to Air Defense Weapons, 1984: 34-41.
[2]	李向东, 杜忠华. 目标易损性[M]. 北京: 北京理工大学出版社, 2013:1-2.
	LI X D, DU Z H. Target vulnerability[M]. Beijing: Beijing Institute of Technology Press, 2013: 1-2. (in Chinese)
[3]	BREEZE J, POWERS D B. Current opinion in the assessment and management of ballistic trauma to the craniomaxillofacial region[J]. Current Opinion in Otolaryngology & Head and Neck Surgery, 2020, 28(4): 251-257.
[4]	KNUDSON S A, DAY K M, KELLEY P, et al. Same-admission microvascular maxillofacial ballistic trauma reconstruction using virtual surgical planning: a case series and systematic review[J]. Craniomaxillofacial Trauma & Reconstruction, 2022, 15(3): 206-218.
[5]	张克钒, 卢芳云. 美军目标易损性研究发展历程分析[J]. 国防科技, 2022, 43(2):66-74.
	ZHANG K F, LU F Y. Development of target vulnerability research by the U.S. military[J]. National Defense Technology, 2022, 43(2): 66-74. (in Chinese)
[6]	SAUCIER R, KASH H. Computer-man model description: ARL-TR-500[R]. Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, US: US Army Research Laboratory, 1994.
[7]	NEADES D N. The operational requirement-based casualty assessment (ORCA) model[C]//Proceedings of the 12th International Symposium on Military Operational Research. UK: Ministry of Defence, 1995: 1-6.
[8]	CHARLES A S, BROWN M. A computer man anatomical model: AD-A056564[R]. Adelphi, MD, US: US Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, 1978: 1-262.
[9]	STARKS M W. Improved metrics for personnel vulnerability analysis: BRL-MR-3908[R]. Adelphi, MD, US: US Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, 1991:1-43.
[10]	SELLIER K G, KNEUBUEHL B P, HAAG L C. Wound ballistics and the scientific background[J]. American Journal of Forensic Medicine & Pathology, 1995, 16(4):355-355.
[11]	ANDRAS N, WOLFGANG P. Soldier vulnerability model[C]//Proceedings of the 27th International Symposium on Ballistics. Freiburg, Germany: International Ballistics Society, 2013: 22-26.
[12]	SHEWCHENKO N. A Vulnerability/Lethality model for the combat soldier, A new paradigm basis and initial development[C]//Proceedings of Personal Armour DSM Dyneema Systems Symposium. Nuremberg-Furth, Germany: International Personal Armour Committee, 2012: 17-21.
[13]	STEPHEN P S. Advancements in personnel incapacitation methodologies for multiple cartridge projectiles: AD-A240295[R]. Adelphi, MD, US: US Army Research Laboratory Survivability/Lethality Analysis Directorate, 2010.
[14]	LITT O P. Recommendations for a new and improved ORCA modeling system blast module: AD-A428071[R]. Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, US: US Army Research Laboratory, 2004:1-7.
[15]	KNRUBUEHL B P. Wound ballistics[M]. Berlin, Germany: Springs, 2017:180-210.
[16]	BENJAMIN K, EBERIUS N, FROUNFELKER P. Survivability measures for evaluation of personnel in military systems[C]//Proceedings of the 24th International Symposium on Ballistics. New Orleans, LA, US: International Ballistics Society, 2008: 15-24.
[17]	RICHTER M W. The operational effectiveness of medium caliber airburst munitions[D]. Quantico, VA, US: United States Marine Corps Command and Staff College, Marine Corps University, 2000.
[18]	LIU S S, XU C, WEN Y K, et al. Assessment of bullet effectiveness based on a human vulnerability model[J]. Journal of the Royal Army Medical Corps, 2018, 164: 172-178. doi: 10.1136/jramc-2017-000855 pmid: 29279322
[19]	张金洋, 温垚珂, 陈箐, 等. 人员易损性建模及其评估技术研究[J]. 兵器装备工程学报, 2016, 37(4):165-168.
	ZHANG J Y, WEN Y K, CHEN J, et al. Study on human vulnerability modeling and assessment technology[J]. Journal of Ordnance Equipment Engineering, 2016, 37(4):165-168. (in Chinese)
[20]	BOURGET D, DUMAS S, BOUAMOUL A, et al. Preliminary estimate for injury criterion to immediate incapacitation by projectile penetration[C]//Proceedings of Personal Armour Systems Symposium. Nuremberg, Germany: DTIC, 2012: 449-456.
[21]	刘苏苏. 轻武器典型杀伤元与靶标相互作用仿真及评估研究[D]. 南京: 南京理工大学, 2017.
	LIU S S. Study of simulation and assessment of the interaction between typical small arms ammo and target[D]. Nanjing: Nanjing University of Science and Technology, 2017. (in Chinese)
[22]	刘荫秋, 王正国, 马玉媛. 创伤弹道学[M]. 北京: 人民军医出版社, 1991:122-127.
	LIU Y Q, WANG Z G, MA Y Y. Wound ballistics[M]. Beijing: People's Military Medical Press, 1991:122-127. (in Chinese)
[23]	SELLIER K G, KNEUBUEHL B P, HAAG L C. Wound ballistics and the scientific background[J]. Forensic Science International, 1995, 71(3):237-237.
[24]	王光华, 吴志林, 赖西南, 等. 轻武器杀伤效应[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2021:307-339.
	WANG G H, WU Z L, LAI X N, et al. Terminal effects of small arms[M]. Beijing: Science Press, 2021:307-339. (in Chinese)
[25]	张杰, 唐宏, 苏凯. 效能评估方法研究[M] 北京: 国防工业出版社,2009:23-26
	ZHANG J, TANG H, SU K. Research on effectiveness evaluation method[M]. Beijing: National Defense Industry Press,2009:23-26. (in Chinese)
[26]	王以彭, 李结松, 刘立元. 层次分析法在确定评价指标权重系数中的应用[J]. 第一军医大学学报, 1999(4):377-379.
	WANG Y P, LI J S, LIU L Y. The application of analytic hierarchy process in determining the weight coefficient of evaluation index[J]. Journal of Southern Medical University, 1999(4):377-379. (in Chinese)
[27]	王浩圣. 轻武器杀伤效能试验研究[D]. 南京: 南京理工大学, 2011.
	WANG H S. Experimental study on killing efficiency of light weapons[D]. Nanjing: Nanjing University of Science & Technology, 2011. (in Chinese)
[28]	SEKINE Y, SAITOH D, YOSHIMURA Y. Efficacy of body armor in protection against blast injuries using a swine model in a confined space with a blast tube[J]. Annals of Biomedical Engineering, 2021, 49(10): 2944-2956. doi: 10.1007/s10439-021-02750-x pmid: 33686618
[29]	SINGH D, CRONIN D S. Efficacy of visor and helmet for blast protection assessed using a computational head model[J]. Shock Waves, 2017, 27(6): 905-918.
[30]	唐刘建, 温垚珂, 薛本源, 等. 手枪弹侵彻有防护仿生人体躯干靶标试验研究[J]. 振动与冲击, 2019, 38(4):250-254.
	TANG L J, WEN Y K, XUE B Y, et al. Pistol bullet impact soft body armor covered bionic human torso[J]. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 2019, 38(4):250-254. (in Chinese)
[31]	温垚珂, 李子轩, 闫文敏. 基于3D-DIC技术的防弹头盔性能测试与评估[J]. 北京理工大学学报自然版, 2022, 42(5): 463-470.
	WEN Y K, LI Z X, YAN W M, et al. Test and evaluation of ballistic helmet performance based on 3D-DIC technology[J]. Transactions of Beijing Institute of Technology, 2022, 42(5):463-470. (in Chinese)
[32]	KULAGA A R, LOFTIS K L, MURRAY E. Development and verification of body armor target geometry created using computed tomography scans: AD1037473[R]. Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, US: US Army Research Laboratory, 2017.
[33]	COULDRICK C. Optimisation of body armour design parameters: vulnerability and survivability assessment[J]. Advances in Military Textiles & Personal Equipment, 2012, 7(4):196-212.
[34]	HUMPHREY C, HENNEBERG M. Anthropological analysis of projectile trauma to the bony regions of the trunk[J]. Anthropological Review, 2017, 80(2): 207-218.
[35]	CARR D J, LEWIS E, MAHONEY P F. UK military helmet design and test methods[J]. BMJ Military Health, 2020, 166(5): 342-346. doi: 10.1136/jramc-2018-001123 pmid: 31175166
[36]	NAJARI F, JAFARI H, ALIMOHAMMADI A M, et al. The importance of victim's clothes in gunshot wounds[J]. Journal of Emergency Practice and Trauma, 2020, 6(2): 73-76.
[37]	BREEZE J, LEWIS E A, FRYER R. Optimizing the anatomical coverage provided by military body amour systems[M] //BULLM J, CLASPERJ, MAHONEYP F.Blast Injury Science and Engineering. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2016: 291-299.
[38]	郑浩. 基于人体解剖学结构的钝击效应损伤评估研究[D]. 南京: 南京理工大学, 2020.
	ZHENG H. Research on damage assessment of blunt impact effect based on human anatomical structure[D]. Nanjing: Nanjing University of Science & Technology, 2020. (in Chinese)
[39]	向红, 亢春苗, 穆靓, 等. 高频超声测量正常成人球后3mm处的视神经鞘直径及其相关因素[J]. 广西医学, 2020, 42(9):1065-1068.
	XIANG H, KANG C M, MU L, et al. Optic nerve sheath diameter 3mm retrobulbarly measured on high-frequency ultrasound and its related factors in healthy adults[J]. Guangxi Medical Journal, 2020, 42(9):1065-1068. (in Chinese)
[40]	SODERSTROM C A, OSLER T. A modification of the injury severity score that both improves accuracy and simplifies scoring-discussion[J]. The Journal of Trauma Injury Infection and Critical Care, 1997, 43(6):925-926.
[41]	李子轩, 温垚珂, 董方栋, 等. 基于人体解剖结构的单兵防护后损伤评估[J]. 兵工学报, 2022, 43(9): 2190-2199.
	LI Z X, WEN Y K, DONG F D, et al. Assessment of Behind-armor trauma based on human anatomical structure[J]. Acta Armamentarii, 2022, 43(9): 2190-2199. (in Chinese) doi: 10.12382/bgxb.2022.0383
[42]	PEARCE J R. Weaponeering: conventional weapon system effectiveness-second edition[J]. Aeronautical Journal, 2013, 117(1194):864-865.