Response Characteristics of Different Posture Crew Impacted by Underwater Explosion

doi:10.12382/bgxb.2025.0014

Abstract

Abstract:

The crew is the weakness of the ship anti-impact system, and it is helpful to improve the protection design by clearly defining the impact response characteristics of human body.This paper focuses on the impact response regularities of crew in different postures.The impact response characteristics of supine human are studied via the real ship-human underwater explosion (UNDEX) impact test for the first time; A far field UNDEX load-structure-human body integrated response model is constructed based on the Taylor fluid-structure coupling principle, and the vertical response differences of typical organs of human body in different postures under the conditions of typical impact factors (0.30, 0.45 and 0.60) are compared and analyzed.The results indicate that the vulnerable organs of sitting, standing and lying persons are the pelvis, feet and head, respectively, which should be given priority protection.When the human body changes from a sitting position to a standing position, the loads on the organs in the upper part of human body significantly decrease, and the lumbar spine and pelvis are no longer vulnerable parts prone to injury.There is a tendency for the vulnerable parts to shift from the pelvis to the head when the human body changes from a sitting position to a lying position.Under the same impact factor, the response degrees of the organs of human body in different postures directly contacted with the deck are more sensitive to the change of deck mass and show a negative correlation.The research results can provide technical support for the impact protection design.

Key words: underwater explosion, human impact, response characteristics, injury assessment

ZHANG Peng, JIANG Yongbo, MA Peng, LU Jinfang, WU Chao, CHEN Zihao, LI Ying. Response Characteristics of Different Posture Crew Impacted by Underwater Explosion[J]. Acta Armamentarii, 2025, 46(11): 250014-.

Figures/Tables 25

References 37

[1]	孙赫, 闫明, 杜志鹏, 等. 舰艇水下爆炸破损分布特性[J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2024, 44(6):065102.
	SUN H, YAN M, DU Z P, et al. Review of near-field underwater explosion load and ship structure dynamic response[J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2024, 44(6):065102. (in Chinese)
[2]	李营, 杜志鹏, 陈赶超, 等. 舰艇爆炸毁伤与防护若干关键问题研究进展[J]. 中国舰船研究, 2024, 19(3):3-60.
	LI Y, DU Z P, CHEN G C, et al. Fundamental problems in blast-induced damage and protection of naval vessels:a state-of-the-art review[J]. Chinese Journal of Ship Research, 2024, 19(3):3-60. (in Chinese)
[3]	PIETSCH H A. Comparison of the dynamic response and fracture characteristics of female and male lumbar spine and pelvis in underbody blast loading[M]. Detroit,MI,US: Wayne State University, 2023.
[4]	胡文虎. 基于有限元法的钝力性肝、脾损伤及肋骨骨折生物力学机制研究[D]. 广州: 南方医科大学, 2021.
	HU W H. Study on the biomechanical mechanisms of blunt liver,spleen injury and rib fractures based on finite element method[D]. Guangzhou: Southern Medical University, 2021. (in Chinese)
[5]	JIANG Y B, YUAN H B, LI G Y. Damage boundary spectrum of pelvis-lumbar spine of seated human under vertical wide-band shock environment[J]. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2023, 182(Dec.):104767.
[6]	HIRSCH A. A comparison of the responses of men and dummies to ship shock motions[M]. Washington, D.C.,US: National Acedemies Press, 1962.
[7]	MAHONE R M. Man’s response to ship shock motions[J]. David Taylor Model Basin Report, 1966, 2135:2160.
[8]	OGLESBY D B, SHIN Y. Human male and female biodynamic response to underwater explosion events[D]. Monterey,CA,US: Naval Postgraduate School, 1998.
[9]	LIU X X. Nonlinear lumped-parameter model of unconstrained standing postured personnel subjected to vertical upward shock[J]. ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition.American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998, 16042:241-247.
[10]	LIANG C C, CHIANG C F. A study on biodynamic models of seated human subjects exposed to vertical vibration[J]. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 2006, 36(10):869-890. doi: 10.1016/j.ergon.2006.06.008 URL
[11]	KUANG H, QIU Y, LIU C, et al. A nonlinear biodynamic model of seated human body exposed to vertical vibration with sensitivity analysis[J]. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 2023, 204:110758. doi: 10.1016/j.ymssp.2023.110758 URL
[12]	LIU C, QIU Y. Mechanism associated with the effect of backrest inclination on biodynamic responses of the human body sitting on a rigid seat exposed to vertical vibration[J]. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 2021, 510:116299. doi: 10.1016/j.jsv.2021.116299 URL
[13]	张玮, 史少华. 水面舰艇舰员对水下爆炸冲击响应[J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2011, 31(5):521-527.
	ZHANG W, SHI S H. Research on the surface ship biodynamic response subjected to underwater explosion[J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2011, 31(5):521-527. (in Chinese)
[14]	JIANG Y B, CAO X F, WANG Y Z, et al. Response of seated human subject to ship structure motion caused by the combined effect of shock wave and bubble pulsation[J]. Journal of Biomechanics, 2021, 127:110666. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2021.110666 URL
[15]	LIANG C C, CHIANG C F. Modeling of a seated human body exposed to vertical vibrations in various automotive postures[J]. Industrial Health, 2008, 46(2):125-137. doi: 10.2486/indhealth.46.125 URL
[16]	ABBAS W, ABOUELATTA O B, EL-AZAB M, et al. Optimization of biodynamic seated human models using genetic algorithms[J]. Engineering, 2010, 2(9):710. doi: 10.4236/eng.2010.29092 URL
[17]	LIU X X, SHI J, LI G H, et al. Biodynamic response and injury estimation of ship personnel to ship shock motion induced by underwater explosion[C]// Proceeding of the 69th Shock and Vibration Symposium.nternational Shipbuilding Conference, 1998, 18:1-18.
[18]	CHEN H X. Performance of an elastic polymer foam cushion in attenuating responses of shipboard standing-men to ship vertical shock[J]. Journal of Vibration and Control, 2013, 19(13):1999-2012. doi: 10.1177/1077546312449642 URL
[19]	GOVINDAN R, SARAN V, HARSHA S. Low-frequency vibration analysis of human body in semi-supine posture exposed to vertical excitation[J]. European Journal of Mechanics-A/Solids, 2020, 80:103906. doi: 10.1016/j.euromechsol.2019.103906 URL
[20]	GOVINDAN R, SARAN V H, HARSHA S P. Biodynamic human body model to assess the injury risk during space capsule landing[J]. International Journal of Crashworthiness, 2022, 27(5):1257-1269. doi: 10.1080/13588265.2021.1926844 URL
[21]	COLER H, WELLER R. Underwater explosions[J]. Physics Today, 1948, 1(6):35. doi: 10.1063/1.3066152 URL
[22]	ZAMYSHLYAEV B V, YAKOVLEV Y S. Dynamic loads in underwater explosion:AD757183[R]. Washington,D.C.,US: Naval Intelligence Support Center, 1973.
[23]	TAYLOR G I. The pressure and impulse of submarine explosion waves on plates[D]. Cambridge,MA,US: Cambridge University Press, 1963.
[24]	NEEDHAM C E. Blast waves[M]. Berlin,Germany: Springer, 2010.
[25]	KABAKCIOGLU F, BAYRAKTARKATAL E. Sobol sensitivity analysis and acoustic solid coupling approach to underwater explosion[J]. Ocean Engineering, 2023, 281:114752. doi: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2023.114752 URL
[26]	GIBSON L J, ASHBY M F. Cellular solids:structure and properties[M]. Cambridge,MA,US: University of Cambridge, 1997.
[27]	SAEED, SALEHI, CHINEDUM, et al. Performance verification of elastomer materials in corrosive gas and liquid conditions[J]. Polymer Testing, 2019, 75:48-63. doi: 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2019.01.015 URL
[28]	YOGANANDAN N, CHIRVI S, PINTAR F A, et al. Foot-ankle fractures and injury probability curves from post-mortem human surrogate tests[J]. Annals of Biomedical Engineering, 2016, 44(10):2937-2947. doi: 10.1007/s10439-016-1598-2 pmid: 27052746
[29]	KUPPA S, WANG J, HAFFNER M, et al. Lower extremity injuries and associated injury criteria[R]. Warrendale,PA,US: SAE Technical Paper, 2001.
[30]	RUPP J D, REED M P, VAN EE C A, et al. The tolerance of the human hip to dynamic knee loading[J]. Stapp Car Crash, 2002, 46(46):211-228.
[31]	TSE K M, ROBINSON D L, FRANKLYN M, et al. Effect of sitting posture on pelvic injury risk under vertical loading[J]. Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials, 2020, 108:103780. doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.103780 URL
[32]	YOGANANDAN N, MOORE J, DEVOGEL N, et al. Human lumbar spinal column injury criteria from vertical loading at the base:applications to military environments[J]. Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials, 2020, 105:103690. doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.103690 URL
[33]	ROUHANA S W. Biomechanics of abdominal trauma[M]// Accidental Injury:BIOmechanics and PREVention. Berlin,Germany: Springer, 2002.
[34]	GADD C W. Use of weighted-impulse criterion for estimating injury hazard[R]. Warrendale,PA,US:SAE, 1966.
[35]	SANCES JR A, YOGANANDAN N. Human head injury tolerance[M]. Arcadia,CA,US: California Aloray Publishe, 1986:189-218.
[36]	REV. 1 N L. Shockdesigncriteriaforsurfaceships:NAVSHIPS250-423-30[S]. Philadelphia,PA,US: Naval Sea Systems Command, 1995.
[37]	PRASAD P, MERTZ H J. The position of the U.S.delegation to ISO Working Group 6 on the use if HIC in the automotive environment[R]. Warrendale,PA,US:SAE, 1985:851246.

质量/kg	刚度/(N·m^-1)	阻尼/(N·s·m^-1)
M₄=4.17	K₅=166990	C₅=310
M₃=15	K₄=10000	C₄=200
M₃=15	K₃=144000	C₃=909.1
M₂=5.5	K₂=20000	C₂=330
M₁=36	K₁=49340	C₁=2475

质量/kg	刚度/(N·m^-1)	阻尼/(N·s·m^-1)
M₄=4.17	K₅=166990	C₅=310
M₃=15	K₄=10000	C₄=200
M₃=15	K₃=144000	C₃=909.1
M₂=5.5	K₂=20000	C₂=330
M₁=36	K₁=49340	C₁=2475

质量/kg	刚度/(N·m^-1)	阻尼比
N₁=2.5	K₁=6.4×10⁶	${\overline{C}}_{1}$=0.4
N₂=6.64	K₂=9.0×10⁶	${\overline{C}}_{2}$=0.3
N₃=8.36	K₃=2.36×10⁶	${\overline{C}}_{3}$=0.3
N₄=19	K₄=1.625×10⁸×δ²	${\overline{C}}_{4}$=0.3
N₅=21.8	K₅=3.7806×10³+10.9× 10⁶×δ-2.6868×10⁷×δ²	${\overline{C}}_{5}$=0.22
N₆=6.8	K₆=2831.8	${\overline{C}}_{6}$=0.8
N₇=5.5	K₇=202286.1	${\overline{C}}_{7}$=0.2

质量/kg	刚度/(N·m^-1)	阻尼比
N₁=2.5	K₁=6.4×10⁶	${\overline{C}}_{1}$=0.4
N₂=6.64	K₂=9.0×10⁶	${\overline{C}}_{2}$=0.3
N₃=8.36	K₃=2.36×10⁶	${\overline{C}}_{3}$=0.3
N₄=19	K₄=1.625×10⁸×δ²	${\overline{C}}_{4}$=0.3
N₅=21.8	K₅=3.7806×10³+10.9× 10⁶×δ-2.6868×10⁷×δ²	${\overline{C}}_{5}$=0.22
N₆=6.8	K₆=2831.8	${\overline{C}}_{6}$=0.8
N₇=5.5	K₇=202286.1	${\overline{C}}_{7}$=0.2

质量/kg		转动惯量/(kg·m²)
参数	数值	参数	数值
0₁	6.36	I₁	1.35
0₂	23.96	I₂	1.03
0₃	21.27	I₃	0.98
0₄	15.37	I₄	0.93
0₅	9.55	I₅	0.98