Hybrid III Manikin Lumbar Spine Loading Under Vertical Impact

Abstract

ABSTRACT Introduction Clinical investigations have attributed lumbar spine injuries in combat to the vertical vector. Injury prevention strategies include the determination of spine biomechanics under this vector and developing/evaluating physical devices for use in live fire and evaluation-type tests to enhance Warfighter safety. While biological models have replicated theater injuries in the laboratory, matched-pair tests with physical devices are needed for standardized tests. The objective of this investigation is to determine the responses of the widely used Hybrid III lumbar spine under the vertical impact-loading vector. Materials and Methods Our custom vertical accelerator device was used in the study. The manikin spinal column was mounted between the inferior and superior six-axis load cells, and the impact was delivered to the inferior end. The first group of tests consisted of matched-pair repeatability tests, second group consisted of adding matched-pair tests to this first group to determine the response characteristics, and the third group consisted of repeating the earlier two groups by changing the effective torso mass from 12 to 16 kg. Peak axial, shear, and resultant forces at the two ends of the spine were obtained. Results The first group of 12 repeatability tests showed that the mean difference in the axial force between two tests at the same velocity across the entire range of inputs was <3% at both ends. In the second group, at the inferior end, the axial and shear forces ranged from 4.9-25.2 kN to 0.7-3.0 kN. Shear forces accounted for a mean of 11 ± 6% and 12 ± 4% of axial forces at the two ends. In the third group of tests with increased torso mass, repeatability tests showed that the mean difference in the axial force between the two tests at the same velocity across the entire range of inputs was <2% at both ends. At the inferior end, the axial and shear forces ranged from 5.7-28.7 kN to 0.6-3.4 kN. Shear forces accounted for a mean of 11 ± 8% and 9 ± 3% of axial forces across all tests at the inferior and superior ends. Other data including plots of axial and shear forces at the superior and inferior ends across tested velocities of the spine are given in the paper. Conclusions The Hybrid III lumbar spine when subjected to vertical impact simulating underbody blast levels showed that the impact is transmitted via the axial loading mechanism. This finding paralleled the results of axial force predominance over shear forces and axial loading injuries to human spines. Axial forces increased with increasing velocity suggesting the possibility of developing injury assessment risk curves, i.e., the manikin spine does not saturate, and its response is not a step function. It is possible to associate probability values for different force magnitudes. A similar conclusion was found to be true for both magnitudes of added effective torso mass at the superior end of the manikin spinal column. Additional matched-pair tests are needed to develop injury criteria for the Hybrid III male and female lumbar spines.