Evaluation of synthetic clear gelatin as an acceptable surrogate for low-velocity penetrating impacts using the depth of penetration calibration standard

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q2 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL
{"title":"Evaluation of synthetic clear gelatin as an acceptable surrogate for low-velocity penetrating impacts using the depth of penetration calibration standard","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jmbbm.2024.106710","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Ballistic gelatin has been extensively used in ballistics research for decades, but calibration standards were established on limited datasets, and only few studies have attempted to recreate these experiments with biological tissues. Recent studies have demonstrated better biofidelity with 20% <em>ordnance</em> ballistic gelatin, but researchers have discredited the use of <em>synthetic</em> gelatin claiming different behavior than ordnance gelatin. To investigate the use of synthetic clear gelatin as an acceptable surrogate of biological tissue, depth of penetration was compared between low-velocity impacts of various projectiles into porcine tissue (n = 192), post-mortem human subjects (n = 29), and Clear Ballistics synthetic gelatin (n = 39). The predicted depth of penetration of the 0.177\" steel BB (38.1 mm) was consistent with the manufacturer's calibration standard (31.75–44.45 mm) and within calibration bounds of recently proposed empirical equations. Compared to impacts in biological tissue, synthetic gelatin demonstrated the least variability in depth of penetration (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.96). Using ANCOVA, velocity was a significant covariate (p &lt; 0.001), and there were no significant differences in normalized depth of penetration over density between porcine tissue, post-mortem human subjects, and 20% synthetic gelatin (p = 0.22). Ultimately, this study confirmed the use of 20% synthetic gelatin as an acceptable tissue simulant using standard calibration methods for use in future ballistic studies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":380,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751616124003424","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Ballistic gelatin has been extensively used in ballistics research for decades, but calibration standards were established on limited datasets, and only few studies have attempted to recreate these experiments with biological tissues. Recent studies have demonstrated better biofidelity with 20% ordnance ballistic gelatin, but researchers have discredited the use of synthetic gelatin claiming different behavior than ordnance gelatin. To investigate the use of synthetic clear gelatin as an acceptable surrogate of biological tissue, depth of penetration was compared between low-velocity impacts of various projectiles into porcine tissue (n = 192), post-mortem human subjects (n = 29), and Clear Ballistics synthetic gelatin (n = 39). The predicted depth of penetration of the 0.177" steel BB (38.1 mm) was consistent with the manufacturer's calibration standard (31.75–44.45 mm) and within calibration bounds of recently proposed empirical equations. Compared to impacts in biological tissue, synthetic gelatin demonstrated the least variability in depth of penetration (R2 = 0.96). Using ANCOVA, velocity was a significant covariate (p < 0.001), and there were no significant differences in normalized depth of penetration over density between porcine tissue, post-mortem human subjects, and 20% synthetic gelatin (p = 0.22). Ultimately, this study confirmed the use of 20% synthetic gelatin as an acceptable tissue simulant using standard calibration methods for use in future ballistic studies.

利用穿透深度校准标准评估合成透明明胶作为低速穿透撞击的可接受替代物的效果
几十年来,弹道明胶一直被广泛用于弹道学研究,但校准标准是根据有限的数据集建立的,只有少数研究尝试用生物组织重现这些实验。最近的研究表明,20% 的军械弹道明胶具有更好的生物保真度,但研究人员对合成明胶的使用不予认可,声称其行为与军械明胶不同。为了研究使用合成透明明胶作为可接受的生物组织替代物的问题,比较了各种射弹对猪组织(n = 192)、死后人体(n = 29)和 Clear Ballistics 合成明胶(n = 39)的低速冲击穿透深度。0.177 英寸钢质 BB 弹的预测穿透深度(38.1 毫米)与制造商的校准标准(31.75-44.45 毫米)一致,并且在最近提出的经验公式的校准范围内。与生物组织中的撞击相比,合成明胶的穿透深度变异性最小(R2 = 0.96)。使用方差分析,速度是一个显著的协变量(p < 0.001),猪组织、死后人体和 20% 合成明胶之间的归一化穿透深度与密度之间没有显著差异(p = 0.22)。最终,这项研究证实,使用标准校准方法将 20% 合成明胶作为可接受的组织模拟物,可用于未来的弹道研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials
Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials 工程技术-材料科学:生物材料
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
7.70%
发文量
505
审稿时长
46 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials is concerned with the mechanical deformation, damage and failure under applied forces, of biological material (at the tissue, cellular and molecular levels) and of biomaterials, i.e. those materials which are designed to mimic or replace biological materials. The primary focus of the journal is the synthesis of materials science, biology, and medical and dental science. Reports of fundamental scientific investigations are welcome, as are articles concerned with the practical application of materials in medical devices. Both experimental and theoretical work is of interest; theoretical papers will normally include comparison of predictions with experimental data, though we recognize that this may not always be appropriate. The journal also publishes technical notes concerned with emerging experimental or theoretical techniques, letters to the editor and, by invitation, review articles and papers describing existing techniques for the benefit of an interdisciplinary readership.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信