Lower extremities are particularly susceptible to injury in an under‐vehicle explosion. Operational fitness of military vehicles is assessed through anthropometric test devices (ATDs) in full‐scale blast tests. The aim of this study was to compare the response between the Hybrid‐III ATD, the MiL‐Lx ATD and cadavers in our traumatic injury simulator, which is able to replicate the response of the vehicle floor in an under‐vehicle explosion. All specimens were fitted with a combat boot and tested on our traumatic injury simulator in a seated position. The load recorded in the ATDs was above the tolerance levels recommended by NATO in all tests; no injuries were observed in any of the 3 cadaveric specimens. The Hybrid‐III produced higher peak forces than the MiL‐Lx. The time to peak strain in the calcaneus of the cadavers was similar to the time to peak force in the ATDs. Maximum compression of the sole of the combat boot was similar for cadavers and MiL‐Lx, but significantly greater for the Hybrid‐III. These results suggest that the MiL‐Lx has a more biofidelic response to under‐vehicle explosive events compared to the Hybrid‐III. Therefore, it is recommended that mitigation strategies are assessed using the MiL‐Lx surrogate and not the Hybrid‐III.
Keywords: Blast injury, Cadaver, Hybrid‐III, IED, MIL‐Lx