Tensile Force Limits of the Sheep Spine: Comparison to Forces Required to Extricate Grain Entrapped Victims.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Journal of Agromedicine Pub Date : 2024-11-12 DOI:10.1080/1059924X.2024.2426491
Salah F Issa, Mahmoud S Issa, Eric Nauman, Carl Wassgren, Charles Schwab, Zahab S Ahsan, Mahmoud Nour, William Field
{"title":"Tensile Force Limits of the Sheep Spine: Comparison to Forces Required to Extricate Grain Entrapped Victims.","authors":"Salah F Issa, Mahmoud S Issa, Eric Nauman, Carl Wassgren, Charles Schwab, Zahab S Ahsan, Mahmoud Nour, William Field","doi":"10.1080/1059924X.2024.2426491","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Grain storage facility entrapments continue to be of concern in the agricultural industry, with nearly 1,500 documented incidents recorded over the last 45 years. Previous research studies have shown that attempting to extricate a full-size pulling test dummy from a grain mass requires a substantial amount of tensile or pull force - e.g. up to 1.32 kN if \"buried\" at waist depth, 2.77 kN at chest depth, and 4.01 kN at head depth. There is, however, a paucity of studies on the amount of distraction the human lumbar spine region can endure. The objective of this research study was to test the maximum tensile force that could be exerted on a sheep's spine (comparable to the human spine) before the intervertebral discs and surrounding ligament would show signs of failure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Eight lumbar-region sheep spine segments were axially distracted using an MTS Criterion tensile testing machine, and the maximum forces were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The average maximum force that the spinal discs and ligament withstood before showing signs of failure was 2.14 kN (standard deviation of 0.31 kN). This is comparable to the force required to extricate an individual entrapped in a grain mass at chest depth.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The authors recommend that grain entrapment victims should not be forcefully pulled out if buried to waist level or above due to two primary reasons: (1) the large variation in failure load observed in our experiment with sheep spines and (2) the lack of knowledge regarding the victim's pre-existing medical condition. The extractive forces required to remove a victim of entrapment in grain overlaps with the force needed to cause potential damage to the sheep spine, as the 1.7-3.0 kN range is comparable to the 1.65-2.48 kN force range that causes axial failure in the spine.</p>","PeriodicalId":49172,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agromedicine","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Agromedicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2024.2426491","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Grain storage facility entrapments continue to be of concern in the agricultural industry, with nearly 1,500 documented incidents recorded over the last 45 years. Previous research studies have shown that attempting to extricate a full-size pulling test dummy from a grain mass requires a substantial amount of tensile or pull force - e.g. up to 1.32 kN if "buried" at waist depth, 2.77 kN at chest depth, and 4.01 kN at head depth. There is, however, a paucity of studies on the amount of distraction the human lumbar spine region can endure. The objective of this research study was to test the maximum tensile force that could be exerted on a sheep's spine (comparable to the human spine) before the intervertebral discs and surrounding ligament would show signs of failure.

Methods: Eight lumbar-region sheep spine segments were axially distracted using an MTS Criterion tensile testing machine, and the maximum forces were recorded.

Results: The average maximum force that the spinal discs and ligament withstood before showing signs of failure was 2.14 kN (standard deviation of 0.31 kN). This is comparable to the force required to extricate an individual entrapped in a grain mass at chest depth.

Conclusion: The authors recommend that grain entrapment victims should not be forcefully pulled out if buried to waist level or above due to two primary reasons: (1) the large variation in failure load observed in our experiment with sheep spines and (2) the lack of knowledge regarding the victim's pre-existing medical condition. The extractive forces required to remove a victim of entrapment in grain overlaps with the force needed to cause potential damage to the sheep spine, as the 1.7-3.0 kN range is comparable to the 1.65-2.48 kN force range that causes axial failure in the spine.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
绵羊脊柱的拉伸力极限:与解救被谷物缠绕的受害者所需力量的比较。
目标:谷物储藏设施的夹带事故一直是农业行业关注的问题,在过去 45 年中,记录在案的夹带事故有近 1,500 起。以往的研究表明,试图将全尺寸拉力测试假人从谷物堆中解救出来需要很大的拉力,例如,如果 "埋 "在腰部深度,拉力可达 1.32 千牛顿;埋在胸部深度,拉力可达 2.77 千牛顿;埋在头部深度,拉力可达 4.01 千牛顿。然而,有关人体腰椎区域所能承受的分心量的研究却很少。这项研究的目的是测试在椎间盘和周围韧带出现失效迹象之前,绵羊脊柱(与人类脊柱相当)所能承受的最大拉力:方法:使用 MTS Criterion 拉伸试验机对八节绵羊腰椎进行轴向拉伸,并记录最大拉力:结果:椎间盘和韧带在出现失效迹象前所承受的平均最大力为 2.14 千牛(标准偏差为 0.31 千牛)。这与在胸部深度将被谷物团困住的人解救出来所需的力量相当:作者建议,如果谷物被困者被埋至腰部或以上,则不应强行将其拉出,主要原因有两个:(1) 在我们用绵羊脊骨进行的实验中观察到的破坏载荷变化很大;(2) 对受害者之前的身体状况缺乏了解。移除谷物中的被困者所需的拔出力与对绵羊脊柱造成潜在损害所需的拔出力重合,因为 1.7-3.0 千牛顿的拔出力范围与导致脊柱轴向破坏的 1.65-2.48 千牛顿拔出力范围相当。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Agromedicine
Journal of Agromedicine PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
20.80%
发文量
84
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Agromedicine: Practice, Policy, and Research publishes translational research, reports and editorials related to agricultural health, safety and medicine. The Journal of Agromedicine seeks to engage the global agricultural health and safety community including rural health care providers, agricultural health and safety practitioners, academic researchers, government agencies, policy makers, and others. The Journal of Agromedicine is committed to providing its readers with relevant, rigorously peer-reviewed, original articles. The journal welcomes high quality submissions as they relate to agricultural health and safety in the areas of: • Behavioral and Mental Health • Climate Change • Education/Training • Emerging Practices • Environmental Public Health • Epidemiology • Ergonomics • Injury Prevention • Occupational and Industrial Health • Pesticides • Policy • Safety Interventions and Evaluation • Technology
期刊最新文献
Ensuring Safety at Sea: A Call to Action for Small-Scale Fishing Communities in Developing Countries. The Protective Factors of Suicide in Agriculture: A Global Scoping Review. Electrical Hazards on Australian Farms: A Rapid Review of Electrical Perceptions in Agriculture. Promoting Workplace Health, Safety, and Well-Being Among Essential Agricultural Workers Through Vaccine-Preventable Infectious Diseases Training in the Rio Grande Valley. Tensile Force Limits of the Sheep Spine: Comparison to Forces Required to Extricate Grain Entrapped Victims.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1