Estimating Passive Stress Acting on a Grain Entrapment Victim's Chest.

IF 0.9 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health Pub Date : 2018-07-31 DOI:10.13031/jash.12552
Salah F Issa, Carl Wassgren, Charles V Schwab
{"title":"Estimating Passive Stress Acting on a Grain Entrapment Victim's Chest.","authors":"Salah F Issa,&nbsp;Carl Wassgren,&nbsp;Charles V Schwab","doi":"10.13031/jash.12552","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Grain entrapments remain a major concern in the grain industry, with 1,100 incidents documented since the 1970s. One particular concern is the ability of a victim to breathe while entrapped in grain. Anecdotal reports suggest that victims struggle to breathe when entrapped in grain to a depth that covers their chests, yet some evidence indicates that victims should be able to breathe normally as long as their airways are not blocked regardless of depth. The hypothesis for this discrepancy is that previously published experiments measured an active stress state in the grain, while a person breathing also experiences a passive stress state during inhalation. The passive stress is significantly larger than the active stress. The objective of this study was to measure the passive stress when pushing against grain, such as during inhalation, and compare it to active stress state measurements. An MTS Criterion testing machine, which is a force deformation testing device, was used to push a block horizontally against a column of grain and record the force and displacement during the movement. The measured passive stress was calculated from the force and displacement values and ranged from 9.4 to 11.0 kPa at a depth of 20 to 30 cm. These values are three to four times larger than previously published measurements of stresses at similar depths. This result indicates that the discrepancy between experimental results and anecdotal reports is most likely due to the type of stress state experienced in grain entrapment. Findings imply that the pressures on the victim's chest during entrapment are sufficient to cause breathing difficulties or crush/positional asphyxiation in some cases. A full-scale study is recommended.</p>","PeriodicalId":45344,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.13031/jash.12552","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13031/jash.12552","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Grain entrapments remain a major concern in the grain industry, with 1,100 incidents documented since the 1970s. One particular concern is the ability of a victim to breathe while entrapped in grain. Anecdotal reports suggest that victims struggle to breathe when entrapped in grain to a depth that covers their chests, yet some evidence indicates that victims should be able to breathe normally as long as their airways are not blocked regardless of depth. The hypothesis for this discrepancy is that previously published experiments measured an active stress state in the grain, while a person breathing also experiences a passive stress state during inhalation. The passive stress is significantly larger than the active stress. The objective of this study was to measure the passive stress when pushing against grain, such as during inhalation, and compare it to active stress state measurements. An MTS Criterion testing machine, which is a force deformation testing device, was used to push a block horizontally against a column of grain and record the force and displacement during the movement. The measured passive stress was calculated from the force and displacement values and ranged from 9.4 to 11.0 kPa at a depth of 20 to 30 cm. These values are three to four times larger than previously published measurements of stresses at similar depths. This result indicates that the discrepancy between experimental results and anecdotal reports is most likely due to the type of stress state experienced in grain entrapment. Findings imply that the pressures on the victim's chest during entrapment are sufficient to cause breathing difficulties or crush/positional asphyxiation in some cases. A full-scale study is recommended.

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
估计谷物诱捕受害者胸部的被动应力。
粮食诱捕仍然是粮食行业的一个主要问题,自20世纪70年代以来,已有1100起事件被记录在案。一个特别值得关注的问题是受害者被困在谷物中的呼吸能力。轶事报道表明,当受害者被谷物困在深及胸部的深度时,他们会呼吸困难,但一些证据表明,只要他们的呼吸道没有被堵塞,无论深度如何,受害者都应该能够正常呼吸。这种差异的假设是,之前发表的实验测量了谷物中的主动压力状态,而呼吸的人在吸入时也会经历被动压力状态。被动应力明显大于主动应力。本研究的目的是测量在推动谷物时的被动应力,例如在吸入过程中,并将其与主动应力状态测量进行比较。MTS标准试验机是一种力变形测试装置,它将块体水平推到颗粒柱上,记录运动过程中的力和位移。实测被动应力由力和位移值计算得出,在深度为20 ~ 30 cm处,应力范围为9.4 ~ 11.0 kPa。这些数值比之前公布的类似深度的应力测量值大三到四倍。这一结果表明,实验结果与坊间报道的差异很可能是由于在颗粒夹持中所经历的应力状态的类型。调查结果显示,被害者胸部在被诱捕过程中受到的压力足以造成呼吸困难,或在某些情况下造成挤压/体位性窒息。建议进行全面的研究。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health
Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
20.00%
发文量
10
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of Warning Methods for Remotely Supervised Autonomous Agricultural Machines. Farmers' Perceptions of Grain Bin Entry Hazards. Parents' Risk Acceptance and Attitudes Toward the Use of Quad Bikes by Children and Young People in Sweden. Cultural Factors, Migrant Status, and Vulnerability to Increasing Temperatures among Hispanic/Latino Farmworkers: A Systematic Review. Summary of Known U.S. Injuries and Fatalities Involving Livestock Waste Storage, Handling, and Transport Operations: 1975-2019.
×
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