4"1A192 017 INPIOVED DESIGN CRITERIA FD CHS NELNETS(U) FIRM /AERONEDICAL RESEARCH LAS FORT RUCKER AL

I~~~ flllflff.ffff

1A~

i -

MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHAR'

N4AWINAL BUREAU M Sl pNj)

R {

DS

196 4

AL

r,

-. p3

AD-A192 017

USAARL REPORT NO. 86-11

IMPROVED DESIGN CRITERIA FOR CRASH HELMETS

By "

R. Fred RolstonJ. Haley, Jr.

BIODYNAMICS RESEARCH DIVISION

May 1986 DTIC

* E

Approved for public release, distribution unlimited.

US AARL-'U p

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION Of THIS PAGE (ften Does Entered)

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE READ EKSTRUCTIONSBEFORE COMPLETING FORM

1.RPR UMBE 2. GOVT ACCESSION NO 3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER

USAAR. Remport No. 86-11 /9o? 0-41. TITLE (and Subottle) S. TYPE OF REPORT A PERIOD COVERED

Improved Design Criteria for Crash Helmets

6PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER

7. AUTHOR'e) S.CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER(&)

*R. Fred Roisten and Joseph L. Haley, Jr.

9 . PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAMIE AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT, PROJECT. TASK

Biodynamics Research Division, SGRD-UADARAIWOKUTNMBSUS Army Aeromedical Research LaboratoryBox 577, Fort Rucker, AL 36362-5000 62777A 3E162777A878 AG 138

11. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATE

may 1986 ________

is. NUMBER OFPAGES

t4. MONITORING AGENCY NAME & ADORESS(If different from Cmutriiind Office) IS. SECURITY CLASS. (at this report)

UNCLASSIFIED-150. DECLASSIFICATION/DOWNGRADING

SCHEDULE

16. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of thim Report)

pproved for Public Release; distribution unlimited.

17. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the abstract entered In Block "0, it different firom Report)

1S. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES Presented at the Second Southern Biomedical Engineering Con-ference held in San Antonio, Texas, September 1983. Published in Biomedical En-gineering II, Recent Developments, Proceedings of the Second Southern BiomedicalEngineering Conference, New York, Pergamon Press, 1983, pp. 205-208.(See Reverse Side of this form)19. KEY WORDS (Continue On te0er0 Olds It neceawy e nd Identify by block rnumb")

Helmets, Helmet Impact Testing, Head Impact Tolerance

!M AwRAcrt (Cetme mo everes stap fN aceveeam f daittf by block nbumber)

See Back of Page

DJA 172 103 EDITIO* or I Nov6 II s OBSOLETE UNCLASSFE

SECURITY CLASSIFICATIO19 OF THIS PACE (When Date Entered)

iMOTY CLAaCAION OF THIS PA0(fm' DAM2,, . WM

18. Portions of this presentation are included in USAARL Report No. 85-5,Dynamlcm of Head Protection (Impact Protective Comparison of the SPH-4 Flight

Helmet to a Commercial Motorcycle Helmet, by R. Fred Rolston and J. L. Haley, Jr.

July 1985.

20. commercial motorcycle helmet was impact evaluated. The motorcycle hel-

met's impact protection is compared to that of the SPH-4, the standard Army

aviator's helmet. Drop tests, ranging from 0.91- to 2.44-meters, were used for

the helmet testing by means of a helmet/headform free-fall device. The two

examples of the helmet were subjected to 16 drop tests. Two of these drop tests

resulted in a high level of transmitted force and acceleration which focuses on

the inadequate thickness of the motorcycle helmet liner. The helmets did ngt

provide adequate protection to prevent concussion or serious injury at all energ)

levels greater than produced at a 1-meter drop height. The tested helmets could

be changed to provide adequate protection by doubling the thickness of the liner.

Accession For

NTIS GRA&ILTIC TABUnannounced 0Justification

B

Distribution/

Availability CodesiAvail and/or

Dist special

Li

2 /

a.N

UNCLASSIFIED

SgCUMITY CLASSIFICATION OF I HIS PAGE(Wlwn Data Entered)

-- A

Table of contents

Page No.

Introduction...*....*****..... ........................ e.. 3

*Method.*..o......................e....**......... ..... 3

Procedure.e.......... ..... .............o..........*.. 3

Results and disucssion... . . . .. . .. . .. . ... .. .......* * 7

Compendium of US Army SPI{-4 flight helmet testing ........... 11

Conclusions ..... ......0.....0..** ..... 0..0....0..4............ 14

References.,*...................................... 15

List of figures

Figure 1. Cutaway view of the motorcycle test helmet ........ 4

Figure 2. Helmet/headform free-fall test device......... .... S

Figure 3. Variation of transmitted accelerations

for three drop he i g h ts~oo....0 ............ 8

Figure 4. Variation of transmitted accelerations

for two drop heights........9o ... ........ 9

Figure 5. Peak headform deceleration vs. drop heightcompared to derived Wayne State Universitytolerance curve..*..... * ......... ............. 10

Figure 6. US Army aviator helmet--the SPH-4 .................. 12

Figure 7. Transmitted deceleration of standard

US Army aviator helmet.*... . . .. . ...................... 13

List of tables

Table 1. Peak g, transmitted force, and rebound* velocity measured in 16 helmet-headform

helmets....................................................... 6

S

-A.

*#~S

"p

2

I

5 r *'ptp--------------~ - VtVXCt'tVVi.'tVtV

Introduction

Based on government motorcycle test standards in thiscountry and abroad, your head may sustain a transmitteddeceleration of up to 400 1 as a result of impacting pavement

from a six-foot fall. Various studies since 1962 have shown that

levels above 150 will result in various degrees of injury.Levels about 250 1 could be fatal based on the studies ofknockout boxing impacts; thus, it is imperative that helmetdesign/test criteria be revised.

It is well within industry capability to construct improvedimpact protective helmets; however, the compressive foam must bereduced in density and increased in thickness and the test impactsurface must be changed to a flat rather than a sharp cornersurface.

This report illustrates the performance of two foreignmotorcycle helmets and shows the improvement possible by reducingfoam density and increasing its thickness.

Method

The commercial motorcycle helmet shown in Figure 1, wasimpact evaluated. The shell was a solid integral-white plasticof 4.2 mm thickness at the crown, with a thickness of 3.5 mm inthe hatband region. The polystyrene energy-absorbing liner of 12mm thickness was located about 3 cm above the ear canal at thesides and about 2 cm below the occipital bone at the rear.Retention of the helmet was accomplished by the chin strap, whichwas yoke-mounted to the shell. The yoke mount is preferable to asingle swivel mount to the shell because rotation either forwardor rearward is more difficult.

Procedure .

The impact tests were conducted on a drop tower conformingto or exceeding American Standards Association (ASA) Z90.I-1971standards; the impact test device is shown in Figure 2. Therigid base plate exceeds Z90.1 requirements by an order otmagnitude; i.e., it weighs over 1800 kg. This mass insures thatthe headform acceleration is as accurate as is feasible at highacceleration levels. The helmeted headform was impacted

* primarily on a flat surface, but three impacts were conducted onthe standard Z90.I (4.8 cm radius hemisphere) impact surface toprovide comparative data. The helmets were placed on a mediumsize (3.76 kg) cast magnesium headform with one accelerometermounted near the center of gravity as shown in Figure 2. Themagnesium headform was attached to a lightweight cage and thecage was guided vertically on two steel cables. The headform,

3

P?

helmet, and cage were elevated up the vertical cables to aselected drop height for each impact test. The weight of theheadform and cage was 11.0 lb (5.0 kg) while the weight of thehelmet was 2.9 lb (1.3 kg) for a total drop weight of 13.9 lb(6.3 kg).

Soft padding Shell

for fitting

Nylon Rigid f oapadding liner

Locked toshell edge trim

Figure 1. Cutaway view of the motorcycle test helmet.

A uni-axial accelerometer was positioned near the headform'scenter-of-mass, and its signal was amplified by a signalconditioner. Three piezoelectric load washers (Kistler type9021) were positioned beneath the force plate shown in FigureThe accelerometer and force plate transducer were displayed on anoscilloscope and also read from peak voltage meters.

The test sequence and impact locations for the motorcyclehelmet are shown in Table 1. The drop sequence is shown by testnumber in the table. The drop height was varied from 0.91- to2. 44-m.

4 ,.~.

Release_Mechanism

Light Trig-

46 Guide Cables

Head FormOuter Cable Holes

Force Transducer on Pad

ILI

UU

-00on -0 0f 0 O . ' L . . C 0 C

10 10 UN C

0.19

-1 - (7 0 ("1 u00 m0 =0 C- a 0 0% r-- w'0 N alC

00

-. .sa, 0- a 0 0 '0% _a In N C 'V) ' W U% t- m- wS U '% Cm N C 0 10 r.-C r- "n M- C6 0-N N ~ NS on a~ m~ n a' - - - ' a

4) 0

Ali_ _C6 uU 00)

E 3- L

1) :

a r- a' a' 0- E a 'V)0a a ~ '> -w a) 7A' (71 a C. a. ma a S a a a t-- 0

U N ND N 0 LI- ( 0 a 10 (30 Nl u' N N0

(UnE CL -

-L C) c~00V

0.L W E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0wa..zo a' r- z NZ a 'S O S C- ' - C ?-rS t

C C)IQ.

FU - 0 06

0j a: V C C 0a.- 2 EC

cc:C = E ) IE,

C~0 r- C- t- a a a - (-- LA C0 v~ -) OX a)

-3 u- N N: NW - - 0 - -. CL 0 C

N~ ~ C ') L

'ii-

COwa-' 5*5-~C.-

Results and discussion

The two motorcycle-type helmets were subjected to 16 impactteats. The location of impact, energy of impact (drop height andtotal drop mass), impact surface, transmitted force, and

acceleration to the headform are presented in Table 1. The

centroid of all impact points was at least 6 cm above the loweredge of the foam liner. The effect of increased drop height and

concomitant impact energy from 0.91 to 1.47 m is shown in theplot of acceleration vs. time in Figure 3. The differencebetween a flat surface and a 4.8 cm radiused surface for equalimpact energy (1.47 m drop height) also is shown in Figure 3. Itshould be observed that the acceleration value obtained for eight -

(Nos. 10, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21) impact tests at threedifferent drop heights (0.91-, 1.22-, and 1.47 m) are consistent.This indicates uniform quality of the helmets as well as goodinstrumentation. The significant variation of the traces in the4.8-cm radius drops shown in Figure 3 probably are caused byfriction between the guide cables and the headform guide cage.This type of problem is more likely to occur when impacting theradiused surface than when impacting a flat surface due to thelateral movement of the headform and guide cage, as the helmettends to "slip or slide" down the side of the radiused surface.The effect of increasing the drop height to 2.13- and to 2.44-mis shown in Figure 4. At the 2.13-m drop height, the two tracesnearly are identical. At the 2.44-m drop height, the threetraces differ as evidenced from comparison of the 580 peak I onrun 24 F (left rear) and the 350 peak & on run 23 E (left side).This large difference in peak a response most likely is caused bythe "bottoming out" of the foam liner in run 24 F due to the

small volume of foam compressed. A difference of only I mm incrush distance can result in a significantly large change in thepeak acceleration level. It is possible that the frictionprevented drops 22 D and 23 E from being greater than shown inFigure 4.

Peak headform deceleration vs. drop height is shown inFigure 5 and can be compared to the derived WSU tolerance curve(Haley et al. 1966); the effect of various energy levels isshown. The derived curve reveals (with three exceptions) thatall e':perimental impacts on these helmets resulted in injuriousvalues.

The 1975 Snell Foundation Helmet Specification calls for thehelmet to permit transmission of a peak acceleration of 30U & orless when dropped from a height of 3.3 m (10.83 ft). From Figure

5, it can be seen that 9 out of the 16 experimental drops

(Nos. 10, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21) would have passedthe Snell Specification while the experimental runs designatedNos. 11, 16, 22, 23, 24, 25, and 26 would not have passed.

7"

-p -. -~u * *~ * ~ ,.".~*N' -. %.V ~ ..

S-50 #8FaSufc0

1200

0 ~ -100-A _

o 20 -

0

-150 #101.47 meters drop*~-100

0C) #10

< -50 #133

01

< -250 __ l_ SIES

0

~-150-FRN

3 -100 -AV R G

0 1

< -50

00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Time - milliseconds

Figure 3. variation of transmitted accelerations for three drop heights.

8

-4502525H

4%

-400

-350 -26G -

! , -300

c > Flat Surface-250 2.13 meters drop

3-200

0< -150

-100 AVERAGE

-50

0 Sr

1

-550- 24F

-500 -Flat SurfaceI0 2.44 meters drop

-450 "

-400 22D(- -350 23E0

-300

o -250

-200

-150.

-100"

-50

00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Time - millisecondsFigure 4. Variation of transmitted accelerations for two drop

heights.

9-I

MOTORCYCLE HELMETIMPACT IDENTITY SURFACEo Helmet No. 1 - Flat Impactor* Helmet No. 2 - Flat Impactor* Helmet No. 2 -4.8 cm Rad. Hemisphere Impactor

60024

500-

Least. Square Fit02 D.O.T. 218 Std. 250

400226 British Std.

o1 23

s 300 - *Snell Std.

01

200 '

0~0

deivd anestt Uivrit tlDcec r ivedrm5

0 -10

The British Standard requires that a motorcycle helmet notcause a peak headform force of greater than 4,400 lb (19,580 N)when a 5 kg headform mass is dropped from a height of 2.5 a (8.20ft). From Table 1, it can be seen that experimental drops 24 and25 resulted in a transmitted force of 30,000 N (6,673 lb) and22,300 N (4,955 lb), respectively, and would have failed therequirements of the British (2001) Standard, as well as the USDepartment of Transportation (DOT) 218 Standard and the 1975Snell Foudation Standard.

The fact that two of the impacts resulted in such a highlevel of transmitted force and acceleration focuses attention onthe inadequate liner provided in the helmet. The liner should beno less than twice the thickness provided; i.e., the liner shouldbe no less than 25 mm in order to lower the transmitted force totolerable levels for all impacts greater than I a in drop height.

Since it may be expected that motorcyclists may fall or bethrown from heights of 1.6 m up to 3.0 m, it is clear that riderscould receive various degrees of head injury while wearing thehelmet. These energy values are within the limits of 3.3 m(Snell 1975) and 1.8 m (DOT 218) for energy; however, both thesestandards permit transmitted acceleration to the head which is

far in excess of the values recommended (Gurdjian 1962 and Haleyet al., 1966, 1983).

Compendium of US Army SPH-4 flight helmet testing

For comparative purposes, the transmitted deceleration ofthe standard US Army Flight Helmet (Figure 6), the SoundProtective Helmet No. 4 (SPH-4), for 3- through 6-ft drops issummarized in Figure 7. The thickness and density of the SPH-4helmet was varied as shown in Figure 7 to determine the effect ontransmitted peak &. It should be noted that the SPH-4 contains apolystyrene foam liner along with an energy-absorbing websuspension so that one would expect the helmet to yield lowerpeak I values, especially in the apex region than do otherhelmets with equal foam thickness.

Note in Figure 7 that doubling the thickness of thepolystyrene foam liner of the SPH-4 can result in headform peak jvalues of only 140 j at a drop height of 6 ft. This wouldincrease the weight by only one-tenth (0.1) lb. Such dramaticimprovement clearly points the way to improved helmet design.

11

4341tr ji4 ii

12'

ruwuu ruuvq A rw~wCrjx p w VTU7 y A %p,.IR7,j - S..r~h

V*6'Q.

>. LL . CO-.

in CI) 2

a (.j 00 ( 0

I'M e WZM CM z

wwcw,-'Eu. ' 0 ~ 1

W~i~ ~ 1 .U.

0-~W %O

0 C

(IM C =C =.'C

cc C cc *4 c

en

0 1-dFiur . rnsite dcleaio o tadrdUSAmyaiaohelmt (SH-4w130.-

Conclusions

1. The motorcycle helmets tested did not provide adequateforce attenuation to prevent concussion and/or more seriousinjury at all energy levels greater that a 1-a drop height.

2. Existing helmet standards permit the production ofhelmets which provide less protection than is possible,practical, and feasible.

3. The motorcycle helmets tested could be changed toprovide more adequate protection by the doubling of the linerthickness to approximately 2.5 cm..

144

:5

rig.

' .

L -6

References

American Standards Association (ASA). 1971. Specificationfor protective headgear for vehicular users. New York:American Standards Institute, Inc. Z90.1-1971.

British Standards Institution (BSI). 1972. British Standard2001: 1972. London. British Standards Instution.

4;

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and Regulations. 1974.(FMVSS-No 218)-Motorcycle Helmets. 1 March 1974.

Gurdjian, E. D., Lissner, H. R., and Patrick, L. M. 1962.Protection of the head and neck in sports. Journal of theAerospace Medical Association. 182.(5): 509-514.

Haley, J. L., Jr., Turnbow, J. W., Macki, S., and Walhout,G. J. 1966. USAAVLABS TR 65-44 helmet design criteria forimproved crash survival. Fort Eustis, VA. Department of theArmy Aviation Material Laboratory, AD-628-678, 12-18.

Haley, J. L., Jr., Shanahan, D. F., Reading, T., and Knapp, S.1983. Head impact hazards in helicopter operations and theirmitigation through improved helmet design. In C. C. Thomas(Ed): Impact injuries of the head and spine. Chapter 18,p. 549.

Hundley, T. A., Haley, 3. Le, Jr., and Shanahan, D. F. 1981.Medical design criteria for US Army motorcycle helmet. FortRucker, AL: US Army Aeromedical Research Laboratory. USAARLLR-81-2-4-1.

Slobodnik, B. A. 1980. SPH-4 helmet damage and head injurycorrelation. Fort Rucker, AL: US Army Aeromedical ResearchLaboratory. USAARL Report No. 80-7.

Snell. 1975. Standard for protective headgear. Snell MemorialFoundation, Sacramento, CA.

1.

'.5

.5

• 1f

INITIAL DISTRIBUTION b

Commander CommanderUS Army Natick Research and Man-Machine Integration System

Development Center Code 602ATTN: Documents Librarian Naval Air Development CenterNatick, MA 01760 Warminster, PA 18974

Commander Naval Air Development CenterUS Army Research Institute of Technical Information Division

Environmental Medicine Technical Support DetachmentNatick, MA 01760 Warminster, PA 18974

Naval Submarine Medical Research CommanderLaboratory Naval Air Development Center

Medical Library, Naval Sub Base ATTN: Code 6021 (Mr. Brindle)Box 900 Warminster, PA 18974Groton, CT 05340

Dr. E. HendlerUS Army Avionics Research and Human Factors Applications, Inc.Development Activity 295 West Street Road

ATTN: SAVAA-P-TP Warminster, PA 18974Fort Monmouth, NJ 07703-5401

Commanding OfficerCommander/Director Naval Medical Research andUS Army Combat Surveillance and Development Command

Target Acquisition Laboratory National Naval Medical CenterATTN: DELCS-D Bethesda, MD 20014Fort Monmouth, NJ 07703-5304

Under Secretary of Defense forUS Army Research and Development Research and EngineeringSupport Activity ATTN: Military Assistant for

Fort Monmouth, NJ 07703 Medical and Life SciencesWashington, DC 20301

Commander10th Medical Laboratory DirectorATTN: Audiologist Army Audiology and Speech CenterAPO New York 09180 Walter Reed Army Medical Center

Washington, DC 20307-5001 -

Chief, Benet Weapons LaboratoryLCWSL, USA ARRADCOM COL Franklin H. Top, Jr., MDATTN: DRDAR-LCB-TL Walter Reed Army InstituteWatervliet Arsenal, NY 12189 of Research

Washington, DC 20307-5100CommanderNaval Air Development Center CommanderBiophysics Lab (ATTN: G. Kydd) US Army Institute of Dental Research

Code 60B1 Walter Reed Army Medical CenterWarminster, PA 18974 Washington, DC 20307-5300 (

16

HQ DA (DASG-PSP-O) US Army Environmental Hygiene

Washington, DC 20310 Agency Library

Bldg E2100

Naval Air Systems Command Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010

Technical Library Air 950DRa 278, Jefferson Plaza II Commander

Department of the Navy US Army Medical Research InstituteWashington, DC 20361 of Chemical Defense

ATTN: SGRD-UV-AO

Naval Research Laboratory Library Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD

Code 1433 21010-5425

Washington, DC 20375Technical Library

Naval Research Laboratory Library Chemical Research & D,-elopment CenterShock & Vibration Information Center Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD

Code 5804 21010-5423Washington, DC 20375

CommanderHarry Diamond Laboratories US Army Medical ResearchATTN: Tech Information Branch & Development Command2800 Powder Mill Road ATTN: SGRD-RMS (Mrs. Madigan)Adelphi, MD 10783-1197 Fort Detrick, Frederick, MD

21701-5012Director

US Army Human Engineering Laboratory CommanderATTN: Technical Library US Army Medical Research InstituteAberdeen Proving Ground, MD of Infectious Diseases

21005-5001 Fort Detrick, Frederick, MD 21701

US Army Materiel Systems CommanderAnalysis Agency US Army Medical Bioengineering

ATTN: Reports Processing Research & Development Laborator"Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD ATTN: SGRD-UBZ-I21005-5017 Fort Detrick, Frederick, MD 21701

Commander Dr. R. NewburghUS Army Test & Evaluation Command Director, Biological Sciences Division

ATTN: AMSTE-AD-H Office of Naval ResearchAberdeen Proving Ground, MD 600 North Quincy Street21005-5055 Arlington, VA 22217

US Army Ordnance Center Defense Technical Information Center

& School Library Cameron StationBldg 3071 Alexandria, VA 22314

Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD21005-5201 Commander

US Army Materiel CommandDirector ATTN: AMCDE-S (CPT Broadwater)US Army Balli3tic Research Laboratory 5001 Eisenhower AvenueATTN: DR.XBR-OD-ST Tech Reports Alexandria, VA 22333Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD

21005-506617

US Army Foreign Science and Air University Library

Technology Center (AUL/LSE)

ATTW, MTZ Maxwell AFB, AL 36112220 7th Street, NECharlottesville, VA 22901-5396 Commander

Commandant US Army Aeromedical Center

US Army Aviation Logistics School Fort Rucker, AL 36362

ATTN: ATSQ-TDN CommanderFort Eustis, VA 23604Comne US Army Aviation Center & Fort RuckeDirector, Applied Technology Lab ATTN: ATZQ-CDRUSARTL-AVSCOM Fort Rucker, AL 36362ATTN: Library, Bldg 401Fort Eustis, VA 23604 Directorate of Combat Developments

Bldg 507

US Army Training and Fort Rucker, AL 36362

Doctrine Command Directorate of Training DevelopmentATTN: ATCD-ZXFort Monroe, VA 23651 Bldg 502

Fort Rucker, AL 36362

US Army Training andDoctrine Commend Chief

ATTN: Surgeon Army Research Institute Field UnitFort Monroe, VA 23651-5000 Fort Rucker, AL 36362

Structures Laboratory Library ChiefUSARTL-AVSCOM Human Engineering Labs Field Unit

NASA Langley Research Center Fort Rnckeri L 36362MailStop266Fort Rucker, AL 36362

Mail Stop 266

Hampton, VA 23665 CommanderUS Army Safety Center

Aviation Medicine Clinic For Ruc e, AL n636TMC 22, AAFFort Rucker, AL 36362

TMC #22, SAAF

Fort Bragg, BC 28305 CommanderUS Army Aviation Center & Fort RuckeNaval Aerospace Medical AT: AZTT

InstituteATTN: ATZQ-T-ATL

Bldg 1953, Code 102 Fort Rucker, AL 36362

Pensacola, FL 32508 US Army Aircraft DevelopmentTest Activity

US Air Force Armament Development ATTN: STEBG-MP-QA

and Test CenterCairns AAF, Ft Rucker, AL 36362Eglin Air Force Base, FL 32542

Command Surgeon PresidentUS Central Command US Army Aviation Board

MacDill APB, FL 33608 Cairns AAF, Ft Rucker, AL 36362

US Army Missile Command US Army Research & TechnologyLaboratories (AVSCOM)Redstone Scientific Information Center Laborator MAV302M2ATTh: Documents Section Propulsion Laboratory MS 302-2

eNASA Lewis Research CenterRedstone Arsenal, AL 35898-5241

Cleveland, OH 44135

AFAMRL / HEX Commanding Officer

Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433 Naval Biodynamics Laboratory

P.O. Box 24907

US Air Force Institute of Technology New Orleans, LA 70189

(AFIT/LDEE)Bldg 640, Area B Federal Aviation Administration

Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433 Civil Aeromedical InstituteCAMI Library AAC 64DI

University of Michigan P.O. Box 25082

NASA Center of Excellence Oklahoma City, OK 73125in Man-Systems Research

ATTN: R.G. Snyder, Director US Army Field Artillery SchoolAnn Arbor, MI 48109 ATTN: Library

Snow Hall, Room 14

Henry L. Taylor Fort Sill, OK 73503Director, Institute of AviationUniv of Illinois - Willard Airport CommanderSavoy, IL 61874 US Army Academy of Health Sciences

ATTN: LibraryJohn A. Dellinger, MS, ATP Fort Sam Houston, TX 78234Univ of Illinois - Willard AirportSavoy, IL 61874 Commander

US Army Health Services CommandCommander ATTN: HSOP-SOUS Army Aviation Systems Command Fort Sam Houston, TX 78234-6000ATTN: DRSAV-WS4300 Goodfellow Blvd Commander

St Louis, MO 63120-1798 US Army Institute of Surgical Research

ATTN: SGRD-USM (Jan Duke)Project Officer Fort Sam Houston, TX 78234-6200Aviation Life Support EquipmentATTN: AMCPO-ALSE Director of Professional Services4300 Goodfellow Blvd AFMSC/GSPSt Louis, MO 63120-1798 Brooks Air Force Base, TX 78235

Commander US Air Force SchoolUS Army Aviation Systems Command of Aerospace MedicineATTN: SGRD-UAX-AL (MAJ Lacy) Strughold Aeromedical Library..Bldg 105, 4300 Goodfellow Blvd Documents Section, USAFSAM/TSK-4St Louis, MO 63120 Brooks Air Force Base, TX 78235

Commander US Army Dugway Proving GroundUS Army Aviation Systems Command Technical Library

ATTN: DRSAV-ED Bldg 53304300 Goodfellow Blvd Dugway, UT 84022

St Louis, MO 63120

Dr. Diane Damos NUS Army Aviation Systems Command Department of Human Factors

Library & Enfo Center Branch ISSM, USCATTN: DRSAV-DIL Los Angeles, CA 90089-0021

4300 Goodfellow Blvd %St Louis, MO 63120

19%

0S.

US Army Yuma Proving GroundTechnical LibraryYuma, AZ 85364

US Army White Sands Missile RangeTechnical Library DivisionWhite Sands Missile Range, NM 88002

US Air Force Flight Test CenterTechnical Library, Stop 238 %Edwards Air Force Base, CA 93523

US Army Aviation EngineeringFlight Activity

ATTN: SAVTE-M (Tech Lib) Stop 217Edwards AFB, CA 93523-5000

ComanderCode 3431Naval Weapons CenterChina Lake, CA 93555

US Army Combat DevelopmentsExperimental Center

Technical Information CenterBldg 2925Fort Ord, CA 93941-5000

Aeromechanics LaboratoryUS Army Research& Technical Laboratories

Ames Research Center, M/S 215-1Moffett Field, CA 94035

Couander iJLetterman Army Institute of Research VATTN: Medical Research LibraryPresidio of San Francisco, CA 94129 k

3ixth US ArmyATTN: SMAPresidio of San Francisco, CA 94129

DirectorNaval Biosciences LaboratoryNaval Supply Center, Bldg 844

Oakland, CA 94625

20

Col G. Stebbing Canadian Army Liaison OfficeUSDAO-AMLO, US Embassy Bldg 602Box 36 Fort Rucker, AL 36362FPO New York 09510

Netherlands Army Liaison OfficeStaff Officer, Aerospace Medicine Bldg 602RAF Staff, British Embassy Fort Rucker, AL 36362 0

3100 Massachusetts Avenue, NWWashington, DC 20008 German Army Liaison Office

Bldg 602Canadian Society of Aviation Medicine Fort Rucker, AL 36362

c/o Academy of Medicine, TorontoATTN: Ms. Carmen King British Army Liaison Office288 Bloor Street West Bldg 602Toronto, Ontario M55 1V8 Fort Rucker, AL 36362

J,

Canadian Airline Pilot's Association French Army Liaison OfficeMAJ J. Soutendam (Retired) Bldg 6021300 Steeles Avenue East Fort Rucker, AL 36362Brampton, Ontario, L6T 1A2

Canadian Forces Medical Liaison Officer

Canadian Defence Liaison Staff2450 Massachusetts Avenue, NWWashington, DC 20008

Commanding Officer404 Squadron CFB GreenwoodGreenwood, Nova Scotia BOP INO

Officer CommandingSchool of Operational

& Aerospace MedicineDCIEM, P.O. Box 20001133 Sheppard Avenue WestDownsview, Ontario M3M 3B9 ,e

National Defence Headquarters I101 Colonel By DriveATTN: DPMOttowa, Ontario KIA OK2

Commanding OfficerC Headquarters, RAAF Base

POINT COOK VIC 3029

Australia

21

V

* . ~ ~ 4. % ~ ~ V9'V

._.

% -*,. .' -.,

AN

".- .,-

-. • i

,,",.'. .,).,.,,.,%,

,%

o9~'