Appendix B

Committee Meetings

This appendix lists the presentations to the committee at its meetings, fact-finding sessions, and a site visit during the course of the Phase III study.

FIRST COMMITTEE MEETING, AUGUST 9-11, 2010
ABERDEEN, MARYLAND

ATC Update on Clay Actions to Date

Shane Esola, Aberdeen Test Center (ATC)

Working, Ageing, and Temperature Effects on Roma Plastina #1

William Perciballi, Armor Works

Development of a Standard Ballistics Testing Clay

Isaac Peng, Chavant

Pragmatics of Body Armor Testing—Manufacturer Views

Dave Reed, Ceradyne

Commercial Body Armor Testing Perspectives

Donn Dunn, H.P. White Laboratory

Future Handling and Processing of Clay

Christian Action, Action International

Phenomenology and Material Response to High Velocity Impact

Yogendra Gupta, Phase III Committee Member

Pluses and Minuses of Clay and Future Alternatives

James Zheng, PEO Soldier

Gelatin as Future Testing Alternative

Robert Kinsler, Army Research Laboratory (ARL)

ATC Road Map on Phase II Recommendations

MAJ William Lash, ATC



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 264
PREPUBLICATION DRAFT—SUBJECT TO EDITORIAL CORRECTION Appendix B Committee Meetings This appendix lists the presentations to the committee at its meetings, fact- finding sessions, and a site visit during the course of the Phase III study. FIRST COMMITTEE MEETING, AUGUST 9-11, 2010 ABERDEEN, MARYLAND ATC Update on Clay Actions to Date Shane Esola, Aberdeen Test Center (ATC) Working, Ageing, and Temperature Effects on Roma Plastina #1 William Perciballi, Armor Works Development of a Standard Ballistics Testing Clay Isaac Peng, Chavant Pragmatics of Body Armor Testing—Manufacturer Views Dave Reed, Ceradyne Commercial Body Armor Testing Perspectives Donn Dunn, H.P. White Laboratory Future Handling and Processing of Clay Christian Action, Action International Phenomenology and Material Response to High Velocity Impact Yogendra Gupta, Phase III Committee Member Pluses and Minuses of Clay and Future Alternatives James Zheng, PEO Soldier Gelatin as Future Testing Alternative Robert Kinsler, Army Research Laboratory (ARL) ATC Road Map on Phase II Recommendations MAJ William Lash, ATC -264-

OCR for page 264
PREPUBLICATION DRAFT—SUBJECT TO EDITORIAL CORRECTION U.S. Army ATC Welcome and Command Overview COL Jeffrey Holt, U.S. Army, Commanding Officer, ATC Helmet Testing Procedures and Demonstration MAJ William Lash, ATC Statistics Issues Related to Helmet Testing Linda Moss, ARL NIST Perspectives on Helmet Testing and Standards Development Kirk Rice, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Helmet Testing Perspectives–USMC PM-ICE Lt. Col. Kevin Reilly, U.S. Marine Corps, PM-Infantry Combat Environment ARL/SOCOM Alternative Head Forms for Helmet Testing Robert Kinsler, ARL Dixie Hisley, ARL Biokinetic Head Form and Traumatic Brain Injury James Zheng, PEO Soldier Commercial Helmet Testing Perspectives Jim Martin, Chesapeake Labs Prather Study Findings Russell Prather, Phase III committee member Experimental Study of Behind-Armor or Blunt Thoracic Trauma in High-Rate Loading Conditions and Follow-on Studies Dale Bass, Phase III committee member BABTA and Other Recent Approaches to Blunt Trauma Measurement Michael Leggieri, U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Center PEO Perspective on Blunt Trauma Research James Zheng, PEO Soldier Analysis of Blunt Trauma Casualties Edward Mazuchowski, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology Perspectives on Electronic Sensors as a Future Alternative to Clay Adam Fournier, ATC Andrew Merkle, Johns Hopkins University -265-

OCR for page 264
PREPUBLICATION DRAFT—SUBJECT TO EDITORIAL CORRECTION SITE VISIT, AUGUST 30-31, 2010 ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND, MARYLAND Committee members in the instrumentation working group visited facilities of H.P. White Laboratory, Chesapeake Testing Laboratory, ATC, and ARL. DATA-GATHERING SESSION, OCTOBER 12, 2010 ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA Committee members on the statistics working group met with statisticians from the Army Evaluation Center and the representatives from the Office of the Program Manager- Soldier Protective Equipment, U.S. Special Operations Command, DOD Inspector General, and the Office of the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) to discuss issues related to the use of statistical protocols. SECOND COMMITTEE MEETING, OCTOBER 13-15, 2010 WASHINGTON, D.C. Summary of Instrumentation Working Group Site Visits Larry Lehowicz, committee chair Summary of Statistics Working Group Pentagon Discussions Larry Lehowicz, committee chair Alyson Wilson, committee member Ronald Fricker, Jr., committee member Update on Clay Experimentation and Specification Activities Shane Esola, ATC Differences in BFD Measurement Standards Richard Sayre, DOT&E Improvements in Helmet Measurement Robert Kinzler, ARL DATA-GATHERING SESSION, OCTOBER 18-19, 2010 KECK CENTER, WASHINGTON, D.C. -266-

OCR for page 264
PREPUBLICATION DRAFT—SUBJECT TO EDITORIAL CORRECTION Committee members on the methodology working group conducted a data- gathering session at the Keck Center. Questions on prospective post-Prather testing methodologies were posed via telephone to Dixie Hisley, ARL; Andrew Merkle, Johns Hopkins University; Stephen Vatner, New Jersey Medical School; and Weixin Shen, L-3/TRACOR. -267-