Uniform protection

Monday, July 19, 2010

Human factors and physiology are important considerations in the quest to better equip the armed forces, as Dstl's Mark Helliker tells Editor Matthew D'Arcy…

The task of equipping the individual soldier has really taken centre stage in defence procurement over the past decade. The conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have presented new threats, being countered to some extent by the acquisition of hundreds of new armoured vehicles of many different types.

Yet the individual attire – clothing and equipment – worn by the soldiers is also highly important in terms of protection. The soldier fighting in Afghanistan today consequently benefits from improved clothing, vastly superior in many ways to that provided before 2003. This includes more suitable fabrics for the environmental conditions, as well as better body armour, superior helmets, protective eyewear and numerous other enhancements.

As the process of improvement in this area continues, the science and technology behind the provision of world-class defence clothing is proving to be an increasingly important area. Not only does science enable innovation in finding effective solutions to protection challenges, but defence science researchers are also working to make sure apparel is ergonomically suitable and more appropriate to the physiology of service personnel of both genders, whilst ensuring performance levels are maintained.

Mark Helliker is a team leader at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl), and is keen to educate the defence community about the work that he and his colleagues have been delivering to support troops on the front line. As one example, he tells DMJ that they are developing materials that protect particularly vulnerable parts of the body in the context of current operations. "We might not be able to prevent a soldier being injured if he steps on a mine or IED, but maybe we can reduce the severity of their injuries," Helliker says. The focus here has been to prevent those injuries that have a major impact on quality of life: "By providing improved protection, we may be able to reduce the risk of sustaining life changing injuries, and improve long-term rehabilitation."

This is just one illustration of the work being done, and advances are being pursued in a wide range of areas. Ideas are continuously sought to enable better capabilities to be procured. "Where that original idea comes from is not so important to us; we just want to make sure the best gets out to the front," says Helliker. "So if people have a novel idea and it shows promise, then we can work with that person or organisation to help develop it. Some of the best solutions we have fielded have come from left field!"

However for any of these new ideas to make it from the concept stage to actually being used by soldiers on operations, they must not only offer an effective solution – for example stopping bullets – but must do so without having too much of a detrimental effect on a soldier's comfort and physical movement. Integration of equipment and how the soldier interfaces with it is critical.

"There are lots of concepts being assessed at the moment," points out Helliker. "Some are not being taken forward purely because they are too burdensome and a soldier would be simply unable to operate whilst wearing them."

To assess this, Dstl has put rigorous testing in place to make sure that the ideas and technologies they identify are actually liked by the people who will be using them. "We have a framework for human factors assessments for body armour and personal systems where we go through a three-tier evaluation," says Helliker. The first of these tiers includes a discrimination test, which is a rapid inspection and evaluation of how a new technology feels or behaves in comparison with a baseline, often the current in-service equipment. This is designed to provide feedback on possible areas of weakness, to remove risk, and also to demonstrate positive results for the next stages of testing.

Level 2 measures soldier performance in a task-based situation. This involves a small number of soldiers performing military tasks and using standardised human factors data collection methods. These take into account basic physiological and biomechanical measures such as human responses in a field/gym environment.

Finally, Level 3 is focused on providing accurate, repeatable and valid scientific evidence to answer specific physiological, psychological or performance related questions and would normally be carried out in a laboratory or highly controlled environment. These include advanced physiological measures such as core temperature, for example. "The approach is similar to that used in enhancing athletic performance, because that is what the soldier is, a military athlete."
Human factors however, are not simply part of a process for identifying suitable new technologies. Work is also being actively pursued to find more physiologically friendly solutions.

One example, explains Helliker, is a research programme looking at more flexible armour that can allow the body to cool down using its natural cooling mechanisms.

Also in armour development, Dstl is looking to improve on the in-service armour that already offers high levels of protection. "We have in-service a plate that offers very, very good protection. However, we are always looking at alternative technologies and other materials, working with industry to develop new systems that will offer the same excellent protection but at lower weights, or bulk."

Work is also being done to enhance the wearability of the already excellent combat helmet that has saved many lives. "We have been working with industry on trying to improve the comfort of the helmet liner as well as the performance. Most people don't realise the combat helmet protects in two ways – it has ballistic protection and impact or bump protection, basically to protect the user from hitting his head. In that respect we still have the highest performing combat helmet in the world, but we are looking at how we can improve it, in terms of protection levels, comfort and integration with other in-service equipment and clothing."

In summary, all of this is done to make a difference to the survivability of personnel working on operations. "Ultimately what we are trying to do is simply to make things better for the soldier," Helliker says. "We just want the best for the soldier on the ground fighting at the sharp end. We want to make sure the best gets out to the frontline – they deserve nothing less."