## 5 Results and Discussion  
The validation of the numerical model has been conducted through numerical analyses on the basis of the results of experimental tests carried out together with the Military Institute of Armoured and Automotive Technology. As part of the numerical model validation, the results obtained on the \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline  & **Variant with the Protective Panel** \\ \hline Number of elements which the vehicle was made of (shell) & 259,320 \\ Number of elements which the vehicle was made of (solid) & 3792 \\ Number of elements which panels were made of (shell) & 9912 \\ Number of elements which panels were made of (solid) & 134,388 \\ Total & 407,412 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Number of elements in numerical models. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Hardness** & **Yield Stress** & **Strain Hardening** & **Strain Rate Hardening** & **Temperature Softening** \\ \hline HB & \(\alpha_{0.2}\) & A [MPa] & B [MPa] & n & C & \(\varepsilon_{0}\) (s\({}^{-1}\)) & m \\
488–566 & 1707 & 1875 & 415 & 0.98 & 0.001 & 2\(\cdot 10^{-4}\) & 1.0 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Material properties for S355 steel for the MAT_PIECEWISE_LINEAR_PLASTICITY material model. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**\(\rho\) [t/mm\({}^{3}\)]** & **E [GPa]** & **v [-]** & **SIGY [MPa]** \\ \hline
7.8-10\({}^{-9}\) & 2.1\(\cdot 10^{5}\) & 0.3 & 355 \\
**EPS1 [MPa]** & **EPS2 [MPa]** & **ES1 [MPa]** & **ES2 [MPa]** \\
0 & 0.8 & 355 & 550 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Material properties for S355 steel for the MAT_PIECEWISE_LINEAR_PLASTICITY material model. basis of the data from measurements conducted using the Hybrid III 50 th Fast anthropomorphic dummy for the variant of the explosion under the vehicle and the EuroSID-2 re anthropomorphic dummy for the simulation of the explosion next to the vehicle have been compared. The view of the dummies in the real conditions and in the numerical analyses are presented in the Figures below (Figure 7, Figure 8). Measurement results obtained from the experimental tests and numerical calculations are presented in Table 4.  
Figure 8: The view of the EuroSID-2 re dummy during the experimental tests and in the numerical model  
Figure 7: The view of the Hybrid III 50 th Fast dummy during the experimental tests and in the numerical model  
The above characteristic presents the axial force in the bottom part of the dummy's tibia at the moment of an explosion. The peak of 6.25 kN shown in the characteristic chart is a consequence of loading the vehicle's floor with the wave of pressure coming from the detonation of an explosive placed under the vehicle. The kinetic energy of the floor increases affecting the dummy's feet resting on it and then the dummy's tibia. The critical value of compressive axial force in the tibia, according to AEP-55, Vol. 2, is 5.4 kN. The obtained compressive fore of 6.25 kN is higher than the critical value and thus can lead to a tibia injury. The characteristic of compressive axial force in the dummy's neck is presented in Figure 10.  
The characteristic of axial force in the dummy's neck, obtained as a result of the conducted numerical analysis, allows for reading the extreme values of the maximum compressive and stretching force. The value of the maximum stretching axial force in the dummy's neck was 0.095 kN. According to the criterion included in AEP-55, Vol. 3, the critical value of this parameter is 1.8 kN, and thus there is no risk of permanent injuries. The force in the dummy's neck with the value of 0.08 kN, obtained on the basis of experimental tests, is close to the value obtained in the numerical analysis. Figure 11 presents the characteristic of force versus time in the dummy's abdomen. The force with the value of 0.0149 kN, obtained on the basis of the numerical analysis, is higher by 25% than the force obtained during experimental tests. In both cases, the critical value specified at the level of 1.8 kN has not been exceeded.