Quantcast

Helmet safety standards

buckoW

buckoW

Turbo Monkey
Mar 1, 2007
3,787
4,732
Champery, Switzerland
William42 said:
I know there are a lot of threads on this, but i'm a lazy bastard and I just read this article and don't think its been posted yet, but its an interesting take on helmet safety standards.

http://www.bicycling.com/senseless/index.html
Click to expand...
Yeah it is an interesting topic. New standards are being developed with ideas like MIPS, Conehead Technology and the 6D leading the way.

 
Last edited:
frorider

frorider

Monkey
Jul 21, 2004
971
20
cali
http://helmets.org/bicyclingmag1305.htm

fwiw:

Nowhere does the article mention the key flaw in the MIPS argument: in the real world, bicycle helmets are so loosely coupled with the head that a slip-plane inside the helmet structure does not add significant sideways movement in an impact. The helmet moves anyway, unless it is constrained in a lab test. We told the author that, and pointed to it on our Web page, but he chose to ignore it and quote us and others on less basic points about MIPS as if we thought those minor points were the important ones. That is highly misleading to the reader.
Click to expand...
 
Verskis

Verskis

Monkey
May 14, 2010
458
8
Tampere, Finland
Add some pressure to the helmet and it might not be so loosely coupled anymore.
I sure would like to know if MIPS truly have less friction than the helmet pads/scalp and hair combo under high load.

I have had one really bad concussion (don't remember anything about the crash or the next 10 hours, and spoke about the same things over and over again for a while) and several minor ones, I am really tempted to get a MIPS helmet if it could help me not getting braindead in the future.
 
T

thad

Monkey
Sep 28, 2004
388
21
Very interesting. Both the Bicycling article and the motorcycling link verskis posted. DOT and CSPC standards and testing have remained unchanged for 30 years, despite science knowing a lot more about the brain and traumatic injury.

One thing that is interesting to me, is that Bell/Easton use a variety of different foams and techs in hockey, football, snow, skate helmets. Bike and moto are limited to the EPS foam... imo, strictly due to CSPC and DOT standards.

EPP foam is used on several high end hockey helmets.
Protec uses a type of EPP
http://pro-tec.net/technology/bmx#eps
So does POC
http://www.pocsports.com/en/content/view/protective-concepts

Bauer makes a hockey helmet, with system similar, but different to MIPS
 
4130biker

4130biker

PM me about Tantrum Cycles!
May 24, 2007
3,884
450
There's a good article in the current Outside magazine on the same topic.
 
stiksandstones

stiksandstones

Turbo Monkey
May 21, 2002
5,078
25
Orange, Ca
thad said:
One thing that is interesting to me, is that Bell/Easton use a variety of different foams and techs in hockey, football, snow, skate helmets. Bike and moto are limited to the EPS foam... imo, strictly due to CSPC and DOT standards.

EPP foam is used on several high end hockey helmets.
Protec uses a type of EPP
http://pro-tec.net/technology/bmx#eps
So does POC
http://www.pocsports.com/en/content/view/protective-concepts

Bauer makes a hockey helmet, with system similar, but different to MIPS
Click to expand...
You are going to reference football helmets/tech? really?

NFL ends their deal with Easton/Bell=Riddell:
While the NFL reached a $765 million settlement with former players on its concussion litigation, thousands of former players are still suing Riddell, claiming the helmet manufacturer, among other things, overemphasized how much the helmet could prevent brain injury
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9875758/nfl-end-official-helmet-deal-riddell-2013-14-season?src=mobile
Must see documentary:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/league-of-denial/

Football helmets, with all their smoke and mirror 'tech' and 'labs' are as unsafe as it gets, they are made to be worn over and over, be washed out, etc...
 
SBDHrida

SBDHrida

Monkey
Aug 19, 2005
238
0
aMERica
frorider said:
http://helmets.org/bicyclingmag1305.htm

fwiw:
Click to expand...
I emailed one of the engineers at MIPS about this very subject. He said that they've been using wigs on their test rigs to simulate the built in slip with a person with a healthy mop of hair wearing a loosely secured helmet. He said that with the force of a standard impact the friction between the scalp and the helmet is such that they can be essentially treated as rigidly fixed, thus the need for a low friction liner. Obviously he's not without bias, but at least he was an engineer and not in marketing.

Figured it was relevant
 
T

thad

Monkey
Sep 28, 2004
388
21
A helmet has two essential elements that help protect you: a shell and energy absorbing foam. These two components are built to dissipate the energies of an impact to your head. The shell is the hard outer surface of a helmet and has 3 functions. First, it prevents sharp object penetration. Second, it protects the energy absorbing foam from abrasion. Lastly, it spreads out the force of an impact over a greater area.

As the second component of the puzzle, the energy absorbing foam is the inner muscle of a helmet and the more active component of the two. It does the bulk of the work, cushioning and redirecting the G-forces of any impact that tries to work its way towards your head.

Shell: fiberglass, carbon, plastic. Stiffer shells better protect against penetration, but softer shell flexes absorbing energy?

Most bicycle and motorcycle helmets of EPS foam, expanded polystyrene, or styrofoam.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polystyrene

Variables of EPS foam liners:
Density/stiffness of foam
thickness of foam
Ridges for crush zones
dual density

Troy Lee D3


Conehead tech. The cap the sits on your head is low density, softer EPS. Stiffer EPS is injected between cap and the liner. Seems like a great idea to me. Crumple zones, softer foam next to your head, more volume of foam vs traditional design, where there is gap between foam and shell. Though this is at odds with POC's MIPS idea.


http://www.coneheadhelmets.com.au/about_c.html
http://www.kaliprotectives.com/moto/fusion-tech

Most helmets today have liners made of EPS (Expanded Polystyrene), a great shock absorbing material, but it will be permanently compressed when absorbing an impact, even a minor one. Using multi-impact EPP (Expanded Polypropylene) as core material creates a helmet that will protect your head over and over again.
Expanded polypropylene (EPP) is a foam form of polypropylene. EPP has very good impact characteristics due to its low stiffness; this allows EPP to resume its shape after impacts.

Expanded Polypropylene (EPP) is a highly versatile closed-cell bead foam that provides a unique range of properties, including outstanding energy absorption, multiple impact resistance, thermal insulation, buoyancy, water and chemical resistance, exceptionally high strength to weight ratio and 100% recyclability. EPP can be made in a wide range of densities, from 15 to 200 grams per litre, which are transformed by moulding into densities ranging from 18 to 260 grams per litre. Individual beads are fused into final product form by the steamchest moulding process resulting in a strong and lightweight shape.

Both of POC's full faces use EPP liners.
http://www.pocsports.com/en/product/1220/cortex-flow
http://www.pocsports.com/en/product/1211/receptor

Protec has two EPP bmx helmets that meet CSPC standards.
http://pro-tec.net/technology/bmx#eps
http://shop.pro-tec.net/pro_am/bmx/b2/b2-bike-satin-black.html

EPP liners are very popular in higher end hockey helmets.
http://www.easton.com/hockey/products/helmets/e700-matte
 
Last edited:
T

thad

Monkey
Sep 28, 2004
388
21
Bauer promotes several technologies in addition to EPP foam.
http://yourheadyourhelmet.com/en/compare_helmets.php

Poron foam liner over EPP foam.
http://www.rogerscorp.com/hpf/poron/industrial/products/19/PORON-4701-50.aspx
http://tools.rogerscorp.com/poronxrd/index.aspx

seven Technology. This was developed by Cascade, and purchased by Bauer. It is promoted as more protective than EPP liners, though slightly less than EPP with Poron.
http://www.anewenemy.com/the-technology.html


Smith honeycomb
http://www.koroyd.com/


Rotational impacts.
Several companies are directing attention at rotational impacts. Current ASPC and DOT standards own test for linear impact.
MIPS, allows for rotational slip between head and foam liner. POC is only full face, but Scott AM helmets, and several snowboard helmets.
This foot ball pic shows how it works more clearly than POC does.


Bauer's suspend-tech is a similar idea. Inner liner is made of Poron.

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom