Modern Vespa

I didn't want to hijack Windbreakers thread, "The nonsense of a SNELL certification" ... so thought I would start this one to discuss what folks here think are the pros and cons of modern helmet design. This is NOT a full face versus open face debate, so please don't go there.

For the purpose of this thread, I'd like to leave Snell, DOT and ECE ratings out of the equation because I personally believe they are all either self serving and/or inherently deficient. In a day and age when we can send people to the moon, it blows me away that we are basically wearing a hollowed out hunk of styrofoam over our heads which is then wrapped in a harder outer shell!

It seems to me that helmet design has advanced very little since the turn of the 19th century. Where are the technical advances, the material improvements and design wizardry we have seen in other, every day items? I mean, it would make much more sense to me to wear an air cushioned helmet or one with a gel insert or anything other than styrofoam! I mean come on ... styrofoam? Is that the best that helmet designers can do? What happened to thinking outside the box?

We all know that reducing the speed of deceleration of your brain on impact is the aim of good helmet design. So how is it that a substance that does not "give" very much is considered the best possible material to use in modern helmets. Personally, I think it is ridiculous! I believe there are far better solutions to be had but the industry (for whatever reason) seems to be almost stuck in time and design innovation has been left at the door.

Surely, there is a better material or combination of materials (other than styrofoam) which could practically be used to further reduce deceleration injuries on impact?

please understand there are so many types and densitys of styrofoam. manufactures go thru alot in determining the impact abosrbtion of styrofoam use in their products. also remember the life of a helmet is not just buy how much its worn but by how old it is also as the styrofoam looses it density rating over time. Motorcycle racers can only use helmet less than 3 years old. Helmets should be replace every 5 years or sooner if worn just normally. If worn daily for couple of hrs I would think a person would want to change every 2 years.

You may have just pointed out one of the main reasons manufacturers have no interest in developing more advanced technologies for helmet materials!

Some kind of gel, which would stiffen on initial impact but still disperse the forces later in a uniform manner similar to the non-Newtonian properties of this cornstarch and water mixture http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2XQ97XHjVw would be ideal.

The physics behind reducing impact is to prolong the time of the impact (prolong the time you have to stop the momentum and thereby reduce the affect on tissues from deceleration).

The issues here are cost and durability. Styrofoam and padding are cheap. Special gels with non-Newtonian properties are not cheap.

The other issue is not the helmet, so much as the brain. This is what we call the 'secondary impact'. It's not only the brain impacting the interior of the skull (which results in closed head blunt force trauma) but the semi-gelatinous brain structure can actually 'stretch' the neuronal connections and result in a type of brain injury called diffuse axonal injury (DAI). These are not impact injuries but the result of shear forces on the brain tissue. Sadly most cases of DAI do not recover, but end up in comas of varying degrees.

Preventing shear forces is very difficult, you can't pad the brain directly, and you can only prolong the deceleration time so much. A 'brain bag' type helmet that would release an air bag, may be an option, but then you have to deal with visibility, trigger mechanisms, weight, etc.

If the surface of the helmet is too sticky it 'grabs' the road and results in torsional forces on the neck. If it's too hard, more of the impact forces are delivered to the skull and internal tissues.

You may be able to make a safer helmet, but would it be affordable, would it fit well, not obscure vision, weigh less, last long?

Just my $1.95 worth of opinion here.

It works really well, from falling over up to 100mph. It does the job.

Just think how much money it would cost to design and test a NEW material and how many units & for how much to recoup all that investment back... compared with sticking a bit of syrofoam in a fibreglass shell..

But I do totally understand where you're coming from...
I'd like a carbon light weight shell and one that when you turned your head at speed you could turn it back again without any effort...

Mind you they do still fog up!!!

Excellent point you bring up TJ. I have no answers for you but there must certainly be other materials that are superior. If some inventive soul could figure out what these materials are and come up with a superior design that wouldn't degrade in a few years they could make a lot of money and probably run a lot of helmet manufacturers who have been resting on their styrofoam laurels out of business. So who here is gonna do it?

I'd like to see something that would protect your face, but be more open than the wide chin bar on most ff helmets. Something along the lines of a (American) football helmet. I know there have been some made, but they aren't common.

The last thing I'd want around my head in an accident is an air/gel bag that may or may not inflate when it counts. I have hit the ground pretty hard on my dirt bike, and my helmet did do its job. The crash knocked me for a loop, but I was able to get up and ride away.

Even a bungie cord "type" webbing material or trampoline material mounted inside a helmet would be more efficient and more effective than just a hunk of styrofoam.

Perhaps the combination of bungie "type" webbing and styrofoam would work? Or bungie webbing, gel insert and then styrofoam? I don't know ... I am not an engineer, nor a medical practitioner. The webbing or trampoline material could be designed to break at a certain velocity, allowing the gel insert and then the styrofoam to do their part in slowing the deceleration process.

Papa J: Yes, it costs money to do the research, but all research for all products cost money. I really don't see this as a reason to stop trying to build a better and safer helmet!

Alice: When I mentioned air or gel, I didn't mean for it to be something that needs to be inflated by some sort of trigger device. I was thinking more along the lines of bubble wrap ... but using a stronger material than the typical packaging type bubble wrap. A sacrificial type of decelerating device, so to speak. It would only be good for one use and (like any other helmet) you would then have to buy a new helmet ... assuming you survived to ride again!

All I am saying is that I believe there is a great deal of room for improvement in the field of helmet design and that the level of safety could easily be increased through the use of better materials or combination of materials. I never claimed I had the answer though!

I do notice that prices seem to go up, and up, and up, so they must be doing something new to account for the increasing prices, right?

I would like to see air conditioning via a solar panel on the helmet. Here in Florida helmets aren't required. The biggest reason people don't where them is because of the heat.

I think that if you can put AC into the helmet, you would get more people wearing them. This (getting more people to wear a helmet) ultimately would improve overall safety even using any of the current designs.

Same problem here in TX but I don't think a compressor unit mounted to the side of my helmet would look very cool. A solar powered fan to force air through the helmet while at a stop would be nice as long as it was well integrated of course.

+1 on in helmet airconditions or venting. I'd also like to see more in the way of venting like the Givi helmet. And given that its 2009, shouldn't we be at the point of incorporating more safety lights within a helmet and as other threads have pointed out, reflective material built in?

Really?

Helmet from turn of the 19th Century:


Early 20th Century helmet:


Mid 20th Century:


70s:


Turn of the 21st Century:

Liane

Actually, the foam being used does "give", and the type and density used is selected to achieve optimal attenuation in impacts. "HiTech Gel" sounds sexy, but gels do not compress, and thus would not attenuate impact Gs. Of course, you could design a gel filled helmet with flow restrictors so that the gel moved away from the point of impact at a predetermined rate, but how do you know where to put the flow restrictors?

Sometimes what seems old fashioned is quite elegant and fully up to the job. Expecting a helmet that will protect you from every impact possible is like expecting "One size fits all" panty hose to properly fit every woman on Earth. Ain't gonna happen.

Al

Oh well, I suppose aggravation keeps me young

In answer to Traffic's PMed points about styrofoam
(which she asked me to post about):
1. It is far too hot for hotter climates.
-- It should not be the thing thing that's touching your head, anyway
It's the liner that needs to be optimized for hotter climates

2. It is too bulky.
-- Basic physics says that it needs to be bulky
The problem is the deceleration of your brain as it smacks against the inside of your skull
The only way to minimize the amount of crushed brain that results,
is to increase the stopping distance as much as possible
So it's key to have an inch or more of styrofoam that crumples

3. Though they have made many improvements over the years, the fact remains that there are still too many brain injuries sustained by riders due to the fact that the "crumple zone" within a helmet still isn't ideal.
--I'm afraid most of these are from folks wearing fashionable skid lids,
which don't contain a thick enough styrofoam layer (or none at all)
You can get brain injuries in a SNELL or DOT helmet, but by the time you do,
you usually also have other life-threatening injuries to worry about
(Bosco's accident comes to mind)

4. Deceleration Can be improved upon.
--Actually, they can engineer the styrofoam to crumple any way they want it to
The problem was that, to meet the SNELL standard,
they had to engineer it to crumple less, so that it could withstand 2 hits

Cheers

I think it would help to understand that the hunk of styrofoam is really an engineered polystyrene, very different than the cups at your picnic. The densities and crushing characteristics can be honed very finely in order to provide the best protection.

American football helmets use air pockets inside, because linemen can't replace their helmets after every snap. Even at much lower speeds than motorcycle accidents, these guys end up with lots of brain damage. The "one and done" design of motorbike helmets is the way to go, since we aren't crashing every 2 or 3 minutes we're on the road. (if so, then you have other problems! )

theres a lot of helmets there ...... as there is on here hahahahahaha

What Linda and Al Have said.

Plus, gel is heavy, air can leak, Snell must go

Al,

What is state of the art in helo helmets?

TO Quote LfromJersey:
3. Though they have made many improvements over the years, the fact remains that there are still too many brain injuries sustained by riders due to the fact that the "crumple zone" within a helmet still isn't ideal.
--I'm afraid most of these are from folks wearing fashionable skid lids,
which don't contain a thick enough styrofoam layer (or none at all)
You can get brain injuries in a SNELL or DOT helmet, but by the time you do,
you usually also have other life-threatening injuries to worry about
(Bosco's accident comes to mind)

You can't simply classify all brain injuries as due to actual impact (whether of the brain to the interior skull or skull to environmental objects).

Most brain injuries with helmets are of the 'closed head' type. This means that the skull integrity is intact. These injuries come from the brain moving through the deceleration phase of the impact. Blood vessels rip, and neurons stretch. Contre-coup injuries result when the brain 'rebounds' from the side of the initial impact and hits the opposing interior skull side. These can literally bruise the brain tissue. These are known as 'secondary impact' injuries.
You could make a helmet with 5 in of padding to slow you down, but that still would not mitigate the risk of diffuse axonal injury due to shear forces on the brain vs the brain case.
And I am agreed with L's assessment that head trauma is not your only injury to worry about in terms of increased mortality in an accident. Livers and spleens also do not react very well to shear stresses (not to mention your aorta) and that means many a patient has come into my life as a nurse with a perfectly fine head, and a severely lacerated liver.

A nice video which illustrates the mechanisms of injury very nicely, without gore: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmAML1-F2LE

Louis-

I've been retired since 1995. At that time, we used a web suspension helmet. Keep in mind that a helo driver is restrained by a lap belt and dual shoulder harnesses. Our helmets are intended to protect against very different impact forces than a PTW.

That said, my understanding is that since my retirement the Army has adopted a styrene lined helmet.

There were a lot of reasons we stuck to web suspension for so long. They were easier to maintain in the field, and didn't degrade from sweat. Also, it was not uncommon to be in the cockpit 10-12 hours/day in hot environments, and early attempts at styrene lined helmets produced migrane makers that rotted quickly. Apparently those problems have been solved in the new helmets.

I wore a test model of a styrene helmet in the 60's for 30 days. That was about 45 days too long. Apparently enough other test wearers agreed with my assessment, as it never was adopted.

Al

Leia

You hit the kidney right on the head. Folks are looking for a "silver bullet" that will protect them in any and all mishaps, and there just ain't one. As I have posted in the past, one cannot predict and thereby prepare for the forces upon one's body arising from a mishap that one has not yet suffered. The key is safe riding practices that reduce the probability of a mishap. Gear is simply a mitigatory aid should a mishap occur.

Just as you have spent years viewing the medical aftermath of mishaps, I spent years investigating the causes of mishaps, so that causation might be reduced. The two disciplines need to go hand in hand, but the reduction of causative behavior is more readily in the rider's hands and cannot be stressed enough.

Al

I didn't realize you had been retired that long! I thought that perhaps crew helmets would be designed for impact since they wouldn't always be belted in. I took a severe head hit in a surplus pilots helo helmet in a helicopter fire fighting accident in the 80's and was amazed by the external damage to the helmet and the lack of damage to my head....but that was with a much younger brain....

Retired in 95 with 35 years service. Said I would stay in until I got it right. Took that long to do so.

"Theoretically", no crewmember is regularly and routinely unharnessed. In practice, of course, things are otherwise. However, the SPH-4 web suspension helmet was a good design and protected us well. As Leia pointed out, there were all kind of other trauma associated with fatal aircraft mishaps.

Al

I'm sorry to hear that. That one I'm not so sure about

Thanks Arno... "Laughter is the shortest distance between two people." ~Victor Borge

The latest and greatest helo helmet, at least in the Navy, is a hard shell with a thick styrofoam lining. The portion of the helmet that touches your head is a layer or two of bubblewrap covered with a terrycloth liner.

We are cautioned to not drop the helmet or expose it to unnecessary impact. It's basically good for one whack. Then the styrofoam liner needs to be replaced.

You can customize the fit by messing with the bubblewrap.

I have no idea where in either of my posts I said I expected a helmet that would protect me from every impact possible? Nor do I recall even alluding to that!

What I did say is that I believe there is room for improvement and that I don't believe styrofoam is the best material possible. If nobody believes there is room for improvement or that different materials might produce a better and safer helmet ... OK then! I just don't happen to agree.

The Discovery Channel just devoted an entire hour show to helmet design and shows the advances made in them. They are showing professional motorcycle racers crashing at speeds not even dreamed of by us scooterists (150+) and walking away due to the new helmet designs of today's helmets. It is worth a look and may show you that there is in fact advances in the designs of our brain buckets and styrofoam might just be a really good material after all.

OK, I was too harsh with the "from every impact" remark.

Don't sell foam padding short. It has been improving constantly over the years. What is needed is something that will crush at a predetermined rate(s), and that's exactly what foam does. However, and I am not qualified to say exactly what they are, but there are limits to the energy absorbing ability of materials that can be enclosed inside a helmet that isn't a blimp on one's head.

Improvement would be nice, and I am confident it is being worked on and provided. The fact that there are helmets that absorb energy better than others is clear evidence of that.

Al

I think the current styrofoam designs are probably too cost-effective to be replaced by much more expensive materials for at best minor incremental safety improvements, unless some radically new invention pops up. But there is only so much you can do with physics.

That said, I think using shape-forming foams or maybe inflatable liners to ensure fit, which is critical for comfort and to a lesser but still significant extent, safety, is not a bad idea. Lots of people have looked at helmets (or entire brands!) they really liked only to find out they were not a good fit to their head, and yet the problem is usually just a matter of fraction of inches that could be fixed with more adaptable liner systems. Does anyone know if there have been any attempts at this?