A price-performance analysis of the protective capabilities of wholesale bicycle helmets.

OBJECTIVE: Although bicycle helmets are an effective countermeasure against head injury, many cyclists do not wear one. One avenue for facilitating widespread helmet use is through community-driven helmet safety initiatives, which often give away or subsidize wholesale helmet models that are manufactured at a low price point. However, the impact performance of such helmets during real-world accident conditions has yet to be explored. The present study seeks to investigate trends between wholesale bicycle helmet price and protective capabilities. METHODS: Nine common wholesale helmet models (price range $3.65-$12.95) were evaluated according to the bicycle Summation of Tests for the Analysis of Risk (STAR) methodology, which analyzes helmet performance in 24 oblique impact tests reflecting common cyclist head impact conditions. Resulting head peak linear acceleration (PLA) and peak rotational velocity (PRV) were collected and used to predict risk of concussion. Concussion risks were then combined using the STAR algorithm in order to summarize each model's risks into a single, weighted metric. RESULTS: Large ranges in kinematic results led to large variations in concussion risks between helmets, and in turn, large variations in STAR values (13.5-26.2). Wholesale helmet price was not significantly associated with STAR, although incorporating 30 previous bicycle helmet STAR results produced a weak negative correlation between price and STAR overall. Nonetheless, the best-performing wholesale helmet produced one of the lowest overall STAR values for a price of $6.45. Helmet style was instead a superior predictor of STAR, with multi-sport style helmets producing significantly higher linear accelerations and resulting STAR values than bike style helmets. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that the impact performance of wholesale helmets ranges considerably despite their low price-points. Results can also guide helmet safety promotion organizers toward distributing wholesale bicycle helmet models associated with lower overall concussion risks.

Laboratory Reconstructions of Bicycle Helmet Damage: Investigation of Cyclist Head Impacts Using Oblique Impacts and Computed Tomography.

Although head injuries are common in cycling, exact conditions associated with cyclist head impacts are difficult to determine. Previous studies have attempted to reverse engineer cyclist head impacts by reconstructing bicycle helmet residual damage, but they have been limited by simplified damage assessment and testing. The present study seeks to enhance knowledge of cyclist head impact conditions by reconstructing helmet damage using advanced impact testing and damage quantification techniques. Damage to 18 helmets from cyclists treated in emergency departments was quantified using computed tomography and reconstructed using oblique impacts. Damage metrics were related to normal and tangential velocities from impact tests as well as peak linear accelerations (PLA) and peak rotational velocities (PRV) using case-specific regression models. Models then allowed original impact conditions and kinematics to be estimated for each case. Helmets were most frequently damaged at the front and sides, often near the rim. Concussion was the most common, non-superficial head injury. Normal velocity and PLA distributions were similar to previous studies, with median values of 3.4 m/s and 102.5 g. Associated tangential velocity and PRV medians were 3.8 m/s and 22.3 rad/s. Results can inform future oblique impact testing conditions, enabling improved helmet evaluation and design.

Development of the STAR Evaluation System for Assessing Bicycle Helmet Protective Performance.

Cycling is a leading cause of mild traumatic brain injury in the US. While bicycle helmets help protect cyclists who crash, limited biomechanical data exist differentiating helmet protective capabilities. This paper describes the development of a bicycle helmet evaluation scheme based in real-world cyclist accidents and brain injury mechanisms. Thirty helmet models were subjected to oblique impacts at six helmet locations and two impact velocities. The summation of tests for the analysis of risk (STAR) equation, which condenses helmet performance from a range of tests into a single value, was used to summarize measured linear and rotational head kinematics in the context of concussion risk. STAR values varied between helmets (10.9-25.3), with lower values representing superior protection. Road helmets produced lower STAR values than urban helmets. Helmets with slip planes produced lower STAR values than helmets without. This bicycle helmet evaluation protocol can educate consumers on the relative impact performance of various helmets and stimulate safer helmet design.

Differences in Impact Performance of Bicycle Helmets During Oblique Impacts.

Cycling is a leading cause of sport-related head injuries in the U.S. Although bicycle helmets must comply with standards limiting head acceleration in severe impacts, helmets are not evaluated under more common, concussive-level impacts, and limited data are available indicating which helmets offer superior protection. Further, standards evaluate normal impacts, while real-world cyclist head impacts are oblique-involving normal and tangential velocities. The objective of this study was to investigate differences in protective capabilities of ten helmet models under common real-world accident conditions. Oblique impacts were evaluated through drop tests onto an angled anvil at common cyclist head impact velocities and locations. Linear and rotational accelerations were evaluated and related to concussion risk, which was then correlated with design parameters. Significant differences were observed in linear and rotational accelerations between models, producing concussion risks spanning >50% within single impact configurations. Risk differences were more attributable to linear acceleration, as rotational varied less between models. At the temporal location, shell thickness, vent configuration, and radius of curvature were found to influence helmet effective stiffness. This should be optimized to reduce impact kinematics. At the frontal, helmet rim location, liner thickness tapered off for some helmets, likely due to lack of standards testing at this location. This is a frequently impacted location for cyclists, suggesting that the standards testable area should be expanded to include the rim. These results can inform manufacturers, standards bodies, and consumers alike, aiding the development of improved bicycle helmet safety.

Differences in the protective capabilities of bicycle helmets in real-world and standard-specified impact scenarios.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate relative differences in impact attenuation capabilities of bicycle helmets under real-world impact conditions and safety standard-specified conditions using a standard rig. METHODS: A Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) test rig was used to impact 10 helmet models of varied design. Impact configurations included 2 locations and 2 velocities. A frontal rim location (inferior to the standard-defined test area) and a temporal location were selected to reflect common cyclist impacts. An impact velocity of 3.4 m/s, an average normal impact velocity in cyclist accidents, was selected, as well as the CPSC standard velocity of 6.2 m/s. Four samples per helmet model were subjected to each of the 4 impact configurations once (randomized test order per sample), resulting in 160 drop tests. Peak linear acceleration (PLA) and head injury criterion (HIC)-based Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) ≥ 4 brain injury risk were determined and compared across helmets and impact configurations using analysis of variance. Other impact characteristics such as duration, effective liner stiffness, and energy dissipated were also calculated from acceleration data. RESULTS: Helmet performance varied significantly between models. PLA ranged from 78 to 169 g at 3.4 m/s (0-2% AIS ≥ 4 brain injury risk) and 165-432 g (10-100% risk) at 6.2 m/s. Temporal impacts resulted in higher PLAs than frontal impacts, likely due to increased effective liner stiffness. However, 2 helmets exceeded the CPSC pass-fail threshold (300 g) at the frontal rim location, producing >70% risk. Force-displacement curves suggest that bottoming-out occurred in these impacts. Aside from bottoming-out cases, helmets that performed worse in one impact configuration tended to perform worse in others, with non-road-style helmets among the worst. CONCLUSIONS: The 10 bicycle helmets tested produced considerable differences in their protective capabilities under both real-world and standard-specified conditions on the CPSC rig. Risk of severe brain injury varied widely between helmets at the standard impact velocity, whereas the common, lower severity impacts produced PLAs associated with concussion. Helmets of a nonroad style generally performed worse across configuration. The temporal location produced higher risks for most helmets, although some helmets were found to offer inadequate protection at the helmet rim. Because this is a commonly impacted location in cyclist accidents, there may be benefit to expanding the testable area in standards to include the rim. Results from this study demonstrate the value in testing nonstandard conditions and can be used to inform standards testing and helmet design.

Ranges of Injury Risk Associated with Impact from Unmanned Aircraft Systems.

Regulations have allowed for increased unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) operations over the last decade, yet operations over people are still not permitted. The objective of this study was to estimate the range of injury risks to humans due to UAS impact. Three commercially-available UAS models that varied in mass (1.2-11 kg) were evaluated to estimate the range of risk associated with UAS-human interaction. Live flight and falling impact tests were conducted using an instrumented Hybrid III test dummy. On average, live flight tests were observed to be less severe than falling impact tests. The maximum risk of AIS 3+ injury associated with live flight tests was 11.6%, while several falling impact tests estimated risks exceeding 50%. Risk of injury was observed to increase with increasing UAS mass, and the larger models tested are not safe for operations over people in their current form. However, there is likely a subset of smaller UAS models that are safe to operate over people. Further, designs which redirect the UAS away from the head or deform upon impact transfer less energy and generate lower risk. These data represent a necessary impact testing foundation for future UAS regulations on operations over people.

Biomechanical Perspectives on Concussion in Sport.

Concussions can occur in any sport. Often, clinical and biomechanical research efforts are disconnected. This review paper analyzes current concussion issues in sports from a biomechanical perspective and is geared toward Sports Med professionals. Overarching themes of this review include the biomechanics of the brain during head impact, role of protective equipment, potential population-based differences in concussion tolerance, potential intervention strategies to reduce the incidence of injury, and common biomechanical misconceptions.