Super Skin Helmet- the new standard in safety?

[Paul_E_D]

I don't think so. If the helmet bites, your head stops. THAT is the problem we are trying to mitigate. Once the helmet is sliding, I agree that it is a nonfactor, but the helmet stopping is definitely adding to the transmission of forces to the head.

I think it merits testing and study in the real world. Why NOT try something that could reduce injuries? Just because some stubborn people think you cant improve a helmet?

[DucDave]

I don't think so. If the helmet bites, your head stops. THAT is the problem we are trying to mitigate. Once the helmet is sliding, I agree that it is a nonfactor, but the helmet stopping is definitely adding to the transmission of forces to the head.

I think it merits testing and study in the real world. Why NOT try something that could reduce injuries? Just because some stubborn people think you cant improve a helmet?

Agreed...completely. Testing and science not speculation by philosophers like me!!!

[oVTo]

But you have to admit that with a round helmet there are no direct impacts. They are all glancing blows. If you eliminate that intitial "bite" when the helmet touches the pavement, deceleration of the head is reduced and energy can move forward.

I know all my crashed helmets do have bite marks where the pavement clearly grabbed the shell.

Just so we're using the same words, I'll define direct impact. It is the force that's perpendicular to the surface being struck. For example, if you drop a basketball onto flat pavement, the direct impact would be the downward force of the basketball's mass times gravity.

If you drop a basketball 200' from building or 200' from a supersonic jet, it will strike the ground with the same downward force. One is a 'glancing blow', but both have the same downward force.

We agree that few crashes have just the 'direct impact'. But virtually all crashes have it. Shape doesn't matter. The angle of the strike doesn't matter.

Are the bite marks on your crashed helmets from the pavement grabbing the lid or from the first strike when there was maximum downward force? Probably some of both.

[oVTo]

I don't think so. If the helmet bites, your head stops. THAT is the problem we are trying to mitigate. Once the helmet is sliding, I agree that it is a nonfactor, but the helmet stopping is definitely adding to the transmission of forces to the head.

I think it merits testing and study in the real world. Why NOT try something that could reduce injuries? Just because some stubborn people think you cant improve a helmet?

I don't think anyone's claiming you can't improve helmets. There's always room for improvement.

This helmet might be an improvement. But I don't believe IDCs claims of such dramatic improvement. Being critical of a marketing blurb's claim isn't the same as thinking helmets can't be improved.

I disagree with IDC's claim that "rotational head injury is currently seen as the greatest cause of brain damage or death for motorcyclists involved in road accidents." I've read a bit about helmets and crashes and blunt force trauma seems to be the dominant cause of injury. I've never seen rotational head injury listed as the biggest problem. Maybe I just haven't read the right studies...

But the testing done by Snell, DOT, and others all seems to focus on blunt force impacts - dropping weights directly on the lids and measuring the Gs inside. They have rotational tests, but only to verify the helmets won't come off in an accident; I don't think they measure the angular force transmitted. It might be a great set of tests to add.

IDC's claim of a 67.5% reduction in the possibility of brain injury just doesn't seem credible to me. They don't link to any data anywhere on their site. If they can prove it, I'll get inline for one of those lids.

[Paul_E_D]

I agree their claims are ridiculous. Helmets were saving lives before we had any statistics though. Putting this tech out there can't be a bad thing. Underneath it is...a helmet!

[NobodySpecific]

Ok, so here is an example with SOME numbers. We know that the downward force is the mass * 9.8 m/s/s. The lateral force is a bit trickier, but lets say you are going 60 mph (~26 m/s). Now lets say that the friction on the ground causes you to lose half of your speed in 1 second (lets assume that your head hits first and is the first thing to slow down). That gives us a lateral force of mass * 13 m/s/s. If you can reduce that lateral force by 1/2, you have a total reduction of greater than 25%. I would say that's worth it. Of course I'm not sure what the real world numbers are, but it is certainly a promising bit of research. Did I bugger that physics up? I didn't actually draw out the force diagrams, just wanted to do some quick number crunching in my head.

[oVTo]

I agree their claims are ridiculous. Helmets were saving lives before we had any statistics though. Putting this tech out there can't be a bad thing. Underneath it is...a helmet!

Absolutely. If everything else (shell, polystyrene, etc) is the same, this could be an improvement. And maybe it will lead to other improevments.

[Uncle Snake]

i guess the real question here is whether or not these helmets are Noel Ball Approved

i know Sharks are!! sonofa....

I'm guessing that Noel would give that helmet his "mushroom" stamp of approval......

[RandyO]

It's the impact that causes brain damage, not the slide.

yes, but the slide can easily cause a severe neck injury, my thinking is that this concept would reduce the neck injury potential

I think the "rotational" brain injury they speak of is disconnecting it from your spine

[butcher bergs]

Well I, for one, would have loved to feel what the impact would generate when wearing this helmet during my T11 incident that completely rung my bell and shredded my shoulder in the process.


I'm gonna go ahead and say that, regardless of shape, there's not much of a "glancing blow" when you pile your head directly into the ground. Also, there's nothing "minor" about the grab and twist, again, once the helmet contacts the ground.

Just my opinion tho.

[oVTo]

I contacted IDC and asked for info. They replied with this:

http://www.phillipshelmets.com/HOME.htm

I haven't been through it all, but there's some pretty good stuff for anyone whose interested in the technology. I'm less skeptical.

I couldn't find any US dealers, but Biking Direct has the Solano for 220GBP.

[NobodySpecific]

I'm gonna go ahead and say that, regardless of shape, there's not much of a "glancing blow" when you pile your head directly into the ground.

That's exactly the point though, this helmet will turn what used to be a direct hit and turn it into a glancing blow by allowing the head to continue travelling in the forward direction. This system wouldn't help collisions with other objects (guard rails, trees, cars) as the majority of that force IS in the forward direction, but any contact with the ground is done at an angle (unless you aren't moving forward). This will often feel like a direct impact because the head is being slowed dramatically in both directions (forward and down). If you can reduce just one component of that force (as I explained above) then the impact becomes dramatically reduced.

Imagine jumping forward a few feet and landing on pavement. That will feel very similar to a straight up and down jump because you have lateral traction. Now try doing the same thing on a bowling alley, and suddenly it feels more like a "glancing blow" and you will keep travelling forward (while simultaneously probably slamming your head on the ground, but that's irrelevant). Yes, there is still a significant impact with the ground (that's why there is still an old fashioned helmet underneath), but the effects of lateral traction are just as significant in a lot of cases.

[butcher bergs]

That's exactly the point though, this helmet will turn what used to be a direct hit and turn it into a glancing blow by allowing the head to continue travelling in the forward direction.

I'm aware of this. I didn't want people to read a statement that a round helmet equals glancing blows whenever contact is made. My Shoei and brain would disagree.

[NobodySpecific]

I'm aware of this. I didn't want people to read a statement that a round helmet equals glancing blows whenever contact is made. My Shoei and brain would disagree.

I know, I wasn't calling you out (or at least I wasn't trying to), I was just trying to further clarify the point of the helmet. Hence why I deleted most of the quote, since it was in agreement.

[butcher bergs]

O I C

I misinterpreted your post.

[markbvt]

I contacted IDC and asked for info. They replied with this:

http://www.phillipshelmets.com/HOME.htm

I haven't been through it all, but there's some pretty good stuff for anyone whose interested in the technology. I'm less skeptical.

The explanatory video on that site is really good and makes it very clear how this technology helps (complete with demonstration). Interesting stuff.

--mark

[Paul_E_D]

My point about glancing blows was not to say there is not a lot of force delivered, but just to point out that rarely do we hit the pavement in a direct (linear) fashion. We are moving forward, and do not drop from the sky as if skydiving.

From the site referenced above:
There are two different types of force at play whenever an impact occurs:

* A LINEAR FORCE, which is caused by a straight and direct impact (such as when a ball hits a wall without rotating); it consists firstly of blunt compression (the hit) and then a reaction (the bounce) causing direct injury to the point of impact and potential further injuries following a straight line into the brain.
* A ROTATIONAL FORCE is slightly oblique and causes the head to rotate around its point of articulation at the top of the spine as it is hit.


P.S. where's the video???

[markbvt]

P.S. where's the video???

http://www.phillipshelmets.com/ABOUT_PHPS.htm

Or directly...
http://www.phillipshelmets.com/images/Superskin.wmv

--mark

[Punjistick]

yes, but the slide can easily cause a severe neck injury, my thinking is that this concept would reduce the neck injury potential

I think the "rotational" brain injury they speak of is disconnecting it from your spine

this was my first thought after seeing this.