Impact Performance Comparison of Advanced Bicycle Helmets with Dedicated Rotation-Damping Systems

Evaluation of an Elastomeric Honeycomb Bicycle Helmet Design to Mitigate Head Kinematics in Oblique Impacts

Head impacts in bicycle accidents are typically oblique to the impact surface and transmit both normal and tangential forces to the head, causing linear and rotational head kinematics, respectively. Traditional expanded polystyrene (EPS) foam bicycle helmets are effective at preventing many head injuries, especially skull fractures and severe traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) (primarily from normal contact forces). However, the incidence of concussion from collisions (primarily from rotational head motion) remains high, indicating need for enhanced protection. An elastomeric honeycomb helmet design is proposed herein as an alternative to EPS foam to improve TBI protection and be potentially reusable for multiple impacts, and tested using a twin-wire drop tower. Small-scale normal and oblique impact tests showed honeycomb had lower oblique strength than EPS foam, beneficial for diffuse TBI protection by permitting greater shear deformation and had the potential to be reusable. Honeycomb helmets were developed based on the geometry of an existing EPS foam helmet, prototypes were three-dimensional-printed with thermoplastic polyurethane and full-scale flat and oblique drop tests were performed. In flat impacts, honeycomb helmets resulted in a 34% higher peak linear acceleration and 7% lower head injury criteria (HIC15) than EPS foam helmets. In oblique tests, honeycomb helmets resulted in a 30% lower HIC15 and 40% lower peak rotational acceleration compared to EPS foam helmets. This new helmet design has the potential to reduce the risk of TBI in a bicycle accident, and as such, reduce its social and economic burden. Also, the honeycomb design showed potential to be effective for repetitive impact events without the need for replacement, offering benefits to consumers.

Biomechanical Response of Head Surrogate With and Without the Helmet

Measurements of brain deformations under injurious loading scenarios are actively sought. In this work, we report experimentally measured head kinematics and corresponding dynamic, two-dimensional brain simulant deformations in head surrogates under a blunt impact, with and without a helmet. Head surrogates used in this work consisted of skin, skull, dura, falx, tentorium, and brain stimulants. The head surrogate geometry was based on the global human body models consortium's head model. A base head surrogate consisting of skin-skull-brain was considered. In addition, the response of two other head surrogates, skin-skull-dura-brain, and skin-skull-dura-brain-falx-tentorium, was investigated. Head surrogate response was studied for sagittal and coronal plane rotations for impactor velocities of 1 and 3 m/s. Response of head surrogates was compared against strain measurements in PMHS. The strain pattern in the brain simulant was heterogenous, and peak strains were established within ∼30 ms. The choice of head surrogate affect the spatiotemporal evolution of strain. For no helmet case, peak MPS of ∼50-60% and peak MSS of ∼35-50% were seen in brain simulant corresponding to peak rotational accelerations of ∼5000-7000 rad/s2. Peak head kinematics and peak MPS have been reduced by up to 75% and 45%, respectively, with the conventional helmet and by up to 90% and 85%, respectively, with the helmet with antirotational pads. Overall, these results provide important, new data on brain simulant strains under a variety of loading scenarios-with and without the helmets.

Human Head and Helmet Interface Friction Coefficients with Biological Sex and Hair Property Comparisons

Dummy headforms used for impact testing have changed little over the years, and frictional characteristics are thought not to represent the human head accurately. The frictional interface between the helmet and head is an essential factor affecting impact response. However, few studies have evaluated the coefficient of friction (COF) between the human head and helmet surface. This study's objectives were to quantify the human head's static and dynamic COF and evaluate the effect of biological sex and hair properties. Seventy-four participants slid their heads along a piece of helmet foam backed by a fixed load cell at varying normal force levels. As normal force increased, static and dynamic human head COF decreased following power-law curves. At 80 N, the static COF is 0.32 (95% CI 0.30-0.34), and the dynamic friction coefficient is 0.27 (95% CI 0.26-0.28). Biological sex and hair properties were determined not to affect human head COF. The COFs between the head and helmet surface should be used to develop more biofidelic head impact testing methods, define boundary conditions for computer simulations, and aid decision-making for helmet designs.

Consensus Head Acceleration Measurement Practices (CHAMP): Laboratory Validation of Wearable Head Kinematic Devices

Wearable devices are increasingly used to measure real-world head impacts and study brain injury mechanisms. These devices must undergo validation testing to ensure they provide reliable and accurate information for head impact sensing, and controlled laboratory testing should be the first step of validation. Past validation studies have applied varying methodologies, and some devices have been deployed for on-field use without validation. This paper presents best practices recommendations for validating wearable head kinematic devices in the laboratory, with the goal of standardizing validation test methods and data reporting. Key considerations, recommended approaches, and specific considerations were developed for four main aspects of laboratory validation, including surrogate selection, test conditions, data collection, and data analysis. Recommendations were generated by a group with expertise in head kinematic sensing and laboratory validation methods and reviewed by a larger group to achieve consensus on best practices. We recommend that these best practices are followed by manufacturers, users, and reviewers to conduct and/or review laboratory validation of wearable devices, which is a minimum initial step prior to on-field validation and deployment. We anticipate that the best practices recommendations will lead to more rigorous validation of wearable head kinematic devices and higher accuracy in head impact data, which can subsequently advance brain injury research and management.

Drop Test Kinematics Using Varied Impact Surfaces and Head/Neck Configurations for Rugby Headgear Testing

World Rugby employs a specific drop test method to evaluate headgear performance, but almost all researchers use a different variation of this method. The aim of this study was, therefore, to quantify the differences between variations of the drop testing method using a Hybrid III headform and neck in the following impact setups: (1) headform only, with a flat steel impact surface, approximating the World Rugby method, (2 and 3) headform with and without a neck, respectively, onto a flat MEP pad impact surface, and (4) headform and neck, dropped onto an angled MEP pad impact surface. Each variation was subject to drop heights of 75-600 mm across three orientations (forehead, side, and rear boss). Comparisons were limited to the linear and rotational acceleration and rotational velocity for simplicity. Substantial differences in kinematic profile shape manifested between all drop test variations. Peak accelerations varied highly between variations, but the peak rotational velocities did not. Drop test variation also significantly changed the ratios of the peak kinematics to each other. This information can be compared to kinematic data from field head impacts and could inform more realistic impact testing methods for assessing headgear.

Evaluation of two rotational helmet technologies to decrease peak rotational acceleration in cycling helmets

The risk of brain trauma has been associated with the rotational kinematics leading to the development of helmets with a variety rotational management technologies. The purpose of this paper was to employ a rotation specific test protocol to evaluate the effectiveness of two of these technologies. Dynamic response of the head was measured to assess the performance of each technology. Three cycling helmets with identical construction were included in this study. One helmet with no rotational technology, an established, commercial technology and a novel helmet rotational technology designed and assembled by the authors were tested. A drop test onto a 45° anvil was used to measure the ability of each helmet to manage the dynamic response of the head form during a series of impacts. The results revealed both rotational helmet technologies resulted in lower peak rotational acceleration and brain strain, however each technology demonstrated unique performance characteristics depending on the impact condition.

The Effect of MIPS, Headform Condition, and Impact Orientation on Headform Kinematics Across a Range of Impact Speeds During Oblique Bicycle Helmet Impacts

Bicycle helmets are designed to attenuate both the linear and rotational response of the head during an oblique impact. Here we sought to quantify how the effectiveness of one popular rotation-attenuating system (MIPS) varied across 3 test headform conditions (bare, covered in stockings, and hair), 3 oblique impact orientations, and 4 impact speeds. We conducted 72 freefall drop tests of a single helmet model with and without MIPS onto a 45° angled anvil and measured the peak linear (PLA) and angular acceleration (PAA) and computed the angular velocity change (PAV) and brain injury criterion (BrIC). Across all headform conditions, MIPS reduced PAA and PAV by 38.2 and 33.2% respectively during X-axis rotation, 47.4 and 38.1% respectively during Y-axis rotation, and 22.9 and 20.5% during a combined ZY-axis rotation. Across all impact orientations, PAA was reduced by 39% and PAV by 32.4% with the bare headform while adding stockings reduced PAA and PAV by 41.6 and 36% respectively and the hair condition reduced PAA and PAV by 30.2 and 24.4% respectively. In addition, our data reveal the importance of using consistent headform conditions when evaluating the effect of helmet systems designed to attenuate head rotations during oblique impacts.

An Investigation into Helmet Use, Perceptions of Sports-Related Concussion, and Seeking Medical Care for Head Injury amongst Competitive Cyclists

The purpose of this study was to investigate competitive cyclists' helmet use, perceptions of sports-related concussion (SRC), and medical-care-seeking behaviors. A mixed-method approach was used with qualitative and quantitative data presented. The study comprised of a cross-sectional analysis of 405 competitive cyclists who completed an online survey. Results indicated that most participants believed a bicycle helmet protects against SRC (79.5%) and considerable numbers of participants would not seek medical care for potential head injury in scenarios where this would be recommended. It was also discovered that marketing of concussion reduction technology influences cyclists' helmet-purchasing behaviors. With the data presented, it is recommended that governing bodies in cycling need to develop educational resources to address gaps in knowledge regarding SRC amongst cyclists. We also suggest that more independent research on concussion reduction technologies in bicycle helmets is needed, with advertising supported by clear scientific evidence to avoid negatively influencing head injury management and reporting behaviors amongst cyclists.

Potential of Soft-Shell Rugby Headgear to Mitigate Linear and Rotational Peak Accelerations

Rugby union is a popular sport played across the world. The physical contact inherent in the game means that players are at increased risk of concussive injury. In 2019, World Rugby created a new category of permitted headgear under Law 4 as a medical device. This established a pathway for headgear designed to reduce peak accelerations to be worn in matches. Investigations of the potential of soft-shelled protective headgear to reduce head impact accelerations have been mostly limited to the analysis of linear kinematics. However rotational head impact accelerations have long been implicated as far more injurious. The aim of this study, therefore, was to assess the linear and rotational acceleration reduction brought about by soft-shelled rugby headgear. A Hybrid III headform and neck were dropped onto a modular elastomer programmer impact surface, impacting at four different velocities (1.7–3.4 m/s) in five different impact orientations. Impact surface angles were 0°, 30°, and 45°. Peak linear and rotational accelerations, PLA and PRA respectively, were recorded. All headgear significantly reduced PLAs and PRAs when compared to a no headgear scenario. The new generation, headgear reduced all measures significantly more than the older generation of headgear. Impact locations offset from the center of mass of the headform resulted in the highest PRAs measured. As the impact surface angle increased, both PLAs and PRAs decreased. The study demonstrated that headgear tested lowered PLAs by up to 50%, and PRAs by up to 60% compared to the bare headform. Our data suggest that new generation headgear could make a difference on the field in reducing injurious impact accelerations in a collision.

Influence of Friction at the Head-Helmet Interface on Advanced Combat Helmet (ACH) Blunt Impact Kinematic Performance

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to compare the rotational blunt impact performance of an anthropomorphic test device (ATD: male 50% Hybrid III head and neck) headform donning an Advanced Combat Helmet (ACH) between conditions in which the coefficient of static friction (μs) at the head-to-helmet pad interface varied.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two ACHs (size large) were used in this study and friction was varied using polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), human hair, skullcap, and the native vinyl skin of the ATD. A condition in which hook and loop material adhered the headform to the liner system was also tested, resulting in a total of five conditions: PTFE, Human Hair, Skullcap, Vinyl, and Hook. Blunt impact tests with each helmet in each of the five conditions were conducted on a pneumatic linear impactor at 4.3 m/s. The ATD donning the ACH was impacted in seven locations (Crown, Front, Rear, Left Side, Right Side, Left Nape, and Right Nape). The peak resultant angular acceleration (PAA), velocity (PAV), and the Diffuse Axonal Multi-Axis, General Evaluation (DAMAGE) metric were compared between conditions.

RESULTS

No pairwise differences were observed between conditions for PAA. A positive correlation was observed between mean μs and PAA at the Front (τ = 0.28; P = .044) and Rear (τ = 0.31; P = .024) impact locations. The Hook condition had a mean PAV value that was often less than the other conditions (P ≤ .024). A positive correlation was observed between mean μs and PAV at the Front (τ = 0.32; P = .019) and Right Side (τ = 0.57; P < .001) locations. The Hook condition tended to have the lowest DAMAGE value compared to the other conditions (P ≤ .032). A positive correlation was observed between the mean μs and DAMAGE at the Rear (τ = 0.60; P < .001) location. A negative correlation was observed at the Left Side (τ = -0.28; P = .040), Right Side (τ = -0.58; P < .001) and Left Nape (τ = -0.56; P < .001) locations.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study indicate that at some impact locations kinematic responses can vary as a function of the friction at the head-to-helmet pad interface. However, a reduction in the coupling of the head-helmet pad interface did not consistently reduce head angular kinematics or measures of brain strain across impact locations. Thus, for the ACH during collision-type impacts, impact location as opposed to μs seems to have a greater influence on head kinematics and rotational-based measures of brain strain.

An Overview of the Effectiveness of Bicycle Helmet Designs in Impact Testing

Cycling accidents are the leading cause of sports-related head injuries in the US. Conventional bicycle helmets typically consist of polycarbonate shell over Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) foam and are tested with drop tests to evaluate a helmet’s ability to reduce head kinematics. Within the last decade, novel helmet technologies have been proposed to mitigate brain injuries during bicycle accidents, which necessitates the evaluation of their effectiveness in impact testing as compared to conventional helmets. In this paper, we reviewed the literature to collect and analyze the kinematic data of drop test experiments carried out on helmets with different technologies. In order to provide a fair comparison across different types of tests, we clustered the datasets with respect to their normal impact velocities, impact angular momentum, and the type of neck apparatus. When we analyzed the data based on impact velocity and angular momentum clusters, we found that the bicycle helmets that used rotation damping based technology, namely MIPS, had significantly lower peak rotational acceleration (PRA) and Generalized Acceleration Model for Brain Injury Threshold (GAMBIT) as compared to the conventional EPS liner helmets (p < 0.01). SPIN helmets had a superior performance in PRA compared to conventional helmets (p < 0.05) in the impact angular momentum clustered group, but not in the impact-velocity clustered comparisons. We also analyzed other recently developed helmets that primarily use collapsible structures in their liners, such as WaveCel and Koroyd. In both of the impact velocity and angular momentum groups, helmets based on the WaveCel technology had significantly lower peak linear acceleration (PLA), PRA, and GAMBIT at low impact velocities as compared to the conventional helmets, respectively (p < 0.05). The protective gear with the airbag technology, namely Hövding, also performed significantly better compared to the conventional helmets in the analyzed kinematic-based injury metrics (p < 0.001), possibly due to its advantage in helmet size and stiffness. We also observed that the differences in the kinematic datasets strongly depend on the type of neck apparatus. Our findings highlight the importance and benefits of developing new technologies and impact testing standards for bicycle helmet designs for better prevention of traumatic brain injury (TBI).

A New Assessment of Bicycle Helmets: The Brain Injury Mitigation Effects of New Technologies in Oblique Impacts

New helmet technologies have been developed to improve the mitigation of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in bicycle accidents. However, their effectiveness under oblique impacts, which produce more strains in the brain in comparison with vertical impacts adopted by helmet standards, is still unclear. Here we used a new method to assess the brain injury prevention effects of 27 bicycle helmets in oblique impacts, including helmets fitted with a friction-reducing layer (MIPS), a shearing pad (SPIN), a wavy cellular liner (WaveCel), an airbag helmet (Hövding) and a number of conventional helmets. We tested whether helmets fitted with the new technologies can provide better brain protection than conventional helmets. Each helmeted headform was dropped onto a 45° inclined anvil at 6.3 m/s at three locations, with each impact location producing a dominant head rotation about one anatomical axes of the head. A detailed computational model of TBI was used to determine strain distribution across the brain and in key anatomical regions, the corpus callosum and sulci. Our results show that, in comparison with conventional helmets, the majority of helmets incorporating new technologies significantly reduced peak rotational acceleration and velocity and maximal strain in corpus callosum and sulci. Only one helmet with MIPS significantly increased strain in the corpus collosum. The helmets fitted with MIPS and WaveCel were more effective in reducing strain in impacts producing sagittal rotations and a helmet fitted with SPIN in coronal rotations. The airbag helmet was effective in reducing brain strain in all impacts, however, peak rotational velocity and brain strain heavily depended on the analysis time. These results suggest that incorporating different impact locations in future oblique impact test methods and designing helmet technologies for the mitigation of head rotation in different planes are key to reducing brain injuries in bicycle accidents.

Impact Performance Comparison of Advanced Snow Sport Helmets with Dedicated Rotation-Damping Systems

Rotational acceleration of the head is a principal cause of concussion and traumatic brain injury. Several rotation-damping systems for helmets have been introduced to better protect the brain from rotational forces. But these systems have not been evaluated in snow sport helmets. This study investigated two snow sport helmets with different rotation-damping systems, termed MIPS and WaveCel, in comparison to a standard snow sport helmet without a rotation-damping system. Impact performance was evaluated by vertical drops of a helmeted Hybrid III head and neck onto an oblique anvil. Six impact conditions were tested, comprising two impact speeds of 4.8 and 6.2 m/s, and three impact locations. Helmet performance was quantified in terms of the linear and rotational kinematics, and the predicted probability of concussion. Both rotation-damping systems significantly reduced rotational acceleration under all six impact conditions compared to the standard helmet, but their effect on linear acceleration was less consistent. The highest probability of concussion for the standard helmet was 89%, while helmets with MIPS and WaveCel systems exhibited a maximal probability of concussion of 67 and 7%, respectively. In conclusion, rotation-damping systems of advanced snow sport helmets can significantly reduce rotational head acceleration and the associated concussion risk.

The effect of the scalp on the effectiveness of bicycle helmets' anti-rotational acceleration technologies

OBJECTIVE

Medical data has lead to the common understanding that bicycle helmets need to be improved to better protect against brain injuries resulting from rotational acceleration. Although many different technologies exist for reducing rotational acceleration during impacts, the lack of an official testing standard means that their evaluation is based on customized set-ups that may differ and not represent real accident conditions. Previously, the authors have shown that scalp tissue plays an important role during helmet testing by absorbing energy and creating a low friction interface between head and helmet, thus reducing rotational accelerations and velocities. However, no published study has yet examined the effectiveness of anti-rotational helmet technologies in the presence of a biofidelic scalp layer. The objective of this study is to address this gap.

METHODS

Three different commercially available helmet models, each one equipped with a different technology, were tested in the presence of scalp tissue, in two different scenarios; with and without the technology present. The effectiveness of each of these technologies is already documented in other studies, but only in the absence of a biofidelic scalp layer. Tests were carried out using HIII headform with porcine scalp attached to the outmost layer. Motion tracking was used to compare the impact kinematics of each helmet model in both scenarios.

RESULTS

Results showed that when a biofidelic scalp layer is present, there is no statistical difference between helmet models with and without the anti-rotational technology in terms of rotational acceleration, velocity, relative rotation, impact duration and injury risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that the presence of the scalp can obscure the functionality of anti-rotational acceleration technologies. This could indicate that the effectiveness of technologies tested in previous studies, which have not tested anti-rotational acceleration technologies in the presence of a realistic scalp layer, may exaggerate the contribution of such technologies if compared with a more biofidelic set-up. The study supports the fact that headforms should be better designed by incorporating artificial skin layers that can better imitate scalp's behavior and, in addition, provides insights for the design of technologies against rotational acceleration.