Hint:
Someone wearing a damaged helmet, ignorant of the fact that it is now compromised and should have been replaced?
How can wearing a helmet offer no protection from injury?
- Thread starter Cyclopathic
- Start date
- Status
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Hint:
Someone wearing a damaged helmet, ignorant of the fact that it is now compromised and should have been replaced?
It's a long time since I did any, but I don't think a cycling helmet is suitable for rock climbing. For a start, I think that they need a tougher shell to cope with (sharp) stone fall.
There are a number of specialist rock climbing helmets available, and like cycling helmets they should be replaced if they become damaged.
Unfortunately wearing the appropriate helmet and replacing it when damaged, or when it's effectiveness becomes reduced by age can become expensive.
Cardboard for craniums: how packaging is being used for helmets
By Matt Hussey
07 March 12
Related features
Comments 5
This article was taken from the April 2012 issue of Wired magazine. Be the first to read Wired's articles in print before they're posted online, and get your hands on loads of additional content by subscribing online.
"The design of helmets hasn't changed in 45 years," says designer Anirudha Surabhi. "Whether you pay £20 or £120, you get the same product." Surabhi is CEO of Kranium, a London-based company that creates helmets with honeycomb cardboard.
The idea came in 2010 after he fell off his bicycle and suffered concussion -- despite wearing a standard polystyrene helmet. He claims to have bettered that design. "The honeycomb cells trap air, which acts as a compression membrane," says Surabhi. "The structure is designed to absorb the impact by flexing and crumpling. By crumpling it continues to absorb the impact, as opposed to cracking like polystyrene.
Once polystyrene cracks it stops doing any good." In impact tests, the Kranium liner exerted, on average, only 85Gs, as opposed to 220Gs in standard helmets. The helmets should be on sale this summer. "There is a stigma attached to this being a paper-based product, but when people see that it's far more effective, hopefully we'll change their minds."
Kranium: the facts
-- The mould cost £250. One for polystyrene would be £12,500
-- The helmet passed the EN 1078 safety test five times in a row
-- The Kranium soaks up four times more impact energy than its rivals
By Matt Hussey
07 March 12
This looked an interesting one,
I do love it how people want it all ways, on one hand telling us helmets are a placebo , as your highly unlikely to ever need one and in even of an accident they are next to a waste of time, then berating us if our helmet isn't in perfect condition, - what difference does it make if the first two are correct?
But next time i Wang my head I will let you know if my (slightly) scratched helmet fails me. - but I've stuck my 'statistically this isn't happening' sticker over it , so I'm sure I will be fine.
By Matt Hussey
07 March 12
Related features
Comments 5
This article was taken from the April 2012 issue of Wired magazine. Be the first to read Wired's articles in print before they're posted online, and get your hands on loads of additional content by subscribing online.
"The design of helmets hasn't changed in 45 years," says designer Anirudha Surabhi. "Whether you pay £20 or £120, you get the same product." Surabhi is CEO of Kranium, a London-based company that creates helmets with honeycomb cardboard.
The idea came in 2010 after he fell off his bicycle and suffered concussion -- despite wearing a standard polystyrene helmet. He claims to have bettered that design. "The honeycomb cells trap air, which acts as a compression membrane," says Surabhi. "The structure is designed to absorb the impact by flexing and crumpling. By crumpling it continues to absorb the impact, as opposed to cracking like polystyrene.
Once polystyrene cracks it stops doing any good." In impact tests, the Kranium liner exerted, on average, only 85Gs, as opposed to 220Gs in standard helmets. The helmets should be on sale this summer. "There is a stigma attached to this being a paper-based product, but when people see that it's far more effective, hopefully we'll change their minds."
Kranium: the facts
-- The mould cost £250. One for polystyrene would be £12,500
-- The helmet passed the EN 1078 safety test five times in a row
-- The Kranium soaks up four times more impact energy than its rivals
By Matt Hussey
07 March 12
This looked an interesting one,
I do love it how people want it all ways, on one hand telling us helmets are a placebo , as your highly unlikely to ever need one and in even of an accident they are next to a waste of time, then berating us if our helmet isn't in perfect condition, - what difference does it make if the first two are correct?
But next time i Wang my head I will let you know if my (slightly) scratched helmet fails me. - but I've stuck my 'statistically this isn't happening' sticker over it , so I'm sure I will be fine.
Helmet advocacy while wearing a broken one is a bit like preaching safe sex while wearing a split condom. They work (to the extent that they do work) based on science not on magic, you don't get points for pretending
And yes, the Kranium does look interesting. I saw a prototype at the BIke Show a few years ago but haven't heard much news of it since. I wonder how well-ventilated it is, though I suppose an open cardboard lattice is a good deal less insulating than polystyrene to start with, so maybe it doesn't need as much airflow
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
Ooooohhhh, he almost said it again!2205856 said:
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
No, you've got to say it again then I'll gladly do so.
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
Not a problem, I'm sure it'll wait for another day.
May say more about EN1078 as a standard than the effectiveness of the helmet
Had it passed Snell B95 then I would be more inclined to consider it seriously
well - better a damaged helmet than no helmet is what I say.
daft thing is it takes far more clobber from low branches than the the ground which is normally softer.
Its reassuring to know Cunobelin can spot a broken helmet from that far away, - to me it looks just a bit scrapped, even if (and theres no evidence ) part is compressed, is it compressed fully? - If I hit it again would it hit the exact same area of compression? - all a bit unlikely.
But his point about EN1078 is very very valid.
which is a real pisser as you want an effective helmet , but if they double the price to get better protection would people buy them?
I would , but then I would keep it in the box and wear my old tatty broken one out in the woods. I don't want to mess up my nice new one would I. !
shouldbeinbed
Rollin' along
- Location
- Manchester way
yeah but only with themselves
*puts down wooden spoon and wanders off kicking stones along the ground*
shouldbeinbed
Rollin' along
- Location
- Manchester way
I would like to see helmets designed and built with a suitable flattish surface forward and rearward facing to more easily facilitate attaching a set of lights up there visible through and over the cars around me in the way bar mounted ones aren't, without having to look like you've got an extra nipple right on top. High level lighting for me is the most effective safety feature of all the helmets I've ever owned and worn and crashed with and without. not sure I'd go fo the above pic'd cardboard one on this alone, I can't see where I'd get my little Lezynes on that.
* Flattish so that the more relaxed and racy types can both get a good beam angle out of it - or drop and flat bar versions with differently raked lighting points
* Flattish so that the more relaxed and racy types can both get a good beam angle out of it - or drop and flat bar versions with differently raked lighting points
- Status
