头盔认证对摩托车头盔防护性能的影响

IF 1.1 Q4 ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL
N. Q. Radzuan, Mohd Hasnun Arif Hassan, M. Omar, K. A. Abu Kassim
{"title":"头盔认证对摩托车头盔防护性能的影响","authors":"N. Q. Radzuan, Mohd Hasnun Arif Hassan, M. Omar, K. A. Abu Kassim","doi":"10.15282/jmes.18.1.2024.1.0776","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The convenience of online shopping has increased access to a vast array of helmet options and deals for motorcyclists. However, the e-commerce enables an influx of unverified and potentially hazardous helmets lacking the rigorous quality control into the market, hence, placing unaware bargain seekers at risk. The non-certified variants questions in terms of impact protection abilities because they visually look similar to certified helmets. This study compared certified full face and open face helmets against their non-certified counterparts by analysing injury predictor metrics. Using a test rig simulating 5.58 ± 0.29 m/s impacts, an anthropomorphic test device wearing both helmet types and certification statuses measured peak resultant linear and angular accelerations, head injury criterion alongside brain injury criteria scores. The data revealed comparable side and rear impact performance between non-certified and certified helmets. However, frontal impacts exposed deficiencies without certification. The non-certified full face helmets registered over twice the peak linear acceleration of certified while open face types still exceeded certified by 40% in frontal impacts. Additionally, non-certified full face helmets indicated up to 100% predicted concussion risks in side and frontal crashes based on the angular accelerations. The poorer frontal impact and elevated injury odds demonstrate certification's key safety advantages that certification should not be ignored while it still providing more protection than no helmet. However, individual needs to carefully select helmets due to performance differences of helmets. Riders should ultimately prioritize proven protection given the severe consequences of head trauma though non-certified may suffice for some low-risk environments.","PeriodicalId":16166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The influence of helmet certification in motorcycle helmets protective performance\",\"authors\":\"N. Q. Radzuan, Mohd Hasnun Arif Hassan, M. Omar, K. A. Abu Kassim\",\"doi\":\"10.15282/jmes.18.1.2024.1.0776\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The convenience of online shopping has increased access to a vast array of helmet options and deals for motorcyclists. However, the e-commerce enables an influx of unverified and potentially hazardous helmets lacking the rigorous quality control into the market, hence, placing unaware bargain seekers at risk. The non-certified variants questions in terms of impact protection abilities because they visually look similar to certified helmets. This study compared certified full face and open face helmets against their non-certified counterparts by analysing injury predictor metrics. Using a test rig simulating 5.58 ± 0.29 m/s impacts, an anthropomorphic test device wearing both helmet types and certification statuses measured peak resultant linear and angular accelerations, head injury criterion alongside brain injury criteria scores. The data revealed comparable side and rear impact performance between non-certified and certified helmets. However, frontal impacts exposed deficiencies without certification. The non-certified full face helmets registered over twice the peak linear acceleration of certified while open face types still exceeded certified by 40% in frontal impacts. Additionally, non-certified full face helmets indicated up to 100% predicted concussion risks in side and frontal crashes based on the angular accelerations. The poorer frontal impact and elevated injury odds demonstrate certification's key safety advantages that certification should not be ignored while it still providing more protection than no helmet. However, individual needs to carefully select helmets due to performance differences of helmets. Riders should ultimately prioritize proven protection given the severe consequences of head trauma though non-certified may suffice for some low-risk environments.\",\"PeriodicalId\":16166,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15282/jmes.18.1.2024.1.0776\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15282/jmes.18.1.2024.1.0776","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

网上购物的便利性增加了摩托车手获得大量头盔选择和优惠的机会。然而,电子商务使未经验证和缺乏严格质量控制的潜在危险头盔流入市场,从而使不知情的讨价还价者面临风险。未经认证的变体在冲击防护能力方面存在问题,因为它们在外观上与认证头盔相似。这项研究通过分析伤害预测指标,对经过认证的全脸和开放式头盔与未经认证的头盔进行了比较。使用模拟 5.58 ± 0.29 米/秒冲击的测试装置,佩戴两种头盔类型和认证状态的拟人测试装置测量了结果线性和角加速度峰值、头部损伤标准和脑损伤标准分数。数据显示,非认证头盔和认证头盔的侧面和后部撞击性能相当。但是,正面撞击暴露了未认证头盔的不足之处。未经认证的全脸头盔的峰值线性加速度是经过认证的头盔的两倍多,而开放式头盔在正面撞击中的峰值线性加速度仍然比经过认证的头盔高出 40%。此外,根据角加速度,非认证全脸头盔在侧面和正面碰撞中的脑震荡风险预测高达 100%。较差的正面撞击和较高的受伤几率表明,认证头盔具有关键的安全优势,因此不应忽视认证头盔,因为认证头盔提供的保护仍优于无认证头盔。然而,由于头盔的性能差异,个人需要谨慎选择头盔。鉴于头部外伤的严重后果,骑手最终应优先考虑经过验证的保护措施,尽管在某些低风险环境下,无认证头盔可能就足够了。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The influence of helmet certification in motorcycle helmets protective performance
The convenience of online shopping has increased access to a vast array of helmet options and deals for motorcyclists. However, the e-commerce enables an influx of unverified and potentially hazardous helmets lacking the rigorous quality control into the market, hence, placing unaware bargain seekers at risk. The non-certified variants questions in terms of impact protection abilities because they visually look similar to certified helmets. This study compared certified full face and open face helmets against their non-certified counterparts by analysing injury predictor metrics. Using a test rig simulating 5.58 ± 0.29 m/s impacts, an anthropomorphic test device wearing both helmet types and certification statuses measured peak resultant linear and angular accelerations, head injury criterion alongside brain injury criteria scores. The data revealed comparable side and rear impact performance between non-certified and certified helmets. However, frontal impacts exposed deficiencies without certification. The non-certified full face helmets registered over twice the peak linear acceleration of certified while open face types still exceeded certified by 40% in frontal impacts. Additionally, non-certified full face helmets indicated up to 100% predicted concussion risks in side and frontal crashes based on the angular accelerations. The poorer frontal impact and elevated injury odds demonstrate certification's key safety advantages that certification should not be ignored while it still providing more protection than no helmet. However, individual needs to carefully select helmets due to performance differences of helmets. Riders should ultimately prioritize proven protection given the severe consequences of head trauma though non-certified may suffice for some low-risk environments.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
42
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Mechanical Engineering & Sciences "JMES" (ISSN (Print): 2289-4659; e-ISSN: 2231-8380) is an open access peer-review journal (Indexed by Emerging Source Citation Index (ESCI), WOS; SCOPUS Index (Elsevier); EBSCOhost; Index Copernicus; Ulrichsweb, DOAJ, Google Scholar) which publishes original and review articles that advance the understanding of both the fundamentals of engineering science and its application to the solution of challenges and problems in mechanical engineering systems, machines and components. It is particularly concerned with the demonstration of engineering science solutions to specific industrial problems. Original contributions providing insight into the use of analytical, computational modeling, structural mechanics, metal forming, behavior and application of advanced materials, impact mechanics, strain localization and other effects of nonlinearity, fluid mechanics, robotics, tribology, thermodynamics, and materials processing generally from the core of the journal contents are encouraged. Only original, innovative and novel papers will be considered for publication in the JMES. The authors are required to confirm that their paper has not been submitted to any other journal in English or any other language. The JMES welcome contributions from all who wishes to report on new developments and latest findings in mechanical engineering.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信