■采用一种新颖的测试方法来评估多向冲击保护系统(MIPS)头盔技术在头部撞击过程中的旋转速度和加速度。
■使用第50百分位的雄性杂种III拟人化测试装置(ATD或假人)完成了优化研究。头盔包括碱性发泡聚苯乙烯泡沫(EPS)和两种不同的MIPS头盔(MIPS1和MIPS2)。利用带有导轨和电动雪橇的24.38米长的高架轨道从大约2.13米的高度复制坠落。电动雪橇设定为20.92kph的预设速度,由Siemen的人机界面(HMI)技术控制,脱扣机构引起ATD从雪橇旋转到沙面。数据是从DTSSLICENANO记录器以及位于ATD头部形式内的三轴线性加速器和角速度传感器获得的。在ATD与砂面撞击期间,使用合成加速度(峰值G\s)测量头部运动学,冲击持续时间(ms)和旋转速度(rad/s)。
■每个头盔的总共三个试验未显示EPS与EPS之间的显着差异MIPS1组,合成加速度的峰值(G's)(p=0.100),合成加速度的持续时间(ms),(p=0.100),旋转速度的峰值(G's),(p=0.700),和旋转速度的持续时间(ms),(p=0.700)。同样,EPS与MIPS2测试表明,与EPS头盔相比,MIPS2头盔之间没有显着差异,在合成加速度(p=0.400)的情况下,持续时间加速度(p=0.200),旋转速度(p=0.400)和持续时间速度(p=0.400)。然而,当MIPS头盔数据被汇集时,(总影响n=6)和EPS头盔数据(总影响n=3)进行了比较,发现加速度持续时间有统计学意义的差异(p=0.048).
■当前的测试使用从规定的高度掉落或滚动的头盔头形式。这些方法通过身体本身的角动量减少了颈部和头部的巨大负荷。我们的新测试方法没有发现各种头盔类型在大脑峰值旋转力减小时的性能存在显着差异,然而,我们的数据表明,MIPS头盔衬垫可能会减少影响的持续时间。加速持续时间的减少可能表明颈部的整体旋转较少,由于MIPS衬垫对这些力的抑制。
UNASSIGNED: Employ a novel testing method to assess Multi Directional Impact Protection System (MIPS) helmet technology on rotational velocity and acceleration during head impact.
UNASSIGNED: An optimization study was completed utilizing a 50th percentile male Hybrid III anthropomorphic test device (ATD). Helmets included expanded polystyrene foam (EPS) and two different MIPS helmets (MIPS 1, MIPS 2). A 24.38-m-long elevated track with rails and a motorized sled was utilized to replicate a fall from approximately 2.13 m. The sled was set to a speed of 20.92 kph, where a tripping mechanism induced rotation in the ATD from the sled and onto a sand surface. During impact of the ATD with the sand surface, head kinematics were measured using resultant acceleration (peak G\'s), duration of impact (ms), and rotational velocity (rad/s).
UNASSIGNED: A total of three trials for each helmet did not demonstrate a significant difference between the EPS vs. MIPS 1 group with, peak (G\'s) for resultant acceleration (p = 0.100), duration (ms) for resultant acceleration, (p = 0.100), peak (G\'s) for rotational velocity, (p = 0.700), and duration (ms) for rotational velocity (p = 0.700). Similarly, the EPS vs. MIPS 2 testing demonstrated no significant differences between the MIPS 2 helmet compared to the EPS helmet, with resultant acceleration (p = 0.400), duration acceleration (p = 0.200), rotational velocity (p = 0.400) and duration velocity (p = 0.400). However, when the MIPS helmet data were pooled, and the EPS helmet data were compared, a statistically significant difference in the duration of acceleration was found (p = 0.048).
UNASSIGNED: Current testing uses a helmeted head form which is dropped or rolled from a prescribed height. These methods discount the loading placed on the neck and head through the angular momentum of the body. Our novel testing method did not find significant differences between the helmet types in diminishing peak rotational forces to the brain; however, our data suggests that MIPS helmet liners may reduce duration of impact. The reduction of acceleration duration could indicate less rotation of the neck, due to the dampening of these forces by the MIPS liners.