Fitzgerald Dodds, Davis Fabre, Kevin Schrum, Robert Oster, Thomas Buford, Sara Gould
{"title":"一种新的马术头盔测试方法:头盔衬套性能高逼真模拟。","authors":"Fitzgerald Dodds, Davis Fabre, Kevin Schrum, Robert Oster, Thomas Buford, Sara Gould","doi":"10.1080/00913847.2023.2282381","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Employ a novel testing method to assess Multi Directional Impact Protection System (MIPS) helmet technology on rotational velocity and acceleration during head impact.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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 (<i>p</i> = 0.100), duration (ms) for resultant acceleration, (<i>p</i> = 0.100), peak (G's) for rotational velocity, (<i>p</i> = 0.700), and duration (ms) for rotational velocity (<i>p</i> = 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 (<i>p</i> = 0.400), duration acceleration (<i>p</i> = 0.200), rotational velocity (<i>p</i> = 0.400) and duration velocity (<i>p</i> = 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 (<i>p</i> = 0.048).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":51268,"journal":{"name":"Physician and Sportsmedicine","volume":" ","pages":"381-385"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A novel equestrian helmet testing method: helmet liner performance in highly realistic simulation.\",\"authors\":\"Fitzgerald Dodds, Davis Fabre, Kevin Schrum, Robert Oster, Thomas Buford, Sara Gould\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00913847.2023.2282381\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Employ a novel testing method to assess Multi Directional Impact Protection System (MIPS) helmet technology on rotational velocity and acceleration during head impact.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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 (<i>p</i> = 0.100), duration (ms) for resultant acceleration, (<i>p</i> = 0.100), peak (G's) for rotational velocity, (<i>p</i> = 0.700), and duration (ms) for rotational velocity (<i>p</i> = 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 (<i>p</i> = 0.400), duration acceleration (<i>p</i> = 0.200), rotational velocity (<i>p</i> = 0.400) and duration velocity (<i>p</i> = 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 (<i>p</i> = 0.048).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51268,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Physician and Sportsmedicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"381-385\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Physician and Sportsmedicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00913847.2023.2282381\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physician and Sportsmedicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00913847.2023.2282381","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
A novel equestrian helmet testing method: helmet liner performance in highly realistic simulation.
Objective: Employ a novel testing method to assess Multi Directional Impact Protection System (MIPS) helmet technology on rotational velocity and acceleration during head impact.
Methods: 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).
Results: 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).
Conclusions: 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.
期刊介绍:
The Physician and Sportsmedicine is a peer-reviewed, clinically oriented publication for primary care physicians. We examine the latest drug discoveries to advance treatment and recovery, and take into account the medical aspects of exercise therapy for a given condition. We cover the latest primary care-focused treatments serving the needs of our active patient population, and assess the limits these treatments govern in stabilization and recovery.
The Physician and Sportsmedicine is a peer-to-peer method of communicating the latest research to aid primary care physicians’ advancement in methods of care and treatment. We routinely cover such topics as: managing chronic disease, surgical techniques in preventing and managing injuries, the latest advancements in treatments for helping patients lose weight, and related exercise and nutrition topics that can impact the patient during recovery and modification.