Looks like a boondoggle to me. I wouldn't trust my brain to someone's science experiment..
My guess as an ex physics grad student and who got his doctorate in mechanical engineering is this...to reduce the torsional forces you want the least amount of friction between the helmet and the ground...think of something that has low friction...an ice skate, skis, snowboard...has a smooth surface like a conventional helmet.
Now the graphic he has shows some sort of covering ripping off...it could be with this helmet that there is a large spike in the torsional force at
a) the moment the covering starts to rip off,
b) when the covering has mostly been peeled off and its getting pulled of the helmet entirely when it snags on something on the pavement
c) after the covering is gone and I have the not as smooth underlying part of the helmet that was glued on to the covering which is now rubbing along the asphalt.
As far as the fancy graphic is concerned if you read the script above it is says:
"The next stage was finite element analysis, utilising a model produced by Strasbourg University. The concepts tested showed that with zero friction and ideal materials there were theoretical improvements of up to 85% in protection against rotation and up to 40% against linear forces"
Translation: "This data is from a computer model not from an actual test with an actual helmet with actual moving asphalt
I actually did some finite element analysis in college...there are all sorts of ways to get it wrong, or to leave out of the modeling important nonlinear effects that invalidates your results.
the 6,900 lives part is amost certainly a bogus number using all sorts of assumptions.
suggest investing in a MSF course until a reputable government agency has tested this in a well thought out controlled experiment. Government agencies are slow, but there is no replacement for good science.
My guess as an ex physics grad student and who got his doctorate in mechanical engineering is this...to reduce the torsional forces you want the least amount of friction between the helmet and the ground...think of something that has low friction...an ice skate, skis, snowboard...has a smooth surface like a conventional helmet.
Now the graphic he has shows some sort of covering ripping off...it could be with this helmet that there is a large spike in the torsional force at
a) the moment the covering starts to rip off,
b) when the covering has mostly been peeled off and its getting pulled of the helmet entirely when it snags on something on the pavement
c) after the covering is gone and I have the not as smooth underlying part of the helmet that was glued on to the covering which is now rubbing along the asphalt.
As far as the fancy graphic is concerned if you read the script above it is says:
"The next stage was finite element analysis, utilising a model produced by Strasbourg University. The concepts tested showed that with zero friction and ideal materials there were theoretical improvements of up to 85% in protection against rotation and up to 40% against linear forces"
Translation: "This data is from a computer model not from an actual test with an actual helmet with actual moving asphalt
I actually did some finite element analysis in college...there are all sorts of ways to get it wrong, or to leave out of the modeling important nonlinear effects that invalidates your results.
the 6,900 lives part is amost certainly a bogus number using all sorts of assumptions.
suggest investing in a MSF course until a reputable government agency has tested this in a well thought out controlled experiment. Government agencies are slow, but there is no replacement for good science.
