Manifold

I've driven with various organizations, PCA and otherwise, and helmet standards vary a good bit as far as full or open face, SA or M, and year. I don't recall a lot of specifics being given on required condition, and I agree that evaluating that could get rather subjective. The rigor of helmet inspection also varies, ranging from none to thorough.

IMO, a reasonable minimum standard should be adhered to, but no more. And I would be less strict about safety measures which protect only the driver (eg, helmet) versus safety measures which protect both the driver and others on the track (eg, fluid leaks from the car).

Veloce Raptor

Who needs a helmet when you drive one of these?

mglobe

Depends on which goomba is riding int he back seat.

mhm993

Curt, I work the tech line at lots of events, and honestly have issues about being asked to determine the quality and condition of participants' helmets. I can tell easily when brake pads are worn, but I have no ability--or training--to determine a helmet's condition, including hidden defects.
Further, and I'm not a lawyer, wouldn't it seem that creating additional standards greater than showing the acceptably rated helmet will create additional liabilities for the region if a driver is injured wearing a helmet that your inspectors approved?
Just my two cents.

ZAPmobile

+100

jdistefa

When's the last time a 2000 vs. 2010 helmet made a measurable difference in the clinical outcome of a significant head injury mechanism? As long as the structure is intact, it's all baloney, smoke and mirrors, and litigation-driven-angst-posturing.

I wouldn't get involved in anything more than setting a standard (admittedly arbitrarily) and confirming that people comply.

winders

And what credentials do you have to back up this opinion? Helmets use an EPS (or similar) material for the liner. This material certainly becomes less effective over time. This material can lose its "structure" without the helmet owner knowing about it.

Is a 5 year replacement schedule on the conservative side? Almost certainly. But this is one place were being conservative is a good idea. Unless, of course, your head isn't worth it....

Scott

jdistefa

^ MD, ER/trauma/ortho

Feel free to post data that it makes any difference re. walking/talking clinical outcomes not bench impact tests.

Helmets should be used, should fit well (IMHO the most important criteria), shouldn't catch on fire, and should have their structure intact. I stand by my previous comments that rest of it is hooey and/or re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Just sayin

Matt Romanowski

I don't have the data, but there it does exist to support the 10 year life on helmets. They do degrade from wearing them. All the little hits you put on your helmet climbing in and out of the car, carrying it, etc degrade it as well.

As far as the OP goes, you're over thinking the whole thing. The minimum standards has a way to deal with this. You don't need to become a helmet engineer.

jdistefa

^ Matt, the issue isn't whether materials degrade, or whether some materials absorb energy better than others. Asked and answered. The question is whether any of it actually matters re. significant injury mechanisms that are going to hurt the brain no matter what. You can slice it and dice it a bunch of ways, but the reality is that existing data are bench impact tests, proxy measurements, and application of first principles. I still submit that a lot of this is window dressing, number chasing, and bureaucracy. It's the usual result of the intersection of quasi-medicine, liability *** covering, and risky pursuits.

Helmet technology does and will get better over time but if you bang your head hard enough you're still going to be drinking out of a straw regardless of whether your helmet sticker said "2000" or "2005" or "2010". And there are a number of other factors that impact potential brain injury that are independent of reasonable helmet age.

winders

And this gives you insight into helmet design and EPS structure integrity how? The answer is that it does not. A florist could know as much as an ER Doc.....

Scott

winders

It matters.....

Scott

jdistefa

Scott,

Closed head injuries are among the most common presentations to ER in north america. In my particular practice catchment area I unfortunately know an awful lot about head injuries and injury mechanisms, and have lectured on them. I've also been on the world cup (skiing) as a doc for years, where, as you might imagine, head injuries and helmet design are a constant preoccupation. Lastly, I have specific insight and knowledge into helmet design re. relationship with one of the manufacturers.

I'm happy to answer any questions you might have, but i'm currently buying flowers for you. Sorry I'm a day late.

jdistefa

Ugh. Just insulting. And you, of course, completely missed the point of my posts. On second thought, just carry on.

Matt Romanowski

I'm with you that in certatain situations, it doesn't matter if you're wearing the best helmt, you're going to be injured. But, helmets actually do improve a bunch every 5 years. As an example of the difference in quality of helmets - an FIA spec helmet performs roughly 20% better in testing than a Snell 2010. How does that relate to injuries - not sure, but I guess it makes a material impact.

Graphic to support the FIA to Snell reference. From Ed Becker, the Executive Director of Snell.