Evaluation of full-face, open-face, and airbag-equipped helmets for facial impact protection.

Two-wheeler riders frequently sustain injuries to the head and face in real-world crashes, including traumatic brain injury, basilar skull fracture, and facial fracture. Different types of helmets exist today, which are recognized as preventing head injuries in general; however, their efficacy and limitations in facial impact protection are underexplored. Biofidelic surrogate test devices and assessment criteria are lacking in current helmet standards. This study addresses these gaps by applying a new, more biofidelic test method to evaluate conventional full-face helmets and a novel airbag-equipped helmet design. Ultimately, this study aims to contribute to better helmet design and testing standards. Facial impact tests at two locations, mid-face and lower face, were conducted with a complete THOR dummy. Forces applied to the face and at the junction of the head and neck were measured. Brain strain was predicted by a finite element head model taking both linear and rotational head kinematics as input. Four helmet types were evaluated: full-face motorcycle and bike helmets, a novel design called a face airbag (an inflatable structure integrated into an open-face motorcycle helmet), and an open-face motorcycle helmet. The unpaired, two-sided student's t-test was performed between the open-face helmet and the others, which featured face-protective designs. A substantial reduction in brain strain and facial forces was found with the full-face motorcycle helmet and face airbag. Upper neck tensile forces increased slightly with both full-face motorcycle (14.4%, p >.05) and bike helmets (21.7%, p =.039). The full-face bike helmet reduced the brain strain and facial forces for lower-face impacts, but not for mid-face impacts. The motorcycle helmet reduced mid-face impact forces while slightly increasing forces in the lower face. The chin guards of full-face helmets and the face airbag protect by reducing facial load and brain strain for lower face impact; however, the full-face helmets' influence on neck tension and increased risk for basilar skull fracture need further investigation. The motorcycle helmet's visor re-directed mid-face impact forces to the forehead and lower face via the helmet's upper rim and chin guard: a thus-far undescribed protective mechanism. Given the significance of the visor for facial protection, an impact test procedure should be included in helmet standards, and the use of helmet visors promoted. A simplified, yet biofidelic, facial impact test method should be included in future helmet standards to ensure a minimum level of protection performance.

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: The authors work at Autoliv, located in Vårgårda, Sweden. Autoliv (www.autoliv.com) develops, manufactures, and sells protective safety systems to car manufacturers. Results from this study may impact how Autoliv chooses to develop its products.