Helmet safety standards and approvals.

[Rod]

Helmet safety standards and approvals
DOT (FMVSS218): The lowest standard of certification.
The helmet is dropped on it’s top twice, once on a flat anvil and once on a round anvil from 1.86 metres, deceleration must not exceed .400 g. A pointed object dropped on a second helmet and must not fully penetrate the liner or padding.
Even half helmets easily obtain DOT Certification bc the face and chin bar are never tested.
DOT testing is carried out by the manufacturer with zero oversight by any agency.
ECE certification is a little better than DOT.
ECE testing includes the DOT testing with these additions.
The helmet is also tested for abrasion resistance and deformation under weight (68kg), the face shield is also tested, the chinstrap is tested to a higher standard (300 kg) and the testing is performed by a third party with representatives from the manufacturer and the government present before the helmets go on the market.
Snell certification.
Snell uses 5 different shaped anvils. Also, the helmets are dropped from multiple heights while being tested for Snell certification, all of which are higher than DOT and ECE drop heights. In addition to all the other tests for impact, penetration and retention, Snell also tests helmets for the strength and integrity of the chin-bar along with the dome. Finally, the visor of a helmet for Snell certification is tested for its strength and resistance to debris breaking through by shooting it with three lead pellets from an air rifle.
FIM Homologation
FIM approval is the highest safety standard a helmet can acquire. There are only about a dozen helmets with this certification. Even every shell size needs it’s own certification.
LINEAR IMPACT
The FIM test approach first assesses the helmet response to very high and medium-low severity linear impacts, randomly in 13 out of 22 pre-established locations distributed all over the helmet surface. This aims at evenly assessing the level of protection against skull fracture and at featuring the mechanical properties of the protective padding (or liner).
Helmet sample #1 (HIGH SPEED UNECE POINTS)
As defined in UNECE 22.05 (Impact-absorption test), with flat anvil only
UNECE points B, X, P, R: 8.2 (+0.15, -0.0) [m/s]
UNECE point S:6.0 (+0.15, -0.0) [m/s]
Helmet sample #2 (HIGH SPEED EXTRA POINTS)
As defined in UNECE 22.05 (Impact-absorption test), with flat anvil only
3 “extra” points (selected among 12 pre-defined points): 8.2 (+0.15, -0.0) [m/s]
Helmet sample #3 (LOW SPEED UNECE POINTS)
As defined in UNECE 22.05 (Impact-absorption test), with flat anvil only
UNECE points B, X, P, R, S: 5.0 (+0.15, -0.0) [m/s]
OBLIQUE IMPACT
Innovatively, the FIM test procedure pioneers the assessment of the helmet response to medium severity oblique impacts, aiming at evaluating the level of protection against brain injuries generated by critical rotational accelerations. The oblique test constitutes the most novel and modern aspect of the methods of testing and reflects a very common scenario occurring in real world accidents, although never addressed in international standards so far.
Helmet sample #4 points 45, 180 and 270 degrees
Helmet sample #5: points 0 and 135 degrees
As defined in UNECE 22.05 (Impact-absorption test), with:
platinum cure silicone coated headform (µ = 0.78)
“oblique anvil”: 45º plane, abrasive paper to be substituted after significant damage
impact velocity 8.00 (+0.15, -0.00) [m/s]
PENETRATION TEST
In addition, a penetration test is included in the protocol and used to check the shell resistance to impacts against sharp objects.
As defined in JIS T8133: 2007 5.2 and 7.5 (Type 2), with:
spherical support
dropping height: 2 [m]
2 penetration sites, above the Snell “test line”, at least 75 [mm] separate
THRESHOLDS
Samples #1 and #2
Peak linear acceleration ≤ 275 g
HIC ≤2 880
Sample #3
Peak linear acceleration ≤ 208 g
HIC ≤ 1300
Sample #4 and #5
Peak linear acceleration ≤ 208 g
HIC ≤ 1300
Peak rotational acceleration ≤ 10400 rad/s2
BrIC ≤ 0.78
Sample #6
No contact between striker tip and support surface
Helmets with FIM certification are:
AGV pista gp r (s,ms)
AGV pista Gp rr (all sizes)
ARAI RX7v (xs to large)
ARAI RX7x (xs to large)
BELL pro star (S,m,l)
CAST cm6 (m, ml)
HJC RPHA 01R (xxs to m)
KYT NZ-RACE (xs to m)
LS2 Thunder gp (all)
LS2 Arrow gp (all)
Nolan X-lite x803p (xs to l)
Shark Race R pro gp (xs to xl)
Shoei x14 (s to l)
Suomy SR GP (xs to m)
NHK GP-R tech (s, m)
MT KRE Plus (xs, s)
MT KRE snake carbon (all sizes)

[kenup283]

it’s something I find myself looking at every winter...

A few years ago it was reading the new FIM standard, last year in was reading Snell 2020 and pondering why they introduced D and R versions.

Each time I land on Snell as having the highest energy impact requirements. So I have to disagree with the stament above about FIM as the highest safety standard.

This winter will be reading the new ECE 22.06 recently released. This is replacing the old reg ECE22.05 that many just refer to as ECE. Think of it as Europe’s DOT.

I have a feeling, but want to read for myself, that it still will be leaser as I do not see it going past the FIM and the trend in recent studies driving these updates has been to look at lower velocity impacts and comparing those to concussion criteria versus good old fashion skull fracture and impacts that could kill in one hard hit. These studies look at bicycle speed crashes to say stiffer helmets made for motorcycles speeds are worse. Over simplification but that’s the general idea.

It’s actually the reason Snell introduced an Snell2020R version ahead of the new ECE regulation to still give riders a choice in EU markets for something that offers higher impact potential while giving helmet manufacture a reasonable chance meeting both standards with what will be the new law of the land in Europe.

For us here in US we can still get the higher impact energy potential from a Snell2020D version. Again more winter reading material this year.