Crash and helmet

For all discussions about this "lively" subject. All topics that are substantially about helmet usage will be moved here.
mattheus
Posts: 5044
Joined: 29 Dec 2008, 12:57pm
Location: Western Europe

Re: Crash and helmet

Post by mattheus »

Jdsk wrote: 27 Sep 2022, 11:49am Yes, skull fractures can have very nasty effects even without immediate brain injury.
Did someone say fractures were harmless, and actually quite invigorating? Hunt them down, now!
Last edited by mattheus on 27 Sep 2022, 12:07pm, edited 1 time in total.
mattheus
Posts: 5044
Joined: 29 Dec 2008, 12:57pm
Location: Western Europe

Re: Crash and helmet

Post by mattheus »

Stevek76 wrote: 26 Sep 2022, 12:01pm For the brain ... a cracked helmet with no signs of crushing will have done nothing to help
Exactly. Thank-you.
jois
Posts: 334
Joined: 22 Sep 2022, 12:29pm

Re: Crash and helmet

Post by jois »

Stevek76 wrote: 26 Sep 2022, 12:01pm
dmrcycle wrote: 23 Sep 2022, 8:21pm But what about chemical energy. Charge up a battery with a bike dynamo, energy is conserved not mechanical momentum.
What about chemical energy? You seem to be conflating energy and momentum considerably here they are different properties, for a start, energy is a scalar, not a vector. Both are, however, always conserved, regardless of what the energy does regarding getting converted between its various forms, including mass.
Momentum is simply mass of an object multiplied by its velocity.
Well... not entirely. Classically yes it is, once relativity gets involved then not so much. Hence photons, which are massless, still having some momentum.
mattheus wrote: 26 Sep 2022, 8:49am and sometimes a skull fracture.
A skull fracture is hardly insignificant I'd suggest! And the resultant swelling can have its own complications. In reality both the energy and momentum transfers are going to be relevant in any collision, a reduction in energy (even if it's a small one from just cracking the plastic & EPS) is surely not to be sniffed at and a helmet will also help spread the forces across a wider area of the skull, will further reduce the chances of any fracture.

For the brain slopping about issue then no, a cracked helmet with no signs of crushing will have done nothing to help that, but I think people can be OTT when suggesting a cracked helmet has done 'nothing' even if their protective capabilities can be extremely overstated at times.
I've had that discussion before. The maths of general relativity definetly say that photons have moment. I'm less sure that this has ever been measured and could therefore be an artifact of the maths rather than a fact. It is rather about making testable predictions than just taking it on faith

The issue comes when you delve in to quantum mechanics and conclude that mass is illusionary. As such photons are no more or less massless than a protons or a neutron or indeed anything made of them
Jules59
Posts: 420
Joined: 16 Jan 2019, 2:34pm

Re: Crash and helmet

Post by Jules59 »

Steady rider wrote: 26 Sep 2022, 8:23pm how much force to crack a helmet?
how much force to crack a skull?
You dont need a skull fracture to have an extremely serious brain injury. Diffuse axonal injury can be devastating - saw that most frequently in "survivors" car crashes - little obvious injury but permanent damage often resulted
mattheus
Posts: 5044
Joined: 29 Dec 2008, 12:57pm
Location: Western Europe

Re: Crash and helmet

Post by mattheus »

Jules59 wrote: 27 Sep 2022, 3:12pm
Steady rider wrote: 26 Sep 2022, 8:23pm how much force to crack a helmet?
how much force to crack a skull?
You dont need a skull fracture to have an extremely serious brain injury. Diffuse axonal injury can be devastating - saw that most frequently in "survivors" car crashes - little obvious injury but permanent damage often resulted
<googles ... >
What is diffuse axonal injury (DAI)? Diffuse axonal injury is the shearing (tearing) of the brain's long connecting nerve fibers (axons) that happens when the brain is injured as it shifts and rotates inside the bony skull. DAI usually causes coma and injury to many different parts of the brain.

Yes! Exactly! Skull fractures are a tiny* part of the risks in a head-impact.

[my bold]

*but I didn't say they were trivial injuries. Or fun. Or not worth worrying about. Or "insignificant". Or ... or ...
Steady rider
Posts: 2749
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: Crash and helmet

Post by Steady rider »

Steady rider wrote: ↑26 Sep 2022, 8:23pm
how much force to crack a helmet?
how much force to crack a skull?
Trying to answer the questions, it will depend on several factors for a cracked skull, such as age and impact location.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1238919/
The results of our experiments are as follows: 1) The forces necessary to produce the first fracture (seperations of the parietotemporal suture) are between 135 kg and 385 kg. (average; 258 kg) 2) The forces necessary to produce the second fractures (true fractures) are between 195 kg and 550 kg. (average; 356.3 kg) 3)
For helmets, one opinion,
https://www.google.com/search?q=force+t ... e&ie=UTF-8
Evaluation of the helmet-only compression data showed initial cracking that occurred in the range of 100– 200 lbf. The average cracking force was found to be 140 lbf
It looks like helmets may crack at about 50-100kg and skulls at about 200-500kg.
All this probably shows is that helmets will crack at lower impact forces than that required to crack an adult skull. Other people may find more accurate results.
dmrcycle
Posts: 73
Joined: 20 Sep 2022, 12:16am

Re: Crash and helmet

Post by dmrcycle »

The idea that a helmet shattering with no deformation has no effect on impact/damage to the head/brain is absurd. The idea that conservation of momentum means the head retains all the impact unless there is some deceleration force being the physics behind this is equally ridiculous. Energy transfer is the key here. Conservation of momentum (as Newton himself stated) is only true in a closed system with no external forces. Friction losses in deforming material being an external force, in this case that dissipates kinetic energy and therefore momentum. Yes considering the universe as a whole momentum is conserved but we are only considering three things, the helmet, the impact surface and the head. External forces are at work here. A bike helmet is an open structure, it's designed to break and crack to dissipate energy and actually deform. Fracture is the next step beyond deformation. If you don't believe me I only a BSc in Applied Physics perhaps listen to a professor of biomedical engineering in a video from the Royal Institution who is more qualified than me.
Watch this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgH5ZwZ1OdI

No matter what you argue about the psychology of helmet wearing, human behaviour and risk arguments you cannot argue with the physics that wearing a helmet reduces injury. It's like arguing black is white. Have a debate about society and behaviour but not the laws of physics. Thats not up for debate.
Last edited by dmrcycle on 27 Sep 2022, 11:07pm, edited 1 time in total.
dmrcycle
Posts: 73
Joined: 20 Sep 2022, 12:16am

Re: Crash and helmet

Post by dmrcycle »

mattheus wrote: 27 Sep 2022, 12:06pm
Stevek76 wrote: 26 Sep 2022, 12:01pm For the brain ... a cracked helmet with no signs of crushing will have done nothing to help
Exactly. Thank-you.
not true!
Jdsk
Posts: 24636
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Crash and helmet

Post by Jdsk »

jois wrote: 27 Sep 2022, 12:23pm ...
The maths of general relativity definetly say that photons have moment. I'm less sure that this has ever been measured and could therefore be an artifact of the maths rather than a fact. It is rather about making testable predictions than just taking it on faith

The issue comes when you delve in to quantum mechanics and conclude that mass is illusionary. As such photons are no more or less massless than a protons or a neutron or indeed anything made of them
1 I think that you mean special relativity rather than general relativity.

2 I think that you mean momentum rather than moment.

3 The momentum of the photon was measured just about a century ago. And Compton's Nobel Prize followed soon afterwards.

4 Photons are more "massless" than protons or neutrons because protons and neutrons have a non-zero rest mass and photons don't. Because they're travelling at the speed of light or they wouldn't be photons.

Jonathan

PS: And of course quantum mechanics isn't needed in the analysis of the effects of blows to the head. And for that analysis mass is very real.
jois
Posts: 334
Joined: 22 Sep 2022, 12:29pm

Re: Crash and helmet

Post by jois »

Jdsk wrote: 28 Sep 2022, 1:06am
jois wrote: 27 Sep 2022, 12:23pm ...
The maths of general relativity definetly say that photons have moment. I'm less sure that this has ever been measured and could therefore be an artifact of the maths rather than a fact. It is rather about making testable predictions than just taking it on faith

The issue comes when you delve in to quantum mechanics and conclude that mass is illusionary. As such photons are no more or less massless than a protons or a neutron or indeed anything made of them
1 I think that you mean special relativity rather than general relativity.

2 I think that you mean momentum rather than moment.

3 The momentum of the photon was measured just about a century ago. And Compton's Nobel Prize followed soon afterwards.

4 Photons are more "massless" than protons or neutrons because protons and neutrons have a non-zero rest mass and photons don't. Because they're travelling at the speed of light or they wouldn't be photons.

Jonathan

PS: And of course quantum mechanics isn't needed in the analysis of the effects of blows to the head. And for that analysis mass is very real.
If you are going to be my spell checker you will have a long and thank less job

I'm quite prepared to be wrong.

But no crompton didn't get his Nobel prize for measuring the momentum of the photon. Something to do with x-rays and electrons and the Crompton effect.

He also did a lot of calculations about photons but no actual measurements of momentum

I've also found a scientific team that says they may be finally able to measure the momentum, that was 2018 no mention that they have as yet.

If you have a link to cromptons achievement measuring momentum of photons IL be pleased to see it

Thanks Joseph

NB something with no mass can't be more mass less than something else with no mass. Just saying
Last edited by jois on 28 Sep 2022, 1:35am, edited 1 time in total.
Jdsk
Posts: 24636
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Crash and helmet

Post by Jdsk »

Jdsk wrote: 28 Sep 2022, 1:06am4 Photons are more "massless" than protons or neutrons because protons and neutrons have a non-zero rest mass and photons don't. Because they're travelling at the speed of light or they wouldn't be photons.
jois wrote: 28 Sep 2022, 1:32am NB something with no mass can't be more mass less than something else with no mass.
What's the "something else with no mass" to which that refers?

Thanks

Jonathan
jois
Posts: 334
Joined: 22 Sep 2022, 12:29pm

Re: Crash and helmet

Post by jois »

Jdsk wrote: 28 Sep 2022, 1:34am
Jdsk wrote: 28 Sep 2022, 1:06am4 Photons are more "massless" than protons or neutrons because protons and neutrons have a non-zero rest mass and photons don't. Because they're travelling at the speed of light or they wouldn't be photons.
jois wrote: 28 Sep 2022, 1:32am NB something with no mass can't be more mass less than something else with no mass.
What's the "something else with no mass" to which that refers?

Thanks

Jonathan
That would be the things you mentioned in the same paragraph
Jdsk
Posts: 24636
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Crash and helmet

Post by Jdsk »

jois wrote: 28 Sep 2022, 1:37am
Jdsk wrote: 28 Sep 2022, 1:34am
Jdsk wrote: 28 Sep 2022, 1:06am4 Photons are more "massless" than protons or neutrons because protons and neutrons have a non-zero rest mass and photons don't. Because they're travelling at the speed of light or they wouldn't be photons.
jois wrote: 28 Sep 2022, 1:32am NB something with no mass can't be more mass less than something else with no mass.
What's the "something else with no mass" to which that refers?
That would be the things you mentioned in the same paragraph
Protons and neutrons have a rest mass. Photons don't.

Jonathan
jois
Posts: 334
Joined: 22 Sep 2022, 12:29pm

Re: Crash and helmet

Post by jois »

Jdsk wrote: 28 Sep 2022, 1:41am
jois wrote: 28 Sep 2022, 1:37am
Jdsk wrote: 28 Sep 2022, 1:34am

What's the "something else with no mass" to which that refers?
That would be the things you mentioned in the same paragraph
Protons and neutrons have a rest mass. Photons don't.

Jonathan
They don't have mass at all according to a professor at fermilab, or specifically the mass is an illusion

I can link his vid " why mass is an illusion "if you want to take it up with him

In short nothing they contain ie quarks have mass so..... Where does the mass actually come from ?
Last edited by jois on 28 Sep 2022, 1:52am, edited 1 time in total.
Jdsk
Posts: 24636
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Crash and helmet

Post by Jdsk »

jois wrote: 28 Sep 2022, 1:32amBut no crompton didn't get his Nobel prize for measuring the momentum of the photon. Something to do with x-rays and electrons and the Crompton effect.

He also did a lot of calculations about photons but no actual measurements of momentum

...

If you have a link to cromptons achievement measuring momentum of photons IL be pleased to see it
A Quantum Theory of the Scattering of X-rays by Light Elements
Arthur H. Compton
Phys. Rev. 21, 483 – Published 1 May 1923

https://journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/10 ... Rev.21.483

Jonathan
Post Reply