Time and Location

Wednesday, September 20th, 1:00 PM (total time 4.5 hours)
2071 Bainer Hall

Co-Chairs

Dr. Phil Martin, Transport Research Laboratory, United Kingdom
Dr. David Hynd, Transport Research Laboratory, United Kingdom

Description

Cycle helmets are critical items of personal protective equipment that aim to reduce both the occurrence and severity of head injuries by providing adequate head protection during collisions. The safety performance of a cycle helmet is fundamental to protecting cyclists during a fall or collision; however, very little is known about the relative protective qualities of different cycle helmet models.

To address this issue, a number of research institutes have begun to develop cycle helmet testing and assessment programs to rate the relative safety performance of cycle helmets. These institutes are truly international, with the UK, US, Sweden, Germany, France and Australia all beginning to develop such schemes. To maximize the positive impact of such schemes, the global harmonization of these approaches at an early stage may be beneficial.

This workshop will provide these research institutes with an opportunity to present the latest outcomes of their research, discuss current best practices for testing and assessing cycle helmet safety performance and provide a forum for debating the global harmonization of the various approaches currently being adopted. Finally, the workshop will aim to create a roadmap for achieving a global cycle helmet safety performance consumer information scheme.

Schedule

Welcome and introductions from the Chair (13:00-13:05)

Consumer testing for helmet safety: What do consumers need from us (13:05-13:25)

• Presenting the case for implementing a global cycle helmet safety consumer testing scheme
• Overview of strengths and challenges facing the current helmet testing landscape and the requirements for ensuring such a scheme remains focused on consumer needs
• Presenter: Randy Swart (Executive Director, Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute)

Global approaches toward testing cycle helmet safety performance (13:25-14:20)

• Overview of best practices adopted by research institutes worldwide and their effects on outcome measures
• Focused session on differences in testing philosophies, testing apparatus and measurement principles and their potential effects on the sensitivity, repeatability and reproducibility of results
• Several 15 minute presentations and 5 min Q&A sessions with globally recognized research leaders including:
  Helena Stigson (Folksam): Consumer testing of bicycle helmets – experiences over the years
  Siobhan O’Connell (TRL): Effects of testing procedure on the outcomes of bicycle helmet safety tests
  Megan Bland (Virginia Tech): Influence of headform and neck during bicycle helmet testing

Global approaches toward assessing cycle helmet safety performance (14:20-15:00)

• Overview of best practices adopted by research institutes worldwide and their effects on outcome measures
• Focused session on differences in kinematic and Finite Element Analysis techniques for assessing injury and rating schemes based upon in-depth accident datasets
• Several 15 minute presentations and 5 min Q&A sessions with globally recognized research leaders including:
  Steve Rowson (Virginia Tech): Injury criteria, risk & rating schemes
  Remy Willinger (University of Strasbourg): Advanced linear and oblique helmet impact test methods for consumer tests

Coffee & networking break (15:00-15:15, South Kemper patio)

Future-Backwards: Creating a roadmap towards a global cycle helmet safety consumer information scheme (15:15-16:20)

• Group activity to developing a 3-year plan for achieving a successful, harmonized, consumer information scheme
• Contribute to defining what a successful global consumer information scheme will look like 3 years from now
• Create a timeline that maps a clear route to realizing a harmonized consumer information scheme
• Debate on benefits and challenges of different approaches

Global harmonization – how hard can it be? (16:20-17:15)

• Focused debate on the various benefits/drawbacks surrounding three key “headline” issues for harmonization
  Oblique impact test specs – angling for an answer
  Weighting star ratings
  Quality injury criteria – kinematic or numerical methods?

Closing remarks from the Chair (17:15-17:20)