This Is Your Brain - Composite Fusion and Helmet Shells
Press Release
![This Is Your Brain - article image]()
Helmets are designed to deform during a crash. How much is dependent upon the crash and the intended helmet design. It is impossible for a helmet designer to know the speed, the angle, the surface, and all other factors involved in any individual crash, so designers are left to try to cover as many situations as possible to ensure that you have the best protection over the widest range of impact scenarios. Essentially, helmet design is a ‘greater good’ effort for your brain based on the designer and the manufacturing technology available.
The major safety components of your helmet are the outer shell and the inner foam liner. The outer shell has several purposes. It protects the inner foam liner (the part of your helmet that dissipates the majority of energy upon impact) from penetrating and abrasive forces. It spreads the load of an impact over a greater area utilizing more of the energy absorbing foam, and it dissipates energy on its own depending on the rigidity.
So how hard should your helmet shell be? Tough and strong like an armored vehicle? Not so much. A helmet shell needs to have some ‘give’. That means that upon impact it must deform in the most efficient way possible. If there is no deformation the energy transfers past the inner liner to your head and consequently to your brain. When the shell is too hard the only deformation of the inner liner is that of the rider’s head being forced into the liner – the opposite of what should happen. The impact needs to deform from where the energy is applied, at the point if impact, the outside of the shell – the furthest point away from your brain.
When the outer shell deforms correctly, the impact energy is transferred to the inner liner. This starts the process of dissipating energy more quickly and efficiently. What does that mean to the rider wearing the helmet? It means forces resulting from an impact are slowed before they are applied to your brain.
Think about cars and crumple zones. The old school way of thinking was that we wanted a BIG car, one that is built like a brick shit house and able to withstand huge forces. These days, car manufacturers know that the vehicle needs to ‘give’ – to crumple, so the car takes the impact forces instead of everybody inside the car. Take a look at vehicle crash ratings. We know that energy does not just ‘go away’, it has to be acted upon by an alternate force. When a car’s crumple zone absorbs impact energy from a crash, the chance of survival is increased.
How do we know this works in helmets? We built the same model Kali helmet using traditional construction methods (foam and shell made separately then glued together) and then again with Composite Fusion, Kali's proprietary in-molding process. The helmets built with Composite Fusion reduced linear impacts by as much as 20-25% - same helmet model, same geometry, and same impact locations. Then we tried Composite Fusion with a thicker shell and found that the impact did not break the shell down quick enough to offer anywhere near as significant a reduction of linear deceleration.
We cannot change the amount of energy resulting from a crash, but we can manage that energy more efficiently. Thinner helmet shells allow for far better impact energy management. Composite Fusion allows us to refine how outer shells are made, particularly when it comes to making them thinner. The shell and foam are fused together which adds rigidity and support from the inner liner without having to add thickness, weight, and rigidity to the exterior shell. That starts the energy dissipation faster and handles it more efficiently.
![Impact energy management - traditional construction vs Composite Fusion]()
Composite Fusion helmets provide better overall impact energy management, increased dynamic range and are smaller, lighter and stronger. Lighter and stronger means a helmet with less mass attached to your head. In a crash, less mass attached to your head reduces the linear and rotational impact forces acting on your brain. A better-engineered helmet shell means a more efficient and overall better performing helmet.
MENTIONS: @KaliProtectives
Helmets are designed to deform during a crash. How much is dependent upon the crash and the intended helmet design. It is impossible for a helmet designer to know the speed, the angle, the surface, and all other factors involved in any individual crash, so designers are left to try to cover as many situations as possible to ensure that you have the best protection over the widest range of impact scenarios. Essentially, helmet design is a ‘greater good’ effort for your brain based on the designer and the manufacturing technology available.
The major safety components of your helmet are the outer shell and the inner foam liner. The outer shell has several purposes. It protects the inner foam liner (the part of your helmet that dissipates the majority of energy upon impact) from penetrating and abrasive forces. It spreads the load of an impact over a greater area utilizing more of the energy absorbing foam, and it dissipates energy on its own depending on the rigidity.
So how hard should your helmet shell be? Tough and strong like an armored vehicle? Not so much. A helmet shell needs to have some ‘give’. That means that upon impact it must deform in the most efficient way possible. If there is no deformation the energy transfers past the inner liner to your head and consequently to your brain. When the shell is too hard the only deformation of the inner liner is that of the rider’s head being forced into the liner – the opposite of what should happen. The impact needs to deform from where the energy is applied, at the point if impact, the outside of the shell – the furthest point away from your brain.
When the outer shell deforms correctly, the impact energy is transferred to the inner liner. This starts the process of dissipating energy more quickly and efficiently. What does that mean to the rider wearing the helmet? It means forces resulting from an impact are slowed before they are applied to your brain.
Think about cars and crumple zones. The old school way of thinking was that we wanted a BIG car, one that is built like a brick shit house and able to withstand huge forces. These days, car manufacturers know that the vehicle needs to ‘give’ – to crumple, so the car takes the impact forces instead of everybody inside the car. Take a look at vehicle crash ratings. We know that energy does not just ‘go away’, it has to be acted upon by an alternate force. When a car’s crumple zone absorbs impact energy from a crash, the chance of survival is increased.
How do we know this works in helmets? We built the same model Kali helmet using traditional construction methods (foam and shell made separately then glued together) and then again with Composite Fusion, Kali's proprietary in-molding process. The helmets built with Composite Fusion reduced linear impacts by as much as 20-25% - same helmet model, same geometry, and same impact locations. Then we tried Composite Fusion with a thicker shell and found that the impact did not break the shell down quick enough to offer anywhere near as significant a reduction of linear deceleration.
We cannot change the amount of energy resulting from a crash, but we can manage that energy more efficiently. Thinner helmet shells allow for far better impact energy management. Composite Fusion allows us to refine how outer shells are made, particularly when it comes to making them thinner. The shell and foam are fused together which adds rigidity and support from the inner liner without having to add thickness, weight, and rigidity to the exterior shell. That starts the energy dissipation faster and handles it more efficiently.
Composite Fusion helmets provide better overall impact energy management, increased dynamic range and are smaller, lighter and stronger. Lighter and stronger means a helmet with less mass attached to your head. In a crash, less mass attached to your head reduces the linear and rotational impact forces acting on your brain. A better-engineered helmet shell means a more efficient and overall better performing helmet.
MENTIONS: @KaliProtectives
Author Info:
Member since Apr 16, 2011
Must Read This Week
[UPDATED] Final Elite XC Results & Overall Standings from the Mairiporã XC World Cup 2024
41857 views
41857 views
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
You have to register the serial number beforehand and then send in an email for an rma number.
I have a maraka xc helmet that had no one bad impact but it was getting old, had a few small impacts and the foam was destoyed. They warrantied it no questions asked. Cost me $8 to send it to them and $12 for shipping on the replacement helmet. Got a brand new updated helmet for $20. I'm super stoked about it.
I ended up buying my 5 year old their kids helmet and it's the nicest kids helmet ive seen. It cost $30, his previous giro was $40
I'm buying an interceptor when they're available to replace my older a1
bird.man.sm14@gmail.com
Puns? I'm all out of yolks.
No disrespect to all the websites and mags out there but when they review most just say "obviously we never crashed it but it fit well and looks cool". I've seen some tests on European web mags which do this but the manufacturer should supply this.
First company that does it with good results should sell a load more helmets, everyone thinks Kali or POC are the safest, prove it Kali and beat the score of the other manufacturers.
Releasing the basic 'g' numbers for front, side and top impacts would be an amazing start for the consumer. Imaging being able to look at a helmet and think, nope not buying that one as it passes on 33% more force than the other one in a crash. I've never seen any trail helmet manufcturer release data, only Leatt for the latest full face 6.0. How is this good for the consumer???
Print the results = We get safer helmets, which every biker wants
It could easily be done just like cars, 3 or 4 standard impacts and give out the numbers, let us decide.
It would also drive innovation, it's be pretty harder for a company to justify a $200 helmet over a $80 if the $80 helmet had better numbers.(Yes I know other factors like weight and venting play a role)
It would be great if the industry as a whole helped fund an independent research group like IIHS.
Just think, Specialized could float most of it if they cut out one or two lawsuits.
I for one want to know how well a helmet did on a test. To pass some tests you only have to be below 250g, 250g!!!!! That's a huge impact which I hope my head never goes through as I'll be lucky to be alive, and if I was I'd probably struggle to function and might eat food through a straw.
If the test pass rate is say 250g, but the Kali helmet passes and only gives 145, then great. If a Giro gets 170, I'd buy the Kali. Why can't we know this?
The problem is making a real comparison to other manufacturers, and even more importantly, how do we agree on testing standards? Test labs, test administrators, lab techs and the tests themselves all vary significantly.
Someone needs to spend the money and the time to do an independent and comprehensive test for all helmets on the market - a massive undertaking. We're happy to submit any of our helmets to anyone who chooses to take this on.
As you said the '"next step is to compare that data with other manufacturers",
when can we see this this? Do you plan to release the data on your helmets too?
Way to be innovative though in such an important, yet overlooked, part of action sports.
OK so we have data, but different test standards, testing companies etc. So how hard can it be to start something meaningful on Pinkbike?
Here is a plan, I'm calling on you guys @KaliProtectives @BellBikeHelmets @GiroSportDesign @troyleedesigns @LeattUSA
- Decide what tests should be carried out, top, side, back
- Decide weight, height, shape, anvil type.
- Agree to release results with helmets
- Release results in the same measurement system, basically metric, 'G'
- Agree to get around legal BS, disclaimer saying this is intended as specific testing info only, etc. etc. etc. so you can release the info without any court cases coming back.
The companies that do this will get a huge increase in sales guaranteed. Any company that does not join in should be shamed on PB. Something is better than nothing when it comes to information, it might not be perfect but close to reality is better than nothing.
If you release the results I'm sure @mikekazimer: @RichardCunningham: @mikelevy: will publish in the review.
Stand up and do something meaningful, improve the safety for the industry, it honestly wont take much.
As I mentioned this has been done with motorcycle helmets, and the manufacturers did not agree with the results. Many helmets scored low because part of the test was a blow to the ear area, somewhere almost impossible to hit because your shoulder gets in the way. Yet some high end helmets weren't scoring well because they scored low in this area.
The truth is that no one agrees on a standard test that replicates real world impacts. If you release data on lab testing, manufacturers will build helmets to perform best under that specific lab test. This is not necessarily a good thing
The only way they will release the days is if the public ask for it. Ihave much more respect for both Kali and Leatt now as they will give us the results from their testing. They are willing to back up the products with figures. I applaud that.
What would you suggest?
If acompany wants to do extra tests and publish results then that is up to them.
The companies that market themselves as safety orientated companies kali, leatt, POC should all want to be part of this. Maybe the others would, maybe not. But that way iknow who I would trust.
yup, its endemic, I see 100s of motorists every day during my bike commute, including lorry drivers, bus drivers busy using hand held phone whilst driving -effing scary!
large numbers admitted privately to regularly breaking the law using a hand held phone, in national motoring organisation survery
no Traffic Policing prescence in London any more, sadly due to austerity cutbacks and anti-terrorism hype
motorist 100 times more likely to get parking ticket than busted for jumping red light or using phone whilst driving
How many people die riding a bike?
That's my only point.
What if another car hits you?
Would a helmet not prevent head trauma. save lives ?
In all forms of racing vehicles a helmet is mandatory.
Would you be much safer driving your car with a helmet on ?
Or would you feel like a dork because your image is more important than safety.
Like any helmet maker, if you plan to tell us your helmet is going to do a better job than anyone elses... You best be showing us some legitimate proof! Slow motion capture of your helmet being impact tested against 5 other major helmet manufacturers comparible helmets would be nice. .. actually anything but that just isn't going to cut it.
This whole thing reminds me of Spank Vibrocore... As good as carbon but at alloy cost.. yet we never saw any of this "testing" they did to find these statements to be true... Never even saw a graph...
Kali is doing some killer stuff in the world of Mountain biking but please don't be posting this propaganda poop.
Just for those a bit slow on the uptake that was of course a joke.
As people have said above some valid points made but back it up useful video evidence - slow motion impact testing and results
So if we have 2 helmets, one with a theoretical super flexible shell, another with a theoretical totally rigid undeformable shell. What is the difference?
In both cases *all* the energy is absorbed by crushing the soft liner (since in this case no force is absorbed by deforming the shell).
The rigid shell seems better because it will cause the impact to be absorbed across all the liner than spans the force-facing part of your skull. Spread out the impact.
With flexible shell the force just hits a single part of the liner and once that padding is used up at the impact point, the remaining force goes to your head.
Seems like the best design would have a semi-rigid-destructable shell so also absorbs impact force, meaning it isn't totally rigid and unbreakable, nor is it super flexible.
Funny: this is anti-marketing: fake bullshit arguments is a great way to warn folks away from your stuff.
Isn't that exactly what they are proposing? Did you even read the article?
The helmet being too hard will send some shock-waves to the whole shell, but ultimately any energy not dissipated by this will be dissipated by crushing the liner of the helmet AGAINST YOUR HEAD in the direction of the impact. Too soft and it will dissipate in one point and eventually hit your head. The technology Kali are supporting (as I understand it) is aiming to have the correct balance of weight, flexibility etc. in order to have the helmet crush from he impact side, not head side, thus dissipating more of the energy before your head gets involved. I imagine a lot of other companies also support this notion but are tackling it from different angles, like MIPS.