Originally Posted by slvoid
No but by putting words in my mouth and making up things when you have nothing else to say, it doesn't make you anti-helmet, it just makes you sound ignorant (not that you are).
Well, that wasn't directed entirely at you. I just get frustrated that no-one ever seems to want to talk about the flaws in the design and how to improve it. Helmet wars always seem to tread the same old path, and it gets tiresome. I appreciate you actually bothering to engage in discussing this and hope to continue knocking ideas around. You come across as knowledgable on the subject and I value your input.
I've been dwelling for several years on the idea of actually making a helmet based on these ideas. I think the materials are available to make something close, if a bit heavy, and with a bit of development they could be improved to meet cyclists requirements for weight and ventilation. Maybe if we can come up with something I'll actually do it this year.
So to fire this up, here's what I've been considering:
It would constitute three layers, similar in concept to the current design.
Closest to the head would be the 'comfort' layer of an open cell foam. This would be applied in patches to allow for the movement of air around the scalp. It would be slightly thicker and perhaps a little stiffer foam than the piddly little patches velcroed to the inside of today's typical helmet.
Next would be the crushable layer where the real work is done. I'd look at using a closed cell foam (a product called Sorbothene is what I've been considering). Without doing any sort of testing or calculations, my suspicion is that this layer could be thinner than the layer of styrofoam currently employed and provide as much or more capacity to decelerate the skull.
Encase the whole thing in a couple of layers of Kevlar and there you have it in essence.
Other concerns can be addressed in the styling of it. I think adequate ventilation can be achieved with careful placing of vents to allow air in at the front, through carefully designed channels to circulate the air over the head, and out at the back. The ideal would be to achieve maximum airflow with the minimum amount of openings.
While we're at it, I'd like to see the coverage extended to include the back of the neck and possibly the ears, but allowing for the range of movement that occurs in normal cycling.
Discuss.