Virginia Tech STAR rating system being developed for hockey helmets

[JR Boucicaut 3802]

A source had told me a few months back they were looking to do this. Good to see all mfgrs on board.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/23/sports/hockey/for-safety-hockey-helmets-going-under-microscope.html?ref=sports&_r=0

[jdksaves 56]

Good, this is needed to move the category ahead further along with help consumers and dealers with knowing what they are getting or selling

[Chadd 916]

A lot of current generation helmets will be on clearance soon. I would bet that a significant number fare very poorly in the VA Tech testing.

[AfftonDad 88]

Please don't tell me my (or my son's) Easton E700 has a low rating. It's so light... I don't want to go back to a heavier helmet.

[Monty22 833]

I'm curious to see what helmets do well/poorly, specifically the different padding packages and suspension liners offered against say a traditional VN foam offering.

[althoma1 575]

I'd be interested to know the ratings of all the current models as well as future ones. Hopefully they rate current models and not just new releases and the information is publicly available and not just advertised by manufacturers for select models that receive higher ratings. The public should be made aware of the low rated models as well and if they have an older helmet if they should consider upgrading. In the end that could benefit manufacturers as it could lead people who had no intention of changing their helmets any time soon deciding to upgrade.

[goblue9280 33]

That actually brings up an interesting question... how to interpret the results with regards to kids. If you read any of the stuff that Dr. Stuart/Mayo Clinic presented to USA Hockey with regards to youth concussions, they talk about things like neck strength and kids under 12 being more susceptible to concussions. Looking at the VTech football methodology, the ratings are for adult helmets... so I'm assuming the neck strength they assumed and head weight are for an average adult. How would the results change if you considered the neck strength and head weight of an average peewee hockey player? I'm curious if there is a point at which the weight of added padding actually increases the risk of concussion for kids due to their weaker neck muscles and lower threshold for deceleration.

Please don't tell me my (or my son's) Easton E700 has a low rating. It's so light... I don't want to go back to a heavier helmet.

Just found this on the FAQ section of the VTech website:

Only adult helmets were evaluated. Can the results be extrapolated to youth helmets?

Currently, it is unknown how youth helmets perform relative to adult helmets of the same name.

Unfortunately, there are no data to indicate whether youth helmets perform better, worse, or the

same as their adult counterparts. We anticipate having a paper published within the next year that

will provide insight into this question. The STAR evaluation system was developed based on the

head impact exposure of collegiate football players. Youth football players are likely to

experience a different head impact exposure, which will require a modified evaluation system.

We have begun to collect data from youth football players and recently published a journal article

in the Annals of Biomedical Engineering describing the first dataset on youth head impact

exposure. However, it may be two more years before we release youth specific ratings.

Daniel et al. (2012):

http://www.springerlink.com/content/r1w055654612u47j/?MUD=MP

[SirJW 207]

I just read that article b4 coming here and was confused about the helmets they are focusing on such as the Bauer 4500 and it didn't mention new helmet tech that has come out in the past few years.

[TitanG 5]

I'm curious to see whether this STAR system will be applied to goalie masks. I read somewhere that the NHL might try to force goaltenders to wear only certified masks in the coming season, even though many wear custom molded ones that are arguably more protective. So, in theory, they could test a molded mask versus a stock, certified mask and see which performs "better."

Goalie masks do not only have to protect from puck impacts (which have been tested extensively), but also the occasional hit from a stick, player, etc.

It will be interesting since hockey has two distinctly different types of headgear for different positions, which is not the same for football.

[Chadd 916]

Please don't tell me my (or my son's) Easton E700 has a low rating. It's so light... I don't want to go back to a heavier helmet.

I love my E700 as well, but I don't think any EPP based helmet will fare well in their testing. It's too bad that Easton never got to market with a retail version of the prototype they showed us a couple years ago.

[oldtrainerguy28 478]

I think this system will do nothing for the hockey industry. They would have to completely modify the testing. Not to mention from the start a helmet will not reduce a concussion in the game of hockey it is much faster that football!

[Chadd 916]

I think this system will do nothing for the hockey industry. They would have to completely modify the testing. Not to mention from the start a helmet will not reduce a concussion in the game of hockey it is much faster that football!

I disagree, I think the cushioning aspect is much more applicable than the current impact dispersion testing.

[oldtrainerguy28 478]

( I think the cushioning aspect is much more applicable than the current impact dispersion testing.)

Thats great in therory but the speed of the game will not allow for a helmet to reduce the chance of concussion! Not in the game of hockey anyway. Way to many variables. Is it a bad idea no. But in his discussions he says that the current system and people involved are doing nothing and his system is the only way. to that I say BS!!!

[Chadd 916]

( I think the cushioning aspect is much more applicable than the current impact dispersion testing.)

Thats great in therory but the speed of the game will not allow for a helmet to reduce the chance of concussion! Not in the game of hockey anyway. Way to many variables. Is it a bad idea no. But in his discussions he says that the current system and people involved are doing nothing and his system is the only way. to that I say BS!!!

The only bad thing is to dismiss it out of hand, as you are doing. That is the real BS. Are there questionable aspects of the new testing regimen? Absolutely. However, that doesn't mean you shouldn't try to move forward.

[DarkStar50 679]

With regard to current model helmets going on clearance, both shop guys and customers should look very closely at the 5 year helmet expiration sticker before purchasing. I received a helmet delivery to my shop from a major vendor that had shipped helmets with expiration dates that expired in 3 years. In other words, these helmets were sitting in their warehouse for 2 years already! I returned them for current stock.

The variables between hockey and football are huge. I hope the research team gets a clear understanding that these two sports may both necessitate helmets but the impacts of helmets and hitting are entirely different.

[jimmy 194]

A guy brought in 60 football helmets for sanitizing last week. We were chatting about the new technology in them, floating discs, similar to those on the new CCM Helmet. He was saying these are now the standard in football.

As for hockey players, in my experience, most could care less about the protectivness, it's more about the mirror test and what's popular. it amazes me that people also want to cheap out on a helmet, yet will spend $250 on a OPS. Even more serious is the dooshbag coaches that require everyone on the team to wear the same model helmet.

[oldtrainerguy28 478]

The only bad thing is to dismiss it out of hand, as you are doing. That is the real BS. Are there questionable aspects of the new testing regimen? Absolutely. However, that doesn't mean you shouldn't try to move forward.

I think you may forget being on the CSA board I have dealt with this school and there testing for over 3 years now. And everyone at the table agrees that with the present tests they are using they will not do anything to forward the helmets as they are. Instead of creating a "New": testing system they should be looking at if there is anything to reduce the chances of a concussion. If that was the work being done first then all the power. But the fact is they got a ton of cash to "research testing" when in fact all it is a more glorified testing system that only says more precisely the weakness of the different helmets are. Look at the funding this school has compared to The Brain Institute in Boston at BU. ! Sorry but sitting there saying this is wrong thats wrong isn't improving the helmets or anything else it just shows possible weakness!

[JR Boucicaut 3802]

And CSA/HECC has? For years VN was the standard til EPP came out in the early 90s...which is still the standard. Yeah, they've made progress...

How is the 4500 still passing cert to this day? As long as CSA/HECC keeps on saying it's certified, Bauer will keep on making it.

Virginia Tech's research put the onus on football helmet manufacturers to come up with better helmets. At the end of the day, you can't sit there and say that VT is doing something wrong and use CSA as your reasoning.

Will be very curious to see what VT comes up with - an industry outsider without ulterior motives - looking in.

[DarkStar50 679]

I'm just curious: anyone that has replied to this post, have you had a concussion occur while playing hockey? I will easily admit I have and the longer I continue to play, the less it takes in terms of "getting hit" to sustain the effects of another one. The research and the results will be far apart long before they make a difference in the marketplace in my opinion.

[Chadd 916]

I think you may forget being on the CSA board I have dealt with this school and there testing for over 3 years now. And everyone at the table agrees that with the present tests they are using they will not do anything to forward the helmets as they are. Instead of creating a "New": testing system they should be looking at if there is anything to reduce the chances of a concussion. If that was the work being done first then all the power. But the fact is they got a ton of cash to "research testing" when in fact all it is a more glorified testing system that only says more precisely the weakness of the different helmets are. Look at the funding this school has compared to The Brain Institute in Boston at BU. ! Sorry but sitting there saying this is wrong thats wrong isn't improving the helmets or anything else it just shows possible weakness!

Wait, they're bad because the tests they do now don't work for hockey, but creating a new testing regime is also a bad idea?n The governing bodies have shown little enthusiasm for making the more radical changes needed to address the root cause of concussions, at least VA Tech is looking to push the envelope.

Criticism of a "competitor" isn't flattering but is does explain your position. Having another party put money and research into the issue is almost always a good thing. In this case, they are looking at the problem from a different angle and I think that is a good thing. The current standards have resulted in helmets that are a step backwards in concussion prevention in a number of ways.

[jsykes 35]

Sorry but sitting there saying this is wrong thats wrong isn't improving the helmets or anything else it just shows possible weakness!

Ummm... that is exactly what needs to be done because without pointing out the things that are wrong, they dont get fixed.

If the current testing isnt pointing out the issues, then the new testing is needed to do just that.

Then once, the problems are identified, they can be addressed, hopefully with helmets that will be safer.

Years ago, many racecar drivers were being killed in accidents where they suffered from basilar skull fractures. Helmets werent the problem and further testing found that no helmet would help and that it was the decelleration of the entire head area while the body was restrained by belts, causing these fractures.

After the new testing and figuring out the issue, a new device, called a HANS was developed to help slow the decelleration of the head and since that device was introduced, it has saved many, many lilves, and to my knowledge, no one has died from a basilar skull fracture while wearing the device.

It goes directly to your point in that they found an issue that the current standards and tests werent accounting for. They did more testing, found the issue and fixed the problem.

To sit there and say they shouldnt change or improve the testing becasue all it will do is point out the problems is absurd. That is the first step in identifying the problems and, hopefully, creating safer products.

[oldtrainerguy28 478]

Ok first off I was reading and replying after flying home from Australia on the 21 hour flight. So I think my meanings have come out a little bit wrong here. I will get my head back together and reply with much better information that actually makes sense........

(Will be very curious to see what VT comes up with - an industry outsider without ulterior motives - looking in.) CSA and HECC being non profit there are no ulterior motives. I may have been a little off in my comments and will take the criticism but to say there are motives on the CSA and HECC board is actually offensive!

[bunnyman666 445]

Ok first off I was reading and replying after flying home from Australia on the 21 hour flight. So I think my meanings have come out a little bit wrong here. I will get my head back together and reply with much better information that actually makes sense........

(Will be very curious to see what VT comes up with - an industry outsider without ulterior motives - looking in.) CSA and HECC being non profit there are no ulterior motives. I may have been a little off in my comments and will take the criticism but to say there are motives on the CSA and HECC board is actually offensive!

I would think that the only motivation that the CSA and HECC would have is to protect players. I believe that is the motive of both testing schemes, and would be the motive of the VT testing scheme. You know the old expression "this needs a fresh set of eyes", right? I think all could benefit from a third party.

That being said, I think all testing concerns could learn from each other and would help protect players. That is why these concerns were created, right?

[oldtrainerguy28 478]

Wouldnt disagree to the above as long as all were working along the same lines.

[bunnyman666 445]

Wouldnt disagree to the above as long as all were working along the same lines.

I suspect the VT testing protocols will go through a fair bit of tweaking. I adapted my cycles to failure testing for bicycle parts and frames from various industries, and it took a few engineering students to adpat the tests to apply correctly, but I was able to reliably test items accurately.

I would hope that all were working amongst the same lines, but I am an idealist. But the "fresh eyes" approach seems like it would make everybody better.

Edited July 31, 2014 by bunnyman666