News WaveCel: nuova tecnologia per i caschi

 

sniffo

Biker superioris
29/8/10
832
65
Padova
Mi era arrivata una newsletter di una tecnologia rivoluzionaria che dovevano presentare oggi.

Sinceramente speravo in un telaio in grafene.

Non ho voglia di leggere tutto l'articolo ma non mi sembra molto diverso dalle strutture a nido d'ape dei caschi Smith ed Endura. Se poi gli danno pure lo stesso colore verde acido...
 
Ultima modifica:

makkot

Biker velocissimus
17/8/13
2.366
219
a nord di nessun sud
Bike
(29+) e (fat)
Se poi lo vendono a 300 euro affermando di volere far salire in sella più persone possibili,,,,saranno ottimi ingegneri, ma come venditori fanno pena
 
  • Like
Reactions: salukkio

andry-96

Biker forumensus
16/5/17
2.071
862
23
Brescia
Bike
Giant anthem advanced pro
Mi era arrivata una newsletter di una tecnologia rivoluzionaria che dovevano presentare oggi.

Sinceramente speravo in un telaio in grafene.

Non ho voglia di leggere tutto l'articolo ma non mi sembra molto diverso dalle strutture a nido d'ape dei caschi Smith ed Endura. Se poi gli danno pure lo stesso colore verde acido...
Il telaio in grafene è ancora ben lontano

La differenza fra questo e il nido d’ape koroyd( si scrive così?) è che questo dovrebbe lavorare molto meglio su urti con rotazione o comunque impatti non dritti visto che nasce per deformarsi in più direzioni
 

marco

Баба Яга
Diretur
29/10/02
35.552
5.840
48
Monte Bar
www.mtb-mag.com
Bike
Diverse
Mi era arrivata una newsletter di una tecnologia rivoluzionaria che dovevano presentare oggi.

Sinceramente speravo in un telaio in grafene.

Non ho voglia di leggere tutto l'articolo ma non mi sembra molto diverso dalle strutture a nido d'ape dei caschi Smith ed Endura. Se poi gli danno pure lo stesso colore verde acido...
se avessi letto e soprattutto guardato il video avresti visto che non c'entra una mazza con la struttura a nido d'ape
 

SlowMotion

Biker superis
6/5/11
369
68
Sesto S. Giovanni MI
Bike
YT Jeffsy 2017
Mi domando se con una struttura ad elementi cosí ravvicinati l'aria circola bene o resta molto caldo.
Per la cronaca, é un dubbio che ho anche con i caschi koroyd, che non ho mai provato.

Il sospetto é che possa girare bene solo aria forzata, quindi in discesa, mentre in salita, quindi in sostanziale assenza di vento (gli ingegneri la chiamano "convezione naturale"), il ricambio di aria potrebbe essere molto scarso.

Farete una prova pratica?

Il costo é relativo, é una novitá e devono rientrare dell'investimento fatto, col tempo immagino e spero scenderá.
 

andry-96

Biker forumensus
16/5/17
2.071
862
23
Brescia
Bike
Giant anthem advanced pro
Mi domando se con una struttura ad elementi cosí ravvicinati l'aria circola bene o resta molto caldo.
Per la cronaca, é un dubbio che ho anche con i caschi koroyd, che non ho mai provato.

Il sospetto é che possa girare bene solo aria forzata, quindi in discesa, mentre in salita, quindi in sostanziale assenza di vento (gli ingegneri la chiamano "convezione naturale"), il ricambio di aria potrebbe essere molto scarso.

Farete una prova pratica?

Il costo é relativo, é una novitá e devono rientrare dell'investimento fatto, col tempo immagino e spero scenderá.
lo spessore è comunque basso, diminuisce un po l'area delle aperture ma meno di quanto sembri dalle foto
in realtà dei "canali" stretti per l'aria dovrebbero peggiorare la situazione ad alta velocità( fra moti turbolenti e "viscosità" dell'aria) piuttosto che alle basse dove conta quasi unicamente la sezione totale delle aperture, poi siccuramente passa un po' di aria in meno ma bisgona vedere come hanno studiato tutto il casco, se hanno fatto anche le versioni da strada immagino che il problema sia limitato
 

marco

Баба Яга
Diretur
29/10/02
35.552
5.840
48
Monte Bar
www.mtb-mag.com
Bike
Diverse
Mi domando se con una struttura ad elementi cosí ravvicinati l'aria circola bene o resta molto caldo.
Per la cronaca, é un dubbio che ho anche con i caschi koroyd, che non ho mai provato.

Il sospetto é che possa girare bene solo aria forzata, quindi in discesa, mentre in salita, quindi in sostanziale assenza di vento (gli ingegneri la chiamano "convezione naturale"), il ricambio di aria potrebbe essere molto scarso.

Farete una prova pratica?

Il costo é relativo, é una novitá e devono rientrare dell'investimento fatto, col tempo immagino e spero scenderá.
ci sono almeno due test di caschi smith con il koroyd, cerca nel mag.
Il casco Bontrager dovrebbe arrivarmi settimana prox
 

marco

Баба Яга
Diretur
29/10/02
35.552
5.840
48
Monte Bar
www.mtb-mag.com
Bike
Diverse
MIPS non sembra molto contenta di avere concorrenza:

As the leader in the field of rotational motion solutions for helmets, MIPS subjected the new WaveCel helmet technology to their battery of tests, with results far below WaveCel’s substantial claims of injury prevention.

Yesterday morning, WaveCel, through its exclusive licensee Bontrager, announced a new set of helmets featuring their technology, a honeycomb-like insert that attempts to decrease linear impacts and duplicate MIPS’ proven ability to lessen the rotational motion associated with potential brain injuries such as diffuse axonal injury, subdural hematoma, and concussion.

WaveCel has made sizeable claims about the efficacy of this technology, stating on their website that it’s “up to 48x more effective at preventing concussions” than a regular EPS helmet, that “adding the WaveCel technology reduced [the incidence of concussion] to 1.2%,” and, via Bicycling magazine “the company says that a helmet with WaveCel will prevent a concussion 99 out of 100 times.”

Preliminary test results of WaveCel helmets by MIPS cannot substantiate these claims. While further testing is warranted, MIPS cannot see that the helmets perform in a way that the claims Bontrager/WaveCel makes in the comparison between WaveCel and other helmets/technologies.

MIPS’ position on evaluating the possibility of a concussion resulting from a crash is that it is a highly variable event and unique to the individual impact and rider physiology. No two crashes are the same and no two people are the same, so the risk of concussion is a near-impossible claim to make. However, rotational motion itself can be measured objectively, so that is the metric MIPS can actually report and address.

For over 20 years, MIPS has been researching brain injuries and designed its system to reduce rotational motion transferred to the brain from angled impacts to the head, keeping people safer in the outdoors, from casual beginners to professional athletes. MIPS has conducted more than 22,000 tests in their state-of-the-art test lab in Sweden. MIPS’ own Dr. Peter Halldin, with Dr. Hans von Holst, has authored several academic papers on helmet impact biomechanics since 2001.

While MIPS finds it encouraging that more and more brands are acknowledging the damaging rotational motion, there is still a lack of an industry-wide standard from third party testing organizations to ensure accurate information for consumers – something MIPS called out earlier this month.

“We at MIPS have conducted more than 22,000 tests and we know that not all helmets are equally safe, not even the ones that claim to address rotational motion”, says Johan Thiel, CEO of MIPS. “While we hope from a consumer standpoint that Bontrager’s claims are accurate, we are curious to see how it lives up to the tests conducted in our lab.”

“We are a company of scientists, so we’re approaching this in the spirit of collaboration inherent to scientific research. If together, we can make cycling safer for riders, then we will have honored our mission to make the safest helmets possible.”
 

pk71

Biker tremendus
15/12/08
1.038
601
Vicopisano
Bike
Nicolai G16
MIPS non sembra molto contenta di avere concorrenza:

As the leader in the field of rotational motion solutions for helmets, MIPS subjected the new WaveCel helmet technology to their battery of tests, with results far below WaveCel’s substantial claims of injury prevention.

Yesterday morning, WaveCel, through its exclusive licensee Bontrager, announced a new set of helmets featuring their technology, a honeycomb-like insert that attempts to decrease linear impacts and duplicate MIPS’ proven ability to lessen the rotational motion associated with potential brain injuries such as diffuse axonal injury, subdural hematoma, and concussion.

WaveCel has made sizeable claims about the efficacy of this technology, stating on their website that it’s “up to 48x more effective at preventing concussions” than a regular EPS helmet, that “adding the WaveCel technology reduced [the incidence of concussion] to 1.2%,” and, via Bicycling magazine “the company says that a helmet with WaveCel will prevent a concussion 99 out of 100 times.”

Preliminary test results of WaveCel helmets by MIPS cannot substantiate these claims. While further testing is warranted, MIPS cannot see that the helmets perform in a way that the claims Bontrager/WaveCel makes in the comparison between WaveCel and other helmets/technologies.

MIPS’ position on evaluating the possibility of a concussion resulting from a crash is that it is a highly variable event and unique to the individual impact and rider physiology. No two crashes are the same and no two people are the same, so the risk of concussion is a near-impossible claim to make. However, rotational motion itself can be measured objectively, so that is the metric MIPS can actually report and address.

For over 20 years, MIPS has been researching brain injuries and designed its system to reduce rotational motion transferred to the brain from angled impacts to the head, keeping people safer in the outdoors, from casual beginners to professional athletes. MIPS has conducted more than 22,000 tests in their state-of-the-art test lab in Sweden. MIPS’ own Dr. Peter Halldin, with Dr. Hans von Holst, has authored several academic papers on helmet impact biomechanics since 2001.

While MIPS finds it encouraging that more and more brands are acknowledging the damaging rotational motion, there is still a lack of an industry-wide standard from third party testing organizations to ensure accurate information for consumers – something MIPS called out earlier this month.

“We at MIPS have conducted more than 22,000 tests and we know that not all helmets are equally safe, not even the ones that claim to address rotational motion”, says Johan Thiel, CEO of MIPS. “While we hope from a consumer standpoint that Bontrager’s claims are accurate, we are curious to see how it lives up to the tests conducted in our lab.”

“We are a company of scientists, so we’re approaching this in the spirit of collaboration inherent to scientific research. If together, we can make cycling safer for riders, then we will have honored our mission to make the safest helmets possible.”
Se sono veramente mossi dallo spirito scientifico e dalla "missione" di salvaguardare i ciclisti perché non liberalizzano il brevetto?
Ovviamente gli contesto l'ipocrisia e non i prodotti, che secondo me (e l'ho provato sulla mia pelle), sono ottimi.
 

albatros_la

Biker tremendus
25/6/09
1.072
227
Collegno (TO)
www.flickr.com
MIPS non sembra molto contenta di avere concorrenza:

As the leader in the field of rotational motion solutions for helmets, MIPS subjected the new WaveCel helmet technology to their battery of tests, with results far below WaveCel’s substantial claims of injury prevention.

Yesterday morning, WaveCel, through its exclusive licensee Bontrager, announced a new set of helmets featuring their technology, a honeycomb-like insert that attempts to decrease linear impacts and duplicate MIPS’ proven ability to lessen the rotational motion associated with potential brain injuries such as diffuse axonal injury, subdural hematoma, and concussion.

WaveCel has made sizeable claims about the efficacy of this technology, stating on their website that it’s “up to 48x more effective at preventing concussions” than a regular EPS helmet, that “adding the WaveCel technology reduced [the incidence of concussion] to 1.2%,” and, via Bicycling magazine “the company says that a helmet with WaveCel will prevent a concussion 99 out of 100 times.”

Preliminary test results of WaveCel helmets by MIPS cannot substantiate these claims. While further testing is warranted, MIPS cannot see that the helmets perform in a way that the claims Bontrager/WaveCel makes in the comparison between WaveCel and other helmets/technologies.

MIPS’ position on evaluating the possibility of a concussion resulting from a crash is that it is a highly variable event and unique to the individual impact and rider physiology. No two crashes are the same and no two people are the same, so the risk of concussion is a near-impossible claim to make. However, rotational motion itself can be measured objectively, so that is the metric MIPS can actually report and address.

For over 20 years, MIPS has been researching brain injuries and designed its system to reduce rotational motion transferred to the brain from angled impacts to the head, keeping people safer in the outdoors, from casual beginners to professional athletes. MIPS has conducted more than 22,000 tests in their state-of-the-art test lab in Sweden. MIPS’ own Dr. Peter Halldin, with Dr. Hans von Holst, has authored several academic papers on helmet impact biomechanics since 2001.

While MIPS finds it encouraging that more and more brands are acknowledging the damaging rotational motion, there is still a lack of an industry-wide standard from third party testing organizations to ensure accurate information for consumers – something MIPS called out earlier this month.

“We at MIPS have conducted more than 22,000 tests and we know that not all helmets are equally safe, not even the ones that claim to address rotational motion”, says Johan Thiel, CEO of MIPS. “While we hope from a consumer standpoint that Bontrager’s claims are accurate, we are curious to see how it lives up to the tests conducted in our lab.”

“We are a company of scientists, so we’re approaching this in the spirit of collaboration inherent to scientific research. If together, we can make cycling safer for riders, then we will have honored our mission to make the safest helmets possible.”
Se sono veramente mossi dallo spirito scientifico e dalla "missione" di salvaguardare i ciclisti perché non liberalizzano il brevetto?
Ovviamente gli contesto l'ipocrisia e non i prodotti, che secondo me (e l'ho provato sulla mia pelle), sono ottimi.
Ho commentato il MIPS in qualche occasione, sulla base di test condotti da terzi (anche qui ma il commento è in attesa di moderazione da due giorni... spero lo staff lo sblocchi!).
Il punto è che il vino è sempre buono a detta dell'oste. MIPS e Trek ovviamente dicono che il proprio prodotto è il migliore. La cosa curiosa è che ho seri dubbi che siano entrambi migliori di un buon casco tradizionale, e questo perché i test non sono rappresentativi sotto diversi punti di vista.
Sono felice che il casco ti abbia salvato la testa (lo ha fatto anche a me), credo che un casco normale te l'avrebbe salvata comunque, probabilmente senza tangibili differenze rispetto al casco MIPS.
 

 

Discussioni simili