Headform Mounting Performance in Cricket Standard Testing

Stone, B; Halkon, B; Harland, A

Headform Mounting Performance in Cricket Standard Testing

Stone, B Halkon, B

Harland, A

Permalink

Publication Type:: Conference Proceeding
Citation:: Procedia Engineering, 2016, 147 pp. 401 - 406
Issue Date:: 2016-01-01

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Published versionAdobe PDF (456.29 kB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Stone, B	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Halkon, B https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5459-2329	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Harland, A	en_US
dc.date.issued	2016-01-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Procedia Engineering, 2016, 147 pp. 401 - 406	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/117401
dc.description.abstract	© 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. The current British Standard for head protectors for cricketers specifies a projectile test to ensure that a helmet can prevent the ball penetrating the peak-grille gap and deformation of the grille onto the face. For practical reasons, it is specified that the headform is mounted onto a grounded frame. This study aims to determine whether this "Fixed" mounting technique influences the response of the headform relative to a theoretically preferable "Free" suspension. A pressurised air cannon was used to project a "BOLA"TM ball at three nominal speeds (22, 25 and 28 m/s) and at three target impact locations (136 (Top), 108 (Middle) and 80 (Bottom) mm from the base). High speed video was used to identify the contact duration and accelerometer data were used to assess the peak resultant headform acceleration and velocity during this period. Generally, good agreement between the two scenarios was found in regard to peak resultant headform acceleration, particularly at the 25 and 28 m/s impact speeds. In terms of headform velocity, the two scenarios showed greater variation when the full contact duration was considered, with root mean square deviations ranging from 1.77-5.6 in all testing conditions. However, some portions of the impact were considerably more consistent than others. These initial results indicate that the result of the penetration test, as specified in BS 7928:2013, would be independent of the suspension technique particularly given the convergence of results at the specified standard velocity (28 m/s). Future work should look to identify the loading and unloading phases of an impact, and use this to compare headform response. Thus allowing a more in-depth investigation of headform mounting performance and provide more clarity on the use of the Fixed technique in cricket standard tests.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Procedia Engineering	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1016/j.proeng.2016.06.327	en_US
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.title	Headform Mounting Performance in Cricket Standard Testing	en_US
dc.type	Conference Proceeding
utslib.citation.volume	147	en_US
utslib.for	09 Engineering	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology/School of Mechanical and Mechatronic Engineering
utslib.copyright.status	open_access	*
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	147	en_US

Abstract:

© 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. The current British Standard for head protectors for cricketers specifies a projectile test to ensure that a helmet can prevent the ball penetrating the peak-grille gap and deformation of the grille onto the face. For practical reasons, it is specified that the headform is mounted onto a grounded frame. This study aims to determine whether this "Fixed" mounting technique influences the response of the headform relative to a theoretically preferable "Free" suspension. A pressurised air cannon was used to project a "BOLA"TM ball at three nominal speeds (22, 25 and 28 m/s) and at three target impact locations (136 (Top), 108 (Middle) and 80 (Bottom) mm from the base). High speed video was used to identify the contact duration and accelerometer data were used to assess the peak resultant headform acceleration and velocity during this period. Generally, good agreement between the two scenarios was found in regard to peak resultant headform acceleration, particularly at the 25 and 28 m/s impact speeds. In terms of headform velocity, the two scenarios showed greater variation when the full contact duration was considered, with root mean square deviations ranging from 1.77-5.6 in all testing conditions. However, some portions of the impact were considerably more consistent than others. These initial results indicate that the result of the penetration test, as specified in BS 7928:2013, would be independent of the suspension technique particularly given the convergence of results at the specified standard velocity (28 m/s). Future work should look to identify the loading and unloading phases of an impact, and use this to compare headform response. Thus allowing a more in-depth investigation of headform mounting performance and provide more clarity on the use of the Fixed technique in cricket standard tests.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/117401