Guest Posted February 7, 2001 Posted February 7, 2001 Hello, any out there that can explain to me why climbing helmets are suspension helmets without a liner? My understanding is that a suspension helmet will spread the force of any impact over the whole band that fits on your head, but it would only absorb the impact as much as the webbing stretches. Would it not be better to use a helmet with a crushable foam liner as in a skiing helmet? Maybe people do for ice? Quote
Rodchester Posted February 7, 2001 Posted February 7, 2001 mant helmets are made of closed cell materials, such as styrofoam. Other than that...hmm? I just don't have any idea. ------------------ Have a nice day. Quote
DPS Posted February 7, 2001 Posted February 7, 2001 I have invested considerable time researching the function of climbing helmets. Helmets work in the following fashion: By wearing a helmet a shield of good mojo is generated which envelopes the wearer protecting him/her from falling objects. It acts like a talisman. As a dedicated researcher, I have tested this phenomenon by occasionally not wearing a helmet. Nearly every instance was accompanied by some type of cranial impact. This effect can be compared to wearing clean underwear (in case you are hit by a car and end up in the hospital). If you wear clean underwear, your chances of being hit by a car are very low, statistically speaking. I wear clean underwear every day and have yet to be hit by a car while crossing the street. (See, your mum was right.) Quote
Ade Posted February 7, 2001 Posted February 7, 2001 The BMC (British Mountaineering Council) published a report on helmets a while back in their Summit magazine. It's not available online although you can browse reports. If I remember right climbing helmets fall into two categories; hard shell and solid foam. Hard shell helmets work by absorbing the impact as the whole helmet deforms not just the webbing, that's why having ample space in between the cradle and the head is so important. Solid foam helmets absorb the impact as the foam breaks. From recollection I seem to remember the tests saying that hard shell helmets transfered a lower impact force to the head although although in some cases, a blow to the forehead, some of the foam helmets were better. Hard shells could also be used after an impact whereas a foam helmet would probably be useless as it would be in many pieces. Serious impacts will produce white stress marks in hard shell helmets so don't buy a white helmet as these will be hard to see. If I can find the article I'll post some numbers. Ade Quote
highclimb Posted February 7, 2001 Posted February 7, 2001 i agree with Ade about the hard shell helmets. i have an Ecrin Roc. i have been hit my a rock the size of a grapefruit, luckly i had my helmet on or i would have been a bloody mess. the helmet absorbed the impact very well. of course i had a spliting headache for an hour afterward. but other than that i was fine. i always wear a helmet when i am in the alpine enviroment. its like a pair of crampons or and ice axe. its a must have. and strongly suggest everybody feel the same way. safe climbing Aidan Quote
cj001f Posted February 7, 2001 Posted February 7, 2001 Part of the reason behind the hardshell helmet, is that it will still be somewhat functional after multiple impacts - the plastic shell and the webbing are designed to withstand multiple impacts wherease the closed cell foam is useless after one impact. Hard Shells are also have superior resistance to sharp/highly angled projectiles(sharp falling rocks) - as comparison bike helmets are useless against curbs. Carl Quote
Ade Posted February 7, 2001 Posted February 7, 2001 There was some discussion in the article as to how well foam helmets held up to impacts from sharp objects. It's much more likely that a sharp object could penetrate a foam helmet as opposed to a shell one. I think the BMC were going to do some more tests. Quote
dan_e Posted February 7, 2001 Posted February 7, 2001 I believe as others have mentioned, that the suspension design is prefered due to the abilty to absorb many impacts. If anyone here mtn. bikes, they know that you have to replace your helmet after hard falls, usually because it's cracked. I would not want something like this in the mountains, especially ice climbing where you can get hit many times during a climb. Side note: Has anyone else noticed the amount of photos with ice climbers not wearing helmets? I just can't imagine not wearing one while ice climbing. I have never been hit by falling rock (close calls), but I have been hit by falling ice more times that I can possibly remember! Quote
highclimb Posted February 8, 2001 Posted February 8, 2001 Dane, yeah i have noticed that, its crazy! just sit back think about what you are climbing: this isnt yosemite granite we are talking about ITS FROZEN WATER AND YES IT CAN BREAK AND IT HURTS LIKE A B#@%*. to all those people out there who have gotten away from am iceclimbing outing without a helmet concideryourself lucky. Aidan Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.