Dr. A.S.McIntosh 1/10/15

ARB HS 2012 The new Australian regulation

Author: Dr Andrew McIntosh (PhD) Director, McIntosh Consultancy and Research Adj. Professor, ACRISP, Federation University Australia [email protected]

Outline

¥ Personal background ¥ Development of ARB HS 2012 Ð Review of helmet standards Ð Helmet testing Ð Prototype development ¥ ARB HS 2012 helmet performance ¥ Policy and engagement ¥ Future work

6th ICHSWJ Hong Kong 2015 1 Dr. A.S.McIntosh 1/10/15

Personal Background

¥ Doctoral research on biomechanics of head injury and (graduated 20 years ago) ¥ Ongoing interest in helmets, head injury biomechanics, standards, test methods, injury risk management and safety. Ð Bicycle, motorcycle, water sports, football, combat sports, equestrian, cricket, ice hockey… ¥ In 2005, Dr Michael Turner electrified the First World Congress on Sports Injury Prevention in Oslo with his talk on jockey safety and helmets.

NSW helmet standards in 2007

¥ Jockeys and track work riders in NSW were required to wear helmets meeting one of the following standards: Ð AS/NZS 3838:2003 Helmets for -riding and horse related activities Ð ASTM F1163-01 Standard Specification for Headgear Used in Horse Sports and Horseback Riding Ð British Standard (BS) EN 1384/1996 (and onwards) Specification for helmets for equestrian activities

6th ICHSWJ Hong Kong 2015 2 Dr. A.S.McIntosh 1/10/15

Performance requirements - 2007

¥ In the Australian Standard, the peak acceleration measured at the headform centre of mass shall not exceed 300 gravities (g). AS/NZS 3838 includes two impact test configurations: Ð 1.5 metre drop on to the flat anvil Ð 1.3 metre drop on to the “V” anvil Ð Helmets are conditioned (wet, cold etc) ¥ The ASTM F1163 and EN 1384 helmets offer similar levels of protection. ASTM has a 300 g requirement for a 1.8 metre drop on to the flat anvil, and a 1.3 metre drop on to the hazard anvil. ¥ EN 1384 specified a 250 g requirement for a 1.5 metre free fall drop on to the flat anvil only.

Alternative Standard in 2007: EN High Impact Performance

¥ In the European High Performance standard, helmet samples are exposed to 50ûC, -20ûC, UV radiation and water conditioning prior to testing. The Standard includes the following tests for impact energy attenuation and loading: Ð 2 metre drops on to the hazard and hemispherical anvils: 250 g max. peak headform acceleration, >150 g for max. 5 ms. Ð 3 metre drop on to the flat anvil: 250 g max. peak headform acceleration, >150 g for max. 5 ms. Ð 1 metre drop on to the flat anvil: 80 g max. peak headform acceleration. Ð Resistance to penetration: 0.5 metre striker drop onto helmet, striker shall not leave an indentation on the test block. Ð Lateral crush: 180J lateral impact (7.5kg @ 2.45 metres), headform load shall not exceed 10kN. ¥ No helmet manufactured to this standard. ¥ Mutually exclusive performance requirements. ¥ Little consideration for test laboratory capabilities

6th ICHSWJ Hong Kong 2015 3 Dr. A.S.McIntosh 1/10/15

ARB HS 2012 Ð Stage 1

¥ Review of helmet standards, performance criteria, test methods, injury risks Ð In 2007, the benchmark at the commencement of the study was EN 14572:2005 High Performance Helmets for Equestrian Activities. Ð The initial question was within the constraints of current jockey helmet mass, bulk and thickness, is it possible to construct a helmet that will meet the specifications of EN 14572:2005?

Methods

¥ Guided free-fall impact tests were conducted using a rigid headform ¥ Drop heights were from 1 to 2.5 m ¥ Flat, hemispherical and V-anvils were used ¥ The maximum headform acceleration was the main output of interest.

6th ICHSWJ Hong Kong 2015 4 Dr. A.S.McIntosh 1/10/15

drop carriage

pin release mechanism

twin guide wires

drop arm 3m headform

rails

sample

steel base plate

Selection of helmets assessed

Helmet Shell Liner Price $Aus New Derby Jockey Thermoplastic EPS $135

GPA Jock Up-3 Polymer resin EPS $380

Champion Ventair Glass-fibre Reinforced EPS $250-$280 Deluxe Polymer (GRP) LAS Country HD ABS EPS $180-$270

GPA Jock Up-1 Fibreglass weave EPS $850-$900

Aussie 21 Thermoplastic alloy EPS $130

Japanese Carbon-fibre weave EVA/ rubber foam -----

All, except Japanese helmet, meet standards

6th ICHSWJ Hong Kong 2015 5 Dr. A.S.McIntosh 1/10/15

2007-2008 Results

Helmet tests on the flat anvil

500

400

300

200 Peak acceleration (G) acceleration Peak

100

0 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 Drop height (m)

CVA Deluxe LAS Country GPA Jockup 1 Aussie 21 Japanese New Derby Jockey GPA Jockup 3

2007-2008 Results

Helmet tests on the hemispherical and V anvils

500

400

300

200 Peak acceleration (G) acceleration Peak

100

0 Hemispherical 1.5m Hemispherical 2m V-anvil 1.5m V-anvil 2m Drop configuration

CVA Deluxe LAS Country GPA Jockup 1 Aussie 21 Japanese New Derby Jockey GPA Jockup 3

6th ICHSWJ Hong Kong 2015 6 Dr. A.S.McIntosh 1/10/15

Next Phases

¥ Material Testing ¥ Fabrication of helmet prototypes and testing ¥ Numerical modelling of helmet prototypes and assessment

What did we learn?

¥ Material Testing ¥ Prototypes Ð 30+ mm thick liners 30mm Composite Liner Samples

400 improved and extended 350 overall performance. 300

250 Ð 30+ mm thick liners 200 increased repeatability 150 Peak acceleration (G) Peak acceleration 100 Ð Not possible to meet the 50

0 3.0 m, 250 g, EN test PU90 PU90 PU90 PU170 PU170 PU170 EPP90 EPP90 EPP90 ALH ALH PU48 ALH EPS35 PU48 EPP46 EPS35 PU48 EPP46 EPS35 PU48 EPP46 EPS35 EPP46 Material 1.5 m 2.0 m 2.5 m ! Ð Increases in thickness and material selection increased helmet mass Example of composite material 30mm thickness liner samples tested at 1.5, 2.0 & 2.5 m

6th ICHSWJ Hong Kong 2015 7 Dr. A.S.McIntosh 1/10/15

Numerical modelling

¥ The parametric study confirmed that it was possible to design a helmet that would would come close to meeting the high energy impact requirements of standard EN14572:2005 in the 3.0 m drop-height. ¥ The helmet dimensions would be in the range 35-40 mm thick and 550 grams. ¥ However, meeting the low severity requirement of this standard was considered very difficult with this design.

ARB HS 2012 Ð Stage 2

¥ In the drafting of ARB HS 2012, consideration was given to the ARB's injury risk management objectives and the capacity of helmets to fulfil a wide range of objectives. ¥ ARB HS 2012 extends the performance of helmets so that they offer greater protection to the head in more severe impacts than helmets previously mandated for activities. ¥ Since 2012, the ARB has worked with helmet suppliers to identify and assist those willing to meet the challenge of making the world's best jockey helmet.

6th ICHSWJ Hong Kong 2015 8 Dr. A.S.McIntosh 1/10/15

Elements of ARB HS 2012 (revision currently under consideration, enforced by withdrawal of EN 1384)

Helmets shall (A) Conform to one of (B) Additional tests these standards: a) High Energy Impact Test: (1) a) AS/NZS 3838 2006; 2500 mm flat anvil and (2) 2000 b) United States (US) ASTM F11 mm Hazard V-anvil the headform 63-01; acceleration shall not exceed 250g peak c) PAS 015:2011; n b) Load Distribution. When tested d) United States (US) ASTM F11 in accordance to AS/NZS 2512.9 63-04a (reapproved 2011) with a drop height of 1 m, the e) VG 01.040, Recommendation for localised load shall not exceed Use, 12/12/2014 250 N. The anvil shall not make contact with the surface of the headform c) Dynamic Strength of the Retention System. With a drop height of 0.25 m, the dynamic displacement shall not exceed 30 mm.

Head injury dose response

Note: In an equivalent energy impact the headform acceleraon will be greater with a rigid headform, as used in a helmet test, compared to a human head. Therefore, a measured headform acceleraon of 250 g in a helmet tests is more similar to a a human Head experiencing a 220-230 g impact, approximately.

6th ICHSWJ Hong Kong 2015 9 ARB!HS!2012! Reference!Material! Dr. A.S.McIntosh Draft!v1!18!September!2015! 1/10/15 COMPARISON&OF&A&‘GENERIC’&HS2012&HELMET&WITH&THE&HISTORICAL&HELMET&SAMPLE&

Test!data!from!the!Historical!Helmet!Sample!for!2.5!m!impacts!against!a!flat!anvil! and!2.0!m!impacts!against!a!“V”!Hazard!anvil!can!be!compared!with!the!pass! criterion!for!HS2012,!i.e.!250!g.!!!Twentymfive!(25)!tests!from!2.5!m!onto!a!flat! anvil!and!17!tests!from!2.0!m!onto!the!hazard!anvil!were!included.!!Including!14! tests!from!1.5!m!onto!a!flat!anvil,!there!was!a!total!of!56!relevant!helmet!impact! ARBtests!in!the!Historical!Helmet!Sample.!! HS 2012 Ð For!example,!the!mean!peak!acceleration!What is the for!2.5!m!tests!onto!the!flat!anvil!is!360!g,!which!is!the!average!of!25!tests.!!The! potentialrange!from!one!standard!deviation!below!the!mean!to!one!standard!deviation! improvement? above!the!mean!for!the!2.5!m!drop!tests!is!265!g!to!455!g.!

Table$1:$$Historical$Helmet$Sample$performance$in$drop$tests.$$Numbers$in$cells$ are$derived$from$the$peak$headform$acceleration$(g).$$For$example,$the$mean$ peak$acceleration$for$2.5$m$tests$onto$the$flat$anvil$is$360$g,$which$is$the$average$ of$25$tests.$$

! Peak!headform!acceleration!(g).! Test! 2.0!m!V! 2.5!m!Flat! 1.5!m!Flat! Configuration! Hazard!

Number!of!tests! 25! 14! 17! Average! 360! 189! 280! SD! 95! 42! 96! MeanmSD! 265! 147! 184! Mean+SD! 455! 231! 376!

!

Figure!1!presents!the!250!g!HS2012!pass!criterion!against!a!graph!of!head!injury! likelihood!versus!maximum!resultant!head!acceleration!(g).!!Maximum!resultant! head!acceleration!is!equivalent!to!peak!head!acceleration.!!The!data!were!derived! from!tests!on!post!mortem!human!test!objects,!therefore,!they!do!not!equate! perfectly!to!results!from!tests!undertaken!with!a!rigid!headform,!such!as!those! on!the!helmets.!!Typically,!the!peak!head!acceleration!in!an!equivalent!test!with!a! more!compliant!humanmlike!head!will!be!less!than!with!a!rigid!headform.!!!The! graph!of!head!injury!likelihood!is!also!referred!to!as!head!injury!tolerance! curves.!

Page 5 of 23!

The mean peak headform acceleraon for the Historical Helmet Sample is 360 g, which is associated with an approximate 81 % likelihood of skull fracture or AIS severity 3 and 4 head injury (i.e. serious and severe); note this is the average of the best esmate for skull fracture of 75% and the best esmate for serious and severe head injury of 86%.

6th ICHSWJ Hong Kong 2015 10 Dr. A.S.McIntosh 1/10/15

¥ Therefore, in the context of 2.5 m flat anvil impact tests, the pass criterion for HS2012 of 250 g equates to (i) an absolute reduction of 28% in the likelihood of skull fracture and serious and severe head injury and (ii) a relative reduction of 35% in the likelihood of skull fracture and serious and severe head injury. ¥ In terms of Numbers Needed to Treat (NNT), the 28% Absolute Risk Reduction equates to an NNT of 3.6. Therefore, in an equivalent head impact, for every four jockeys who are involved in an impact, the NNT suggests that one additional skull fracture or serious/severe head injury will be prevented. Ð Qualifications ¥ This assumes that the jockeys and others will be exposed to the same impacts as tested in ARB HS 2012 ¥ As incidence and exposure data become available, NNT will be revised.

Comparison of Aussie Rider Safety Pty Ltd New Derby (ARB #2) with ARB HS2012 and historical helmet sample. New Derby (ARB #2) test data provided by Aussie Rider Safety.

6th ICHSWJ Hong Kong 2015 11 Dr. A.S.McIntosh 1/10/15

2.5 m flat anvil impact tests

2.0 m V hazard anvil tests

6th ICHSWJ Hong Kong 2015 12 Dr. A.S.McIntosh 1/10/15

1.5 m flat anvil impact tests

6th ICHSWJ Hong Kong 2015 13 Dr. A.S.McIntosh 1/10/15

Other assessments

¥ Jockeys, trainee jockeys and track riders were invited to assess the new helmets. ¥ Generally positive responses ¥ Mass, feel of helmet sitting high on the head and concerns about injury hazards were raised

6th ICHSWJ Hong Kong 2015 14 Dr. A.S.McIntosh 1/10/15

Next steps

¥ Supply to the market ¥ Prospective study of helmet performance Ð Epidemiology Ð Incident investigation Ð Usability ¥ Program of ARB HS 2012 revisions Ð Oblique impacts Ð Improve low severity impact performance Ð Response to changes in national standards

General Issues

¥ Quality control and batch testing Ð Ongoing batch testing of helmets critical Ð Certification by relevant certification body ¥ Better to have common technical specifications, relevant to local conditions, across national boundaries Ð However, consensus processes can be undermined and/or poor consensus outcome Ð Running rail, vests and other equipment and infrastructure are areas where greater commonality would be beneficial

6th ICHSWJ Hong Kong 2015 15 Dr. A.S.McIntosh 1/10/15

Acknowledgements

¥ The research on jockey helmets was initiated by Racing NSW in 2007. The project was largely funded by a grant from the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation (RIRDC) and undertaken at the University of New South Wales (UNSW) by the author, then employed at UNSW. Ð Keith Bulloch at Racing NSW ¥ In 2010, the Australian Racing Board (ARB), now Racing Australia, took over from Racing NSW and saw the project to a successful conclusion with the assistance of the author. Ð Leadership of Andrew Harding and Peter McGauran ¥ Research staff at UNSW (2007-2011) ¥ Australian jockeys, riders, apprentices and representatives ¥ Helmet suppliers

Questions

¥ Andrew McIntosh Ð [email protected] Ð Sydney, Australia

6th ICHSWJ Hong Kong 2015 16