Int J Advanced Design and Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 14/ No.

1/ March – 2021 83

Design and Analysis of Bicycle

Helmet Made of PETg and ABS
with Honeycomb Structure
Against External Impacts using
Abaqus Software
Sajjad Pakzad1*, Ahad Shah Hosseini2
Faculty of Design, Tabriz Islamic Art University, Iran
E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]
*Corresponding author

Maryam Dehghani3, Amirbahador Khalkhali4

M.Sc. Student, Faculty of Design, Tabriz Islamic Art University, Iran
E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]

Received: 3 April 2020, Revised: 9 August 2020, Accepted: 2 September 2020

Abstract: The bicycle helmet has a significant role in reducing and preventing
impact because of reducing the deceleration of the skull, spreading the area over
which the forces of the impact reach them and preventing direct contact between the
skull and the impacting object. Honeycomb structure, due to its elastic properties,
extends the energy absorption time of the whole structure and also increases the
ability of the whole structure to absorb energy. Therefore, it can be used in the liner
designing of a helmet to reduce velocity, energy, and acceleration in impacts. In this
paper, intending to identify the minimum stress transmitted to the helmet during an
impact, we used Rhino software to model a helmet with honeycomb liner and outer
shell and then analyzed it in Abaqus software. Due to the fact that the size of various
parts of the head is different in people, so for more comfort and safety, the use of
customized-helmet is emphasized. To design and make a customized-helmet, the
materials used in designing the helmet are ABS and PETg filaments, which can be
used in 3D printing. These two materials have been analyzed with four compositions
for the liner and the shell of the helmet. The results show that the best combination
of the helmet with Minimum stress transmission and appropriate plastic strain due
to impact is the helmet case with honeycomb liner of PETg and a shell made of ABS.

Keywords: Abaqus, Honeycomb, Bicycle Helmet, Stress Analysis

Reference: Sajjad Pakzad, Ahad Shahoseini, Maryam Dehghani, and Amirbahadur

Khalkhali, “Design and Analysis of Bicycle Helmet Made of PETg and ABS with
Honeycomb Structure Against External Impacts using Abaqus Softwareˮ , Int J of
Advanced Design and Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 14/No. 1, 2021, pp. 83–90.
DOI: 10.30495/admt.2021.1896746.1185

Biographical notes: Sajjad Pakzad is currently an assistant professor in the Faculty

of Design in Tabriz Islamic Art University, Tabriz, Iran. His research interests
include Industrial Design, Parallel Mechanism and Robotics. Ahad Shahhoseini is
currently an assistant professor in the Faculty of Design in Tabriz Islamic Art
University, Tabriz, Iran. His research interests include Industrial Design, Eco-
Design and Design studies. Maryam Dehghani and Amirbahadur Khalkhali are
currently MSc students at the Industrial Design at the Faculty of Design in the Tabriz
Islamic Art University, Tabriz, Iran.

Research paper © 2021 IAU, Majlesi Branch

84 Int J Advanced Design and Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 14/ No. 1/ March – 2021

1 INTRODUCTION the area over which the forces of the impact reach the
skull to prevent forces being concentrated on small areas
Bicycle-related head in the united states(us) resulted in of the skull. 3) preventing direct contact between the
an estimated 81000 emergency room visits in 2011. and skull and the impacting object [6].
77% of these patients were diagnosed with Traumatic
Brain Injury (TBI). Among children and teenagers,
bicycling results in more cases of TBI than any other
sport or recreational activity. the number of bicycle-
related TBIs have increased steadily over the past fifteen
years, despite increased rates of helmet use among
cyclists [1]. Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) is one of the
biggest causes of death in adults under the age of 45 and
survivors of such injuries can suffer long term
neurological disability which has significant public
health and societal implications [2]. Among this
situation, helmets are the best strategy to protect your
head from Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) [3].
Based on 3D anthropometric data, 3D heads cans were
collected with a Philips-scanner at a low dosage, it is
possible to create accurate 3D models of the human
heads and in an experiment aimed at evaluating helmets
designed in the traditional and new method, the
researcher understands that the redesigning helmet shell
with the new method is smaller in height than the
original shell. In the traditional method, without the Fig. 1 Comparison of the brain against the three types of
reference of a 3D head model, it is hard for the designer impacts (vertical columns) while the target has a helmet (first
to accurately control the protection distance, and thus the row), no helmet (second row), a medical image of the injury
area [5].
designer is inclined to design a conservative space
between the shell and the head. This may explain why
In this paper, intending to identify the minimum stress
the original shell has such an excessive height. The
transmitted to the helmet during an impact, the model of
redesigning helmet weighs 12.8% less than the original.
helmet was modeled with honeycomb liner and outer
The centroid of the redesigned helmet shell is 10.9mm
shell and then analyzed. The materials used in designing
lower than the original one (z-axis direction), and the
the helmet are ABS and PETg filaments, which can be
moments of inertia of the helmet shell are also obviously
used in 3D printing. These two materials have been
decreased. These results imply that stability is also
analyzed with four compositions for the liner and the
improved [4].
shell of the helmet.
Figure 1 presents the cross-section view of the brain
strain for three impact cases. The first row is about head
injuries for helmeted impacts. The second row shows the
unhelmeted impact and the third row is medical imaging 2 STANDARD OF HELMETS
in medical images, the circle indicates the injury. The
red areas indicate high strain levels in a first and second Standards have evolved and changed over time
row. In all three cases, the area with the highest strain reflecting the state of knowledge of real crashes and how
was in the same region for both the helmeted and helmets have failed to provide protection. Given that
unhelmeted impacts, but strain levels were reduced in most of the key requirements in standards are specified
helmeted impacts [5]. Put simply, bicycle helmets (and in terms of performance in tests, they do not restrict the
most other sorts of helmets) aim to reduce the risk of development and use of new materials nor the skills of
serious injury due to impacts to the head. Serious head the designer [6].
injuries can take two forms: skull injuries and brain To be sold in the United States, bicycle helmets must
injuries. While simple fractures to the skull can heal, comply with the CPSC's Safety Standard for Bicycle
brain injuries, unlike those to other body regions do not Helmets [7], [2].
and can lead to long-term consequences. Bicycle This bicycle helmet standard was produced by the
helmets perform three functions: 1) reducing the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). The
deceleration of the skull and hence the brain by standard was developed in conjunction with ASTM and
managing the impact. This is achieved by crushing the the test procedures are largely similar to the F1447
soft material incorporated into the helmet. 2) spreading standard [2].

© 2021 IAU, Majlesi Branch

Int J Advanced Design and Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 14/ No. 1/ March – 2021 85

It has to be remembered that before the publication of helmet safety standards. Generally, these tests involve a
the CPSC regulation in the USA, none of the standards series of controlled impacts positioning the helmet on a
was mandatory and it is the main difference between test head form. The helmeted head form is then dropped
CPSC and ASTM, because ASTM is a voluntary bicycle in guided falls onto specified test anvils. The impact site
helmet standard [6]. So in this paper, we also used the and the impact of energy must meet certain requirements
CPSC standard to evaluate the helmet performance for the tests to be valid. This helmeted head form model
against the impacts. To confirm helmet protection consists of a head form and helmet models [8]. “Table
capability, impact tests should be performed based on 1ˮ summarizes the types of CPSC standard tests.

Table 1 Types of CPSC standard tests [9]

Tests The purpose of the test How to do the test

The procedure specifies a dynamic
impact load of a 4-kg (8.8-lb) weight
The standard specifies a test procedure and dropped from a height of 0.6 m (2 ft)
Positional Stability requirement for the retention system’s effectiveness to impact a steel stop anvil. This load
(Roll Off) in preventing a helmet from ‘‘rolling off’’ a head. is applied to the edge of a helmet that
is placed on a headform on a support
stand. The helmet fails if it comes off
the headform during the test
The test requires the chin strap to
remain intact and not to elongate
more than 30 mm (1.2 in) when
The standard requires that helmets be able to meet
subjected to a ‘‘shock load’’ of a 4-
a test of the dynamic strength of the retention
kg (8.8-lb) weight falling a distance
system. This test ensures that the chin strap is
Retention System of 0.6 m (2 ft) onto a steel stop anvil.
strong enough to prevent breakage or excessive
This test is performed on one helmet
elongation of the strap that could allow a helmet to
under ambient conditions and on
come off during an accident
three other helmets after each is
subjected to one of the different hot,
cold, and wet environments
To ensure that helmets will adequately protect the
head in a collision. This test involves securing the
Under the standard, the helmet is
helmet on a headform and dropping the helmet.
Impact Attenuation tested with three types of anvils (flat,
The helmet must provide protection at all points
hemispherical, and curbstone),
above a line on the helmet that has a specified
relation to the headform.

In this paper, the CPSC standard impact test was used to helmet is custom-designing by using the 3D printing
analyze the stress transmitted to the helmet. In assessing method, since the customized design of safety helmets
helmets under this standard, helmets on a head form are offers improved wearing comfort and thus better
evaluated in an impact test. The total weight of the set protection for the wearers and it can significantly reduce
that drops should be from 3.9 to 5 kg [9]. weight and increase the stability of the helmet.
3.2. Helmet Liner
Impact forces cause both linear and rotational head
3 THE COMPONENTS OF THE HELMET AND ITS acceleration. The crushing of the helmet liner prevents
FEATURE or reduces brain injuries by reducing the peak impact
force FN to less than 10 kN, thereby reducing the peak
3.1. Shell head accelerations [10]. Finite-Element Analysis (FEA)
One of the main components in the helmets is the outer was used to consider the improvement of bicycle helmet
shell that protects the head against impact and the performance which shows that thicker foam liners of
hanging system of the helmet ensures us about its proper lower compressive yield stress can protect the head
installation and comfortability in use. significant against a linear acceleration in 150 J impacts.
improvement of the fitting comfort in a helmet is also Using a two-foam helmet with a single-density liner has
related to its low shell weight, lower inertia moment, a better performance against the impact than a two-foam
lower centroid position and other external shell features with dual-density liner and could cope with higher
[4]. One of the best choices for making a comfortable energy impact. However, these limited simulations

© 2021 IAU, Majlesi Branch

86 Int J Advanced Design and Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 14/ No. 1/ March – 2021

suggest that a dual-density liner is unlikely to have 4 IMPACT TEST OF CPSC STANDARD
significant advantages over a single-density liner and we
can ignore it [10]. 4.1. Selecting of Point for Impact Test
3.3. Honeycomb Structures In cyclist crashes influence of impact location and
Honeycomb structures are widely used in the velocity are the two important factors that are effective
automotive, aerospace and marine industries [11]. This in risks of head injury. Six locations dispersed around
structure processes a superior energy absorption the helmet were selected to assess helmet performance
performance compared to the solid structures with the over a range of impact scenarios. The positions are 1 mm
same consistent materials under the same mass level. apart. Locations were set > 120 mm apart, which the
To create specific properties in any honeycomb CPSC suggests that it is the sufficient distance to prevent
structure, the desired property can be obtained by overlap of damage profiles from previous tests [14]. In
changing the hexagonal geometric parameters or other the normal impact test (linear acceleration), the helmet
properties. For example, honeycomb construction with mass is 5 kg which is attached to the holder of the impact
less elasticity can reduce acceleration compared to other test device at an angle of 45 degrees to apply the impact
structures. Hard materials used in this structure can in front of the helmet [1]. Therefore, in this article, which
increase acceleration and greater resistance to force. But is based on the CPSC standard, the impact will hit the
in general, the choice of materials with high flexibility is front of the helmet and the results will be recorded.
preferable. At lower input energy levels, a flexible (“Fig. 2ˮ )
structure, lower material modulus and lower wall
thickness are required, and when the energy input is
high, it requires greater depth to avoid bottom out [12].
The example of a helmet made by this method can be
named as Wavecel helmet. This helmet is consisted of a
thick aluminum honeycomb liner that was elastically
suspended between the outer shell and inner liner. This
unique cell structure of this particular honeycomb
allowed forming the liner into a spherical shape inside
the helmet shell while retaining a regular cell geometry.
For mitigation of liner acceleration, this honeycomb is
served as a non-elastic crumple zone to absorb the
normal component of the impact force that was directed
perpendicular to the outer helmet shell. To reduce the
risk of TBI among helmeted bicyclists, this novel
bicycle helmet was developed with Angular Impact
Mitigation (AIM) system capable of reducing both linear
and angular head acceleration and improving brain
injury criteria [1], [13]. The average impact velocity of
the honeycomb structure helmet was comparable to
other standard helmets. The non-elastic crumple zone of Fig. 2 Selected point for impact test [14].
honeycomb structure helmets yielded a 24% lower
rebound velocity and a 43% reduction in rebound energy 4.2. Selecting of Anvil Type for Impact Test
compared to standard helmets. The maximum linear In the CPSC standard, the helmet is tested with three
acceleration of the head form during impact was 14% types of anvils (flat, hemispherical, and curbstone).
lower with AIM helmets than with standard ones. The Impacts are specified on a flat anvil from a height of 2
corresponding HIC values were 15% lower and the risk meters and on hemispherical and curbstone anvils from
of concussion and DIA decreased by 27% and 44% a height of 1.2-meter. The helmet dropped on to a flat
respectively. These helmets also have a maximal liner anvil at 6.2 m/s or a hemispherical or curbstone anvil at
compression of 67% while the maximum compression 4.8 m/s [15-18]. Among all types of anvils, depending
of the EPS liner in standard helmets was 31% [1]. Due on results obtained by researchers from comparing head
to the importance of helmet weight loss in its comfort acceleration under impacts against flat and curbstone
and stability as well as the effect of honeycomb structure anvil, we noticed that the linear acceleration and head
on improving the performance of the helmet by the injury for the helmeted head impacting in flat anvil is
impact, in this article, we also used honeycomb structure higher than the curbstone one. In the impact test, the
to design the liner of the helmet that is covered by a thin energy-absorbing by the helmet against flat anvil is
outer shell which protects the head from direct impact or lower than the curbstone one [19]. In other researches,
contact with outside factors. the researcher often used only the flat anvil, [7-8], [20]

© 2021 IAU, Majlesi Branch

Int J Advanced Design and Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 14/ No. 1/ March – 2021 87

since flat impact surfaces are most common in field perform with “Table 2ˮ specifications. This has helped
impacts [21]. Therefore, due to the higher linear us to identify the best way to use this material to design
acceleration and head injury in impact test against flat a cycling helmet.
anvils than curbstone ones, and considering its
importance in other researches, in this paper we have just Table 2 ABS and PETg Material Specifications
studied the results of honeycomb helmet impact against Material ABS PETg
the flat anvil. Density(g/cm3) 1.12 1.25
Young's modulus(GPa) 2.1 1.4
4.3. Finite Element Simulation using Abaqus
Poisson's ratio 0.35 0.33
Software Yield stress(MPA) 20 15
Rapid advances in computer technology have enabled
applied mathematicians, engineers, and scientists to Table 3 The helmet material components of defining helmet
make significant progress in solving previously D C B A
intractable problems. The FE method contributes greatly Honeycomb
to helmet test modeling. As such, computer simulation PETg ABS PETg ABS
liner
is an economical and time-efficient alternative to PETg ABS ABS PETg Outer shell
physical testing. The main advantage of the numerical
test model over the physical test model is that it enables For this experiment, we considered four components for
researchers to easily investigate the eff ect of material the helmet cases (“Table 3ˮ ), which include the
and geometrical factors of the helmet on head injuries. honeycomb and outer shell material. This helmet was
FE simulations are also indispensable to evaluate Head tested with falling at a speed of 6.2 m / s from two
Injury Criteria (HIC) [8]. meters’ height, taking into account the gravity of the
According to this, Kholoosia and Galehdari [22] used ground and the impact on the front side of helmets are
honeycomb structure to design 4mm thick of defined. Customized helmets parts were modeled using
polypropylene helmets which were covered by an ABS Rhino software (“Fig. 3ˮ ), the helmet included 1.8mm
plastic layer with an inner radius of 9 cm and an external liner thickness and 2mm outer shell thickness. The stress
radius of 13 cm. The structure was modeled through analysis during the impact was performed using
Abaqus software and according to the Japanese standard ABAQUS software.
JIS T8133, flat and hemispherical anvils were
considered to simulate head impact by initial velocities
of 5.8 m/s and 4.8 m/s, respectively. Moreover, the
oblique impact by the angle of 60 degrees was studied.
The honeycomb structure of the helmet, based on both
the computer simulation and the physical impact test, in
addition to meeting the required standard, affects the
performance of the helmets and improves it. The
computer simulation tests are an economical and time-
efficient alternative while also adapting the results of the
experimental and physical tests. So in this paper, we
used the computer simulation and testing method with
Abaqus software to obtain the results that we need.

5 MATERIAL USED

Among the materials available for use in the helmet, the

researchers found that nylon material responds better to
impact when integrated with ABS plastic bumpers [23].
Divakar et al [24] also conclude that by analyzing ABS
plastic with a double layer of glass fiber, the double layer
of glass fiber increases the ABS resistance. This paper
aims to identify the minimum stresses to be applied to
the helmet during the collision, to identify the best
material for cycling helmet layers comprising two main
body parts with honeycomb structure and integrated
shell between the 3D printer filters that ABS and PETg Fig. 3 Helmet designed in Rhino software.

© 2021 IAU, Majlesi Branch

88 Int J Advanced Design and Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 14/ No. 1/ March – 2021

6 RESULTS OF HONEYCOMB HELMET IMPACT

TESTING BASED ON CPSC standard

The test was performed according to the fall conditions

for the amount of stress entering the cap, which is shown
in “Fig. 4ˮ and “Table 4ˮ .

Table 4 The maximum stress transmitted to helmet liner in

different cases
Maximum stress cases
19.9055 A (ABS+PETg)
14.9887 B (PETg+ABS)
20.0 C (ABS+ABS)
14.9721 D (PETg+PETg)

CASE C

CASE A

CASE D

Fig. 4 The stress applied to Inside the helmet in case: A,

B, C, and D.

As shown in “Table 4ˮ , the maximum stress applied to

the helmet is presented in quadruple cases. The
combination of PETg as the inner layer and PETg as the
outer shell leads to the least amount of stress applied to
the helmet. The PETg composition as the inner layer and
ABS as the outer shell, ABS as the inner layer and PETg
as the outer shell, and finally ABS as the inner layer and
ABS as the outer shell have a higher amount of stress to
the liner helmet, respectively. The results of equivalent
plastic strain (PEEQ) analysis performed by using
abaqus software are also presented in “Fig. 5ˮ .
CASE B

© 2021 IAU, Majlesi Branch

Int J Advanced Design and Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 14/ No. 1/ March – 2021 89

CASE A CASE D

Fig. 5 For CASE A (ABS for honeycomb and PETg for

the outer layer), for CASE B (PETg for honeycomb and ABS
for the outer layer), for CASE C (ABS for honeycomb and
ABS for the outer layer), for CASE D (PETg for honeycomb
and PETg for the outer layer).

Based on the above results, it is found that the plasticity

behavior that is identical in different cases has no
significant difference with each other. Since the amount
of stress in the helmet liner is very close in D and B cases
and there is no significant difference in their plasticity
strain, and due to the properties of ABS filament which
has a better scratch and moisture resistance among the
other filaments, it can be used as an outer shell. So we
can recommend case B as the best combination of the
helmet.
CASE B

7 CONCLUSION

Because of the importance of helmet and its effective

role in preventing brain injury and the advantage of
customizing this type of helmet with 3D printing, this
article aims to identify the highest impact resistance to
identify the best materials for cycling helmet layers
(Including two main body parts with honeycomb
structure and integrated shell) between conventional 3D
printer filters, which are ABS and PETg, to offer the best
use of these materials in cycling helmets. In this regard,
two-part helmet modeling was performed using Rhino
software and the CPSC standard impact test was
performed with a flat anvil on the front of the helmet
with no angel. According to this issue that the optimum
case occurs when the less stress is transmitted to the
helmet liner as well as the less plasticity strain on the
CASE C helmet.

© 2021 IAU, Majlesi Branch

90 Int J Advanced Design and Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 14/ No. 1/ March – 2021

So, the maximum stress transmitted to the helmet during Chiral Honeycomb Structures, Extreme Mechanics
impact and plasticity strain equivalent (PEEQ) were Letters, Vol. 32, 2019.
obtained in Abaqus software using the finite element [12] Caccese, V., Ferguson, J. R., and Edgecomb, M. A.,
Optimal Design of Honeycomb Material Used to
method. Based on the studies and experiments and the Mitigate the Head Impact, Composite Structures, Vol.
results of comparing the reaction of the materials 100, 2013, pp. 404–412.
selected for use in the two parts of the helmet, the best [13] Bliven, E., Rouhier, A., Tsai, S., Willinger, R., Bourdet,
case for use in the manufacture of a cycling helmet with N., Deck, C, M., Madey, S. M., and Bottlang, M.,
the least amount of elasticity and stress applied to the Evaluation of a Novel Bicycle Helmet Concept in
liner due to impact is case B which is included of a PETg Oblique Impact Testing, Accident Analysis and
Prevention, Vol. 124, 2019, pp. 58–65.
liner and an ABS outer shell.
[14] Bland, M. L., McNally, C., Zuby, D. S., Mueller, B. C.,
and Rowson, S., Development of the STAR Evaluation
System for Assessing Bicycle Helmet Protective
REFERENCES Performance, Annals of Biomedical Engineering, Vol.
48, No. 1,2020, pp. 47–57.
[1] Hansen, K., Dau, N., Feist, F., Deck, C., Willinger, R., [15] Bourdet. N., Deck, C., Carreira, R. P., Willinger, R.,
Head Impact Conditions in The Case of Cyclist Falls,
Madey, S. M., and Bottlang, M., Angular Impact
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers,
Mitigation System for Bicycle Helmets to Reduce Head
Acceleration and Risk of Traumatic Brain Injury, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers,
Part P: Journal of Sports Engineering and Technology,
Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 59, 2013, pp.
Vol. 226, 2012, pp. 282-289.
109–117.
[2] Connor, T. A., Meng, S., and Zouzias, D., Current [16] Ching, R. P., Thompson, D. C., Thompson, R. S.,
Thomas, D. J., Chilcott, W. C., and Rivara, F. P.,
Standards for Sports and Automotive Helmets: A
Damage to Bicycle Helmets Involved with Crashes,
Review, European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and
Innovation Program, 2016, pp. 1–42. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 29, 1997, pp.
555–562.
[3] Hoye, A., Bicycle Helmets – to Wear or Not to Wear? A
[17] McIntosh, A. S., Dowdell, B., and Svensson, N., Pedal
Meta-Analyses of the Effects of Bicycle Helmets On
Injuries, Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 117, Cycle Helmet Effectiveness: A Field Study of Pedal
Cycle Accidents, Accident Analysis and Prevention,
2018, pp. 85–97.
Vol. 30, 1998, pp. 161–168.
[4] Liu, H., Li, Z., and Zheng, L., Rapid Preliminary Helmet
Shell Design Based On Three-Dimensional [18] Williams, M., The Protective Performance of Bicyclists
'Helmets in Accidents, Accident Analysis and
Anthropometric Head Data, Journal of Engineering
Prevention, Vol. 23, 1991, pp. 119–131.
Design, Vol. 19, No. 1, 2008, pp. 45–54.
[5] Fahlstedt, M., Halldin, P., and Kleiven, S., The [19] Milne, G., Deck, C., Carreira, R. P., Allinne, Q., and
Willinger, R., Development and Validation of a Bicycle
Protective Effect of a Helmet in Three Bicycle Accidents
Helmet: Assessment of Head Injury Risk Under
- A Finite Element Study, Accident Analysis and
Prevention, Vol. 91, 2016, pp. 135–143. Standard Impact Conditions, Computer Methods in
Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering, Vol. 15,
[6] H. Dickinson, H., Towner, J.,Burkes, M., Hayes, M.,
2012, pp. 309–310.
Dowswell, T., and Towner, E., Bicycle Helmets - A
Review of Their Effectiveness: A Critical Review of the [20] Mills, N. J., Gilchrist, A., Oblique Impact Testing of
Bicycle Helmets, International Journal of Impact
Literature, Publication of Department for Transport:
Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 9, 2008, pp. 1075–1086.
London, No. 30, 2020, pp. 96.
[7] Bland, M., McNally, C., and Rowson, S., Differences in [21] DeMarco, A. L., Chimich, D. D., Bonin, S. J., and
Siegmund, G. P., Impact Performance of Certified
Impact Performance of Bicycle Helmets During Oblique
Bicycle Helmets Below, On and Above the Test Line,
Impacts, Journal of Biomechanical Engineering, Vol.
140, No. 9, 2018. Annals of Biomedical Engineering, Vol. 48, No. 1, 2020,
pp. 58–67.
[8] Teng, T. L., Liang, C. C., and Nguyen, V. H.,
[22] Kholoosi, F., Galehdari, S. A., Design and Analysis of a
Development and Validation of the Finite Element
Model of Helmet Impact Test, Proceedings of the Helmet Equipped with Graded Honeycomb Structure
under Impact of Flat and Hemi-Spherical Anvils,
Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part L Journal of
Procedia Engineering, Vol. 173, 2017, pp. 1299–1306.
Materials Design and Applications, Vol. 227, No. 1,
2012, pp. 82–88. [23] Anil Kumar, K., Babu Suresh, Y., Design and Analysis
of Industrial Helmet, International Journal of
[9] 16 CFR Part 1203, Safety Standard for Bicycle Helmets,
Computational Engineering Research, Vol. 3, No. 12,
Consumer Product Safety Commission, Vol. 63, No. 46,
1998, pp. 11711–11747. 2013, pp. 48–58.
[24] Divakar, H., Nagaraja. R., Puttaswamaiah, S. and
[10] Mills, N. J., Gilchrist, A., Bicycle Helmet Design,
Guruprasad, H. L., Mechanical Characterization of
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers,
Part L: Journal of Materials: Design and Applications, Thermoplastic ABS /Glass Fibre Reinforced Polymer
Matrix Composites, International Journal of Engineering
Vol. 220, No. 4, 2006, pp. 167–180.
Research and, Vol. V4, No. 05, 2015.
[11] Qi, D., Lu, Q., He, C., Li, Y., Wu, W., and Xiao, D.,
Impact Energy Absorption of Functionally Graded

© 2021 IAU, Majlesi Branch