Ten years of standard for protectors

Posted on by admin

Table of contents

Ten years of standard for protectors
2snap

clothing

Ten years of standard for protectors

Ten years of standard for protectors
The party fright

For a decade there has been a standard regulating what protectors have to do. Now experts are calling for tough tightening with new limit values ​​and drop tests. MOTORRAD took a look behind the scenes: The subject is hotly debated.

Jorg Lohse

10/11/2007

There will be no champagne, no one will say moody greetings and no one will give a toast before the main course. There will be no main course at all. Who is it for? Ten years of protectors standard ?? Nobody throws a party for that.
Maybe this has a bit to do with the mood that can still be felt when you ask about the origins of this norm. Because the topic was not popular in the early 1990s.
Motorcycle manufacturers were just as critical of the idea of ​​having the so-called “personal protective equipment” (PPE) for motorcyclists standardized as were the national biker organizations in Europe. One sensed a legally anchored compulsory wearing of protective clothing. And there it would be with freedom on two wheels. So they agreed on a gentlemen’s agreement: Only when a manufacturer expressly refers to the protective effect of his motorcycle clothing in the advertising or in his catalog does the product have to be certified accordingly. An official letter from the European Commission confirmed to critics and doubters that, despite the standardization, there would be no obligation to wear.
While the norm opponents could now lean back comfortably, the proponents, who mainly came from Great Britain and the Scandinavian countries, had more or less free rein. As a result of these trench warfare, the European standard for impact protectors, abbreviation EN 1621-1, was finally adopted on November 17, 1997. Today’s viewers and those involved at the time are certain of the result,
was based more on political turmoil than technical practicability. In general, according to critics, the standard lacks medical aspects as well as specifications for the installation or the wearing properties of the protectors. And such things, it is heard everywhere, should be regulated in a standard that deals with PPE for motorcyclists. It is all the more astonishing that the standard passed the first routine check, which generally takes place every five years, without any damage. The fear of rekindling old battles was apparently too great.
Nevertheless, they did not want to wait for the next check, which would have been its turn only this year. When it became clear that the member states would not be calling for a revision of the standards, the competent CEN Committee TC 162, responsible for “protective clothing including hand and arm protection and life jackets”, decided to set up an ad hoc commission to review the To commission EN 1621-1.
One thing is clear: a new version of the joint protector standard will come. It will contain stricter limit values ​​as well as new test methods. Many committee members at the German and European level emphasize to MOTORRAD that today’s discussion cannot be compared with the black and white arguments that were thrown at one another over ten years ago.
In general, the meeting in the committee is “very consensus-oriented” and is “more in dialogue than purely demanding”. For example, accident researchers and manufacturers could agree on a compromise that is medically necessary but actually also meets the ergonomic requirements for motorcycling. The motto: What use is the best protector if it is actually not wearable. Ten years ago, many agree that such a discussion would have been unthinkable. However: the foundations are not shaken. The drop test and the residual force determined from it will continue to be a central component of the standard.
This is where critics hook in: For them, biological principles are still lacking in the standard. It would have to be based on a completely different insight: what can a human bone withstand, when does it break, how does the protection have to be in order to avoid it? In their opinion, the procedure of the drop test should have a lot more practical relevance? For example, by testing the response behavior of protectors even at lower heights.
Instead of a party mood, fixed discussions will continue. And maybe then the corks will pop for the 20th anniversary.

The accident and the consequences – ouch with an end?

How much does a protector actually bring in an accident? MOTORRAD asked accident researcher Dietmar Otte.

Humans have limits that even modern protectors cannot shake. «This is the conclusion of accident expert Dietmar Otte from the Hanover Medical School. In the event of a blunt impact on a standing obstacle, protectors can hardly stand out. But »they can reduce the potential for injury: Complicated fractures become simple fractures, and painful long-term consequences can also be minimized.« Otte on the ideal protector: »The ideal is a composite plate system, in which the force acting at points is distributed over a large area, and a foam pad acts as a shock absorption zone.

Europe and the protection of bikers – norm is good, everything is good?

Shock absorption, protective surface: what the European regulation requires of protectors in motorcycle clothing.

At the regulars’ table, the word “protector” comes up quickly when it comes to protective padding in motorcycle clothing. But be careful: In motorcycle clothing, only that which is certified according to European standard EN 1621 is considered a protector. European standards are decided by the European Committee for Standardization (CEN), this was adopted with Part 1 (abbreviation EN 1621-1) in November 1997 and deals with the “Requirements and test methods for impact protectors”. EN 1621-2 is more recent: in effect since July 2003, the second part describes the requirements and test methods for back protectors. The central element of both parts is the shock absorption test: a five-kilo dropper falls from a meter in free fall onto the protector, and a measuring head underneath registers the residual force. Joint protectors are allowed to let through a maximum of 35 kilo-Newtons (kN) on average. Stricter limits apply to back protectors. Certified according to level 1, the maximum permissible average value from five impacts is 18 kN, for level 2 protectors the limit is nine kN. One problem of the standard: the definition of the protection area. In order to comply with the limit values, manufacturers can label the protectors for small protective surfaces. Especially with back protectors, specimens that fit ninety-one types but have a ridiculously small protective surface keep appearing .

How to check your protector – original or fake?

The CE marking is not always genuine. We show how you can protect yourself against counterfeiting.

The CE mark actually stands for Communaute Europeenne, the French abbreviation for the European Community. But sometimes insiders also speak of “China-proven”? namely when the goods are obviously counterfeit. In motorcycle clothing, fall padding with a CE imprint appears again and again, but it has never undergone a certification process? Only recently happened when testing textile jackets with nano-coating (MOTORRAD 19/2007). At the latest on a drop test stand (and especially in the event of an accident) the foam cushions would fail miserably. But mostly the counterfeiters make decisive mistakes on the product itself by not labeling it according to the requirements of the standard. The regulation is that protectors are not only clearly labeled themselves (see photos). An information brochure is also included, in which the protector manufacturer is listed with full address.

The future in protector construction – a tough compromise?

Stricter limit values, more tests: the new protector standard.

According to the CEN guidelines, standards should be subject to a revision every five years. In the case of EN 1621-1, the first review in 2002 initially saw no need for action. Which, said the chairman of the responsible standards committee Christoph Meyer from the Italian testing institute Ricotest to MOTORRAD, made all the experts frown. So in an urgent ad hoc process, an out-of-rotation revision was decided. It is still unclear what exactly will change and when the new version will take effect. As became known to MOTORRAD, however, at its last meeting in September 2007, the committee agreed on key points that are considered to be fairly certain to be adopted for a new version of the standard. Accordingly, in addition to the previous limit of 35 kN residual force, there will be a second level, which will probably be 20 kN. There will also be a new drop test in which the test specimens are exposed to high humidity for 72 hours. The aim is to integrate the aging resistance of the protectors more strongly into the test procedure. As an option, manufacturers can also have their products tested in hot and cold conditions so that they can be labeled for use in extreme temperatures. “The wheel,” explains a committee member, “will not be reinvented with this standard. The new version will be more practical ?? even if you will continue to live with the legacy of the original version. ??

Buying protectors properly – safely on your bike

Good protectors are only half the battle. They also have to fit well and be used properly in the station wagon.

The paradox reappears again and again in many clothing tests by MOTORRAD: Textile suits or leather combinations are equipped with first-class protectors, but these are so ineptly positioned or used that they will be in a fall
slip or even turn away. Therefore, it should be clarified during a detailed fitting in the shop whether the protectors in the clothing fit well. Our tips for safe shopping:
?? Protectors must not be loosely hung into the inner lining, but must be firmly connected to the outer fabric.
?? It is good if the protectors can be adjusted individually. Velcro surfaces have proven to be particularly effective.
?? The suit cut must be right. When trying on, assume the typical driving position and ?? best with the help of a second person ?? check whether the protectors can be turned away from the joint to be protected.
?? Textile suits are usually cut very wide. Especially if you do without the inner lining in summer, a stable fit of the protectors is hardly possible. It is better to use protector vests (photo), which can be worn close to the body.
When retrofitting protectors, make sure that they can be inserted into the existing pockets without play. In order to protect yourself against the wrong protectors, it is essential to compare the information on the protector with the information brochure supplied by the manufacturer.

Protector technology transparent – The material battle is raging

Some demand compliance, others demand hardness. Which material is best for making protectors??

For decades, polystyrene, mostly known under the trade name Styrofoam, has prevailed in helmets for shock absorption. So why not use the hard foam to build protectors? On the test bench, these protectors show acceptable values, and they are light as a feather. However, they are not really comfortable to wear and have to be replaced after a fall because they are permanently deformed by the application of force. The same also applies to back protectors in which aluminum honeycombs are used for shock absorption. Elastic materials have a clear advantage here, as they return to their original shape after an impact. However, they shouldn’t have the resilience of a rubber ball. Protectors made of viscoelastic soft foam, which function like a crumple zone on the body, are particularly practical. Hard shells have poor shock absorption properties, but can distribute a point acting force over a large area.

Protectors on the test bench – the right cornering technique

It’s not just the absolute value that counts. In the case of the drop test, it should also depend on the way there.

One thing is clear: the value that a protector generates on the drop test stand can only say something about its performance in an accident to a limited extent. Our graphic on the left clearly shows that a wooden board also generates a top value. However, the test bench scenario is far above what humans can actually endure: the kinetic energy in the event of an impact is 50 joules, the joint protector may on average allow a maximum of 35 kN of residual energy (back protectors, depending on level, nine or 18 kN). A human bone, according to the medicine, breaks at six to nine kiloNewtons, but is pliable. This should be taken into account when building protectors. Viewed in this way, a lot can be read from the force curves for the reality of the accident. Especially when you take the time into account. However, this has not yet been done, nor has it been considered for the new version of the standard.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *