der Wanderer Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 You know what, Glen, you may be right... or not. My own guess is you are probably right, but who knows for a fact? Would it not be nice to actually have data to support that type of guess? Maybe a representative aging test would also include a couple of normalized drop tests (don't laugh, those things exist). Link to comment
der Wanderer Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Actually the manufacturers do not "test" the helmet if you send it to them. Helmet testing is destructive. What they do is observe it (they may xray it, or just do a visual examination). All this business about helmets is astoundingly unscientific and engineering light... Link to comment
vizhip Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Actually the manufacturers do not "test" the helmet if you send it to them. Helmet testing is destructive. What they do is observe it (they may xray it, or just do a visual examination). I agree that they do not "TEST" it, but they verify that it is within specs designed for that helmet and certify it back to you... At least the better manufacturers will do this... the others will admit they don't perform the verification/certification... All this business about helmets is astoundingly unscientific and engineering light... I have to disagree there... If you have ever looked into what it takes to design a helmet you would disagree as well... Maybe our current discussion is unscientific and engineering light, but helmets themselves are not... and I think you will notice that some of the folks have posted some sound reasoning that has some scientific basis even if the science behind the post wasn't provided... Regards - -Bob Link to comment
NonComp Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Ultimately, different components of aircraft are dissassembled and inspected on a scheduled basis (number of hours of flying time) in order to verify their structural integrety. Based on the results of those inspections, the maintenance schedule may be amended by the manufacturer, with service bulletins issued to all owners. Maybe the best way to approach this is come up with a non-destructive testing and evaluation process. Perhaps an inspection, fitting test and a tiny core sample from the crush layers? Or a crush layer resistance test (force required to push a needle into the core)? Sounds like the genesis of an idea for a small business... Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.