Cricket Helmet Shock Absorber and Counterweight System

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing headgear with shock absorbing faceguards is not robust, compact, unobtrusive, or adaptable enough for widespread adoption, and fails to effectively counterbalance frontal loads, leading to helmet tilt and neck strain during impacts.

Innovation Solution

A shock absorber system for headgear that includes a support structure, guide rod, sliding member, and resilient member, which absorbs impact energy by compressing a coil spring or friction spring, and a counterweight system that adjusts to balance the helmet's center of mass, reducing unintended movement and strain on the neck.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If shock absorbing elements are added to the faceguard portion of headgear, then the risk of head and neck injury is reduced, but the device complexity and bulk increase making it less adaptable for large scale adoption

Engineering Contradiction:

Improverisk reductionVSAvoiddevice complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The shock absorbing system is divided into multiple independent shock absorbers, each positioned at specific locations between the faceguard and head-engaging portion. This segmentation allows the complex shock absorption function to be distributed across simpler, modular units that can be independently manufactured and maintained, reducing overall device complexity while maintaining reliability.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The shock absorbers are positioned within the existing structural framework of the headgear, nesting the shock absorption function within the faceguard assembly. This integration allows the shock absorbers to be housed within the existing spatial envelope of the headgear without adding significant external bulk, making the design more adaptable for widespread adoption.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #7Nested doll (Nesting)

2Adaptability or versatility

If attachments are added to the helmet for specific activities, then the functionality is improved, but the center of mass shifts forward causing the helmet to tilt down and requiring neck muscle activation

Engineering Contradiction:

ImprovefunctionalityVSAvoidease of operation

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

A counterweight system is introduced that can be adjusted to compensate for the forward shift in center of mass caused by attachments. The counterweight is positioned to create a balancing moment that offsets the tilt-inducing effect of front-loaded attachments, eliminating the need for continuous neck muscle activation and maintaining ease of operation despite increased versatility.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #8Anti-weight (Counterweight)

Solution Approach 2:

The counterweight system is designed to be adjustable and reconfigurable, allowing users to dynamically modify the balance configuration based on specific activity requirements and attachment loads. This dynamic adjustment capability enables the helmet to maintain optimal balance across different usage scenarios, preserving ease of operation while maximizing adaptability.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

3Ease of operation

If the helmet center of mass is positioned directly over the top of the user's head for optimal balance, then neck strain is minimized, but attachments necessary for specific activities cannot be effectively mounted

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveneck strainVSAvoidattachment capability

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The counterweight system provides a compensating mechanism that allows attachments to be mounted in front-loaded positions without creating net tilt. The counterweight creates an opposing moment that balances the attachment load, enabling both optimal neck strain reduction and effective attachment mounting to coexist.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #8Anti-weight (Counterweight)

Solution Approach 2:

The counterweight system allows different regions of the helmet to have different functional qualities - the front can accommodate activity-specific attachments while the rear contains the counterweight mechanism. This local differentiation enables simultaneous optimization for both attachment capability and balance maintenance.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

The shock absorber system effectively reduces the risk of head and neck injuries by absorbing impact energy and maintaining helmet stability, while the counterweight system ensures the helmet remains balanced, minimizing strain on the user's neck muscles.

Implementation Method 1

a resilient member, which may be a coil spring or friction spring, that absorbs the impact energy of an object striking the faceguard

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectElasticity: Elasticity

Implementation Method 2

The resilient member can be a type or types of springs including, but not limited to, clock springs, leaf springs, a buckling beam, a multiplicity of buckling beams, a circular ring, a multiplicity of circular rings, an ellipse, a multiplicity of ellipses, a torsion bar or a spring absorbing energy by stretching

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectSpring: Spring