玻璃钢(SMC)安全帽研制工艺介绍

安全帽作为保护工人头部的重要防护用品,它的质量直接影响着生命的保障系数。随着安全帽一代代的变更,它的安全系数也在不断地提高。常见的有ABS塑料安全帽、玻璃钢安全帽、聚碳酸酯塑料安全帽等几种不同材质的安全帽产品。下面我们简单地了解一下最新研发的＂海棠＂牌玻璃钢（SMC）安全帽。     

饱水煤样巴西劈裂强度和能量特征试验研究

针对赵固二矿二1煤层煤样在自然和饱水状态下进行巴西劈裂试验,分析了饱水对煤体劈裂强度和能量特征的影响。试验结果表明:加载过程采用载荷控制时峰值前拉应力与时间呈良好线性关系,达到峰值后应力瞬间跌落为零,表现出明显脆性破坏特征;采用位移控制时峰值前拉应力与时间呈非线性关系,峰值后出现分次破坏特征,但两种控制方式在试验破坏前没有本质区别;并得出两种状态下煤样抗拉强度和峰值能率存在差异,自然状态下抗拉强度为1.52MPa,峰值能率为881J/m2,但饱水后,煤样抗拉强度平均软化系数为0.65,平均峰值能率降幅为36.0%;两种状态下煤样抗拉强度与峰值能率大致呈线性关系,表明煤样抗拉强度越高,需要更多能量才能使煤样劈裂破坏。     

安全帽（二）

五、安全帽的技术性能技术性能是指安全帽的防护性能,这是判定安全帽产品合格与否的重要指标。安全帽标准ＧＢ２８１１-８９中规定了安全帽产品应达到的基本技术性能要求和特殊技术性能要求。这些性能要求是产品必须达到的指标,无论是生产者、使用者还是营销者都应以此为依据判定安全帽是否可以生产、使用和销售。（一）基本技术性能要求１.冲击吸收性能冲击吸收性能是指安全帽在受到坠落物冲击时对冲击能量的吸收能力。较好的安全帽在冲击吸收过程中能将所承受的冲击能力吸收８０%～９０%,使作用到人体上的冲击力降到最低,以达到最佳的保护…     

安全帽标准的执行与产品管理

安全帽是对人头部受坠落物及其他特定因素引起的伤害起防护作用的防护装备,由帽壳、帽衬、下颏带和附件组成。当作业人员头部受到坠落物的冲击时,利用安全帽帽壳、帽衬在瞬间先将冲击力分解到头盖骨的整个面积上,利用安全帽各部位缓冲结     

金属圆管劈裂变形及吸能安全特性研究

为开发新型轴向劈裂式锚杆吸能构件,试验研究内径为26 mm,壁厚分别为3和4 mm的金属圆管试件劈裂变形及吸能安全特性,采用能量法分析其吸能原理。结果表明,试件劈裂吸能过程分为峰值载荷阶段和恒定载荷阶段,其中,恒定载荷阶段恒定载荷为59.34116.60 k N,其作用下的吸能量为4.9211.47 k J;试件劈裂过程中变形稳定,形成"螺旋"板条,试件主要通过扩径塑性变形、管壁撕裂、板条摩擦耗散能量;试件恒定载荷值及相应吸能量试验结果与理论结果相符。     

千秋煤矿2号煤层冲击倾向性判别指标研究

在对现行冲击倾向性指标分析的基础上,综合考虑煤样变形破坏过程中冲击能量效应和时间效应,提出有效冲击能量速度指数这一新的冲击倾向性判定指标。建立了煤样的单轴压缩峰值前塑性变形消耗能量的计算模型,得出了有效冲击能量速度指数的计算方法和判定准则。通过试验、分析和计算,论证了单轴抗压强度和有效冲击能量速度指数作为煤层冲击倾向性判定指标的可行性和可靠性。研究结果表明:以冲击能量指数、弹性能量指数、动态破坏时间、单轴抗压强度和有效冲击能量速度指数五个指标作为千秋煤矿2号煤层冲击倾向性判别指标,可以增强判定结果的可靠性和准确性。     

关爱生命 请您戴好安全帽

在日常的生活和生产作业活动中,人的头部受到撞击伤害的危险性最大。头部一旦受到冲击伤害,就可能导致脑震荡、颅内出血、颅骨损伤等严重后果,轻则致伤致残,重则危及生命安全。为此,安全帽就成了诸多生产经营单位必备的劳动保护用品。安全帽的防护作用在于,当作业人员头部受到坠落物冲击时,帽壳和帽衬会在瞬间先将冲击力分解到整个头盖骨     

新产品推介

第四代防毒口鼻罩广州市高坚劳保用品有限公司开发出创新型第四代防毒口鼻罩。根据国家标准GB2890-1995的要求,单罐滤毒盒的阻力必须≤80Pa,而高坚第四代防毒口鼻罩滤毒盒在滤毒能力不变的情况下吸气阻力可降到40Pa。它具有重量轻、防毒时间长、吸气阻力小等特点。受到使用企业的普遍好评。新型透气安全帽此安全帽为上海林正安全设备有限公司2004年研发的新产品,它符合国家标准GB2811-89。材质:阻燃ABS材质特点与功能:(1)外观时尚,流线型安全帽外壳设计,使安全帽的佩带更加时尚。(2)新颖的通风透气设计,使作业者即使长时间佩带也不会感…     

个体防护用品知识讲座(十三) 安全帽(一)

一、安全帽的防护作用在生产劳动中 ,意外的坠落物伤及人体的事故时有发生。坠落物对人体的伤害主要是由加速度冲击力引起。这类事故的特点是突发性强 ,不易躲闪 ,同时作用时间短 ,冲击力大 ,尤其是从上而下的坠落物 ,冲击过程只发生在一瞬间。这种事故多发生在建筑、矿山、冶金、采矿、石油勘探、隧道等行业场所。冲击事故一旦发生 ,受伤部位几率最大的首先是头部。头部是人体神经中枢所在 ,其头盖骨最薄处仅２ｍｍ左右。头部一旦受外力冲击 ,就可能引起脑震荡、颅内出血、脑膜挫伤、颅骨损伤等严重伤害 ,从而造成人体机能障碍 ,轻则致残 ,…     

热冲击煤细观损伤与能量响应的相关性研究

为研究热冲击煤细观损伤和能量响应机制的相关性，以平煤十矿24130工作面的煤作为研究对象，借助4K科研相机研究了不同热冲击煤的细观结构特征和热冲击对煤的损伤致裂效应。采用HC-U7非金属超声波探测仪、电热鼓风干燥箱、伺服万能试验机等仪器，开展了不同温度热冲击煤样加载试验，研究了热冲击对煤体单轴抗压强度、弹性模量、泊松比、动态破坏时间、冲击能量指数的影响规律，分析了热冲击煤细观结构、宏观破坏状态、煤物理参数与力学参数及能量指数之间的变化关系，并阐述了热冲击煤受力加载过程中煤能量响应机制。结果表明，煤体细观结构与煤能量响应机制具有较好的正相关性。热冲击煤能量响应特征的差异是由煤初始损伤造成的，煤损伤的存在削弱了煤储存弹性应变能并发生破坏的能力。热冲击温度越高，煤样孔隙越发育，孔隙周围更容易形成高应力区相互叠加，更大程度降低力学性能。损伤发育程度越高，能量积聚和耗散能量越低，峰值前能量积聚和峰值后能量释放越稳定，破坏前能量耗散行为的主导作用越明显。     

Overview of motorcycling in the United States: a national telephone survey

Objectives

Motorcycle registrations have risen in recent years. Although motorcyclist crash fatalities in 2009 were 16% lower than in 2008, they were double the number of deaths in 1997. The present study examined current motorcyclists’ travel patterns and views of motorcycle helmets and other safety topics.

Methods

Motorcycle drivers were interviewed in a national telephone survey conducted in 2009. A weighted sample of 1,606 motorcyclists resulted from adjusting for the oversampling of those younger than 40 and those in the three states without a motorcycle helmet use law (Illinois, Iowa, New Hampshire). All analyses were based on the weighted sample, which was intended to result in a nationally representative sample of motorcyclists.

Results

About one-quarter of respondents said they did not always wear helmets. Of these respondents, 57% said a law requiring helmet use would persuade them to do so, and 27% said nothing would. Ninety-four percent of respondents in states with universal helmet laws said they always ride helmeted, compared with about half of respondents in other states. About half of all respondents favored these laws. About three-quarters said they believe helmets keep riders safer, including two-thirds of respondents who oppose universal laws and almost half of drivers who rarely/never wear helmets. Drivers ages 18–29 and drivers of sport/unclad sport, sport touring, and super sport motorcycles were more likely to always wear helmets, support universal helmet laws, and believe helmets keep riders safer. About half of respondents said antilock braking systems (ABS) enhance safety and that they would get ABS on their next motorcycle. Less than one-quarter thought an airbag would protect a motorcyclist in a crash, and even fewer would consider getting one on their next motorcycle. Forty-three percent of motorcyclists said they had crashed at least once; 62% of the most recent crashes involved no vehicles besides the motorcycle. Respondents reported riding their motorcycles about 5,400 miles, on average, during the past year. Drivers ages 18–29 reported riding fewer miles, on average, than older drivers and more often rode at night and to/from work or school. Drivers of touring and sport touring motorcycles traveled more miles and took more long trips.

Conclusions

Motorcyclists’ travel patterns and views vary widely, but there are distinct patterns by driver age and motorcycle type. Drivers who believe helmets keep riders safer are more likely to always wear them, but this belief appears insufficient to motivate some drivers to wear them. However, universal helmet laws appear effective in increasing helmet use. Many drivers are receptive to purchasing ABS on their next motorcycle.

Impact on industry

States should be encouraged to enact universal helmet laws, and motorcycle manufacturers should be encouraged to offer ABS.     

Protection performance of bicycle helmets

IntroductionThe evaluation of head protection systems needs proper knowledge of the head impact conditions in terms of impact speed and angle, as well as a realistic estimation of brain tolerance limits. In current bicycle helmet test procedures, both of these aspects should be improved. Method: The present paper suggests a bicycle helmet evaluation methodology based on realistic impact conditions and consideration of tissue level brain injury risk, in addition to well known headform kinematic parameters. The method is then applied to a set of 32 existing helmets, leading to a total of 576 experimental impact tests followed by 576 numerical simulations of the brain response. Results: It is shown that the most critical impacts are the linear-lateral ones as well as the oblique impact leading to rotation around the vertical axis (ZRot), leading both to around 50% risks of moderate neurological injuries. Based on this test method, the study enables us to compare the protection capability of a given helmet and eventually to compare helmets via a dedicated rating system.     

A new laboratory rig for evaluating helmets subject to oblique impacts

Current requirements and regulations governing motorcycle helmets around the world are based on test results of purely radial impacts, which are statistically rare in real accidents. This study presents a new impact rig for subjecting test helmets to oblique impacts, which therefore is able to test impacts of increased statistical relevance to real motorcycle accidents. A number of different head-helmet interfaces have been investigated. A test rig was constructed to produce oblique impacts to helmets simulating those occurring in real motorcycle accidents. A Hybrid III dummy head was fitted with accelerometers to measure the accelerations arising during impact testing. The equipment used for data collection was validated in both translational and rotational acceleration. In order to better resemble the human head, an artificial scalp was fitted to the hybrid dummy. The same test rig was used to investigate the performance of a number of different helmets. Impact velocities ranging from 7.3 to 9.9 m/s were tested using a number of different impact angles and impact areas. This study shows that the new test rig can be used to provide useful data at speeds of up to 50 km/h and with impact angles varying from purely tangential to purely radial. The rotational accelerations observed differ greatly depending on both helmet and scalp designs. For example, a helmet with a sliding outer shell placed on an experimental head fitted with an artificial scalp (made to resemble the human scalp) reduces rotational accelerations of the head by up to 56%, compared with those of an experimental head fitted with a fixed scalp and conventional helmet. The degree of slippage between the skull and the scalp, and between the scalp and the helmet, leads to considerable variation in the results. This innovative test rig appears to provide an accurate method for measuring accelerations in an oblique impact to a helmet. In order to obtain a good level of repeatability in oblique impact testing, it is crucial that the helmet be fixed to the head in the exact same way in each individual test. Both the position and the angle of impact must be reproduced identically in each test. The test rig used here has shown that this type of rig can be used to compare different helmet designs, and it therefore is able to contribute to achieving safer helmets.     

有限元在安全帽设计中的应用

安全帽可以防止高空坠落物对人员头部造成伤害。在材料和工艺一定的前提下,安全帽的结构对发挥安全帽的作用尤为重要。本文首先对安全帽作用机理及使用情况进行分析,指出改善安全帽帽壳缓冲性能有利于更好地发挥安全帽的作用。然后简要介绍ANSYS的建模方案以及网格划分和自由度约束情况,通过对安全帽的ANSYS有限元分析,得出安全帽的变形和应变图,并通过分析安全帽从最低端到顶端的变形和应变情况,指出安全帽在撞击过程中的能力吸收规律,根据分析数据提出建立双层安全帽帽壳的改进方案,并再次通过有限元分析得出变形和应变图,验证了双层安全帽帽壳在缓冲方面更有效果,这种分析结果可以为安全帽帽壳的设计提供参考。     

Protective effect of different types of bicycle helmets

The effectiveness of bicycle helmets in preventing head injuries is well documented. There are different opinions about the effectiveness of helmets in preventing face injuries, and few studies have analyzed the effect of different types of helmets. This study was performed to examine the effect of different helmet types to head and face injuries. The use of helmets was analyzed in cyclists with head or face injuries and compared with two control groups. The main control group was cyclists that had injuries not including the head or neck, and another control group was cyclists that had been involved in an accident, regardless of whether they had sustained any injury. Cross-table and logistic regression analyses were applied to analyze the protective effect of helmets. A total of 991 injured patients served as a basis for this study. Most of the accidents, (82%) were single accidents with no other persons involved. Of patients with injuries to the head, excluding face, 11.4% had been using hard shell helmets, and 9.6% had been using foam helmets at the time of the accident. Among the emergency room controls, the proportion of hard shell helmet users and foam helmet users was 26.4% and 11.4%, respectively. Compared to non-helmet users, this gave an odds ratio of 0.36 (CI = 0.21-0.60) for getting head injuries if the cyclists had been using hard shell helmets at the time of the injury, and 0.83 (CI = 0.41-1.67) for users of foam helmets. The odds ratio for getting face injuries was 0.90 (CI = 0.58-1.41) among users of hard shell helmets, and 1.87 (CI = 1.03-3.40) for users of foam helmets. The use of hard shell helmets reduced the risk of getting injuries to the head. Children less than nine years old that used foam helmets had an increased risk of getting face injuries. All bicyclists should be recommended to use hard shell bicycle helmets while cycling.     

Protective Effect of Different Types of Bicycle Helmets

The effectiveness of bicycle helmets in preventing head injuries is well documented. There are different opinions about the effectiveness of helmets in preventing face injuries, and few studies have analyzed the effect of different types of helmets. This study was performed to examine the effect of different helmet types to head and face injuries. The use of helmets was analyzed in cyclists with head or face injuries and compared with two control groups. The main control group was cyclists that had injuries not including the head or neck, and another control group was cyclists that had been involved in an accident, regardless of whether they had sustained any injury. Cross-table and logistic regression analyses were applied to analyze the protective effect of helmets. A total of 991 injured patients served as a basis for this study. Most of the accidents, (82%) were single accidents with no other persons involved. Of patients with injuries to the head, excluding face, 11.4% had been using hard shell helmets, and 9.6% had been using foam helmets at the time of the accident. Among the emergency room controls, the proportion of hard shell helmet users and foam helmet users was 26.4% and 11.4%, respectively. Compared to non-helmet users, this gave an odds ratio of 0.36 (CI = 0.21–0.60) for getting head injuries if the cyclists had been using hard shell helmets at the time of the injury, and 0.83 (CI = 0.41–1.67) for users of foam helmets. The odds ratio for getting face injuries was 0.90 (CI = 0.58–1.41) among users of hard shell helmets, and 1.87 (CI = 1.03–3.40) for users of foam helmets. The use of hard shell helmets reduced the risk of getting injuries to the head. Children less than nine years old that used foam helmets had an increased risk of getting face injuries. All bicyclists should be recommended to use hard shell bicycle helmets while cycling.     

Bicycle helmet use among persons 5 years and older in the United States, 2012

IntroductionIn 2013, injuries to bicyclists accounted for 925 fatalities and 493,884 nonfatal, emergency department-treated injuries in the United States. Bicyclist deaths increased by 19% from 2010 to 2013. The greatest risk of death and disability to bicyclists is head injuries. The objective of this study was to provide estimates of prevalence and associated factors of bicycle riding and helmet use among children and adults in the United States.MethodCDC analyzed self-reported data from the 2012 Summer ConsumerStyles survey. Adult respondents (18 + years) were asked about bicycle riding and helmet use in the last 30 days for themselves and their children (5 to 17 years). For bicycle riders, CDC estimated the prevalence of helmet use and conducted multivariable regression analyses to identify factors associated with helmet use.ResultsAmong adults, 21% rode bicycles within the past 30 days and 29% always wore helmets. Respondents reported that, of the 61% of children who rode bicycles within the past 30 days, 42% always wore helmets. Children were more likely to always wear helmets (90%) when their adult respondents always wore helmets than when their adult respondents did not always wear helmets (38%). Children who lived in states with a child bicycle helmet law were more likely to always wear helmets (47%) than those in states without a law (39%).ConclusionsDespite the fact that bicycle helmets are highly effective at reducing the risk for head injuries, including severe brain injuries and death, less than half of children and adults always wore bicycle helmets while riding.Practical applicationStates and communities should consider interventions that improve the safety of riding such as policies to promote helmet use, modeling of helmet wearing by adults, and focusing on high risk groups, including Hispanic cyclists, occasional riders, adults, and children ages 10 to 14.     

摩托车防护头盔发展现状和展望分析

当今保护人类健康安全日益受到社会普遍重视,头部安全是摩托车乘员的首要问题。摩托车头盔防护依然十分重要;国际上其标准修定较快并不断完善;通过对TBT通报,头盔安全类发明专利等数据分析,得出摩托车头盔的技术研发高峰近期爆发。     

LFT-G注塑工艺在玻璃钢安全帽生产中的应用

玻璃钢安全帽因具有强度高、耐高温,耐水、酸、碱、油、化学腐蚀及良好的绝缘性等特点,被广泛应用于石油化工、矿山、电力、冶炼等多个行业。目前,玻璃钢安全帽的生产工艺仅有两种,一是手糊,二是模压。但这两种生产工艺不仅存在粉尘、噪声、有毒物质等多种职业危害因素,而且由于部分关键工序采用手工制作,因而造成玻璃钢安全帽的质量性能的不稳定。使用LFT-G（长纤维增强热塑性塑料颗粒）作为原材料,将注塑工艺引进玻璃钢安全帽的生产中,实现了玻璃钢安全帽的注塑生产。这种工艺,不仅职业危害因素大大减少,而且也因关键工序中不存在手工作业,从而大大增加了玻璃钢安全帽质量的稳定性,同时,由于LFT-G粒料的长度增加,经过加工后,安全帽成品中的纤维长度也会增加,使得安全帽的抗冲击性能等满足标准要求。为此,以LFT-G为基础的玻璃钢安全帽的注塑工艺具有广阔的应用前景。     

Motorcycle helmets and spinal cord injury: helmet usage and type

The objective of this study was to assess the role of helmets and helmet type in relation to injury to the cervical spinal cord. It was based on a consecutive series of 110 motorcyclists with neurological damage to the spinal cord admitted alive (referred to as acute survivors) to a specialist spinal cord injuries unit at an Australian hospital. Cases were those with injury to the cervical spinal cord and controls were those with injury to the cord of other segments of the spine. The study showed that there was no significant difference in the odds of cervical spinal cord injury among unhelmeted and helmeted motorcyclist acute survivors. In addition, it confirmed the findings of a recently published Australian fatality study demonstrating no difference in the odds of cervical spinal cord injury among full-face and open-face helmet wearers. These results contrasted with the findings of earlier studies. In consideration of the limitations of existing research on the role of helmets in spinal cord injury, further study is required based on a larger series or a series having a higher proportion of non-wearers and open-face helmet wearers, including both survivors and those killed, and including assessment of cord and non-cord spinal injuries separately, helmet type, head impact, and helmet retention.