I know next to nothing about ice hockey and any type of protocols that may be followed if a keeper’s helmet is impacted during a match. As a cricket fan I can say that whenever a helmet is hit there is an inspection of any damage as more than likely the helmet will be changed.
Does your solution really need to withstand 100+ hits or is it more like a motorcycle or cycle helmet where any impact renders it unsuitable for further use?
As far as I'm aware, there's nothing like that in hockey. I've been told goalies take 5+ shots to the mask per practice. From what I've seen, after a hard hit, a goalie might take a look at their mask to make sure it's not broken or cracked but nothing beyond that.
"Lastly but not leastly, I needed to evaluate how the stiffening of the helmet affected the rest of its functionality; I wouldn’t want to make taking a shot to the helmet more dangerous."
As a goalie I can tell you that a stiffer helmet than the one you are using is a lot better (in fact the nme 30 you are using and similar low price helmets are usually referred to as "widow-makers" because they do not offer nearly enough protection for any level of play.
Any decent mask will have a shell that is a lot stiffer than the polycarbonate one you are using now. They will at least be made out of a fiberglass composite while the pro level models are always made out of carbon fiber.
It might actually be advantageous for your current design to use a stiffer, more high level mask, since you are relying on the mask as the support for the ropes, although the price point might be problematic (maybe you can find a goalie in your area who is willing to sacrifice a retired mask).
Thank you for your thoughtful comment! You're right about the higher end masks being a lot stiffer. And I fully agree with you that it could be more advantageous for my current design to use those stiffer masks, but I've been going back and forth a bit on if I want to pursue that idea.
I think I'm leaning towards "no". My thinking is that those masks were not designed to take forces in the directions that I'm trying to use them. Especially at the cage attachment points, I could potentially do some damage over time (those inserts seem pretty flimsy). So instead, I want to have a cage that's pretty self contained. From the masks standpoint, I want it to interact like a traditional cage. That's a higher bar for me, but I think I'll feel more comfortable with it.
Yeah, I do agree, that a self contained design, that can be attached to a mask like any other cage would appeal to many more goalies, than getting a new entirely custom mask for better visibility. I don't think a regular mask would handle the strain from this design very well.
And the self contained design has the added advantage of you not needing an expensive mask for the prototyping.
I have been working for a company that provides physical archive services for many years. In order to prevent electrical fires, we have to wear helmets with headlamps. Imagine searching for documents in the dark with a headlamp in a huge warehouse, of course I have accidents with many of my friends. I think this equipment should be reinforced with carbon fiber. In this way, at least the damage caused by accidents will be prevented. I am leaving a link for those who want to examine the company I work for or provide service regarding this issue.
Don't have it up anywhere at the moment -- still need to update it. If you shoot me an email, I'll send you my resume as soon as it's updated. In a pinch, my LinkedIn profile is probably the best I have available now: https://www.linkedin.com/in/surjan-singh/ (though even that's a little out of date).
I know next to nothing about ice hockey and any type of protocols that may be followed if a keeper’s helmet is impacted during a match. As a cricket fan I can say that whenever a helmet is hit there is an inspection of any damage as more than likely the helmet will be changed.
Does your solution really need to withstand 100+ hits or is it more like a motorcycle or cycle helmet where any impact renders it unsuitable for further use?
As far as I'm aware, there's nothing like that in hockey. I've been told goalies take 5+ shots to the mask per practice. From what I've seen, after a hard hit, a goalie might take a look at their mask to make sure it's not broken or cracked but nothing beyond that.
"Lastly but not leastly, I needed to evaluate how the stiffening of the helmet affected the rest of its functionality; I wouldn’t want to make taking a shot to the helmet more dangerous."
As a goalie I can tell you that a stiffer helmet than the one you are using is a lot better (in fact the nme 30 you are using and similar low price helmets are usually referred to as "widow-makers" because they do not offer nearly enough protection for any level of play.
Any decent mask will have a shell that is a lot stiffer than the polycarbonate one you are using now. They will at least be made out of a fiberglass composite while the pro level models are always made out of carbon fiber.
It might actually be advantageous for your current design to use a stiffer, more high level mask, since you are relying on the mask as the support for the ropes, although the price point might be problematic (maybe you can find a goalie in your area who is willing to sacrifice a retired mask).
Thank you for your thoughtful comment! You're right about the higher end masks being a lot stiffer. And I fully agree with you that it could be more advantageous for my current design to use those stiffer masks, but I've been going back and forth a bit on if I want to pursue that idea.
I think I'm leaning towards "no". My thinking is that those masks were not designed to take forces in the directions that I'm trying to use them. Especially at the cage attachment points, I could potentially do some damage over time (those inserts seem pretty flimsy). So instead, I want to have a cage that's pretty self contained. From the masks standpoint, I want it to interact like a traditional cage. That's a higher bar for me, but I think I'll feel more comfortable with it.
Thanks again.
Yeah, I do agree, that a self contained design, that can be attached to a mask like any other cage would appeal to many more goalies, than getting a new entirely custom mask for better visibility. I don't think a regular mask would handle the strain from this design very well.
And the self contained design has the added advantage of you not needing an expensive mask for the prototyping.
I have been working for a company that provides physical archive services for many years. In order to prevent electrical fires, we have to wear helmets with headlamps. Imagine searching for documents in the dark with a headlamp in a huge warehouse, of course I have accidents with many of my friends. I think this equipment should be reinforced with carbon fiber. In this way, at least the damage caused by accidents will be prevented. I am leaving a link for those who want to examine the company I work for or provide service regarding this issue.
https://www.reisswolf.com.tr/
Where is yr resume posted?
Don't have it up anywhere at the moment -- still need to update it. If you shoot me an email, I'll send you my resume as soon as it's updated. In a pinch, my LinkedIn profile is probably the best I have available now: https://www.linkedin.com/in/surjan-singh/ (though even that's a little out of date).