US20160256763A1

US20160256763A1 - Compositions for preventing head injuries in team sports

Info

Publication number: US20160256763A1
Application number: US14/544,907
Authority: US
Inventors: Michael Henry McGee
Original assignee: Individual
Current assignee: Individual
Priority date: 2015-03-06
Filing date: 2015-03-06
Publication date: 2016-09-08

Abstract

A manufacture or composition of matter for impact mitigation and injury prevention when used as elements of a helmet for football and other sports, or in other similar impact mitigation situations, which protects the wearer from concussions and other injuries by providing a soft and flexible yet very strong outer surface, and a gel or other viscous interior, held in place against the head of the wearer by the same or a similar yet softer material as on the outer surface; and a helmet which does not have earholes and uses an electronic means to transmit sounds.

Description

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

None—An Information Disclosure Statement is attached to this Application

STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED R&D

Not Applicable

(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT

Not Applicable

(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A COMPACT DISC OR AS A TEXT FILE VIA THE OFFICE ELECTRONIC FILING SYSTEM (EFS-WEB)

Not Applicable

STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR

The present application is an greatly expanded and significantly improved extension to the Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/925,002, filed on Jan. 8, 2014, by Michael McGee, and entitled “A helmet for use in football and other sports . . . ,” the entire disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The invention generally relates to a team sports helmet, consisting of a manufacture or a combination of matter for the stated purpose of reducing head injuries in sports such as football, lacrosse, hockey or baseball.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Certain competitive contact sports such as football require the use of a helmet to protect participants from certain head injuries which may be sustained due to high-impact collisions between one player and another. Many different types of helmets have been developed and used ever since the beginning of field contact sports. Over the last century many such helmets have been developed and patented. Without exception these improvements over time have led to the provision of an outer shell made of a hard and inflexible or semi-flexible material, usually plastic, which has no ability whatsoever to ameliorate or reduce the shock of a collision between one player and another or between a player and an immovable object.
These traditional helmets, which are well-known in the art, also may have what is referred to as “shock-absorbing” linings inside the inflexible outer shell, which actually do not absorb any of the kinds of the shocks of which we are most concerned in the present invention.
The various “improvements” have been made to the various components of the football helmet, and these improvements are known in the art. In general, though, the overall provision of a rigid or semi-flexible outer shell has remained the same, and to the present day this hard and ultimately inflexible configuration is the only form of football helmet which is in use in the sport, all the way from youth Pee Wee Football to professional football. Thus the traditional sports helmet of today, with certain minor configuration differences, is of only one single type.
This current traditional sports helmet is actively contributing to major sports injuries at all levels from children to professionals, and there is no formulation of a sports helmet in the current art which in any way will reduce these major sports injuries.
Prior art tends to describe that due to the nature of contact sports, no helmet can completely prevent injuries to those who play the sport. The prior art also tends to blame the player by emphasizing that no equipment can help a player who uses the equipment improperly or employs poor form or technique. No football helmet or other protective helmet, the inventors say in order to cover their inability to formulate a safe and effective helmet, can prevent head, chin or neck injuries or prevent severe paralysis, permanent brain injury or death to the user of the helmet. This type of giving up on safety is a part and parcel of the state of the art in the development of football helmets.
There are other programs which invite research proposals to “identify key factors and methodologies for causing changes in the culture and behavior of . . . athletes, other high-risk young adult populations and the associated community at large with regard to concussion and concussion education.” The legitimate focus of this type of program is to encourage athletes to report concussions when they happen and stay out of play until healed. Other than this limited purpose, it is not the “culture and behavior of athletes” which is to blame for the infliction of concussions at all levels of contact sports; it is the utter lack of technological sophistication in developing sports helmets and other equipment which will protect against concussions.
The deadly consequences of giving up on developing technologically sophisticated safety equipment which will prevent concussions are seen daily as present and former players are left to spend the rest of their lives with scrambled brains or paralysis, or some other type of concussion syndrome which leaves them less than fully functional in their daily lives for the remainder of their natural lives. Giving up on safety is not a satisfactory response when there are certainly more ways to improve safety than the creative inventors of today have come up with.
The sports helmets currently in use today do a good job only in preventing bruises and tears to the skin of the player; and in preventing head injuries when a player falls to the ground or gets tangled up in a pile of players where the cumulative forces are not great and there is not any substantial opposing force operating against the helmet. This type of prevention is all that current sports helmets are good for. Even those who oversee the technical aspects of sports helmet construction do not claim any greater protection for a player who wears their helmets during contact sports. So the players don't get bumped and scraped about the head. What is missing from the listed description of possible injuries?
The description of possible injuries currently and ominously omits the proven fact that more than half of all football players receive multiple brain concussions during their active playing time, which can lead to both temporary and permanent brain damage. The problem tends to occur when one hard helmet collides either directly or sideswipe with another hard helmet during the course of a game, creating a substantial snapping pressure on the inside of the skull of the player, or generating a coup or contrecoup brain injury. Further, other impacts with players and with stationery objects such as the ground generate similar substantial forces which can generate some of the same types of direct or sideswipe concussions and coup or contrecoup injuries. Further, hard contact by the helmet with the hard body pads on another player can create some of the same injuries.
The momentum of a collision between one player and another going in the opposite direction, or between a moving player and a non-moving player or the ground, are identical. In terms of an equation, the momentum of an object is equal to the mass of the object times the velocity of the object: Momentum=mass·velocity. Thus if you have a football player who weighs 225 pounds, and he is running forward at a rate of up to 20 miles per hour, then the force applied to his head, through his helmet, if he comes to a sudden stop is going to be substantial regardless of how he makes the sudden stop.
Research has shown that a strong football player, whether he be in high school or the NFL, can and does sprint for a short period of time during the course of a play at a rate of up to 20 miles per hour. Using our equation, the average player has a momentum of about 4,500 lbs·mph/s2 SI units during the course of most plays on the field. The described force is a very substantial momentum, and if this amount of forward momentum is suddenly stopped in the area of the head of the player, then the instantaneous snapping coup and contrecoup pressure within the head is more than substantial.
And what is it that happens when such momentum-driven pressures are applied to the head of a player on the field? The currently used helmets with a hard exterior ensure only that there will be no tears to the skin, nor will there be a depressed skull fracture. The present formulations of sports helmets do a superior job of protecting against such injuries.
The present formulations of sports helmets totally fail to protect against concussions and other head injuries, including coup and contrecoup brain damage. In spite of the present advanced types of sports helmets being used, up to fifty percent of all football players experience one or more serious concussions during the course of their time spent playing football. These concussions do not involve direct impact with the head of the player, since the current formulations of helmets entirely prevent such direct impact to the head. There is virtually no chance that a player's head or skull will receive a direct impact of any kind during the course of playing a contact sport such as football. Thus it can be seen that none of the concussions now being experienced by football players are related to any direct impact with the head of the player.
Therefore the current prevalence of concussive brain injuries among football players can be seen to arise from two sources, which are coup and coup-contrecoup motions of the brain tissue within the skull, and other momentum-based displacements of neck muscle and brain tissue. These damaging motions happen, as have been described, with such force as to create a bruise or other lesion on or in the brain, or to create a tearing or bruising of other critical structures inside the skull or in the brain stem or other parts of the neurological system, or in the physical structures of the neck. The damage may be either temporary or permanent, and such injuries of the brain and associated structures diminish the thinking and reasoning abilities of the player either for a time or on a permanent basis.
A coup injury occurs at the site of the indirect impact of the head with an object, and a contrecoup injury occurs on the side opposite the area that was impacted. Coup and contrecoup injuries are associated with cerebral contusions, a type of traumatic brain injury in which the brain is bruised; and are also associated with the tearing or serious stretching of other structures within the totality of the neurological system. Additionally, such a sudden impact may cause the abrupt movement of the Dura Mater and the other of the three layers of the meninges that surround the brain and spinal cord. The Dura surrounds the brain and the spinal cord and is responsible for keeping in the cerebrospinal fluid. There may be either temporary or permanent disruptions in the meninges and the cerebrospinal fluid following such an impact.
The exact mechanism, for both coup and coup-contrecoup injuries, involves an instantaneous abrupt deceleration of the head, causing the brain to collide with the inside of the skull, and in some cases tear or dislocate associated structures within the head or neck. It is likely that inertia is the primary factor in the injuries, e.g. the brain, which is “floating” inside the skull; keeps moving after the skull is stopped by a fixed object and suddenly decelerated. Such inertial movement of the brain and associated structures within the skull will occur upon impact with another player who is moving in the opposite direction or at an angle to the affected player, or by impact with any other solid object on the field such as the ground or with any other object moving in the opposite direction from the affected player.
The embodiment of the sports helmet described herein is specifically designed to eliminate or substantially reduce the number of coup and coup-contrecoup brain injuries sustained by players during the course of either practice or play in the game of football, and perhaps in other sports such as hockey as well. It is ultimately the goal of this embodiment to reduce the occurrence of cerebral concussions to less than ten percent in football and other related sports, so that a cerebral concussion is an unusual and exceptional injury—rather than being an injury sustained by up to fifty percent of football players, with a large number of these injuries resulting in permanent brain damage, as is now the case.
It is also asserted herein that the present invention will have the additional effect of eliminating cerebral concussions entirely for youth football players whose weight is 140 pounds or less, since the forward momentum (as above described) for players of this size or smaller is so much less than that of a larger player that there will not be enough force generated by a collision, when wearing the herein described helmet, to generate any coup or coup-contrecoup injuries inside the skull of the player.

REFERENCES CITED


U.S. Patent Documents

1,060,220	April 1913	White
1,203,564	November 1916	April
1,262,818	April 1918	McGill
1,449,183	March 1923	Johnstone
1,522,952	January 1925	Goldsmith
1,655,007	January 1928	Boettge
1,691,202	November 1928	Van
1,705,879	March 1929	Rodgers
1,868,926	July 1932	Tatore
1,892,943	January 1933	Geyer
2,140,716	December 1938	Pryale
2,250,275	July 1941	Riddell
2,296,335	September 1942	Brady
2,354,840	August 1944	Seletz
2,570,182	October 1951	Daly et al.
2,688,747	September 1954	Marx
2,758,304	August 1956	McGowan
2,768,380	October 1956	Golomb
2,785,405	March 1957	Snyder
D180239	May 1957	McMurry
2,850,740	September 1958	Adams
2,861,272	November 1958	Stuart
2,867,811	January 1959	Jones
2,904,645	September 1959	Sarles
2,969,546	January 1961	Morgan, Jr.
2,985,883	May 1961	Marietta
2,986,739	June 1961	Rozzi
3,039,108	June 1962	Lohrenz
3,113,318	December 1963	Marietta
3,166,761	January 1965	Strohm
3,167,783	February 1965	Wolfe
3,186,004	June 1965	Carlini
3,187,342	June 1965	Aileo
3,216,023	November 1965	Morgan
3,263,236	August 1966	Humphrey
3,274,613	September 1966	Sowle
3,327,313	June 1967	Pukish
3,447,162	June 1969	Aileo
3,548,409	December 1970	Aileo
3,548,410	December 1970	Parker
3,609,764	October 1971	Morgan
3,619,813	November 1971	Marchello
3,713,640	January 1973	Margan
3,761,959	October 1973	Dunning
3,783,450	January 1974	O'Connor
3,787,895	January 1974	Belvedere
3,793,241	February 1974	Kyle et al.
D230911	March 1974	Isps, Jr.
3,818,508	June 1974	Lammers et al.
3,854,146	December 1974	Dunning
3,882,547	May 1975	Morgan
3,916,446	November 1975	Gooding
3,934,271	January 1976	Rhee
3,994,020	November 1976	Villari
3,994,021	November 1976	Villari et al.
3,994,022	November 1976	Villari et al.
4,023,213	May 1977	Rovani
4,028,743	June 1977	Christensen
4,044,400	August 1977	Lewicki
4,060,855	December 1977	Rappleyea
4,075,714	February 1978	Ryder et al.
4,101,983	July 1978	Dera et al.
4,233,687	November 1980	Lancellotti
4,272,853	June 1981	Schuessler
4,279,038	July 1981	Bruckner et al.
4,287,613	September 1981	Schulz
D267287	December 1982	Gooding
4,363,140	December 1982	Correale
4,370,759	February 1983	Zide
4,390,995	July 1983	Walck
4,398,306	August 1983	Gooding
4,404,690	September 1983	Farquharson
D271249	November 1983	Farquharson
4,461,044	July 1984	Reiterman
4,475,248	October 1984	L'Abbe et al.
4,477,929	October 1984	Mattsson
4,633,531	January 1987	Nimmons
4,646,368	March 1987	Infusino et al.
4,651,356	March 1987	Zide
4,677,694	July 1987	Crow
4,692,947	September 1987	Black et al.
4,706,305	November 1987	Cho
4,741,054	May 1988	Mattes
4,744,107	May 1988	Fohl
4,774,729	October 1988	Coates et al.
4,794,652	January 1989	Piech von Planta et al.
4,808,469	February 1989	Hiles
4,831,668	May 1989	Schulz
4,837,866	June 1989	Rector et al.
4,853,980	August 1989	Zarotti
4,866,792	September 1989	Arai
4,885,806	December 1989	Heller
4,903,346	February 1990	Reddemann et al.
4,916,759	April 1990	Arai
D309512	July 1990	Crow
4,947,490	August 1990	Hayden
5,014,365	May 1991	Schulz
5,035,009	July 1991	Wingo et al.
5,083,321	January 1992	Davidsson
5,093,936	March 1992	Copeland
5,093,939	March 1992	Noyerie et al.
5,101,517	April 1992	Douglas
5,129,108	July 1992	Copeland
5,136,728	August 1992	Kamata
5,142,700	August 1992	Reed
D332507	January 1993	Anderson et al.
5,175,889	January 1993	Infusino
5,177,816	January 1993	Schmidt et al.
5,263,203	November 1993	Kraemer et al.
5,263,204	November 1993	Butsch
5,267,353	December 1993	Milligan
5,293,649	March 1994	Corpus
RE34699	August 1994	Copeland
D350710	September 1994	Keiffer
5,347,660	September 1994	Zide et al.
D357555	April 1995	Brueckner
5,418,257	May 1995	Weisman
5,461,730	October 1995	Carrington
D364487	November 1995	Tutton et al.
5,502,843	April 1996	Strickland
5,539,936	July 1996	Thomas
5,553,330	September 1996	Carveth
D378236	February 1997	Zanotto et al.
D378624	March 1997	Chartrand
D382671	August 1997	Shewchenko
D383953	September 1997	DeFilippo
5,713,082	February 1998	Bassette et al.
5,724,681	March 1998	Sykes
5,732,414	March 1998	Monica
5,737,770	April 1998	Chen
5,790,988	August 1998	Guadagnino, Jr. et al.
5,794,274	August 1998	Kraemer
5,799,337	September 1998	Brown
D406399	March 1999	Hohdorf
5,883,145	March 1999	Hurley et al.
D408236	April 1999	Rennick
5,915,537	June 1999	Dallas et al.
5,930,840	August 1999	Arai
5,938,878	August 1999	Hurley et al.
5,946,735	September 1999	Bayes
5,953,761	September 1999	Jurga et al.
5,963,990	October 1999	White
5,966,744	October 1999	Smith
6,047,400	April 2000	Spencer
6,054,005	April 2000	Hurley et al.
6,070,271	June 2000	Williams
6,073,271	June 2000	Alexander et al.
6,079,053	June 2000	Clover et al.
6,081,932	July 2000	Kraemer
6,128,786	October 2000	Maddux
6,138,284	October 2000	Arai
6,189,156	February 2001	Loiars
6,199,219	March 2001	Silken
6,219,850	April 2001	Halstead et al.
6,226,801	May 2001	Alexander et al.
D445962	July 2001	Brignone et al.
6,256,798	July 2001	Egolf
6,272,692	August 2001	Abraham
D448526	September 2001	Brignone et al.
6,282,726	September 2001	Noyerie et al.
D448890	October 2001	Brignone et al.
6,298,483	October 2001	Schiebl et al.
6,298,497	October 2001	Chartrand
6,324,701	December 2001	Alexander
D453399	February 2002	Racine
6,360,376	March 2002	Carrington
6,370,699	April 2002	Halstead et al.
D459032	June 2002	Gatellet
D459554	June 2002	Gatellet
D459555	June 2002	Gatellet
6,438,762	August 2002	Jenkins
6,438,763	August 2002	Guay et al.
6,446,270	September 2002	Durr
D465067	October 2002	Ide et al.
6,481,024	November 2002	Grant
D466651	December 2002	Halstead et al.
6,499,139	December 2002	Brown
6,499,147	December 2002	Schiebl et al.
D475486	June 2003	Ide et al.
6,701,535	March 2004	Dobbie et al.
D492818	July 2004	Ide et al.
D495838	September 2004	Arai
6,826,509	November 2004	Crisco, III et al.
6,934,971	August 2005	Ide et al.
D509928	September 2005	Barnoski
6,938,272	September 2005	Brown
D511026	October 2005	Ide et al.
D512534	December 2005	Maddux et al.
7,146,652	December 2006	Ide et al.
7,240,376	July 2007	Ide et al.
D575458	August 2008	Ho
D582607	December 2008	Ferrara et al.
D587407	February 2009	Nimmons et al.
D587852	March 2009	Nimmons
D587853	March 2009	Nimmons
D857854	March 2009	Nimmons et al.
D857855	March 2009	Nimmons et al.
D603099	October 2009	Bologna et al.
D603100	October 2009	Bologna
D616154	May 2010	Daniel
D625050	October 2010	Chen
D628748	December 2010	Stewart
D629162	December 2010	Daniel
D633658	March 2011	Daniel
7,954,177	June 2011	Ide et al.
D654629	February 2012	Chou et al.
D654630	February 2012	Chou et al.
2002/0104533	August 2002	Kalhok et al.
2002/0174480	November 2002	Lombard
2003/0188375	October 2003	Wilson
2003/0209241	November 2003	Fournier
2004/0025231	February 2004	Ide et al.
2009/0265841	October 2009	Ferrara
2010/0005573	January 2010	Rudd et al.
2011/0209272	September 2011	Drake
2012/0011639	January 2012	Beauchamp et al.
2012/0079646	April 2012	Belanger et al.
7,774,866	October 2006	Ferrara
8,104,593	January 2012	Lin
8,336,122	December 2012	Harris
8,528,119	September 2013	Ferrara
8,578,520	November 2013	Halldin
8,621,672	January 2014	Chuback
8,844,066	September 2014	Whitcomb
8,850,623	October 2014	Mazzoccoli
8,863,319	October 2014	Knight
8,863,320	October 2014	Kelly et al.


Foreign Patent Documents

692011	January 2002	CH
8321097	October 1983	DE
3338188	May 1985	DE
3603234	August 1987	DE
19745960	April 1999	DE
512193	November 1992	EP
256430	August 1926	GB
1354719	May 1974	GB
56-53735	May 1981	JP
57-205511	December 1982	JP
3-22024	March 1991	JP
05-132809	May 1993	JP
5-72922	October 1993	JP
07-109609	April 1995	JP
07-126908	May 1995	JP
10-195707	July 1998	JP
2001-020121	January 2001	JP
59-37323	September 2011	JP
WO95/34229	December 1995	WO
WO01/52676	July 2001	WO

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

Currently more than half of all football players, from the youngest child To the professional athlete, receive multiple brain concussions during their playing time, which can lead to both temporary and permanent brain damage. There are similar injuries in other team sports. The problem tends to occur when one hard helmet collides either directly or sideswipe with another hard helmet during the course of a game, creating a more than doubling of the snapping pressure on the inside of the skull of the player, or generating a coup or contrecoup brain injury. Further, if an individual hits the ground or one or more other players, there is a substantial increase in the forces with which the individual collides with the ground and/or with the one or more other players, which can generate some of the same types of direct or sideswipe concussions and coup or contrecoup injuries. Further, hard contact by a player with any part of the body of another player who is either standing still or moving toward the player can create some of the same force-related injuries.
A normal full speed of collision for a football or other sports player with another player can be up to twenty miles per hour. When one player rams another player with both going full speed, the effective impact speed each player experiences is at least forty miles per hour, perhaps much more. The rigid or semi-flexible outer surface of all current helmets ensures that the maximum total force multiplier will be received by the brain of each of the players; and the hard impacts with other individuals and with the ground can create a significant force multiplier.
All football helmets patented and in use today describe a rigid or semi-flexible outer shell, which means that all football is played in such a manner that there is a more than doubling of forces when there is a collision or sideswipe between the two rigid objects. Likewise, all football games and practice drills today involve high impact collisions with other players and with the ground or other solid objects, creating all kinds of injuries and the likelihood of coup-contrecoup head injuries.
The overall soft materials here described relate to injury prevention in team sports. They maintain the integrity of the structure of the helmet through multiple collisions, and lead to a halving or less of the forces when there is a direct or sideswipe collision with another helmet, thus substantially reducing or eliminating the likelihood of concussions or other coup or contrecoup brain injuries.

DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The description of this invention is quite detailed due to the absence of drawings. Any drawing would simply show multiple layers or infusions of protective materials arranged as described, along with these materials applied into the shape of a traditional football helmet, and the “absence of an earhole” in the said traditional helmet. The present invention follows the same basic visual framework as current art, and the changes which distinguish the present invention from prior art are fully described in a manner which makes the new manufacture or combinations of matter, which are to some degree intangible, crystal clear from the descriptions.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The advantages recited in this invention are accomplished by the sports helmet presently described. The football helmet of the present invention eliminates entirely the semi-flexible or hard outer shell of previous embodiments of current traditional football helmets, and replaces the semi-flexible or hard shell with a manufacture or combination of matter consisting of a soft outer shell for the helmet, a gel interior between the outer shell and the inner lining, and a soft inner lining, and the “absence of an ear hole” to retain the new flexibility all the way around the left and right sides of the helmet. These attributes work in combination as a single unit to reduce the consequences of all impacts to the head of a football player.
Visually the football helmet may, yet is not required to, look very much like current helmets, which preserves the integrity of the experience for the fans watching the game. The only difference is that the football helmet of the present invention may be an inch or two inches, or any other dimension, larger on the outside than the present shape and size of sports helmets, to accommodate the materials which sit between the outside soft shell of the helmet and the inner lining. The helmet outer shell will possibly have a matte or woven impression on the outside, since a shiny surface would crack at the first collision. The surface thus will not be as shiny as present helmets and yet the team logos will stay in place and partly obscure the less shiny exterior. This change in appearance will attract little notice from viewers and within a very short time after its introduction into play will be totally integrated into the fan experience without any prolonged period of visual adjustment. Also claimed, though, are configurations of the exterior of the helmet which may have a shape which is different from the current shape of a football helmet and which will require some adjustment or even significant adjustment of the fan perception of the player on the field.
The present invention provides for a soft yet strong outside covering for the helmet, which wraps around the head in the same manner as traditional helmets and as such provides for full coverage and significant protection from direct hits and gouges to the head. The outside covering will be made from a from a manufacture or combination of materials consisting of a variety of flexible materials which will not rupture or tear or compress to failure under the most rigorous conditions of a game, and which will not allow leakage of any viscous material which is placed between the outer and the inner shells of the helmet. Current materials science provides a number of such flexible materials. One example of such a material is a thin layer of Kevlar cloth which has been infused lightly with rubber or another rubber-like material to prevent leakage. This Kevlar-based covering retains its flexibility, is lightweight, cannot be pierced or torn or shredded, and does not leak. Regardless of the actual material used, the standard must be that under no conditions shall a collision with another player, or object on the playing field which produces force on the outside of the helmet including the ground be able to penetrate the outer covering and/or create a leak or displacement which will allow the outside force to impact directly on the scalp of the player.
The inner wall of the present invention provides a manufacture or combination of materials consisting of a flexible cap over the head of the player, which will roughly conform to the shape of the player's head. The cap may be made of the same materials as the exterior wall of the helmet, or it may be made of a more rubber-based or textile-based material which will provide a greater degree of softness and absence of abrasiveness when the player's head is encased in the flexible cap. The most important aspect of the cap is that it will have the same capabilities as described for the exterior of the helmet: it retains its flexibility, is lightweight, cannot be pierced or torn or shredded, and does not leak. The difference is that the inner wall of the present invention does not have to be quite as rugged as the outer wall, and as such may be built with an eye to the comfort of the wearer. There may be a liner inside the inner wall, made of cloth or other soft material; and/or a honeycombed or other breathable plastic or other flexible material, against the head, which conforms to the shape of the head, and which may allow some circulation of air next to the scalp. The inner liner may or may not have blocks of soft foam between the liner and the head.
Thus the inner cap of the present invention will be made either of a different combination of matter from the outer shell, or different formulations of the same matter as in the outer shell, such as Kevlar and rubber. These different materials must be bonded together at the edge of the helmet in such a way that no leakage or tearing or rupture will occur when force is applied to the exterior of the helmet. The best combination of matter for bonding the outer shell and the inner cap will have to be decided upon by advanced materials scientists. Here it is described that the two portions of the helmet, the outer shell and the inner cap, shall be bonded together with the application of a viscous strip of soft plastic between the edges, or a glue which is flexible after drying, and that after this initial bonding the two sections shall be anchored by sewing the two sections together with loops of a high tensile strength thread. The sewing will prevent any separation of the glued edges under even the maximum force applied to the exterior of the sports helmet.
In between the outer shell and the inner cap will be an open space which will be an inch or two inches (or any other dimension) larger on the outside than the present shape and size of sports helmets. This space is filled with a viscous gel or other viscous material, or another soft and malleable yet tough substance which will have the capacity to compress and give way when subjected to the force of a strike on the exterior of the helmet. The purpose of this gel or other viscous material is to absorb any force applied to the exterior of the helmet, and to dissipate much of such force within the helmet itself; rather than transferring the force of the external strike into the interior of the skull of the player, as current formulations of sports helmets inevitably accomplish.
A simple and illustrative way to show the difference inherent in the present embodiment is to drop a raw egg. Let the raw insides of the egg represent the brain of a player, and the shell of the egg the skull. If you drop the egg from a height of one yard onto a hard floor it will break. The insides of the egg will splat out onto the floor and be mixed up. However, if you drop another egg from the same height onto a pillow it will not break.
The change in momentum of the egg is the same in both cases, but the time taken at the end is not. The egg dropped on the floor stops very quickly, which means the force on the egg is large, so it breaks. The egg dropped on the pillow slows down and stops more slowly since the pillow is squishy. Therefore the force on the egg is smaller and the egg does not break. The pillow also spreads the force over a larger part of the surface of the egg, which also helps save it. The interior of the egg, representing the brain of a player, retains its integrity and is not damaged or mixed up.
The combinations of matter used in the present invention will be for the most part liquid or viscous materials. Any other materials, no matter how fluffy, will compress at a much more rapid rate than a gel or other viscous material, or else will provide almost no immediate compression, which will result in almost all of the force of the outside strike being transferred to the interior of the skull of the player. For example, compressed air tends to become quite solid when suddenly struck, and thus does not have the continuous give that is needed to accomplish the protective purpose. It is estimated that with the use of a gel or other viscous material, the weight of the sports helmet will be increased by as little as two pounds up to as much as three pounds or more. This is not a significant weight and can be compensated for by additional neck and shoulder exercises by a player, and the resultant benefit of the helmet will be so substantial that there will be no hesitation on the part of players to take the necessary training to adjust to the slightly heavier helmets. In addition players will adapt to having no hard surface between them and any other player by running more plays in a manner which avoids intentional head contact.
In the current invention it will be necessary to adjust the amount of give and viscosity of the gel or other substance (hereafter “gel”) to a very precise degree. The intention is that the maximum amount of force applied to the helmet from the outside during play or practice will compress or displace the gel for almost the full depth of the gel, yet leaving at least an eighth of an inch of distance, or other small distance, between the compressed outer shell and the inner cap. In this manner the maximum force will never create a situation where the force itself actually impacts the inner cap and by definition the skull of the player. Also in this manner the nearly full compression of the gel will absorb the maximum amount of force, leaving little or no force to be applied as a strike directly to the skull; in a manner which will allow the brain inside the skull to remain at rest or with only minor jostling even with a maximum impact. When two helmets collide at speed the reduction in total force will be even greater and brain injury will be even less likely.
In order to prevent the gel or other viscous substance from moving suddenly from one part of the space between the outer shell and the inner cap, it will be necessary to install thin yet strong flexible baffles or separators inside the space between the outer shell and the inner cap at regular intervals and attached immovably at ninety degree angles, or at some other appropriate angles, to the shell and inner cap, and running without leakage from one side to the other, such as from front to back or from one ear to another, or in smaller interlocked pockets, within the interior space holding the fluid, to form a series of walls or obstructions for checking the unrestrained lateral or sideways movement of fluid from one part of the helmet to another. These baffles will have small holes in them which will allow the movement of fluids side-to-side from one part of the interior space to another only at a pre-determined rate of transmission. These baffles will eliminate almost the entire unrestrained lateral or sideways surge brought about by kinetic energy which can occur in any volume of liquid or gel when it is suddenly impacted or otherwise acted upon by an outside force. This restraint of surge is particularly important with regard to impacts to the side of the helmet, and to sideswipe impacts regardless of the angle with which the impact intercepts the outer shell of the helmet.
Some previously patented helmets describe a football helmet which retains a hard and inflexible outer shell, and yet has inside the shell a plurality of pockets which contain either air or another liquid material. Upon the application of force to the helmet the air pockets are expected to compress at a controlled rate and thus reduce the disruptive effect of the applied force on the head of the player. The most serious problem with this approach is that on the field the immediate striking force against the helmet is fully and completely transmitted to the interior of the skull of the player at the very precise instant that the striking force comes in contact with the hard and inflexible or semi-flexible outer shell. Rigid structures striking each other at speed have a spike of deceleration occurs within approximately the first 0.00001 seconds. It is this sudden spike of deceleration which snaps the skull into a coup or coup-contrecoup injury as the inertia of the suspended brain tosses it roughly back and forth within the skull. The inner air pockets, at the moment of the application of the maximum striking force, take half a second or more to decompress, and do no more on the field than assist in the transmission of the striking force to the interior of the skull of the player.
As was said earlier in the present invention description, compressed air is very hard when suddenly impacted, even if it is slowly vented within a very short time after the impact. Thus the provision of air pockets or other foam or materials inside a hard and inflexible or semi-flexible outside shell of a football helmet has very little ability to reduce the number of coup and coup-contrecoup brain injuries, which occur due to the inertia of the brain tissue inside the suddenly decelerated impacted skull of the player. The true test of the presently patented art is that there has been no noticeable decline in the numbers or percentages of brain injuries occurring in the sport from any earlier time to the present.
Another concern with football helmets is the ability of the player to hear what is being said on the field, including when plays are called and executed. Thus hearing is a necessary element of the ability to play football on the field. Traditional helmets have provided for a hole in each side of the helmet in the area of the ear which will allow the player to hear. The present invention prescribe the “absence of an ear hole”, though there will be a small internal space carved out for the ears themselves in the inner lining. It is unlikely that building an ear hole through the gel at the proper location will be feasible, since it will be necessary to have a significant thickness of gel even down the sides of the helmet. An ear hole will reduce the effectiveness of the helmet of the present invention, particularly with regard to hits to the side of the helmet or glancing blows to the helmet.
The preferred embodiment of the present invention will not have a break in the gel and therefore will not provide for an ear hole. There is a significant need for the gel cushion to be fairly thick even on the sides of the helmet as low as the ears and below, for protection against rotational or shear forces and from glancing blows, as well as from direct impact to the side of the helmet or upwards impact to the helmet with the applied force beginning from a location below the level of the helmet. The provision of ear holes will reduce this type of protection, and therefore is to be avoided unless the holes can be engineered into the structure without compromising the depth of the gel cushion low on the sides of the helmet.
The present technological progress in electronics, especially in the area of small and durable parts, allows for each player to have ear buds inside one or both ears, with one or more soft flexible wires coming out of the earbuds and connecting the earbuds to a heavily hardened micro transmitter/receiver which will be located at a place on the player's body where it is least likely to be smashed during play. Such an electronic device must also have a wire going to a hardened microphone in a location where it can pick up talk on the field. The device may also have a receiver for the relay of instructions from the sidelines, and a microphone for the player to speak to those on the sidelines. The system may also be set up so that when one player speaks into his microphone all the other players on the same team will hear what is said through electronic transmission from the microphone, rather than having to rely only on the external microphone. It is foolish for football helmets to continue to rely on twentieth century technology such as open ear holes, when the state of electronics technology has clearly advanced to the point where electronic hearing is both feasible and quite reliable, even in the hard use environment of contact sports.
The two parts of the present invention thus differ substantially from the prior art and are a major improvement on what currently exists. All prior art with regard to modern sports helmets discloses a helmet with a rigid or semi-flexible outer shell. The newer prior art describes padding or collapsible air cells inside the rigid or semi-flexible outer shell. There are also a few examples in the prior art where there is an attempt to add padding to the outside of the rigid outer shell, yet these do not eliminate the outer shell. None of the prior art anticipates the physics of sudden striking forces, where rigid structures striking each other at speed have a spike of deceleration which occurs within the first 0.00001 seconds.

Claims

1. A highly flexible yet strong manufacture or combination of matter, Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303 (1980), described as the outer shell of a helmet, with possibly a matte or woven impression on the outside, since a shiny surface would crack at the first collision, and which may or may not be shaped like a traditional football helmet, with perhaps a somewhat larger overall exterior surface area than present helmets.

1a. The method described in 1 above, being a manufacture or combination of matter, which may include chemicals used to alter the elasticity and flexibility of the method, for preventing injuries in team sports; comprising a combination of materials in the outer shell of the said helmet, one combination being a first compound consisting of a strong yet flexible cloth such as a thin layer of any flexible Kevlar® fabric; and a second compound consisting of an infusion within, or a covering over the interior and exterior surface of the first compound, of rubber or another non-porous or waterproof substance, for the very specific purpose of providing a lightweight and flexible exterior surface for a sports helmet. Also useful may be a combination of infused rubber, or another non-porous or waterproof substance, or one of the other herein described means of waterproofing, and Kevlar® 49 Fabrics, which are fabrics with Low density, high tensile strength and excellent toughness, resistance to fatigue and impact damage as well as good wear resistance, or Kevlar 29 Fabrics, Ballistic Grade such as Warp 17 Kevlar 29 3000 Denier X Fill 17 Kevlar 29 3000 Denier, Plain Weave.

1b. The method described in 1 above, being a manufacture or combination of matter consisting of woven stainless steel wire, Kevlar®, and polyester, infused with rubber; or a combination of Kevlar® infused with nitrile rubber; or a combination of a nylon or Kevlar® infused with or coated with Polyurethane, which is made of highly elastic organic polymers, or chains of molecules that are primarily composed of carbon and hydrogen derived from fossil fuels, which in some formulations can be soft and rubbery in use; or a combination of the same materials infused or coated with Ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene (UHMWPE, UHMW), also known as high-modulus polyethylene, (HMPE), or high-performance polyethylene (HPPE), or with Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), a synthetic fluoropolymer of tetrafluoroethylene. The best-known brand name of PTFE-based formulas is Teflon by DuPont; or a combination of Gore-Tex materials, typically based on thermo-mechanically expanded PTFE and other fluoropolymer products, along with one of the waterproofing methods described in this Paragraph 1; a combination of 1000 (or less or more) Denier very heavy weight nylon with a urethane coating, which has excellent tear strength and is very abrasion resistant; or a rubber or another non-porous or waterproof substance combined with Spandex, Lycra or elastane, which are synthetic fiber known for their exceptional elasticity, and are polyester-polyurethane copolymers; or other similar materials.

2. A manufacture or combination of matter, which may include chemicals used to alter the viscosity and flexibility of the method, described as a stiff yet highly malleable and viscous gel of any kind between the outer shell of the helmet and the inside liner; with or without pockets or baffles or separators running from the outer shell to the inner lining made of a flexible material, extending at a 90 degree or other angle from the outer shell to the inner lining, permeable only with carefully calculated holes, dividing the gel into calculated moveable compartments; all for the specific intended purpose of use in team sports and other external impact mitigation situations, which protect the wearer from concussions and other injuries; the described pockets or baffles or separators will have small holes in them which will allow the movement of fluids side-to-side from one part of the interior space to another only at a pre-determined rate of transmission, and will eliminate almost the entire unrestrained lateral or sideways surge brought about by kinetic energy which can occur in any volume of liquid or gel when it is suddenly impacted or otherwise acted upon by an outside force, and this restraint of surge is particularly important with regard to impacts to the side of the helmet, and to sideswipe impacts regardless of the angle with which the impact intercepts the outer shell of the helmet.

2a. The method described in 2 above, being a manufacture or a composition of matter for preventing injuries in team sports; comprising a combination of matter consisting of (1) the outer and inner shell of the helmet as described herein, combined with (2) a malleable and viscous gel of any kind, including but not limited to the formulations described in the rest of this sentence, in combination with the outer and inner shell, said gel being structured to be flexibly in the space between the outer shell of the said helmet and the inside lining of the helmet and to be able to compress sufficiently to relieve much of the stress of an impact on the brain; one formulation being a medical grade collagen gel with various concentrations of glutaraldehyde which render the gel more or less viscous, for the specific purpose of acting as an external impact mitigation structure. See “Characterization of collagen gel solutions and collagen matrices for cell culture” by Sheu, Huang, Yeh, and Ho, Biomaterials 22 (2001) 1713-1719; or a hydrogel, which is a network of polymer chains that are hydrophilic; or a fairly liquid ultrasound gel with chemical additives to make it more or less viscous; or IsoGel®, a unique super soft viscous polymer that provides superior properties for cushioning and comfort products, which is chemically altered with different additives and formulations to provide complete customization of the IsoGel® polymer system to fit any application.

3. An inside lining between the inner surface of the shock-absorbent gel and the scalp of the wearer, to hold in the moveable and possibly somewhat liquid shock-absorbent gel; which conforms to the shape of the head and is made of probably much softer yet still waterproof combinations of the same or similar materials as the outer shell; in a combination of matter, with an inner liner between the inner materials which hold in the gel and the scalp, made of cloth or other soft material; and/or a honeycombed or other breathable flexible material against the head, which conforms to the shape of the head, and which may allow some circulation of air next to the scalp. The inner liner may or may not have blocks of soft foam between the liner and the head to allow the circulation of air.

4. The outer shell and the inside lining of the present invention may be made of the same materials or of different materials, or different formulations of the same material such as Kevlar. These different materials must be bonded together at the edge of the helmet in such a way that no leakage or tearing or rupture will occur when force is applied to the exterior of the helmet. Here it is described that the two portions of the helmet, the outer shell and the inner cap, shall be bonded together with the application of a viscous strip of soft plastic between the edges, or a glue which is flexible after drying, and that after this initial bonding the two sections shall be anchored by sewing the two sections together with rather large loops of a high tensile strength thread. The sewing will prevent any separation of the glued edges under even the maximum force applied to the exterior of the sports helmet. The bonding of the sections of possibly disparate materials in a sports helmet is the innovation, and may include different materials than otherwise described here.

4. The absence of an ear hole on either side of the here described helmet. Traditional helmets have an ear hole penetrating from the inside to the outside of the helmet on each side, so that the individual can hear sounds from the field of play. The preferred embodiment would not have an ear hole, which would allow for a more even distribution and give of the gel within the sides of the helmet. With no ear hole, the preferred embodiment would be a manufacture or combination of matter, the combination of matter being (1) the “absence of an earhole” along with (2) the use of an electronic radio device of heavy duty construction with a microphone to the outside of the helmet and/or a wireless connection to other players and/or to the sidelines.