Ergonomic Evaluation of Pilot Helmet and Neck Injury

  • Xiangyu GeEmail author
  • Qianxiang Zhou
  • Zhongqi Liu
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 973)


In addition to protecting pilot’s head, flying helmet is also a mounting platform for head-mounted display, tracking and sighting systems, night vision devices, oxygen masks, and wireless communication devices. Although these helmets can greatly improve the combat effectiveness, these systems may increase the support load of head and neck, and the irrational design of helmet ergonomics will lead to the shift of Centre of Gravity (CG) of helmet and the increase of joint torque of neck, which increases the risk of neck injury to pilot. In response to this problem, this paper developed a system based on the three-point method for measuring CG of helmet, which is used to measure CG and Moment of Inertia (MI) of helmet, and to measure the physical parameters of two flying helmets. Measurement results are follows: mass M1 = 1.143 kg, M2 = 1.020 kg, CG C1 = (0.002, 0.542 and 7.630 cm), C2 = (0.314, 0.117 and 2.446 cm).MI J1 = (0.072, 0.089, 0.016 kg•m2), J2 = (0.041, 0.056, 0.015 kg•m2).The error analysis results show that the measurement error of system is less than 2 mm, which indicates that the system has high calculation accuracy and simple testing steps. In addition, the neck muscle fatigue test of wearing a helmet was carried out, and the fatigue degree of each muscle was analyzed quantitatively by using muscle fatigue model. This paper can provide some method support for man-machine ergonomics design of helmet, analysis of helmet mass parameter and evaluation of pilot’s neck injury.


Flight helmet Ergonomics evaluation Neck injury Centre of gravity Moment of Inertia sEMG Muscle fatigue 


  1. 1.
    Gaur, S.J., Joshi, V.V., Aravindakshan, B., Aravind, A.S.: Determination of helmet CG and evaluation of neck injury potentials using ‘knox box criteria’ and neck torque limits. Ind. Aerosp. Med 57(1), 37–44 (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Manoogian, S.J., Kennedy, E.A., Duma, S.M.: A literature review of musculoskeletal injuries to the human neck and the effect of head supported mass worn by soldiers. USAARL contract report no. CR-2006-01 (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Merkle, A.C., Kleinbeiger, M., Mannel, O.U.: The Effect of Head Supported Mass on the Risk of Neck Injury in Army Personnel. John Hopkins APL Technical digest, 26 (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bevan, M. G., Ward, E., Luong, Q.: Neck torque study induced by head-borne visual augmentation systems (VAS) in ground-based applications. NSTD-09-1007 (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Leclair, B., O”Connor, P.J., Podrucky, S., Lievers, W.B.: Measuring the mass and center of gravity of helmet systems for underground workers. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 64, 23–30 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bogerd, C.P.: A review on ergonomics of headgear: thermal effects. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 45, 1–12 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mathys, R., Ferguson, S.J.: Simulation of the effects of different pilot helmets on neck loading during air combat. J. Biomech. 45(14), 2362–2367 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mh, V.D.O., Steinman, Y., Sluiter, J.K., et al.: The effect of an optimised helmet fit on neck load and neck pain during military helicopter flights. Appl. Ergon. 43(5), 958–964 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ibrahim, E.: The Effects of Neck Posture and Head Load on the Cervical Spine and Upper Extremities. Master’s thesis. McMaster University, Hamilton, ON (2015)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ankrum, D.R.: Questions to ask when interpreting surface electromyography (sEMG) results. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Ann. Meet. Proc. 44(30), 5530–5533 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mannion, A.F, Dolan, P.: Electromyographic median frequency changes during isometric contraction of the back extensors to fatigue. Spine 19(11), 1223–1229 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Masuda, K., Masuda, T., Sadoyama, T., et al.: Changes in surface EMG parameters during static and dynamic fatiguing contractions. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 9(1), 39–46 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Falla, D., Rainoldi, A., Merletti, R., et al.: Myoelectric manifestations of sternocleidomastoid and anterior scalene muscle fatigue in chronic neck pain patients. Clin. Neurophysiol. 114(3), 488–495 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stapley, P.J., Beretta, M.V., Dalla Toffola, E., et al.: Neck muscle fatigue and postural control in patients with whiplash injury. Clin. Neurophysiol. 117(3), 610–622 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bronfort, G., Evans, R., Nelson, B., et al.: A randomized clinical trial of exercise and spinal manipulation for patients with chronic neck pain. Spine 26(7), 788–797 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Xiaohong, J., Junbing, M., Rencheng, W., et al.: Effect of helmet mass and mass center on neck muscle strength in military pilots. J. Med. Biomech. 27(4), 416–420 (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yang, L.F., Kang, B.: Study on human neck muscles’ comfort of different height levels based on sEMG method. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Asia Conference on Industrial Engineering and Management Innovation. Atlantis Press, Paris, pp. 563–574 (2016)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chowdhury, S.K., Nimbarte, A.D., Jaridi, M.A.: Discrete wavelet transform analysis of surface electromyography for the fatigue assessment of neck and shoulder muscles. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 23(5), 995–1003 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dragomiretskiy, K., Zosso, D.: Variational mode decomposition. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 62(3), 531–544 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Costa, M., Goldberger, A.L., Peng, C.K.: Multiscale entropy analysis of complex physiologic time series. Phys. Rev. Lett. 89(6), 705–708 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Costa, M., Healey, J.A.: Multiscale entropy analysis of complex heart rate dynamics: discrimination of age and heart failure effects. Comput. Cardiol. IEEE (2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Takahashi, T., Cho, R.Y., Mizuno, T., et al.: Antipsychotics reverse abnormal EEG complexity in drug-naive schizophrenia: a multiscale entropy analysis. Neuroimage 51(1), 173–182 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Escudero, J., Abásolo, D., Hornero, R., et al.: Analysis of electroencephalograms in Alzheimer’s disease patients with multiscale entropy. Physiol. Measurement 27(11), 1091 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Catarino, A., Churches, O., Baron-Cohen, S., et al.: Atypical EEG complexity in autism spectrum conditions: a multiscale entropy analysis. Clin. Neurophysiol. 122(12), 2375–2383 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Beihang University School of Biological Science and MedicalBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations