Jump to content

Mask innovation: A look into brainstorming new possibilities.


Recommended Posts

First problem that comes to my mind is how far away the cage is from your eyes. the closer it is to your face, the less it obstructs your view; once it moves further away, it's virtually impossible to position the bars in such a way that they aren't all up in your field of view.

Especially weird given that they definitely gave thought to sight lines, what with the transparent chin piece.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets keep in mind that this is just a sports science kind of project, pushing the envelope to see what can be achieved under the right conditions.

The model seen has the following issues that I think needs rethinking: The front frame/shell does not extend back enough on the side for those blind shots like in one-timers or in the RVH. The forehead seems to have a large flat spot that won't help deflect the puck properly. The studs that stick out, especially on the top of the head would catch on puck, maybe. The lower transparent chin might fog up or have water droplets not helping with vision, in any case you usually look down the cage, not the chin itself (Grilles Anges Gardien is a great choice). In this example the D3O rings are supposed to add as dampeners, but D3O hardens upon impact, not confident about it. I would also add screws to the lower corner of the cage to help better secure it to the shell, normally masks have 6 screw attachments.

It would be interesting to have the designer participate and understand his thinking process.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 things that make me questions this:

·        The open area behind the ear- I know the idea is that you should be facing the puck, but there are too many goal-mouth scrambles and strange deflections to allow this

·        In the image shown it appears that the “designer” is caught up copying “high-point” features which don’t necessarily add to the function but rather is an attempt to gain crown approval – the Brian’s reference, cage extension as a “nod to past mask designs”, round vent holes, outer shell supposedly inspired by older masks

This appears more like a post secondary school project-a conceptual design, with a lot of concept and not too much design…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In case anyone missed it, this concept was done in 2009.  The designer references such vintage brands as RBK and Nike-Bauer (lol)...it looks like it done for a design portfolio than actually marketed to gear manufacturers

If we want to engage in mask design discourse, we may be better served looking at what's actually being made and sold now and trying to improve on something that was admittedly dead in the water the day he published

image.png.6bb2adc366770aee15fc06f621a4b362.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, it has to be taken at face value. Granted it was in 2009 and was merely an attempt at exploring the extremes, I'm sure this is how Pete Smith and company approached the idea of their Boxy hinge foam pads. Same could be said of the Onezy mask (forgot the actual name).

We could talk more on what's out now. Warrior was the latest to talk about new and exciting things about their mask line introduction. I still am not sure of what are exactly the big innovations. Maybe they should do a video breaking it down for the masses.

Bottom line, I thought it would be cool to post it as all ideas in the world stem from either simple concepts to pushing beyond the norm.

At least it got you talking ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey @RichMan - no disrespect to you - didn't mean it to come out that way if it did.  I just personally have an issue with people floating conceptual designs with no real meat. If there was some testing done to back this idea up, then fine. I've seen many conceptual designs that end up nothing like the original because the real work is getting it to do what it needs to. Until you have a functioning concept, it is , in this case, just someone drawing goalie masks.

Someone once said to me, before you buy into anything you should first always para-phrase the line from "Jerry McGuire": "Show me the numbers/stats"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Colander said:

Hey @RichMan - no disrespect to you - didn't mean it to come out that way if it did.  I just personally have an issue with people floating conceptual designs with no real meat. If there was some testing done to back this idea up, then fine. I've seen many conceptual designs that end up nothing like the original because the real work is getting it to do what it needs to. Until you have a functioning concept, it is , in this case, just someone drawing goalie masks.

Someone once said to me, before you buy into anything you should first always para-phrase the line from "Jerry McGuire": "Show me the numbers/stats"

 

No insult taken. We're just throwing around thoughts and opinions just like at the pub :D 

There has to be a shit load of designs and drawings out there that never saw the light of production on any given subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always thought there could be thicker padding inside the damn mask but also been thinking about puck redesign. A differently designed puck would change everything. A game changer if you will. Instead of the vulcanized rubber, there could be something that's dense but at the same time more absorbing, the idea of course  being like safer barriers in auto racing. The puck could become more bouncy, who knows, but with the right compounds there could be a happy medium found.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Scythe said:

I've always thought there could be thicker padding inside the damn mask but also been thinking about puck redesign. A differently designed puck would change everything. A game changer if you will. Instead of the vulcanized rubber, there could be something that's dense but at the same time more absorbing, the idea of course  being like safer barriers in auto racing. The puck could become more bouncy, who knows, but with the right compounds there could be a happy medium found.   

How about a dual density puck?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any kind of material that makes pucks more absorbent upon impact with our masks would mean players aren't able to accelerate the puck off of one timers or slapshots the way they currently are, and it would massively change the way pucks handle on a stick. There's also cost to consider, and adoption at other levels of hockey; a puck which you can't shoot as hard, handles very differently, and is more expensive to manufacture, won't be adopted at lower levels.

I don't see it going anywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Scythe said:

I've always thought there could be thicker padding inside the damn mask but also been thinking about puck redesign. ...

IMO - close, but two items (which, yes I have stated before):

1. Thicker or possibly  dual density foam, in the sweat band

2. Chin cup with more resilient straps

Your mask is then mated to your head via two resilient mounting points.  I never understood the ides of having the inside of the mask covered with semi-stiff foam - all that does is transfer all the shock directly to your head, whereas a resilient support allows for deceleration.

I already did the thicker sweatband bit (about 2x as thick as the original) -really made a difference IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Colander said:

IMO - close, but two items (which, yes I have stated before):

1. Thicker or possibly  dual density foam, in the sweat band

2. Chin cup with more resilient straps

Your mask is then mated to your head via two resilient mounting points.  I never understood the ides of having the inside of the mask covered with semi-stiff foam - all that does is transfer all the shock directly to your head, whereas a resilient support allows for deceleration.

I already did the thicker sweatband bit (about 2x as thick as the original) -really made a difference IMO

An absorbent layer underneath a stiff outer shell is how armour has been made since humans started forming metal into sheets, because it works.

The semi-stiff foam is what absorbs the shock; the stiff outer shell ensures that the impact is spread throughout all of the foam, dispersing the energy as widely as possible. So, yes, while some energy will transfer through those layers, it's about dispersing that energy over as wide an area as possible.

Using only two mounting points would concentrate energy transfer into those two places, which is exactly what you don't want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The two mounting points would be resilient  to allow dissipation go the energy via deceleration. If you look at  seat belt, that's essentially what it does. Even an air bag has a level of resilience. Impacting a super high pressure (i.e. hard) air bag would be no different that slamming into the dash or steering wheel..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Colander said:

The two mounting points would be resilient  to allow dissipation go the energy via deceleration. If you look at  seat belt, that's essentially what it does. Even an air bag has a level of resilience. Impacting a super high pressure (i.e. hard) air bag would be no different that slamming into the dash or steering wheel..

Standard seatbelts do a great job of keeping you from flying out of the vehicle, or rattling around inside like a pinball, during a collision; but, they're shit at decelerating your body in such a way that you don't get hurt. That's why more specialized vehicles which travel at higher speeds use things like four-point harnesses that lock you in place more securely, and it's also why airbags exist. Airbags work because they form around your body when you meet, dispersing your energy over as wide an area as possible, and increase the time you spend decelerating, to take pressure off of the seatbelt.

Two mounting points would not improve energy dispersal throughout your mask over an absorbent foam that closely conforms to your skull.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Colander said:

Actually seat belts do more that that, employing  pyrotechnics in the pretensioners per the linked article to increase as they put it the "ride-down" deceleration as explained in the linked article

http://www.carsp.ca/research/resources/high-tech-vehicle-safety-systems/seat-belt-pretensioners/

 

The pretensioning mechanism only removes slack from the belt; like I said, they're designed to keep you in one place, not to decelerate you safely. That's what the airbag is for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, airbags are not a resilient system.

A hockey stick is a resilient system: it stores energy when you flex it, then releases that energy when you follow through, and reverts back to true after releasing that energy.

Airbags absorb the impact energy of your body, which is released by dispersing gases, and do not revert back to true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK - I am defining resilient as something that flexes under load, not necessarily that it springs back.   I always think of something springing back as an an elastic deformation, but, yes you are correct in your definition of resilient.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 20 Guests (See full list)

  • Member Statistics

    2,015
    Total Members
    2,646
    Most Online
    Niall Tucker
    Newest Member
    Niall Tucker
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...