Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 15, 2025

A Test Bed to Examine Helmet Fit and Retention and Biomechanical Measures of Head and Neck Injury in Simulated Impact
Published on: September 21, 2017
Cross-sectional survey to investigate bicycle riders' knowledge and experience of structural weakness in bicycles in
Julie Hatfield1, Soufiane Boufous2, Andrew Roman Novak3
1Transport and Road Safety Research, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia j.hatfield@unsw.edu.au.
Background:
Structural weakness may occur within bicycles (eg, during manufacture or impact) and may result in sudden failure and serious injuries. While some indicators of structural weakness may be detected by visual inspection, others require more advanced non-destructive tests. Available research is yet to adequately examine bicycle riders' awareness and experience of the structural weakness in bicycles, or their knowledge and use of testing methods.
Methods:
An online cross-section survey of 298 bicycle riders was conducted to address these knowledge gaps.
Results:
11.4% of respondents had experienced at least one crash that they suspected was due partly to structural weakness, with just over half resulting in injury and just under half involving costs greater than $A500. About 25% of respondents had a component replaced because of 'failure during normal use'. More than one third did not think it was necessary to test for indicators or weaknesses when buying a used bicycle, or after a crash. Testing was most likely following motor vehicle collisions and for bicycles with carbon components. Visual inspection was the most reported form of testing and only 42% of respondents reported being aware of any non-destructive methods of testing.
Discussion And Conclusions:
11.4% of respondents had experienced at least one crash that they suspected was due partly to structural weakness, with just over half resulting in injury and just under half involving costs greater than $A500. About 25% of respondents had a component replaced because of 'failure during normal use'. More than one-third did not think it was necessary to test for indicators or weaknesses when buying a used bicycle or after a crash. Testing was most likely following motor vehicle collisions and for bicycles with carbon components. Visual inspection was the most reported form of testing, and only 42% of respondents reported being aware of any non-destructive methods of testing.Results suggest that structural weakness in bicycles is fairly common while awareness of the issue, and methods of testing for it, is limited. Public education about when and how to test for weakness (eg, after any crash), and improvement in production standards and quality assurance, may reduce injuries due to bicycle failure.
Related Concept Videos
Design Consideration
The factor of safety is another key...
Fatigue
Surveys
Cross-bridge Cycle
Indeterminate Structure
Frames: Problem Solving II

