[jimmy]

Bruce Weinman in:
http://www.specialstage.com/forum/cgi-bin/DCForumID2/1565.html#47
talked a lot about the HANS.

I went to their website
http://www.hansdevice.com/
and it appears silent on rallying.

Bruce, is there more info out there regarding rally and HANS? Does anyone other than Mark use one? Specifically, has a co-driver anywhere in the world used one, and if so, how was it? Were there handouts or cites or anything else that came from your seminar? Thanks.

press on,
jimmy

 

[Trevor Donison]

>Bruce Weinman in:
>http://www.specialstage.com/forum/cgi-bin/DCForumID2/1565.html#47
>talked a lot about the HANS.
>
>I went to their website
>http://www.hansdevice.com/
>and it appears silent on rallying.
>
>Bruce, is there more info out there regarding rally and
>HANS? Does anyone other than Mark use one? Specifically,
>has a co-driver anywhere in the world used one, and if so,
>how was it? Were there handouts or cites or anything else
>that came from your seminar? Thanks.
>
>press on,
> jimmy

Thanks Jimmy (or is that James?)

Mark, could you give us some real world experience information?

 

[mayhem83]

>Mark, could you give us some real world experience
>information?

I can tell you that a normal person with the HANS set up properly will see reduced motion with a HANS device. Since my arthritic condition already severely limits my mobility, I do not see any reduction in range of motion.

I do feel that the reduction in mobility for most people is more than acceptable for the additional protection the device offers. I would also highly recommend looking at all types of head and neck restraint devices available and choose which would be best for your situation.

The devices that I know are available are;

HANS device
Hutchins device
G-Force has one
Simpson has one
Bill Simpson's new company has one
Many seat manufacturers make seat that either have or can add head, shoulder and knee support wings.

Look into all options and consult experts as I certainly am not an expert on restraint devices.

All that being said, I will continue to use the HANS device as it works very well for me.

Mark Utecht

 

[Bruce]

>Bruce, is there more info out there regarding rally and
>HANS? Does anyone other than Mark use one? Specifically,
>has a co-driver anywhere in the world used one, and if so,
>how was it? Were there handouts or cites or anything else
>that came from your seminar? Thanks.
>

Sorry, Jim, no handouts. Rallying had not been on H&D's radar screen up until we talked to them, and I'm not aware if there are codrivers using it. If you have questions, you can contact them directly and they're glad to answer.

We've been working on getting one or two HANS devices to have codrivers test, but nothing is certain yet.

Bruce

 

[Bruce]

>Many seat manufacturers make seat that either have or can
>add head, shoulder and knee support wings.

Take a look at NASCAR in-car shots and you'll see how heavily reinforced the head support wings are...this is due to some of Dr. Melvin's research. You'll also see that many are using those triangular nets in the middle of the car to further restrain the driver in a side impact. It seems that something like this might have applications in rallying.

Bruce

 

[Jim]

The Isaac System (similar to HANS but uses shocks instead of straps) is testing for 90 degree side impacts and had this to say:

The Isaac System may also help protect the driver in side impacts, but this research has just begun. "We recently completed computer simulations of how the Isaac System would react in a 90 degree crash, and discovered that it would remove about 50% of lateral head loads, which are very dangerous," Baker said. This issue is presently being addressed with side head supports built into the seat or nets used to control head motion, but these can limit driver visibility and make it difficult to exit the car quickly. "Ideally, the Isaac System alone could solve this problem, but we won't know until we complete crash testing. It certainly helps, though," said Baker.

http://isaacdirect.com/

[hr]

Also, interestingly enough, Bell Motorsports has this on their website:

BELL Motorsports and PYROTECT do NOT recommend any helmet restraint system whatsoever. To install such an aftermarket system on any BELL or PYROTECT helmet immediately voids all warranty's.

We suggest you review the Society of Automotive Engineers paper #2002-01-3304 from the SAE Motorsports conference of December 2002 completely and draw you own, independent conclusion as to install such a device or not.

We use our special, extra high density elastomeric contoured collar that fits down over the shoulders, is elliptical shape and sized the same as Snell 95 or later helmets. Impact in any direction will cause the helmet to initially compress the collar, and will do so without any instantaneous peak deceleration or neck rotation. This design limits neck extension, until full collar compression, without ?snap?, and then should not cause neck compression, a possible serious consequence of some head restraint devices.

http://www.bellmotorsports.com/helmet_restraint_devices.htm

[hr]

Just sharing some information found while looking for instances of helmet restraint involved in rally or off-road racing.

 

[shortcakes]

There is also the Wright Device, which was developed by an SCCA Club Racer, who works/or worked for NASA.

Ask your Club Racing peers about testing devices. Their use is burgeoning in the Sports Racer/Formula classes. Many of them had similar complaints about visability, and ease of removal in case of a fast exit.

As I understand it, it took them 3 or 4 sessions to get use to the additional distraction. Now, they are not even noticed.

I would imagine if the Rally community is able to offer any crash data on the frequency of accidents vs. injuries, the developers would be able to better conform a system that works for the majority of Rally incidents.

Thanks, Holly Remington

 

[SeanKHotay]

SAE paper #2002-01-3304: SledTest Eval. of Head/Neck Restraints

>We suggest you review the Society of Automotive Engineers
>paper #2002-01-3304 from the SAE Motorsports conference of
>December 2002 completely and draw you own, independent
>conclusion as to install such a device or not.

If anyone needs/wants a copy, I've got it. 819Kb

Send me a note at: mull ad [email protected] ea rth link .net (take out the spaces)

Incidently, the aforementioned Dr. Melvin is one of the authors. I think I also attended a seminar by Foster, one of the other authors (gotta go thru my notes @ work to verify).



(edited for grammar)

 

[SeanKHotay]

I, too, attended one of Dr. Melvin's seminars on racing safety ('Driver Safety for the Weekend Warrior'), this sponsored by the Detroit Region back in May '01. He also works as a consultant to my employer, TRW (Occupant Safety Systems).

Bruce stated pretty much the jist I took from the seminar except I'd add the following:

There's a huge difference btwn 6-point & 5-point belts. The function of these belts/this belt is as an anti-submarine device (i.e., keeps you from sliding under the lap belt), keeping the lap belt low &, especially in the case of 6pt, restraining movement of extremities.

Properly placed/anchored, the 6-point works well in this capacity; they also reduce chest loads 50% & neck tension 15% over 4pt belts.

5-point harnesses work only slightly better than 4-point harnesses.

Those triangular nets are call Head Guiding nets. They are designed to minimise neck twisting in a rollover & side impacts. 'Proper placement is @ head level angled outward @ 30deg included. They've shown great promise in the sprint/Outlaw cars.'

I've got (free-form) notes from Dr. Melvin's talk if anyone's interested.

(editted for clarity & potentially misleading info)

 

[SeanKHotay]

<snip>
>I went to their website
>http://www.hansdevice.com/
>and it appears silent on rallying.
<snip>

They've update the site since I last visited.

I'm pretty sure the previous version mentioned rallying. I think they referenced the 20deg version for rally folk like us (& other racing in production-based cars)...

 

[Audi UrQ]

>
>Those triangular nets are call Head Guiding nets. They are
>designed to minimise neck twisting in a rollover. 'Proper
>placement is @ head level angled outward @ 30deg included.
>They've shown great promise in the sprint/Outlaw cars.'
>

The most recent (or maybe the one before that) copy of the SCCA publication 'SportsCar' had an article on saftey, and mentioned these head guiding nets. Seems to me they may be useful in helping in the case of side impacts (without reducing visibility as much as e.g. those touring car-style seats with the wrap-around head supports). Though, obviously, side nets are not going to help in the case of a full frontal head-on (pun not intended) collision.

>
>* yes, they work to keep the lap belt low but it's not the
>anti-submarine straps' main design function.

Actually, I think I remember reading exactly the opposite (I think it was in the safety / instruction pamphlet that came with my Schroth harnesses) i.e. the purpose of the 5th/6th point is in fact not in and of itself meant to physically prevent your forward movement .... it's purpose is to keep the lap belts low, and it is the restriction of the lap belts moving up that keeps the body from submarining under the belts.

I'm obviously not an expert on this, and it seems you do something saftey-related for a living - so I (or even Schroth) may well be wrong. Just repeating what I think I remember reading. I will see if I can find the pamphlet.

Also, I was interested in their statement regarding the significant increase in effectiveness w.r.t 5 pt. versus 6 pt. harnesses. Not questioning their statement, but I am interested if anyone has any experience with this i.e. comparative effectiveness ? Have not used a 6 pt. Are they much more difficult to get in/out of ? Also, do 6 pt. harnesses require a 6 pt. buckle, or do the 2 loops attach to a single clip, and can therfore use the same buckle as a 5 pt. ?

 

[Glenn Wallace]

Great info!

 

[SeanKHotay]

>
>>
>>Those triangular nets are call Head Guiding nets. They are
>>designed to minimise neck twisting in a rollover. <snip>
>>
>
>The most recent (or maybe the one before that) copy of the
>SCCA publication 'SportsCar' had an article on saftey, and
>mentioned these head guiding nets. Seems to me they may be
>useful in helping in the case of side impacts <snip>

Yes, they also minimise neck/head movement in side impacts, too. Inadvertant omission... I'll update my post.

They don't do much to protect from side impact intrusion.


>>* yes, they work to keep the lap belt low but it's not the
>>anti-submarine straps' main design function.
>
>Actually, I think I remember reading exactly the opposite (I
>think it was in the safety / instruction pamphlet that came
>with my Schroth harnesses) i.e. the purpose of the 5th/6th
>point is in fact not in and of itself meant to physically
>prevent your forward movement .... it's purpose is to keep
>the lap belts low, and it is the restriction of the lap
>belts moving up that keeps the body from submarining under
>the belts.

Definitely, a low lap belt does a great deal to help in anti-submarining, e.g., passenger car safety using 3pt harnesses. Position of the lap belt's anchors is another factor in keeping the lap belt low.

The main point of my comments were that the 6pt harness does a much better job of restraint.

Tho, hmmm...I might have mixed facts on 5pt v. 6pt...I'm trying to paraphrase Dr. Melvin from my 2yo notes so my comments are suspect.

I don't claim to be a belt expert, either.

Thinking some more, I would agree that the main function of the 5-point harness' 5th belt is to keep the lap belt low.

The 5pt harness does little, tho, to keep the lower extremities from moving forward, i.e., 'pulling' one's body under the lap belt. For example, if the collision is off-center, one's body will have a tendency to skew around the 5th belt.

The 6th & 5th belts of a 6pt harness, 'properly anchored below or behind the butt', does a great deal to prevent this forward movement, even in an off-centered crash.

Methinks my original post needs some cleaning up...


><snip> ... (....Schroth) may well be wrong. <snip>

I would believe Schroth over my ramblings. Regardless of which is the main function, the point is that a low lap belt & lower extremity restraint prevent submarining.

 

[Guest]

It would be interesting to see how Bell's collar compares in the same sled testing they ran on the other 3 devices.

I have to think they are just covering their own behinds by not allowing modifications to their helmuts.

 

[John Sundelin]

If I remember correctly, there are a couple of different styles of 6 pt belts. For a reclined seating position (i.e. formula car), the straps are set up a little differently, and are intended to prevent forward motion to some extent. The sedan style systems are really not much different than a standard 5 pt. I have a 6 pt Schroth Profi-III in my car, mostly to split the load on the anchoring points, but it also does tend to contact the less critical areas of one's anatomy. I imagine it would still be extremely painful to have it stop much of the forward motion though.

--
John

 

[rallymeister]

rallymeister

There is alot of good info here on this topic. Here is my take on all the devices out there ( except neck collar by Bell what a joke) none of the devices are going to stop all injuries and as many ways as we can hit a tree I dont think they ever will. But in light of the recent events it will probably years before our sport gets any feedback on the cause of death. You dont have to be a rocket sientist to figure it out.I believe that all these systems will help minimize injury or death if they are worn and adjusted right. I have purchased a devise and will wear it at Maine in two weeks.I am going to first test the mobility and usability and will give any feedback that I can. I like and enjoy all the guys I rally with and I would like to keep it that way. It also earned me some additional browny points in the season long wife series standings.

# 96