tom91ita
01-04-2008, 10:55 PM
Okay, I have been thinking about this quite a bit as I am concerned with the number of organizations that cite SFI 38.1. It could become the de facto spec for all road racing sanctioning bodies.
I will also say up front that I do not have an Isaac nor a HANs or any other type of H&NR other than a really good horse collar. Some may think that it is appropriate I have a horse collar as I have been referred to as a horse's anatomy before.
But I am a firm believer in personal responsibility. So after reading more and looking at the SFI website, I thought why aren’t we giving specific recommendations to NASA & SCCA about an alternate SFI specification that would allow the Isaac.
From http://www.sfifoundation.com/
How is a Standard Initiated?
The SFI Technical Committee initiates the specification process, typically at the request of the affected industry or race sanctioning body.[/b]
As I read the above, a race sanctioning body can request that a specification process be initiated.
Now go to the SFI 38.1 spec (not sure if 10/2004 is current but did not see 38.1 at SFI site):
http://www.hmsmotorsport.com/docs/SFI_38.1...ecification.pdf (http://www.hmsmotorsport.com/docs/SFI_38.1_Head_Restraint_Specification.pdf)
So what would happen if we asked SCCA & NASA to request the following type of spec for these sections (please compare/contrast to the similar sections at the SFI 38.1 noted above) as sort of a proposed SFI Spec 38.2?
2.2 Restraining Devices:
A. Linkages attached to the helmet which transfer restraining loads directly to the helmet from the main device(s) which is secured to the driver's shoulder harness. Methods for attachment of these linkages to the helmet and main device shall be prescribed by the manufacturer.
B. The main device shall be the seat belts or other strap systems such that the reactive load carrying components move with the torso and controls head, neck, and torso relative positions during forward or off-center impact situations.
2.3 Reaction Linkage: The means by which the head force necessary to limit displacement of the head with respect to the torso is reacted. Acceptable reaction linkages could include load paths to the restraint webbing. Direct attachment to react loads to a fixed point or points on a vehicle structure will not be acceptable because of the potential for torso displacements with respect to these points. Imposed loading by the reaction linkage to other areas of the body should be applied using approaches demonstrated to be practical without imposing risk of serious injury.
2.5 Adjustment and release mechanism(s) shall be accessible to both the user and to external personnel to disengage the Head and Neck Restraint System during emergency situations.
I think we need to be proactive on this and start planting the seeds for alternate ideas in the CRB/BOD of SCCA and also send similar notes to NASA. I think that NASA is genuinely interested in safety but they are also interested in a SFI spec that they can point to as well.
This is not intended to be the best but it is a whipping boy to spur productive discussion. Remember, you can lead a horse to water but the horse's anatomy is not far behind.
thanks,
tom
I will also say up front that I do not have an Isaac nor a HANs or any other type of H&NR other than a really good horse collar. Some may think that it is appropriate I have a horse collar as I have been referred to as a horse's anatomy before.
But I am a firm believer in personal responsibility. So after reading more and looking at the SFI website, I thought why aren’t we giving specific recommendations to NASA & SCCA about an alternate SFI specification that would allow the Isaac.
From http://www.sfifoundation.com/
How is a Standard Initiated?
The SFI Technical Committee initiates the specification process, typically at the request of the affected industry or race sanctioning body.[/b]
As I read the above, a race sanctioning body can request that a specification process be initiated.
Now go to the SFI 38.1 spec (not sure if 10/2004 is current but did not see 38.1 at SFI site):
http://www.hmsmotorsport.com/docs/SFI_38.1...ecification.pdf (http://www.hmsmotorsport.com/docs/SFI_38.1_Head_Restraint_Specification.pdf)
So what would happen if we asked SCCA & NASA to request the following type of spec for these sections (please compare/contrast to the similar sections at the SFI 38.1 noted above) as sort of a proposed SFI Spec 38.2?
2.2 Restraining Devices:
A. Linkages attached to the helmet which transfer restraining loads directly to the helmet from the main device(s) which is secured to the driver's shoulder harness. Methods for attachment of these linkages to the helmet and main device shall be prescribed by the manufacturer.
B. The main device shall be the seat belts or other strap systems such that the reactive load carrying components move with the torso and controls head, neck, and torso relative positions during forward or off-center impact situations.
2.3 Reaction Linkage: The means by which the head force necessary to limit displacement of the head with respect to the torso is reacted. Acceptable reaction linkages could include load paths to the restraint webbing. Direct attachment to react loads to a fixed point or points on a vehicle structure will not be acceptable because of the potential for torso displacements with respect to these points. Imposed loading by the reaction linkage to other areas of the body should be applied using approaches demonstrated to be practical without imposing risk of serious injury.
2.5 Adjustment and release mechanism(s) shall be accessible to both the user and to external personnel to disengage the Head and Neck Restraint System during emergency situations.
I think we need to be proactive on this and start planting the seeds for alternate ideas in the CRB/BOD of SCCA and also send similar notes to NASA. I think that NASA is genuinely interested in safety but they are also interested in a SFI spec that they can point to as well.
This is not intended to be the best but it is a whipping boy to spur productive discussion. Remember, you can lead a horse to water but the horse's anatomy is not far behind.
thanks,
tom