Mayf-- I like your line of thinking. Pick components from the mass
production automotive technology we already have today. The idea that the
device should only be active under actual crash conditions and then
automatically revert to passive or at least non-interfering afterward makes
a lot of sense for us as it did to automotive engineers many years ago when
they first started looking beyond simple seatbelts to improve vehicle
safety.
Do we really understand what forces, moments, impulses and accelerations the
head, neck and upper torso can tolerate? That's probably the place to
start. There are beginnings of that in some of the device manufacturer's
websites.
This all sort of makes me wish I could be back in the working world with a
budget to spend on R&D in this direction.
Ed
----- Original Message -----
From: "drmayf" <drmayf@mayfco.com>
To: "LSR" <land-speed@autox.team.net>
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 11:30 AM
Subject: [Land-speed] Head Restraints...another concept.
(snip)
> Now, how about a latching mechanism ala our seat belts? Our lap
> restraints in our street vehicles have belts with inertia mechanisms
> which lock up when a load (impact) happens. Could something like that be
> adapted to prevent forward whip lash by attaching to the helmet? I could
> see something like this with a bit of development. Also there are
> inertia switches on virtually every new car made today to kill the fuel
> pump for the EFI. Could that switch be adapted to latch a head restraint
> in the event of impact and then release so many seconds after that?
> This also seens to be a configuration which is doable.
(snip)
> Any additional thoughts?
> mayf, rested up now, headed back to the front yard to whip the jungle
> into shape...
_______________________________________________
Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html
Land-speed mailing list
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/land-speed
|