2007 HANS Mandating for NASA

#1

Anyone hear anything new on NASA’s decision on whether or not too make the HANS device mandatory for 2007. SCCA has already done it and My PCA buddies who race tell me the P-Car guys are going that way.

I have a HANS so it doesn’t affect me directly but alot of the newbie’s building cars should be aware of this. HANS device is not cheap $800-$1000. I didn’t mind spending the money since safety has always been my FIRST priority and I think for the peach of mind, it’s money well spent.

I haven’t heard anything new on the topic in a while so I thought it might be worth re-adressing. Last I heard is that there’s a VERY good chance that NASA will follow SCCA’s lead and put it in the rules for 2007.

Anyone with NASA connections shed some light on this?

#2

Brain - where did you read about SCCA mandating in 2007?
I haven’t heard any update on NASA mandating.
thanks,
bruce

brain wrote:

[quote]Anyone hear anything new on NASA’s decision on whether or not too make the HANS device mandatory for 2007. SCCA has already done it and My PCA buddies who race tell me the P-Car guys are going that way.

I have a HANS so it doesn’t affect me directly but alot of the newbie’s building cars should be aware of this. HANS device is not cheap $800-$1000. I didn’t mind spending the money since safety has always been my FIRST priority and I think for the peach of mind, it’s money well spent.

I haven’t heard anything new on the topic in a while so I thought it might be worth re-adressing. Last I heard is that there’s a VERY good chance that NASA will follow SCCA’s lead and put it in the rules for 2007.

Anyone with NASA connections shed some light on this?[/quote]

#3

I remeber reading it in an article in GRM. Also, here’s the link to the HANS newsletter. It contains a conversation with Jeremy Thoennes, the Manager of Technical Services with the SCCA.

http://hansdevice.com/app/site/media/sitemedia.nl/id.302/.f

To paraphrase…"He states that an SFI approved device is manadtory for SCCA Pro racing and Highly recommended for amatures."

Post edited by: brain, at: 2006/06/11 19:13

#4

ok, I read that the CRB will consider the proposal to mandate SFI 38.1 compliant HNR devices in their August meeting.
thanks,
bruce

#5

brain wrote:

[quote]Anyone hear anything new on NASA’s decision on whether or not too make the HANS device mandatory for 2007. SCCA has already done it and My PCA buddies who race tell me the P-Car guys are going that way.

I have a HANS so it doesn’t affect me directly but alot of the newbie’s building cars should be aware of this. HANS device is not cheap $800-$1000. I didn’t mind spending the money since safety has always been my FIRST priority and I think for the peach of mind, it’s money well spent.

I haven’t heard anything new on the topic in a while so I thought it might be worth re-adressing. Last I heard is that there’s a VERY good chance that NASA will follow SCCA’s lead and put it in the rules for 2007.

Anyone with NASA connections shed some light on this?[/quote]About 1 month ago I asked Chris this question and he said that he had not been informed by National of any mandate. He also said that you probably couldn’t go wrong if you got the HANS.

#6

well, unless you hit at an oblique angle, get hit from the side, or take a secondary hit when the hans has slipped out from under the belts …

nasaregistrar wrote:

[quote]
About 1 month ago I asked Chris this question and he said that he had not been informed by National of any mandate. He also said that you probably couldn’t go wrong if you got the HANS.[/quote]

#7

I agree totally, what he meant was that it will be very likely that IF NASA mandates a H&N system, whatever the stardard adopted, the HANS will likely meet that standard.

#8

yes, all sanctioning bodies will likely mandate that the HNR is SFI 38.1 certified and there are currently three devices that are certified - Hans, R3 and Hutchens II. It is just unfortunate that SFI 38.1 was drafted by the hans folks and contains some questionable single point of disconnect provisions that eliminate devices like the Isaac from certfication.
cheers,
bruce

nasaregistrar wrote:

#9

[quote]well, unless you hit at an oblique angle, get hit from the side, or take a secondary hit when the hans has slipped out from under the belts …
[/quote]

Guys can buy any device they want, and I don’t get any kickback from hyping the HANS but the "hit from the side" myth is just that…a myth.

HANS has done offset crash testing with excellent results. See thier website.
Quote from the HANS Website:

"Properly mounted belts do not slip off the device. If your shoulder belts will not stay securely over the device when you are firmly belted in chances are that you do not have the shoulder belt mounts properly located in your chassis. Please review the section of the owner’s manual concerning shoulder belt mounting."

The video circulating around the internet showing the HANS slip from under the bels is not an accurate representation of how the device performs.

  1. The belts were extremely loose
  2. The belts were not positioned correctly in height or width
  3. The belts did not have the integrated chest strap that keeps the belts in proper alignment.

Again…Guys can buy what they want if and when an "approved" device becomes mandatory. My original question was: If and when NASA would mandate the use of an SFI 38.1 device.

Post edited by: brain, at: 2006/06/12 17:24

Post edited by: brain, at: 2006/06/12 17:25

#10

[quote]brain wrote:
3. The belts did not have the integrated chest strap that keeps the belts in proper alignment.[/quote]
Hi Brain:
Any further info on that last point?
TIA,
-Matt

Post edited by: mrussell, at: 2006/06/12 17:27

#11

You can see in the picture that many new belts offer the chest strap as a standard part of the belt. It keeps the belts from spreading beyond the width of the HANS device, thus completely eliminates any chance of the belts slipping off the HANS.

HANS specifies in detail the REQUIRED procedures for Fitting instructions. It states: The width of the typical HANS collar is 6 in. The centers of the shoulder belt anchor should be mounted with a lateral separation of no more than 8 in. to ensure that the inner edges of 3 in wide belts are NO MORE than 5 in apart over the HANS collar. In simple terms, you need to keep your belts mounted close together for the HANS to work correctly.

The video that the Isaac PR machine has put on the net doesn’t use the HANS as it’s designed.

http://isaacdirect.com/images/Video/SFIBoth.mpg

  1. The belts are loose (at least 2-3 inches of slack)
  2. They are too wide apart
  3. Recommended Chest Strap was not used.

Anyone can see that the "Test" is a blatant attempt to discredit HANS affectiveness and sell thier inferior product. When I strap in, my belts are as tight as I can stand, my belts are mounted at the correct height and the shoulder belts are mounted less than 3 in apart.

Post edited by: brain, at: 2006/06/12 19:39

Post edited by: brain, at: 2006/06/12 19:41

Post edited by: brain, at: 2006/06/12 19:43

#12

Great info Brain. We (mike and I) decided on the HANS as well. As you noted, it is very important to have the harness straps located appropriately. I zip-tied the straps (on the metal strap adjusters) together at the mounting on the bar behind the seat to keep the 3 inch spacing as recommended. The height of the bar in reference to shoulder height also appears to be an imported consideration (should be and inch or 2 lower). We also have the Simpson harness that has the upper chest strap that secures the harness so the HANS cannot slip out. If NASCAR and F1 are all using HANS, seems like it is at least a reasonable choice.
Ed

#13

Brain,

I agree with 99% of your posting, but I have to disagree with your comment that it is an "inferior product."

I agree with you that the video is not completely honest in that the belts are extremely loose. I wear my belts as tight as I can stand as well.

I tested the Issac device last year by renting a helmet from Issac. The device works, gives you a little more room to move your head from side to side, and was not uncomfortable to wear.

With that being said, I purchased a HANS device. It is not because it is an inferior device. On the contrary, I thought it was well engineered and leverages great engineering principles to be effective. Lastly, it does not require maintenance like buying straps every two years (like the HANS).

I chose the HANS because the Issac is not certified. Also, in the event of an accident, I am not sure whether the safety crews have seen enough of them to extricate me from the car if I am unconscious. Lastly, the HANS is worn by the majority of professional racers which is the biggest endorsement for me.

One of the other myths that you did not mention was the fact that it can be put on in the car. I know I am not the tallest person (I am 5’9"), but I drive to the grid without my helmet and put it on while seated in the car. Most would tell you that this can not be done. Every time on grid this weekend I put it on while in the car. And no… I do not have the quick release straps. I also remove it while driving back to my parking space so I can back up my car.

I think that, in a couple of years, the Issac device will become more mainstream. At that point, I might re-assess my decision. But in the mean time, the HANS works for me.

-Steve

brain wrote:

[quote]You can see in the picture that many new belts offer the chest strap as a standard part of the belt. It keeps the belts from spreading beyond the width of the HANS device, thus completely eliminates any chance of the belts slipping off the HANS.

HANS specifies in detail the REQUIRED procedures for Fitting instructions. It states: The width of the typical HANS collar is 6 in. The centers of the shoulder belt anchor should be mounted with a lateral separation of no more than 8 in. to ensure that the inner edges of 3 in wide belts are NO MORE than 5 in apart over the HANS collar. In simple terms, you need to keep your belts mounted close together for the HANS to work correctly.

The video that the Isaac PR machine has put on the net doesn’t use the HANS as it’s designed.

http://isaacdirect.com/images/Video/SFIBoth.mpg

  1. The belts are loose (at least 2-3 inches of slack)
  2. They are too wide apart
  3. Recommended Chest Strap was not used.

Anyone can see that the "Test" is a blatant attempt to discredit HANS affectiveness and sell thier inferior product. When I strap in, my belts are as tight as I can stand, my belts are mounted at the correct height and the shoulder belts are mounted less than 3 in apart.

Post edited by: brain, at: 2006/06/12 19:39
[/quote]

#14

the chest strap is a component that is actively discouraged by safety workers - it impedes their ability to get you out of the car quickly. The belt spacer behind the head is good to have.

hans only reports offset impacts, not side impacts. The neck load graphic doesn’t show the hutchens II, or the Isaac. I read that there is a Hutchens Hybrid that has now passed 38.1 but I haven’t seen any info on it.

The Isaac video in which the hans comes out from under the straps is during a Wayne State standardized offset impact test - they did not artificially loosen the straps for that test (do you really think they wouldn’t be called on that?) - belts really stretch that much particularly if they are Nylon belts (polyester is better). The only thing that helps a hans is to also have a right side net to catch the head moving laterally. I agree that a properly installed hans works - unfortunately there are a number of ways to improperly install it.

I don’t have any HNR device yet (not racing right now), it just bugs me when the hans is portrayed as the be all and end all (Brain - I’m not saying you did that - I know that wasn’t the focus of your initial question. This topic just gets me going)

thanks,
bruce

#15

I considered the Isaac before buying a HANS. There were two things that really scared me about the Isaac:

  1. It physically attaches your helmet (and head) to the belts. You have to release both the belt and the Isaac to exit the car. I don’t want to add steps to a quick egress.

  2. To me, a simple device is a better device. The mechanical dashpot mechanism used by the Isaac adds some complexity to the system that makes me uncomfortable, especially since I don’t see any way to test its functionality other than to have a crash.

Sasha

Post edited by: Ex36, at: 2006/06/12 23:14

#16

The Isaac folks argue that since the hans stays attached to your body that it can get hung up on the window net as you’re scrambling out the window. So your egress could be impeded that way.
The "dashpot" is just a rate sensitive shock absorber. You would feel if there was a change in the mechanical action.
cheers,
bruce

Ex36 wrote:

[quote]I considered the Isaac before buying a HANS. There were two things that really scared me about the Isaac:

  1. It physically attaches your helmet (and head) to the belts. You have to release both the belt and the Isaac to exit the car. I don’t want to add steps to a quick egress.

  2. To me, a simple device is a better device. The mechanical dashpot mechanism used by the Isaac adds some complexity to the system that makes me uncomfortable, especially since I don’t see any way to test its functionality other than to have a crash.

Sasha<br><br>Post edited by: Ex36, at: 2006/06/12 23:14[/quote]

#17

[color=#FF0000]The Isaac video in which the hans comes out from under the straps is during a Wayne State standardized offset impact test[/color]

Actually the test took place at the Delphi Safety Systems Test Center in Vandalia, Ohio…and those belts sure look loose to me.

[color=#FF0000]The chest strap is a component that is actively discouraged by safety workers - it impedes their ability to get you out of the car quickly. The belt spacer behind the head is good to have.[/color]

I do race and I never had a tech inspector say the chest strap was a problem and several new belt designs incorporate it for use with the HANS

[color=#FF0000]Hans only reports offset impacts, not side impacts. The neck load graphic doesn’t show the hutchens II, or the Isaac. I read that there is a Hutchens Hybrid that has now passed 38.1 but I haven’t seen any info on it.[/color]

Basilar skull fractures, which is what a H&N Restraint system is supposed to prevent happen in headon or near headon crashes.

Again, My oridginal point was if and when NASA would mandate use of a H&N restraint…Not to debate the merits of one type over anohter, but there seems to be alot of misinformation out there and its important that racers do thier research before buying somthing that might not work as well as the HANS

#18

I definitely agree that people should do research before buying an HNR and should likely choose an SFI 38.1 compliant one because that will more than likely be required by all sanctioning bodies. I don’t see why you’re inferring that the hans is superior to all of the others. I don’t think you will find the hans folks recommending the chest strap because that invalidates the single point of detachment requirement of 38.1.

thanks,
bruce

#19

don’t want to belabor this or appear argumentative, but these are important topics…

Because the belts in the Isaac video (see isaacdirect.com) looked loose to me also, I asked Gregg Baker, the Isaac guy, about it. Here is his response:

on chest straps, this from HMS Motorsports, owned by recognized hans/safety expert Joe Marko:

[quote]Matt Long <matt@hmsmotorsport.com> wrote:
Bruce, We do not recommend using sternum straps at all. Depending on the location of the strap it can catch the underside of the Hans tipping it backward and not allowing the Hans to do it’s job. Also if the strap is too high it can catch the driver on the neck also causing serious injury. If your belts are properly installed you should not need a sternum strap. Please let me know if this helps, Matt[/quote]

oh, and on the &quot;when&quot; question, I have read that SCCA will just be &quot;highly recommending&quot; an SFI 38.1 compliant device in Nov 2006, and I can’t see NASA moving to mandate them before SCCA does (just a hunch, though).

hope this helps,
bruce

Post edited by: leggwork, at: 2006/06/13 15:23

#20

When you get your race car together and come to the track, I will be interested in seeing what type of H&N restraint system you use.