Anyone using the HANS device?
 

I know we should always think about safety first, but honestly, who here uses a HANS device for club racing or DEs? I plan on maybe 8-12 DE days this season with hopefully some open lapping days as well. Am I (are we) silly not to use the HANS?

Yes.

No one will look at you sideways for wearing a Hans, anymore.

However, you might want to look at the alternatives. The Hans requires specific space between belts, and depends on user adjustment to work properly. The Isaac doesn't, and also provides some lateral protection (which is good, since most collisions aren't head-on).

www.isaacdirect.com

Jack, the Isaac looks interesting, but I think for PCA DE, it's not too practical. We're required to have the same protection for driver & instructor. Maybe my interpretation is wrong, glad to hear comments.
Anyway, how many instructors have or will put the Isaac mounts on their helmets?

Still, it does look pretty slick.

Yes I and many of the folks in the Chicago PCA use the hans. Would not do anything on a track without it. The newest versions are light weight, come in various sizes, quick release fittings and just may keep you out of a wheelchair!

Anyone using the GForce system? Any feedback?

Yes I and many of the folks in the Chicago PCA use the hans. Would not do anything on a track without it. The newest versions are light weight, come in various sizes, quick release fittings and just may keep you out of a wheelchair!

I've never heard of this rule being applied to head and neck restraints. Has anyone else?

No one requires good common sense.

Its a mantra SAFETY SAFETY SAFETY

Im not sure if you need a HANS device as a green group driver and I would never tell you you didnt need one.

its a dilema that need some investigation.

I bought a Hans last month.

A friend recently sustained a serious and permantly debilitating injury in a pretty low speed racing accident, nuf said.

Just curious. One of our PCA tech requirements is "SEAT BELTS/HARNESSES – Three point harnesses as a minimum. No 4-point harnesses allowed. Original factory installation or securely mounted metal-to-metal for both driver and passenger (equal restraints required)."

I brought this up since the Isaac ties into the harness. Maybe it's a stretch.

I think this is smart stuff to have onboard. Great topic.

safety
 

Sometimes we can only think about what makes our car loud, fast, look cool. Safety equipment, R tires, suspension changes are the priority order I have been tought to use. Once I'm capable of out driving the cars capability I can go from there. In most cases that will never happen.

safety
 

Sometimes we can only think about what makes our car loud, fast, look cool. Safety equipment, R tires, suspension changes are the priority order I have been tought to use. Once I'm capable of out driving the cars capability I can go from there. In most cases that will never happen.

All right, where do you buy one? I'm sold: it was an article I read in Car & Driver that really put me over the edge.

(Hi Jack. How's it going?)

Interesting. Would the rules require that the driver and instructor use identical head and neck restraints, or just the "same protection?" One would think the latter as identical helmets are not required, for example.

This situation is similar to some racing schools that use the Isaac system as a standard. It just stays in the school cars and the school provides the helmets. The inventory is one per car rather than one per driver/instructor, as there is no fit issue.

You guys are in a completely different boat. Many racing sanctioning bodies, e.g. SCCA Pro Racing, VARA, INEX, etc., are going with a policy requiring the use of any H&N restraint that has been formally tested. This might not be a bad direction for PCA to go.

Just my $0.02

(Didn't mean to butt in. We noticed some server traffic coming from this thread.)

I purchased from Northstar motorsports, call Kevin at 8oo-356-2080. Send your helmet and kevin will take care of everything. Different models depending on type of car you drive. For Porsche it's no. 20. There is a normal model made of fiberglass or the prefered one in carbom fiber, which is much lighter. Believe me it's painless to be safe! You can also order direct from Hans, however I prefered them to install the mountings to my helmet.

I'll post another vote for using a HANS. I bought one last year after seeing a fatailty caused by a basal neck injury at one of the club races. I chose HANS because they had authorative crash test data and because it's mandated by F1. It is possible that the other systems work well too, but without good testing, how would you know?

Some people have had difficulty with 3" belts slipping off their HANS. I have not encountered that problem. I am using a Recaro SPG seat which I've been told helps in that respect. The belt holes are apparently closer together in the SPG than other seats. You may also need to use tube collars on the harness bar to keep the belts close together at their mounting points.

Protection for side impact is problematic with all the tethered head restraint systems. Seats with elephant ears seem like they could be helpful. But you have to be careful with those because the ears can block egress through the window should you need to get out without opening the door. BTW, you may find that you have to take your HANS off in order to climb out the window. Mine catches on the roll cage.

I've noticed this year that some of the Speedvision cars have interior head restraint nets in the cars. These nets are triangular and are at head level. I'm thinking these nets are probably a good solution for side impact. Look for those next time you watch one of those races.

-Juan

You are not alone...

"Jeff had a scary moment when his car caught fire in Puerto Rico and he had trouble getting out of the car.

"...so when I was getting out of the car a corner of my HANS device snagged on the net. The only thing that released me was that the net melted and broke."

From here: http://www.theracesite.com/index.cfm?pagetype=2&form_article=6482

Side netting helps.

I saw that race with Altenberg and noted that he snagged on something while trying to get out.

One thing I've discovered in researching safety devices is that there are a lot of interactions that are non-obvious. Examples:

1) neck collars are presumably helpful. However, they add weight to your head and so can actually increase the possibility of neck injury.

2) Alternberg's experience with the net snagging is another. The net should really be installed to fall down out of the way.

3) Does your roll cage have a front cross piece that runs below the steering column and near your knees? You might be concerned about injury to your knees, even if that cross piece is padded.

4) Do you have a quick release steering wheel and drive your car on the street? The standard Mono adaptor is designed to crush on impact, presumably by your head. Does your quick release setup retain this crush piece?

5) NASCAR side bars seem like a good idea. But actually the disadvantage is that they reduce door crush zone, thus increasing the g forces in a side impact -- not good!

I think we benefit greatly from the crash testing done on the production cars that most of us race. There's a lot of data collected and incremental provements over the years. You might think twice about replacing structural elements like bumpers and doors because of the reduction in crush zone. How safe is it to remove the bumper and retain the stock fuel tank?.

In the case of the H&N restraint systems, I'm convinced that you can't decide on the effectiveness of the different designs by eyeballing them. Scientific tests with crash test dummies and such are required. A few years from now we will have more real accident data too.

Here is link to the HANS owner's manual. There's a whole section on testing and results:

http://www.hansdevice.com/owner_manual.pdf

I also received a 10 minute video on CD with my HANS, but I don't think it's published on the web site.

One thing I forgot to mention about the HANS: I recommend getting the quick release option on the tethers. Practice exit procedures and taking the device off -- probably good advice regardless of what safety devices you use.

-Juan

Juan,

Great post. I agree 100%

I chose the Isaac over the HANS for egress issues. I have had the joy of having my car on fire and getting out quickly is paramount. I tried on a HANS and found it to be very bulky and awkward in a touring car. I would not hesitate to use it in a open car though. The Isaac is a very nice unit and has some very compelling data to back it up.

Cheers, James

vhttp://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1080653317.jpg

James,

One point I considered when I looked at the ISAAC is that unlike the other systems, the ISAAC keeps you connected to the harnesses until you explicitly release both sides of the device. With the other systems you are free of the car the moment you release your belts. This may be a problem should you need to get out of the car quickly. It may also be a problem with safety workers that might not be familiar with the operation of the ISAAC.

Another consideration for me was the complexity of the ISAAC mechanical system, and in particular possible undetected failures of the dampers.

Every safety system has failure modes, and presumably the tethered systems are prone to breakage and other failures. But webbing is a very mature technology and there is a lot of data on it, and also standards in place for their use. That is why you have to replace or reweb your belts every 2/5 (SFI/FIA) years.

Actually one thing that really frustrated me when I was researching H&N restraint systems is the lack of really authoratative evaluation of most of the devices. The state is little better than trying to decide on the best laundry detergent based on TV ads. Every manufacturer of course publishes their own data showing how they are better or par with the others. But clearly those are biased presentations.

The one system that did stand out in that respect was HANS. While the data presented on the web site and literature looks good, being the skeptic that I am, that was small part of my consideration. More important was the fact that they have FIA certification and that they are mandated by F1. In addition, I was swayed by their status as the incumbent, given the fact that they have years of data, development, and refinement on their product.

That being said, I would really like to see competition in development of safety devices, and standards in place to assure their quality. H&N systems should be certified in the same way that our other safety gear, helmets, belts, seats, suits are certified by Snell, FIA, SFI, etc. The sooner that happens the better.

Greg, I noted that you work for ISAAC. Can you say anything about what ISAAC and the H&N device industry in general may be doing to develop objective standards and obtain certifications? Is there a time frame when this might happen? I would beg the moderators' permission to let you speak freely on this topic even if that might be interpreted as benefitting a specific product. This is an important enough issue with so little data available, that I feel it is in the forum's best interest.

-Juan

Both systems make it harder to get out quickly. As you pointed out earlier, crawling out the window with the Hans truss is just about impossible. And as I understand it, corner workers are commonly trained to cut belts rather than mess with finding and unlocking buckles (which could be located somewhere in the middle of a fire). That said, the Isaac does need to be disconnected (or your helmet needs to be taken off) before you can get out.

You also have to make sure they're adjusted correctly (which is not necessarily going to make them the most comfortable), and that the belts themselves are kept close enough together to prevent them from slipping off. (Also, relying on the user to remember to change the belts every other year can be a little like expecting me to remember to change the filter in my furnace every six months...)

Shock absorber technology has been around for a pretty long time, too.

Quote:

Greg, I noted that you work for ISAAC. Can you say anything about what ISAAC and the H&N device industry in general may be doing to develop objective standards and obtain certifications? Is there a time frame when this might happen? I would beg the moderators' permission to let you speak freely on this topic even if that might be interpreted as benefitting a specific product. This is an important enough issue with so little data available, that I feel it is in the forum's best interest.

This moderator certainly won't object. The more discussion about this issue, the better.

I think Juan makes (as always) very good points. There are benefits and drawbacks to every system currently available. I hope that head and neck devices continue to evolve and improve, incorporating side and angled impact protection, for example, and reducing the degree to which casual misuse can compromise their effectiveness.

I am glad I asked about the HANS and find everyone's input very informative. The ability to get out of the car quickly seems very important and is hindered by both systems we are discussing. I did find that the HANS has a quick disconnect feature, essentially straps that will dangle down that can be pulled by yourself or safety personnel. Here is a pic.

Bailey

http://www.hmsmotorsport.com/pimg/ha...ickrelease.jpg

Similar to the Isaac quick-release pins:

http://isaacdirect.com/images/Product/Pins/Pins.JPG

Hi Bailey,

Yes exactly -- the quick release tethers.

I found it important when buckling up to ensure that the orange pull straps don't get caught under my shoulder belts. You don't want those to get pulled inadvertently!

Also, it's not obvious, but when you connect and disconnect the tethers from your helmet, don't do that with the quick release. Use the connectors that attach to the helmet instead. I found it very difficult to reconnect the quick release with my helmet on.

Another point you should consider about HANS is what belts to use. Schroth makes a harness that is specifically designed for use with the HANS. The difference is that the shoulder belt is 2" wide instead of the usual 3", and is designed specifically to interface with the HANS yoke. The issue here is that the HANS has to slide smoothly on the shoulder belt without slipping off the side. This is also the reason that the belt holes in the seat need to be close together and that the shoulder belts be 4" (maybe 5"?) apart on the harness bar.

In my case, I opted for 3" belts because I found that my body, seat, and belt mounting position worked fine with the 3" belts.

A note about belts: I was reading that SCCA just mandated a minimum of 6 point harnesses starting in 2007. I unfortunately just purchased 5 point. :( They also mentioned 7 point harnesses -- first I've heard of that. Does anyone know anything about them?

Regarding seats, do you have a back brace, or appropriately certified FIA seat that does not require a brace? While some older seats have been recertified to the new standard, that was not the case with my old Recaro SPG, and I had to buy a new SPG that had the correct certification. Presumably something in the old design was inadaquate for use without a brace.

-Juan

Juan,

This has turned into a very good thread, with some excellent questions and points raised.

Let me finish up some end-of-day stuff and get back to you.

Juan,

Great tips on using the HANS, which is the way I'll likely go. I am building a track/street car and safety is high on the list of priorities.

I have installed Cobra Suzuka seats and have a back brace mounted on the rollbar (opted not to go for a full cage now as the car will still be street legal).

I will be using Schroth 6-pt harnesses and am aware of the 2" HANS shoulder straps and the reasoning. While I am told that a 2" lap belt rides on the hips better than a 3" and is accepted by many race bodies, I read that PCA club racing (which I would like to do in a few years) requires 3" so I will probably go that route.

There is also a decision to be made about whether to go with pull-up or pull-down lap belts. In a prior car I found little room to get leverage with the pulldown, but appear to have the space in the 930. Any thoughts Juan, or from others regarding this?

Thanks,

Bailey

Jack,


I hope that head and neck devices continue to evolve and improve, incorporating side and angled impact protection, for example, and reducing the degree to which casual misuse can compromise their effectiveness.

This is a great point. I don't actually know this, but my sense is that the H&N restraint systems have the potential to do more harm than good if not properly applied. The danger would be in cases where both sides of the helmet might not be equally constrained, either due to failure or misuse. That would have the effect of twisting the user's head, even in a low speed incident, and that sounds bad to me. Maybe it's not a problem. But I've never heard that point addressed.

The thing is that up to now the H&N systems were mostly used in professional applications where their use was probably better controlled, so misapplication was less likely. I can't think of a more anal user group than F1!

But now H&N restraint systems are being purchased by more average users like you and me, that almost certainly can't prepare their cars with the same level of expertise, let alone the same budget as pro teams. I don't know about you guys, but I don't have the pit crew strapping me in and double checking that everything is set up perfectly.

To my knowledge there are no club tech rules or guidelines yet that address the correct application of H&N restraint systems.

-Juan

Hi Bailey,

There is also a decision to be made about whether to go with pull-up or pull-down lap belts. In a prior car I found little room to get leverage with the pulldown, but appear to have the space in the 930. Any thoughts Juan, or from others regarding this?

I like the pull up belts. The reason is that there is very little room on your lap in a race seat for any adjusters, let alone room for your arms to get leverage to adjust them. So I get the adjusters out of the way on the side of the seat.

I basically preset the lap belt lengths so that the two ends won't quite reach, and then push myself against the seat, take a deep breath, and buckle up! After a while you get to know the right pre-buckle lengths. I do find I like to tighten up the shoulder straps while I'm sitting on grid waiting to get on track.

-Juan

Hans quick release works good, and 3" belts fit very good. Find someone that has one and try it on in your car.

I the most recent issue of the PCA Club Racing news letter, SCCA's Sports Car magazine's March issue is referenced and apparently has their annual review of safety apparel, which includes a comparison of various h&n restraints. Has anyone seen this and care to share the article's findings?

Bailey

Juan,

I always hesitate to comment in any thread of this nature due to the risk of being taken as a salesman, so first let me offer up some perspective:

1) No one is going to get rich selling head and neck restraints. The R&D costs are high and the market is small. To date, less than 10,000 H&N restraints are in use--that's less than 2% of all racers. Compare that to about 500,000 artificial hips implanted annually in the U.S. alone.

We set up Isaac as a spinoff of an R&D effort that deals with biomechanical implants, hoping to save some lives, get our R&D $s back and maybe make a few bucks.

2) There is no such thing as a bad H&N restraint. Even the worse products out there will still reduce head loads by 45+%.

See jpackards post above. Getting out of the seat is one thing, getting out of the car is another. It takes a driver longer to get out of a car with a HANS device than with an Isaac system, and it takes much longer for an EMT crew to extricate a HANS user than an Isaac user.

http://www.isaacdirect.com/html/chart.html

All of this data is from the same test lab, the Wayne State University Bioengineering Center in Detroit, using the same crash dummy, crash sled, crash pulse, etc. and, except for the G-Force data, has been reported in peer-reviewed SAE publications. It's not "our" data, it's the lab's data.

Load data for the unprotected dummy was published by the SAE years ago. What we have listed as "Webbing" covers the Hutchens, D-Cel and Wright devices, all of which perform in the same range depending on how tightly they are worn. We helped fund the Wright device testing and Jay Wright has the data available at www.over40racing.com.

The G-Force data is taken from company publications.

Data for the Hutchens, D-Cel and HANS device are published in SAE paper #2202-01-3304.

Data for the Isaac system are published in SAE paper #2002-01-3306.

Don't be so cynical. The vast majority of companies have spent a great deal of resources to help eliminate the #1 cause of racing fatalities. Why would they lie about their product's performance when it would be so easy to prove them wrong? There is only one company that knowingly uses incorrect data in promoting it's own product.

FIA refuses to test an Isaac device. Why? Because it has a distribution arrangement with Hubbard/Downing, Inc. for the HANS device. If you invented the perfect H&N restraint tomorrow, FIA would not test it. Didn't know that, did you?

Look for "Percentage Head Load Reduction" (HLR) to appear as an accepted measure of performance. We initially used this on our Web site but people were not up to speed on the concept, so we switched to absolute load levels. After chatting with Art Kuhn at SFI and some of the sanctioning bodies, it looks like the idea is catching on. Simpson and HANS have been using this measure in their ads.

It's a simple idea and eliminates issues like absolute Gs, but only works for a particular type of impact, e.g. frontal, offset frontal, lateral, etc.

Bailey,

It had photos and a little writeup about each product, but there was no info regarding relative performance.

There was a recent study done too on extrication with various head and neck restraints. The Issac took the Paramedics an average of 60 sec to remove the driver from a sedan and the HANS too an average of 90 sec. Being a paramedic in a past career I have a healthy respect for what these folks have to do. In our local region we will also be showing the flaggers and medical staff at the track the various devices and give them an opportunity to get some hands on experience with the drivers hooked into the car.

Cheers, James

I use the D-Cell system. I love. It also has 2 straps that hang in front that are pulled to release the helmet for quick excape from car.

Very easy to climb out of window with this system.

H&N system certification
 

Hi Greg,

Thanks for yourreply. Actually, I looked into a few other threads that you had posted to also and found some good discussion there. First, I'd like to say that I really appreciate your efforts and that of others that are working on H&N restraint systems to improve our safety! A few followups:


Actually, what you say only reinforces by cynicism. How do Iknow which manufacturers' claims are (knowingly or unknowingly) inaccurate? Even if only one is inaccurate, which one is it? Am I playing Russian Roulette? The user has no choice but to be cynical with the current situation where only the HANS carries any kind of certification.

What about SFI, or maybe Snell? FIA is not the only certification body. Why not pursue certification through these or other organizations? I think most of us use some SFI and Snell certified equipment that does not also have FIA certification.

Can we expect to see some certification through these or other bodies in the near future?

There are other topics in this thread that I would like to discuss, but I will post those separately.

-Juan

interested in this statment about the HANS, I use the quick dosconnects all the time, I find them easier, is there a technical reason behind this or is it just a preference?

Jim