# Airbags and full face helmets



## racerdave (Sep 15, 2003)

The problem is that this study has NO relevance to passenger car airbags. So to recommend anything is being rash.

As far as lawsuit hysteria sweeping the country... um, I don't think frivolous lawsuits are anything new. Seems to me that trend of trying to deflect all personal responsibility has been ramping up for at least 10 years... hardly "sweeping."

Even so... what good is the waiver that each of us signs prior to the event? Is it worth as much as the paper its written on?


----------



## operknockity (Apr 19, 2002)

racerdave said:


> Even so... what good is the waiver that each of us signs prior to the event? Is it worth as much as the paper its written on?


IANAL, but... The waiver is supposed to mean that we have been fully informed of all possible issues with repsect to our safety (or lack there of) and we agree not to hold the organizing body responsible in the event of an accident or injury. The key being "all possible issues". If it turns out that we have not been informed of all of the possible issues AND the organizing body knew it, then the waiver is meaningless should this go to court.


----------



## ·clyde· (Dec 26, 2001)

TeamM3 said:


> apparently you guys don't get the lawsuit hysteria sweeping this country, they have to use that wording or some money grabbing ho-bag lawyer will claim they didn't do enough to warn people, when it comes to safety you always err on the side of safety :dunno:
> 
> highly recommended means only that, as does they are continuing to study the matter further :dunno:  if they knew 100% one way or the other they would have made a hard decision.


There are two things going on. One is the liability issue and the other has to do with actual safety issues. I think that we (at least some of us) do understand the liability implications as well as the precarious situation the SCCA would be in if it ever does face a big lawsuit. That's part of the reason that I have issues with the wording. Regardless of the extent of the risk of using a full face helmet in an airbag equipped car, if there's no other support for the reccomendation than what was in that study (I saw on the evo list that there was also something that came from Ford, but it too lacked detail) the club just blasted open a huge doorway for a lawsuit from someone that suffers injury while using an open face helmet that could arguably been prevented or reduced in severity by using a full face helmet.

The injured (or spousal survivor) to the jury: "Well, you see, I (he) had been wearing full face helmets for years. But then, last year, the SCCA issued an advisory recommending that full face helmets no longer be used in airbag equipped cars. I (he) hit/got hit by something or other and suffered X injury (died). I (we) then found out that this injury (death) probably wouldn't have happened had I (he) been wearing a full face helmet. During the discovery process of this lawsuit, we found that the basis for the SCCA's helmet recommendation was sketchy at best. Further, we also discovered that the type of collision I (he) was in occur about five times more often than the type where open face helmets offered more protection than full face helmets. Digging deeper, we found that only 5% of the collision incidents at Solo II events are of the type where open face helmets offer more protection. In the other 95% of collisions, the full face helmets offer more protection. Had the SCCA advised me (him) of these facts prior to the incident, I (he) would have continued using a full face helmet and I (he) never would have been injured (died) and this lawsuit never filed."

WRT safety itself, even though it's just a recommendation, the fact that it is a recommendation suggests that the SCCA has enough information to conclude (at least initially) that there is a greater overall risk of injury or death from using a full face helmet with airbag in the types of cars we use in Solo II (and the other series listed in the memo) than with an open face helmet. That may be the case, but the wording of the memo also suggests that the amount and/or nature of the inforamtion they have isn't overwhelming enough to support an immediate change to the rules that bans full face helmets in cars with functional airbags. If the SCCA has other information about the risks, they need to make it available to us so we can make informed decisions. If all they have is that study (which appears to have little applicability to cars we use and the way we use them) and maybe an intriguing but just as shallow memo from Ford, it leaves a lot of us wondering.

Although I'd hope that they'd do it if they could, I somehow doubt that it's possible that the SCCA can afford to commision its own study on this issue.


----------



## bren (Jul 1, 2002)

Pinecone said:


> ....that fact that your chin is an inch or so cloer isn't a big deal, IMO.


I think the concern is that the airbag will get under the chin bar on the helmet and try to rip it up off your head, causing the narrow chin strap to exert a great deal of force on your jaw. If that's not the case, then I don't see how hitting an airbag with the chin bar would be worse than hitting the steering wheel or dash board :dunno:


----------



## JST (Dec 19, 2001)

·clyde· said:


> I think that the club would be doing a better service to themselves and their membership if the second paragraph was worded more like this (but, of course, it's something for the lawyers to decide and not me ):
> 
> Based on the conclusions of the study, the SCCA is informing the membership that it has reason to believe that the potential exists for an increased risk of injury to the chin and jaw when using a full faced helmet in conjunciton with a functional airbag compared to that of an open faced in certain collision types. As insufficient information exists at this time for the club to make a well informed determination regarding the extent of that potential risk and how it may compare to other risk factors when using an open faced helmet instead of a full faced helmet the SCCA reminds the membership that no amount of safety precautions and equipment can can completely eliminate all risk associated with motrosports. Safety is the SCCA's number one priority in all of its programs, and to that end, the club will investigate the matter further with the intent of making a well informed determination regarding helmet types and airbags as soon as possible. After that determination is made, changes to rulesets and allowable equipment configurations will be considered as appropriate.


Agree with everything clyde says above. In particular, if a legal CYA is desired, clyde's language is a lot better than the language in the memo, for the reasons that clyde suggests. More importantly, if one of the purposes of this memo is to serve as a legal CYA, I hope that a lawyer competent in this area of practice reviewed/drafted the memo before it went out. Note that I make no comment on the litigiousness of society or the desireability (or lack thereof) of having lawyers involved in every decision--I'm only saying that if you are making a decision based in part on concerns about liability, it's best to talk to an attorney, since they are the ones who best understand liability issues.

In any event, thanks to the SCCA for making this information known, and thanks to Team M3 for posting more detailed information so that we can have this rational, open discussion about this matter. Until I read something more definitive, or until the SCCA changes its rules, I will continue to use a full-face helmet, because I believe based on the evidence that I've seen so far that it is the safest option.


----------



## ·clyde· (Dec 26, 2001)

bren said:


> I think the concern is that the airbag will get under the chin bar on the helmet and try to rip it up off your head, causing the narrow chin strap to exert a great deal of force on your jaw. If that's not the case, then I don't see how hitting an airbag with the chin bar would be worse than hitting the steering wheel or dash board :dunno:


There are lively discussions going on in a number of places right now about this (and what's here is pretty tame ). The concerns being mentioned have as much or more to do with something else. When the airbag hits the helmet, it deforms to the shape of the helmet and exerts its force onto the helmet. The helmet, hitting the airbag, absorbs that force rotates a bit and stops moving. All well and good, so far, right? Okay, so now the helmet has stopped moving, what's your head doing inside the helmet? It's still moving. And the rotation of the helmet brings the chin bar closer to your chin. So when you chin hits the chinbar it takes all of the force...and there lies the injury risk according to the study.

From Chapter 5 of the study above:


> A further characteristic of the Knoll airbag is that the supporting effect takes place chiefly at the chin. Because the airbag has to be supported by the steering wheel, its center axis is level with the steering wheel boss. The driver has to be able to see over the steering wheel, which means that his chin is inevitably on a level with the airbag axis. The effect of this support being applied to the chin is shown in Fig. 11: the chin area of the helmet is supported so powerfully that the helmet lifts up by about 3 cm at the back of the head. On the basis of a head mass of 5 kg and an acceleration in the first phase of 30 G the force on the chin can be estimated at 1.5 kN. In SAE 680785, 1.56 - 1.78 kN is cited as the range in which fractures of the lower jaw can occur. The [Figure 10 and 11 refrenced deleted]
> tests were carried out with a flat tool 2.9 cm in diameter, padded with a 0.5 cm-thick metal net. Since the chin area of the helmet has approximately 1 cm of foam plastic padding, the chin bone would probably withstand slightly more than the stated values, but the estimated value is so close to the cited range that the risk of fractures to the jaw cannot be ruled out.


One of the interesting things, I think, is that using the test criteria of head mass and acceleration, the estimated value of 1.5 kN is still below the SAE range of possible injury (1.56-1.78 kN) and it points out that the chin can probably withstand more due to the padding inside the chin bar.

I don't dispute that the full face helmet may increase the possibility of certain injuries in certain circumstances, but this whole thing has made me question whether the best overall protection is full face, open face or maybe even no helmet at all in air bag equipped cars (particularly when equipped with side curtains now too). :dunno: I'm sure that there are some situations where one is better than the other two, but considering the range of collision types that I'm most likely to experience, I'd like to be able to make a better informed decision about what safety equipment to use than I can by guessing or going with a gut feeling. Of course, as far as risks go, I'm not overly concerned about the possibility of experiencing a collison with more effect than a bumper tap in grid or staging, but if I'm going to take the precautions of buying/using a helmet, I'd like it to be the one that gives me the best percentage chance of being the most useful. I'm okay with it being not the most useful the rest of the time, but I'd still like to know.


----------



## ·clyde· (Dec 26, 2001)

JST said:


> In any event, thanks to the SCCA for making this information known, and thanks to Team M3 for posting more detailed information so that we can have this rational, open discussion about this matter.


:stupid:


----------



## bren (Jul 1, 2002)

·clyde· said:


> ...So when you chin hits the chinbar it takes all of the force...and there lies the injury risk according to the study...


I've taken my share of face plants in full face helmets during my motorcylce/bmx riding youth and never had a problem with contacting the chin bar. I even had to replace a helmet once because the chin bar showed signs of cracking after a particularly hard fall (no matter what your friends on 4wheelers tell you don't try to ride a dirtbike in the snow/ice) 

What I don't get, is why, if the airbag deforms and absorbs the helmet, would this be worse than contact with something much harder like the steering wheel, dash, or another car's hood? The idea of the airbag trying to rip off my head by making a lever out of my helmet is more worrisome to me.


----------



## ·clyde· (Dec 26, 2001)

bren said:


> I've taken my share of face plants in full face helmets during my motorcylce/bmx riding youth and never had a problem with contacting the chin bar. I even had to replace a helmet once because the chin bar showed signs of cracking after a particularly hard fall (no matter what your friends on 4wheelers tell you don't try to ride a dirtbike in the snow/ice)
> 
> What I don't get, is why, if the airbag deforms and absorbs the helmet, would this be worse than contact with something much harder like the steering wheel, dash, or another car's hood? The idea of the airbag trying to rip off my head by making a lever out of my helmet is more worrisome to me.


 The dynamics are different. When your helmet hits the steering wheel or ground, the impact force is spread out (PSI numbers are lessened due to the spreading of force) and it's pretty much the only impact that the helmet has to take to do its work. If the impact occurs on the chinbar, the force still gets spread out over something that isn't part of your body. If your chin is touching the chinbar, only a small amount of force actually gets transferred to your jaw. The rest is going elsewhere.

In the airbag scenario, the helmet absobs the force of the airbag impact. As the helmet rotates from that impact and hits your chin, all of that force goes directly to that small part of your chin.

I don't think that I'm describing it well. :dunno:


----------



## bren (Jul 1, 2002)

·clyde· said:


> In the airbag scenario, the helmet absobs the force of the airbag impact. As the helmet rotates from that impact and hits your chin, all of that force goes directly to that small part of your chin.


Ooooh....Ok. I wasn't thinking about it rotating from left to right (twisting to the side), if that's what you are trying to say than I think I understand now; and yeah, that would be bad.

I guess maybe I was just a bit slow on the uptake. :eeps:


----------



## ·clyde· (Dec 26, 2001)

I didn't mean twisting side to side but rotating on the horizontal(?) axis as it's pushed up (and bringing the chinbar closer to the chin.


----------



## ComBIRDable (Nov 18, 2004)

bren said:


> Ooooh....Ok. I wasn't thinking about it rotating from left to right (twisting to the side), if that's what you are trying to say than I think I understand now; and yeah, that would be bad.


The "rotation" of the helmet is not left to right but up and down. Imagine being able to pull down on the chin bar so the helmet points down toward your chest. The back of the helmet goes up and the front of the helmet goes down. This is the rotation the study discusses. Someone linked the original report with the photos on another forum, and there is a picture of a helmet hitting the air bag. The helmet is pointing down, but the dummy's head is not. From that photo it is easier to see how your chin collides with the helmet in this case.

Scott


----------



## bren (Jul 1, 2002)

ComBIRDable said:


> The "rotation" of the helmet is not left to right but up and down. Imagine being able to pull down on the chin bar so the helmet points down toward your chest. The back of the helmet goes up and the front of the helmet goes down.


Wouldn't that be the Vertical axis? :dunno:

So is the helmet hitting my chest or my chin? I give up...I am obviously having comprehension issues today 

I guess if I see everyone at the first SCCA event in an open-face helmet I'll know the conclusion to the discussions


----------



## ComBIRDable (Nov 18, 2004)

I'll try again. Imagine sticking a pencil through the helmet, through your right ear, through your head, out your left ear and out the other side of the helmet. Now rotate the helmet around the axis formed by the pencil. As the helmet rotates, the chin bar moves closer to your chin.

I'm probably not describing this very well, but does this make sense?

Scott


----------



## bren (Jul 1, 2002)

ComBIRDable said:


> I'll try again. Imagine sticking a pencil through the helmet, through your right ear, through your head, out your left ear and out the other side of the helmet. Now rotate the helmet around the axis formed by the pencil. As the helmet rotates, the chin bar moves closer to your chin.
> 
> I'm probably not describing this very well, but does this make sense?
> 
> Scott


Sure that part I get. Are you saying that is the Horizontal axis? I was never much on geometry 

I just don't see how the airbag is worse than hitting the street face first.

Either way, I do sit very close to the wheel in autox :yikes:


----------



## JST (Dec 19, 2001)

ComBIRDable said:


> I'll try again. Imagine sticking a pencil through the helmet, through your right ear, through your head, out your left ear and out the other side of the helmet. Now rotate the helmet around the axis formed by the pencil. As the helmet rotates, the chin bar moves closer to your chin.
> 
> I'm probably not describing this very well, but does this make sense?
> 
> Scott


It does, but it probably won't after I stick a pencil through my ear.


----------



## teamdfl (Sep 24, 2002)

This sounds like the old Coca Cola and Pop Rocks urban legend.

http://www.snopes.com/horrors/freakish/poprocks.htm


----------



## Pinecone (Apr 3, 2002)

bren said:


> I think the concern is that the airbag will get under the chin bar on the helmet and try to rip it up off your head, causing the narrow chin strap to exert a great deal of force on your jaw. If that's not the case, then I don't see how hitting an airbag with the chin bar would be worse than hitting the steering wheel or dash board :dunno:


Well, your head moves back, until it doesn't. Then it either breaks your neck, or seriously stretches things. Helmet of no helmet. Of coursea horse collar shelps somewhat.

And considering that you head will be moving forward unpon impact, then the air bag deploys, it is more likely to tuck your chin further into your chest.

Also, if the forces on your chin were that high, people would be breaking jaws, and biting off tongues with air bag deployment WIHTOUT the helmet. 

Hey, let's tak esome helmets down to IIHS and let them run them on thier crash dummies. That way cars will soon have to have overhead airbags to prevent you head from moving backwards.

Whatever, I am going to continue ot wear a full face helmet.


----------



## AB (Jan 11, 2002)

Pinecone said:


> .........................Now I can see abnormal loads being applied to the neck......


 :rofl: 










:angel:


----------



## ·clyde· (Dec 26, 2001)

MrAirbags said:


> :rofl:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ok, so this was one of those posts that elicited a snicker or chuckle at first but just grew to a nearly uncontrolable giggle.

:rofl:

So, you just see finally see your name in the title of the thread or what? :bigpimp:


----------

