Brace before impact...!

Brace before impact...!

Author
Discussion

SubaruSteve

546 posts

192 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
Floppy or very high on drugs seems to work quite well:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqEIRxztJZI

mini1380cc

2,944 posts

172 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
As a snowboarder you soon learn to go limp before wiping out. I've had some fast falls on a board and the only ones that result in injury are the ones where i tried to brace for it.

zakelwe

4,449 posts

199 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
My dear departed uncle used to have a seatbelt factory in Cheshire making seatbelts for a lot of car maunfacturers, it's amazing watching the machine that used to snap seatbelts to see their ultimate strength. As a small lad I used to cringe until it finally went bang, I'm sure he only showed me it as some sort of northern real men thing. Git.

Anyhow, he used to tell me how they did tests on multipoint harnesses rather than the traditional 3 point chest and lap and when they did that the dummies heads used to come off, so they had to get stronger dummies. Here the multi point harness worked worse because it was so good it put more strain on the bit still flapping about, ie the head. Of course racing drivers have a very small cockpit before hitting the car with their body, so they need it, now HANS devices have sorted out the head as well.

In a normal car you want to be restrained just enough to avoid hitting the car with any point of your body whilst being restrained at the lowest amount of transitional g force to accomplish that goal. Hence why in a Caterham you might trade off high G's whilst being restrained compared to a Ford C-Max occupant who has more room to have their systems, seat belt and air bags etc, giving them a more relaxed crash experience (RCE)

So given the artificial mechanical needs how can human intervention help these systems, or to get back to the original poster, brace or floppy? Well you want to avoid accelerations/g then brace would always be better in this case, muscles will at least take some of the initial change of g out and even if it does not save your life you have tried to assist your mechanical systems.

If we look at what an ejecting fighter pilot has to do then it would seem that tucking ones extremities in and putting the head back against the headrest does seem ideal, make your surface area uptight against your seat away from the outside "environment" as much as possible.

Last time I rolled a car my only injury was to my right arm that had been flying around and slapped the driver window as the physics turned me into a ragdoll. I couldn't do the brace though because just before I was still trying to unwind the opposite lock, cough frown .

Which brings back the really big question in all this, do you actually have time to think about brace or floppy in a really big accident? I've rolled cars and driven them into parked cars at over 70 (oops) and the only thing I have ever managed to do at that point mentally is say

"Oh bks"

during the impact and then

"This is not going to drive home, if only I could turn back the hands of time by about 3 minutes."

Rather than worrying about brace or floppy it's probably better to work out how best to phrase that phone call conversation for the person who has put up with your expensive hobby all these years. I'd recommend

"Hi gorgeous, do you remember that time I had the motorbike and I had that small prang and you had to visit me in hospital for 6 months? Well thanks to me getting this car and crashing it ... you won't have to ! That was such a good idea of yours, now you can meet the AA man as well! Get the tea on, see you soon, love you always."

Andy

Edited by zakelwe on Monday 3rd January 15:32

clabcon

325 posts

206 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
reggie82 said:
twazzock said:
rottie102 said:
twazzock said:
DanGPR said:
Mr2Mike said:
hairyben said:
dave9 said:
floppy - that's why babies often survive unhurt
Yeah there's been a couple of big airline disasters where the only survivor was a baby.
I'm pretty certain that's purely down to mass rather than "floppyness" i.e. F=MA. The same reason cats can fall out of tower blocks and survive but people generally can't.
Is a baby not equal in mass to an adult? Not weight, but mass.
What the fk are you talking about?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_versus_weight
I know the difference, thanks; I went to secondary school.
I presume he was posting it for the benefit of the person who thought a baby has the same mass as an adult, rather than for you?

I don't think the baby's mass has anything to do with surviving crashes. Ok, the force the baby hits anything with would be smaller, but an adult has a bigger surface area to diperse the force across.

So although Force = Mass X Acceleration, Pressure = Force / Area.

I would expect it is to do with babies not tensing up and maybe also that their bones aren't as brittle.
It's all to do with the surface area:volume ratio. Babies have a much larger SA:V compared to adults, thus spread their small force from low mass over a relativly larger surface area.

And Also Weight = Mass x Gravity

anonymous-user

Original Poster:

55 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
clabcon said:
reggie82 said:
twazzock said:
rottie102 said:
twazzock said:
DanGPR said:
Mr2Mike said:
hairyben said:
dave9 said:
floppy - that's why babies often survive unhurt
Yeah there's been a couple of big airline disasters where the only survivor was a baby.
I'm pretty certain that's purely down to mass rather than "floppyness" i.e. F=MA. The same reason cats can fall out of tower blocks and survive but people generally can't.
Is a baby not equal in mass to an adult? Not weight, but mass.
What the fk are you talking about?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_versus_weight
I know the difference, thanks; I went to secondary school.
I presume he was posting it for the benefit of the person who thought a baby has the same mass as an adult, rather than for you?

I don't think the baby's mass has anything to do with surviving crashes. Ok, the force the baby hits anything with would be smaller, but an adult has a bigger surface area to diperse the force across.

So although Force = Mass X Acceleration, Pressure = Force / Area.

I would expect it is to do with babies not tensing up and maybe also that their bones aren't as brittle.
It's all to do with the surface area:volume ratio. Babies have a much larger SA:V compared to adults, thus spread their small force from low mass over a relativly larger surface area.

And Also Weight = Mass x Gravity
Nothing to do with surface area and everything to do with volume, mass, deceleration and the body's natural ability for shock absorbance.

EFA

Edited by MSTRBKR on Monday 3rd January 15:38

read5458

503 posts

184 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
*Al* said:
Luckily never had this happen to me. Surely most people never have a split second to 'think' about what they will do.People react in different ways in varying situations of danger.I think most people would just think or shout 'Oh st!!!!' *BANG*
I lost my old diesel 106 coming round a hard left bend and found a hedge cutting tractor taking up my side of the road. He had just started cutting with no signs placed anywhere to warn drivers. Was traveling around 55 - 60mph, may have had less than a second to react. I also had 3 of my friends in the car. Pure idiocy on my part and I never drive like a moron anymore.

Car went round the tractor, rear end lost it, spinning, recovered and slid into the verge. Luckily, I hit nothing.

I screamed like a little girl during the whole thing till I managed to get the car stopped.

TVR1

5,464 posts

226 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
I will go with floppy and or pissed. In 2002 I slipped off the guard rail of a second storey balcony onto the concrete floor below. Very, very, very pissed at the time. The only 2 thoughts I had on the way down was 'lift your head up' and 'this is going to hurt'. I managed that but ended up with 3 broken ribs, cracked ankle and a broken wrist and some quite incredible bruising down my side. Probably the most astonishing feeling at the time was bouncing after I hit.

Wouldn't want to do it sober.

Edited by TVR1 on Monday 3rd January 17:17

reggie82

1,370 posts

179 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
MSTRBKR said:
Nothing to do with surface area and everything to do with volume, mass, deceleration and the body's natural ability for shock absorbance.

EFA

Edited by MSTRBKR on Monday 3rd January 15:38
Why do you say volume is important, but surface area isn't?

clabcon

325 posts

206 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
reggie82 said:
MSTRBKR said:
Nothing to do with surface area and everything to do with volume, mass, deceleration and the body's natural ability for shock absorbance.

EFA

Edited by MSTRBKR on Monday 3rd January 15:38
Why do you say volume is important, but surface area isn't?
+1

This should explain why SA is important in a way even the vast majority of the public should be able to understand.

anonymous-user

Original Poster:

55 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
clabcon said:
reggie82 said:
Why do you say volume is important, but surface area isn't?
+1

This should explain why SA is important in a way even the vast majority of the public should be able to understand.
I'm just a student, but from what I've learned I think what I'm about to say is pretty much there hehe

I probably shouldn't have said SA has nothing to do with, as it does when you actually hit an object. I was thinking talking about deceleration forces. The deceleration force of the accident acts upon the entire volume of a person, it isn't as simple as stress = load / area. Essentially, the higher the volume of the person the lower the stress on each cubic mm of their body. They will have a greater resilience to the stresses and will be able to absorb the energy better. Of course if they actually hit objects within the car then SA comes into play with Stress = Load / Area

It's been said children fare better in accidents which might be down to their mass. Their mass is lower than an adult so the deceleration force on their body is lower (Force = Mass x Acceleration). This in turn with the softer bones gives them a better chance in accidents (I think).

Of all this though, the really important thing is to stay relaxed I reckon smile

EFA

Edited by MSTRBKR on Monday 3rd January 18:51

Mr2Mike

20,143 posts

256 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
reggie82 said:
I don't think the baby's mass has anything to do with surviving crashes. Ok, the force the baby hits anything with would be smaller, but an adult has a bigger surface area to diperse the force across.
That would be relevant ONLY in the case that you smear a significant proportion of your body across part of the car in an accident. If you hit an object like the steering wheel or dash, then the surface are of your body is going to have minimal effect. Mass (and therefore force) will play a much larger role.

sharpfocus

13,812 posts

192 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
DanGPR said:
Mr2Mike said:
hairyben said:
dave9 said:
floppy - that's why babies often survive unhurt
Yeah there's been a couple of big airline disasters where the only survivor was a baby.
I'm pretty certain that's purely down to mass rather than "floppyness" i.e. F=MA. The same reason cats can fall out of tower blocks and survive but people generally can't.
Is a baby not equal in mass to an adult? Not weight, but mass.
Am I missing something, or is this one that JTW would be proud of?

Otto

738 posts

217 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
DanGPR said:
Mr2Mike said:
hairyben said:
dave9 said:
floppy - that's why babies often survive unhurt
Yeah there's been a couple of big airline disasters where the only survivor was a baby.
I'm pretty certain that's purely down to mass rather than "floppyness" i.e. F=MA. The same reason cats can fall out of tower blocks and survive but people generally can't.
Is a baby not equal in mass to an adult? Not weight, but mass.
Er, no - you're thinking of density. They will be similar density. Mass is effectively the same as weight.

DanGPR

989 posts

172 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
sharpfocus said:
DanGPR said:
Mr2Mike said:
hairyben said:
dave9 said:
floppy - that's why babies often survive unhurt
Yeah there's been a couple of big airline disasters where the only survivor was a baby.
I'm pretty certain that's purely down to mass rather than "floppyness" i.e. F=MA. The same reason cats can fall out of tower blocks and survive but people generally can't.
Is a baby not equal in mass to an adult? Not weight, but mass.
Am I missing something, or is this one that JTW would be proud of?
Yeah..it was a joke... I didn't make a monumental cock-up or anything..getmecoat

reggie82

1,370 posts

179 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
Mr2Mike said:
reggie82 said:
I don't think the baby's mass has anything to do with surviving crashes. Ok, the force the baby hits anything with would be smaller, but an adult has a bigger surface area to diperse the force across.
That would be relevant ONLY in the case that you smear a significant proportion of your body across part of the car in an accident. If you hit an object like the steering wheel or dash, then the surface are of your body is going to have minimal effect. Mass (and therefore force) will play a much larger role.
That's true. I just presumed that scenario is what you were basing your theory on, seeing as you used a cat falling out of a tower block as an example.

BMWBen

4,899 posts

202 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
When training for any martial art which involves being thrown you first learn how to deal with an impact (because people are going to use the floor as a weapon). The nasty ones like being thrown onto the flat of your back, or being pitched in a 180 over your shoulder are all about getting the correct body position and then *relaxing*.

You pretty quickly realise that when you tense up it really really hurts.

Check this girl out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mboa7__oPKU

If you tense up doing that one it destroys you.

Think about this - what's harder to smash, a china cup (stiff) or a stress ball (soft and squidgy).

Ray Luxury-Yacht

8,910 posts

217 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
sharpfocus said:
DanGPR said:
Mr2Mike said:
hairyben said:
dave9 said:
floppy - that's why babies often survive unhurt
Yeah there's been a couple of big airline disasters where the only survivor was a baby.
I'm pretty certain that's purely down to mass rather than "floppyness" i.e. F=MA. The same reason cats can fall out of tower blocks and survive but people generally can't.
Is a baby not equal in mass to an adult? Not weight, but mass.
Am I missing something, or is this one that JTW would be proud of?
Well, he'd call you an Ambiwlans after the crash at least hehe


K77 CTR

1,613 posts

183 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
I'd definitely say floppy, as has been said before those that are drunk, on drugs, asleep or unconcious prior to the crash tend to fare better in collisions. Never brace your arms on the steering wheel as you will transfer the force through your arms and probably sustain some great burns from the airbags.

Alot of injuries are related to seat position:
Men tend to have the seat laid back more than women, so slip forward in their seats causing hip, femur, knee and ankle injuries from the pedals and steering wheels being pushed up towards the body.
Women have their seats more upright, so lift up from their seats sustaining chest and head injuries from the steering wheel and windscreen.

bobmcgod

405 posts

195 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
I'd go with floppy.

And babies and children survive plane crashes due to size not mass. Their limbs and head are protected by the chair they're strapped to and all of the luck they've sucked from the other 100+ dead people.

morrellski

117 posts

169 months

Monday 3rd January 2011
quotequote all
EDLT said:
Go limp, its why drunk drivers often get away with minor injuries!
+1