Apparel – Guard or protector – For wearer's head
Reexamination Certificate
2002-12-23
2004-11-09
Lindsey, Rodney M. (Department: 3765)
Apparel
Guard or protector
For wearer's head
C002S069000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06813782
ABSTRACT:
STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT
Not Applicable
REFERENCE TO A “MICROFICHE APPENDIX”
Not Applicable
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates generally to the field of protective racing harness systems. More particularly, the present invention relates to an improved safety device for head and neck stabilization for use in high performance vehicles, such as racecars, boats, airplanes or other high-speed apparatus.
2. Description of the Related Art
Racing is a dangerous sport. Attempts to minimize the risk involved with racing have included the increased use and development of seat belts, race harnesses, nomex fireproof clothing and roll bars/cages. However, different injury patterns, and despite the use of standard safety devices, tragic injuries and deaths from head and neck injuries have continued to occur.
Helmets are widely used in vehicles and other motion apparatus for protection of the head of the driver or other occupants thereof. However, while a helmet may provide protection to a wearer's head from injuries caused by impact with foreign objects, helmets are often inadequate to prevent the violent motion of the head and the bending of the neck of the wearer caused by the momentum of a sudden impact. In sudden frontal or angled frontal decelerations, the racers protective helmet becomes a 100+ pound projectile that, instead of protecting the racer, can actually increase the severity of the resultant injuries.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,381,758 contains a thorough discussion of the forces imposed upon a driver's head during frontal impact and the fatal neurological damage that can result therefrom, the details of which are incorporated herein by reference.
In response to this problem, numerous devices have been devised. While all have some protective value, none are without shortcomings—whether it be the cost, the restrictive nature of the device (or the perceived restrictiveness), lack of comfort, difficulty in wearing or attaching the device, or the device's lack of flexibility.
It is standard today for drivers of high performance vehicles to use a five- or six-point seat belt assembly in which all straps tie into a common buckle to restrain the driver during a crash. When a racecar traveling at extreme speeds crashes into an object, such as a concrete wall for example, the body of the driver remains strapped in by the car's seat belt harness, but the driver's neck and head stretch far forward, sometimes smashing the steering wheel or going beyond the wheel. The helmet worn by the driver may protect the driver's head from injuries caused by striking the steering wheel or windshield. Unfortunately, a helmet will not prevent the driver's head from the violent forward or lateral motion caused by inertia and external forces. Such violent movements of the head and neck frequently result in traumatic and disabling injury to the spine, supporting skeletal muscles, spinal cord, and brain. In recent years, several of the world's most renown racecar drivers have been involved in crashes that resulted in serious injuries, or even death, from a skull fracture caused by violent whipping of the head. Many believe that such injuries and deaths could have been prevented had the drivers been using some type of helmet-restraint system.
One common problem with nearly all existing restraint devices is the fairly high cost associated with the purchase of a system. For the limited number of drivers competing in the top three U.S. series—Winston Cup, Grand National and Trucks—cost is not so much a factor. However, there are many other drivers who compete on a much more limited basis, and as such, often do not have the financial resources of the full-time professional racecar drivers. The relatively high cost of existing head and neck restraint devices has the effect of creating a situation whereby drivers, because of cost concerns, end up not wearing this essential safety equipment—an obviously undesirable result.
Another problem associated with existing restraint devices—particularly those that require the user to don them over or under his racing suit—is that a head and neck restraint has to be right for each individual driver. What is right for one person may not be right for another. Conversely, devices that do accommodate a wide range of body types and personal preferences require a substantial number of adjustments to be made to the device in order for the wearer to be able to don the device and/or to position himself with the car's cockpit. Such adjustments are burdensome and time consuming. Further, by increasing the number of variables that must be attended to, the chances of something critical being overlooked also increase accordingly.
The HANS Device
Of the various head-and-neck restraint systems that have emerged in recent years, one of the more popular is the Head And Neck Support or “HANS” device, produced by Hubbard-Downing, Inc. of Atlanta, Ga. The HANS device which consists essentially of a rigid collar-shaped carbon fiber shell that is held onto the driver's upper body by seat belts and fastened to the helmet with flexible nylon tethers attached to both sides of the driver's helmet—is an example of a head and neck support device that makes use of a yoke and collar arrangement.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,638,510 to Hubbard describes an earlier version of the HANS apparatus consisting of a head and neck support device with tethers that are attached between the driver's helmet and the collar of the head and neck support apparatus. The head and neck support apparatus has a yoke integral with the collar that fits around the back of the driver's shoulders, adjacent the neck, and on the front of the driver's chest. The yoke has an opening so that the driver can mount the head and neck support apparatus by placing his head through the opening. An alternate embodiment is described wherein the yoke is provided with a slot in the front so that the driver can put on the apparatus from behind by sliding the apparatus around his neck.
As Hubbard himself later admitted in a subsequent patent for an improved version of his HANS device (U.S. Pat. No. 6,009,566), the apparatus disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,638,510 was lacking in at least one respect, namely, the fact that the loading from the tethers had to be resisted by bending of the collar and yoke of the head and neck support apparatus. This required a substantial collar and yoke structure which occupied space between the bottom of the occupant's helmet and torso. As described by Hubbard in U.S. Pat. No. 6,009,566, the device of U.S. Pat. No. 4,638,510 often interfered with the bottom of the occupant's helmet.
The improved version of the HANS device is not without its own shortcomings, however. To accommodate attachment of the HANS device, fairly intricate modifications must be made to the driver's helmet. In fact, at least up until just very recently, drivers were unable themselves to attach a HANS device to their helmets. Instead, Hubbard-Downing—the sole manufacturer of the HANS device—required drivers in all cases to send their helmets to Hubbard-Downing for attachment.
Further, despite its popularity, it has been observed by some that the HANS device can be uncomfortable to wear, and sometimes gives the wearer the feeling of it not fitting properly. In addition to complaints about discomfort experienced while wearing the system, other drivers have expressed concern that getting out of the car with the hefty safety collar could be a problem, particularly when the driver needs to free himself quickly from the car, such as in the event of a fire, for example. Still others have observed a somewhat claustrophobic feeling when using the HANS device, in that the driver is essentially crammed into the car's cockpit, with the HANS device crammed up against the driver's head and crammed against the seat. In addition, during certain types of racing requiring a driver change during a pit stop w
Kintzi Harry E.
Kintzi Martin C.
Buchanan Ingersoll
Farrell Marc J.
Lindsey Rodney M.
LandOfFree
Safety device and system for head and neck stabilization does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Safety device and system for head and neck stabilization, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Safety device and system for head and neck stabilization will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3356631