Roll Bar padding

[Alien]

Good to know Marshall. No doubt that the rues should require padding that was manufactured specifically to be used as roll bar padding (not literally the pool noodles or home pipe padding). Upon more googling, that explains why some sites list ensolite as resilient and some as non, tho the majority of the places that list it as non resilient are sites that are repeating a rule spec.

Al, if they are looking to change the rules, can we lobby to only require the higher density stuff around the bars that could come in contact with your head?

*edit* Here's the SCCA wording...

I. ROLL BAR PADDING
Braces and portions of the main hoop subject to contact by the driver’s
or passenger’s helmet, as seated normally and restrained by seat belt
and harness, must be padded with a non-resilient material such as
Ethafoam (R) or Ensolite (R) or other similar material with a minimum
thickness of one-half inch.

*edit edit* Found this on a FSAE website. Same situation where the rules said non resilient, but then ok'd ethafoam and ensolite.
http://fsae.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/1.../m/61810772821

I actually contacted the FSAE judges about this rule becuase I wondered why they specifically listed materials to be non-resilient when the manufacture lists them as resilient. The response:

"We seem to be getting hung up on semantics, "resilient", "semi-resilient", "non-resilient", etc. We inserted the phrase "non-resilient" into the FSAE rules a couple of years ago to convey to the teams that we did not want to see rubbery roll bar and head restraint padding such as pipe insulation.

Yes, Dow does classify their Ethafoam as "resilient". However, over the years we have found from experience that it does a very good job as roll bar padding or for head restraints in our forms of motorsport, e.g. Formula SAE, SCCA Club Racing, Solo II and Pro Rallying.

Confor foam CF45 (Blue) is approved by the FIA for use as cockpit and headrest padding for F1 cars above 30 deg C and for sports cars. Below 30 deg. C, F1 cars have to switch to Confor CF42 (Pink). These cars can run at a little higher speeds than we allow Formula SAE cars to reach, and therefore need to meet some tougher standards. Confor is an excellent material that works in these applications.

As far as the "weekend autocrosser" is concerned, our Formula SAE rules are more stringent for car safety than those for SCCA Solo II. So you should have no concern that a car complying with our rules will not meet the Solo II or local autocross rules. You do not need to use "FIA Approved materials". You may if you wish, but it is not necessary.

We hope this answers your question. If not, please contact us again.

Rules Committee,
FSAE"

[Al Fernandez]

Gary, I would love to see the CCR reworded, but I cannot guarantee that it will happen. I've been educated, re-educated, and re-re-educated on what the interpretation of that rule is and entrusted to ensure Texas Officials follow the same.

Cars that do not have the right padding this weekend will be allowed to run and informed that they have to fix it by the next weekend they attend.

[marshall_mosty]

15.6.4 Padding
All roll cage surfaces that may come in contact with the driver should be padded with high-density padding such as Ethafoam or Ensolite. It is recommended that padding meeting SFI specificaiton 45.1 be used.

"Should" indicates a suggestion
"Shall" indicates a requirements

Based on that, we don't need roll bar padding at all, to the letter of the rule.

"Such as"
-adverb
1. to the same degree, amount, or extent; similarity; equally



So, if we choose to pad the roll cage, it needs to be equivalent to Ethafoam and Ensolite. Both of which have numerous grades, densities, and impact properties.



What needs to happen is somthing like this:

15.6.4 Padding
All roll cage surfaces that may come in contact with the driver shall be padded with high-density padding. It is recommended that padding meeting SFI specification 45.1 be used. The following non-SFI padding has been reviewed and approved for use under this section and must be selected if non-SFI 45.1 padding is utilized.

PN: 1234 Mfr: XYZ Company
PN: 5678 Mfr: ABC Company
PN: 9012 Mfr: Acme Roll Bar Padding

What is the official direction, without doubt. I have the "pool noodle" type that was "high density" when I bought it. I was told that I was racing "at risk" at MSR-C. I would like to know if I'm going to be "turned away" at TWS for non-compliance, but as I see it today, we technically don't need padding per the written rule...

Someone PLEASE draw the line in the sand for everyone and get the CCR's updated, if it's as big of a deal as it "should" be.

[mitchntx]

There you go again, thinking the rest of the world and like normal folks think.

However, this is the CCR ...

28.1.13 Should vs. Shall
The word “should” is used throughout this rulebook; and in order to fully grasp its
meaning, the following explanations have been created. When the word “should”
is used, it can be taken to mean that something should be done in accordance
with this book, or the driver can expect the stewards to disallow track time, if they
catch the issue. The reason that it’s stated as “should,” is to add emphasis that
it’s really, and ultimately, the driver’s responsibility. Because Inspectors,
Instructors, Flaggers, and Officials in general, tend to be human, it is an assumed
risk of this activity that a mistake can be made. Therefore, the driver is ultimately
held responsible for his or her own safety.
Furthermore, the word “should” also makes an implication of fallibility and/or
corrects false expectations. For example, “the flagger should display a yellow
flag,” the yellow flag in question may not show because of 1) it relies on the
flagger’s judgment, and that can be subjective, and 2) the flagger is human and
can make a mistake. Therefore, if one is not willing to risk their safety because
they expect other people to be perfect, then they cannot participate in NASA.
To sum it up, the word “should” can be construed in the context of these
examples:
a) “The driver should have roll cage padding (if they expect to be let on
track).”
b) “The official should check for roll cage padding (implying that, even though
they do their best, the Inspectors can miss something).

So should equals shall and shall is the same as should in the context of the CCR.

In other words, they use two different words with different meanings and sentence useage to mean the same thing.

I guess their version of a word processor doesn't have the "Find and Replace" feature.

[marshall_mosty]

Well crap... There you go showing that I didn't fully read the CCR's... They even reference roll cage padding in their reference...

[jdlingle]

If YOU guys think this crap is confusing imagine what its like when you are building your first car! :shock:

Sure wish they would clean some of the wording up so I wouldnt be as scared of buying something and then being told it wont work. On the roll bar padding I just bit the bullet and bought all 45.1 to install as soon as the car gets back from the cage builder, but I still keep thinking something I misinterpretted is going to bite me in the ass my first time through tech.

[edrock96GT]

Hindsight is always 20/20 and everyone becomes an expert on the part of the rules that they didn't know they were breaking...AFTER the fact. Ask me about helmets, firewalls, intakes, head & neck restraints, wire terminals and now SOCKS and I can tell you all about them, and yes some of the rules are written poorly.

For example:
15.17.7 Socks.
Socks made of approved fire resistant material must be worn.

I admit, cotton: no, nomex: yes. But what exactly is "approved" and what isn't? There are a lot more types of fire resistant materials than nomex but NASA gives no reference to what is or is not approved. A clear, concise list would be nice...and could save us $50 in the future.

...but I digest... :lol:

If you're not sure about making a change to your car, look at the CCR first (unlike some of us). The "find" box for PDF is invaluable for searching. Also, don't be afraid to ask. One person might find something that 5 others missed.