The discussion revolves around the concept of using a seat belt as a kill switch for an automobile, specifically in the context of a competition vehicle. Participants explore the feasibility, safety implications, and potential alternatives to this idea, touching on technical aspects and safety concerns.
Participants express a range of opinions on the safety and practicality of using a seat belt as a kill switch. While some acknowledge the potential risks, others argue that the specific context of a competition vehicle may mitigate those concerns. No consensus is reached on the overall safety or advisability of the proposed modification.
Participants highlight various assumptions, such as the vehicle's limited use and the nature of the competition, which may influence the perceived risks. The discussion also touches on the legal and safety responsibilities associated with vehicle modifications.
Actually this vehicle is for a competition and it won't be hitting the road much other than the few days in which the competition will take place.cpscdave said:Most newer cars already have seatbelt sensors built in. Could you hijack that signal??
My car even goes so far to have a weight sensor in the passenger seat to suppress the alarm when no one is sitting in it.
However from a safety standpoint a kill switch such of this might end up being more dangerous. What happens if the sensor fails when you're driving down the highway? Or if you've been out camping in the middle of nowhere and the sensor fails?
So you're saying you don't care if it's really dangerous during those few days?TheNerdyGuy said:Actually this vehicle is for a competition and it won't be hitting the road much other than the few days in which the competition will take place.
no, he is saying the solution doesn't need to work for 30000 hours before failure, just a few.phinds said:So you're saying you don't care if it's really dangerous during those few days?
Sure, and I agree it's almost sure to be safe but "almost sure" isn't all that great when your life could be on the line.donpacino said:no, he is saying the solution doesn't need to work for 30000 hours before failure, just a few.
Actually there is no threat to life,its an electric motor driven vehicle that would barely cross 25kmphphinds said:Sure, and I agree it's almost sure to be safe but "almost sure" isn't all that great when your life could be on the line.
That proposed modification could be contravening your contractual agreement with your insurers. You would be advised to ask them or you could find you were not covered, if you were to have an accident and the assessor were to poke around. In the case of this particular vehicle, I would think he may be very interested in any mods you had done.phinds said:Sure, and I agree it's almost sure to be safe but "almost sure" isn't all that great when your life could be on the line.
If I were going to use a parachute just once - tomorrow - I would want to be pretty sure it was going to work and the 30,000 hour figure would be the one to give an indication of risk. Just as with radio nucleides, even one with a half life of 1,000,000 years could go off now. With a potentially lethal thing like a competition car, I would have a similar attitude. For a radio set or a gas cooker, I might be a bit less fussy. But this is bordering on a duty of care issue (for other competitors) and, as such, should be treated with a fair level of seriousness. You may find something in the competition rules to tell you what's acceptable or not.donpacino said:there is a large difference between a design that will olny last a few days, and a design that is 'almost sure.'
If you were going to use a parachute 30,000 times that would be one thing, as you need to worry about the durability of the cloth, effects of repeated use on the lines. If you plan on using it once, and you KNOW it will work a few times, then that is fine and safe, because you don't need to worry about the cycling effect.sophiecentaur said:If I were going to use a parachute just once - tomorrow - I would want to be pretty sure it was going to work and the 30,000 hour figure would be the one to give an indication of risk. Just as with radio nucleides, even one with a half life of 1,000,000 years could go off now. With a potentially lethal thing like a competition car, I would have a similar attitude. For a radio set or a gas cooker, I might be a bit less fussy. But this is bordering on a duty of care issue (for other competitors) and, as such, should be treated with a fair level of seriousness. You may find something in the competition rules to tell you what's acceptable or not.
I have a worry that this is outside the remit of PF.
Even worse than failing, what if the sensor works?cpscdave said:However from a safety standpoint a kill switch such of this might end up being more dangerous. What happens if the sensor fails when you're driving down the highway? Or if you've been out camping in the middle of nowhere and the sensor fails?
This is a massively bad idea. What made you think this idea would help you win the competition?TheNerdyGuy said:Actually this vehicle is for a competition and it won't be hitting the road much other than the few days in which the competition will take place.