US Patent: 2,710,649
|
| Combination Shoulder And Lap Safety Belts
|
|
Patentees:
|
| Roger W. Griswold, II (exact or similar names) - Old Lyme, New London County,, CT |
| Hugh De Haven (exact or similar names) - Lyme, New London County, CT |
|
|
Patent Dates:
|
| Applied: |
Feb. 19, 1951 |
| Granted: |
Jun. 14, 1955 |
USPTO (New site tip)
Google Patents
Report data errors or omissions to steward
Joel Havens
|
|
Description: |
| This patent is for one of the most important vehicle safety devices ever invented. Volvo was one of the first manufacturers to incorporate this accessory into their vehicles.
Abstract:
While being broadly applicable to any restraint functions including dentist chairs, operating tables, litters, and the like, it pertains specifically to the restraint of occupants of seats such as those of vehicles in which due to sudden accelerations the occupants are subject to forces toward propulsion from the seats. For purposes of illustration it will be assumed that the invention is applied to the seats of aircraft, to prevent or at least minimize the hazards attaching to violent maneuvers or accidents such as collisions and crashes in which the seat occupant is exposed to varying degrees of high accelerations relative to the seat itself. It has became common place in aircraft, military tanks, certain types or uses of automobiles and the like, to provide some sort of restraint for the seat occupants. Since the early days of flying this has taken the form of a seat or lap belt, with a quick release fitting. While this method for partial body restraint has been effective for certain types of relatively minor accelerations of the occupants arising from rough air, voluntary maneuvers, etc., it has proved to be woefully deficient with the higher accelerations experienced in many of the more serious types of accidents. This known ineffectiveness arises from the fact that such lap or seat belts of themselves cannot and do not prevent the generally forward movement of the upper torso and head of the occupant. In response to such dangerous high accelerations, the head of the occupant is thrown forward to impact with the relatively stationary instrument panel, control wheel or other element constituting a potentially lethal instrument or com- ponent, with frequently fatal or dangerous results.
With progress of "crash injury" research, the necessity for some better form of protection for the occupant which will preclude the shocking impacts of the head and upper torso on relatively stationary portions of the vehicle, has been amply established. As an attempted answer to the problem, many forms of separate shoulder harness have been evolved as an augmentation of the partial restraint available from the lap or seat belt, but as provided hitherto they have been possessed of such disadvantageous features as to fail to find the ready acceptance and universal use that theoretically at least should follow the mere pointing out of the dangerous inadequacies of the conventional lap or seat belt. Research indicates that in numerous instances even where such shoulder harnesses have been provided and have been available to the occupants of an aircraft having a fatal crash (for instance) the shoulder harness was not even buckled or attached to the occupant. Part of the blame for this condition lies in the defects of the shoulder harness per se militating against its use as a matter of course, and part no doubt because familiarity breeds contempt and the occupant frequently prefers to wait until the imminence of danger (if he be aware of such) causes a hurried attempt to attach the shoulder harness, which, owing to the time factor, may not be possible before the accident occurs. As a solution to the separate shoulder harness, efforts have been made to combine in a single organization the restraint function of the seat belt with the completely separate restraint function of the shoulder harness. The major difficulty lies in the false premise that the shoulder harness should be provided as an auxiliary assembly of straps to be built upon or attached to the existing safety seat belt. At any rate, as previously pro- vided, the efforts toward combinations of shoulder an seat harness have taken the form of a multiplicity o straps and a plurality of individual more or less complicated fittings, which are compounded upon the quick release equipped seat belt with its fittings, all of which involves high cost. This concept, which requires the occupant to organize the combination, permits discretion on his part as to whether or not the shoulder harness portion of the assembly is or is not properly assembled over his torso. The shoulder harness as previously provide is either uncomfortable and exerts such constant constricting restraint of the occupant as to cause him to be continuously and uncomfortably aware that the shoulder harness is properly coupled or, if loose enough for comfort, is so loose as to fail in its restraining function, ant therefore the normal reaction is a decision to leave it uncoupled. While elaborate efforts have been made to secure looseness with restraint, when needed, by inertia 30devices and the like, which tighten or become anchored under accelerations, they are cumbersome, expensive, no completely satisfactory to the user and still permit discretion as to attachment or detachment of the shoulder harness portions.
Claim:
A combination shoulder and lap safety belt, comprising a plurality of mutually spaced effective anchorage means, a relatively long effectively continuous webbing strap portion engaged and defined in its operative length by two of said plurality of effective anchorage means, a relatively short webbing strap portion engaged and defined in its operative length by another of said plurality of effective anchorage means, means for connecting the relatively short strap to said relatively long strap to divide the tatter into a shoulder strap element and a lower seat strap element in acutely angular divergence. |
|
