All

Hi RCMXRacing. Sorry to hear about that crash...that sounds gnarly! Glad your neck is safe though! Remember the simple fact that T5 toT8 injuries are most common and as you mentioned from compression. I would like to add, that from research i have done that this compression is in almost all cases combined with flexion or forward bending..meaning that the back actually moves away from the braces back piece. So wouldn't blame any brace for such an injury in my opinion. Hope you get better soon!

HNR Eng. Agreed, looking forward to see it! You got somewhat of a disadvantage with that CPR manikin me thinks :-) Any simulation software? FEM? Resident Genius

Good morning HNR Engineer! Neither do I want to turn this into a Leatt thread. Please go and have a better look on their site. Leatt to my knowledge uses a MATD (Motorcycle Anthropomorphic Test Device) neck on their HIII dummy. Taken from their site: "Martin is similar to those dummies used by car manufacturers and boasts a total of some 23 built-in sensors that helps ensure valid and reliable data. In addition to this, Martin has an interchangeable Motorcycle Anthropomorphic Test Dummy (MATD) neck for non-seat belted test conditions (unrestrained torso impacts)". Even if they used a standard HIII...

Watching the video about the Nexis, I can't help but laugh. We use a dummy called "Rescue Randy"!!?? HAHAHA!!! This is a $1000 CPR manikin! Go check it out at http://www.drmass.com/si-1435.html. "We put a spine inside of him"...HAHAHAHA!! How can you take these guys serious with their claims of testing...using a CPR manikin!!. After almost 40 years of Dummy development, these guys quickly figure out how to do it. Buy a $1000 "anatomically correct" CPR manikin and "put a spine inside" of him! It is not about anatomically correct, its about biofidelity, which a CPR manikin DEFINITELY does NOT even...

GuyB....As a test engineer I can tell you that the dummy in their videos is not an instrumented test dummy...looks like nothing more than a fancy mannequin. It doesn't make sense that the wiring loom has been removed and at the same time data is recorded (or presented). I also don't know how it is possible to remove the wiring loom without physically removing the data sensors in the dummy...quite a job to do for no apparent reason??

Will be interesting to know how they measure actual data with their dummy as I can see no wiring loom protruding from the dummy which would indicate that it is not instrumented...