Deactivating Automotive Airbags
- Thread starter Bobby B
- Start date
Member- Sep 3, 2016
- 597
- Tinnitus Since
- 2011
- Cause of Tinnitus
- Punishment for being so darn good looking!
You might want to flatten those tires. If one of those puppies blows you will suffer not only massive db's but personal decapitation also.
Sorry to 'explode' yet another myth in this thread
, but inflation pressure for those tires is likely low...perhaps very low. Many reasons...copious tire volume and large tire surface area can't sustain high stress of high inflator pressure, high side wall compressive strength....massive tire footprint and psi based upon this footprint relative to vehicle weight. Most very large vehicles have very low tire pressures FWIW and if the tire is punctured don't make as much noise as small tire....like a racing bike tire under 120 psi by contrast.
Ecip
Member
- Nov 8, 2015
- 686
- Tinnitus Since
- 4.11.2015
- Cause of Tinnitus
- Still unknown... possibly noise exposure?
I concur. Take a farm tractor, for example. Tire pressure would be around 25 to 35 psi.Sorry to 'explode' yet another myth in this thread
A highway tractor will usually run at 100psi, however.
That's why I ride fat bikes nowSorry to 'explode' yet another myth in this thread
Big volume, low psi, no explosion and tons of fun !
Foncky, I am pretty much riding all on road now. Do about 150 miles a week. Ride with fast guys in town some of whom train 2-3 x's that...freaky miles...back to back century days etc.. I parted out my last off road bike and sold it off...a Ti 29er hardtail. I haven't built a fat bike yet, nor really have the urge. There are a few in my town however. Cycling is a great escape isn't it? I ended up making a choice in my life honestly...all of which well preceded my tinnitus. I quit riding motorcycles on the street because I didn't want to get messed up for road cycling. I didn't get rid of my Arai helmet and leathers howeverWell, I use my fat bikes on rocky singletracks, that works as well
Road bikes are fine too, if you run them tubeless, blow out is less likely to happen !
if a friend shows up with a super sport and my will power breaks down and I ask him to take it out for a spin. I also try to stay out of the local Ducati dealership.
Almost same story here. I used to be a motocross rider... well before T ! A MTB replaced it one day and I never looked back. I could start motocross again though, as there are now very efficient electric MX bikes. Wind noise is not an issue, as you never go very fast on SX tracks.
Not to spend too much time OT, what does your fat bike weigh and what tire pressures do you run?
E-bikes and motorcycles are the future.
Well, I guess the airbag discussion came to an end anyway...
I currently ride a "semi" fat bike, a 650B+ (27.5x3.25 tyres). I run them at 9 psi, I don't know the overall weight but I guess it's around 29lbs (it's a steel fully rigid singlespeed).
I currently ride a "semi" fat bike, a 650B+ (27.5x3.25 tyres). I run them at 9 psi, I don't know the overall weight but I guess it's around 29lbs (it's a steel fully rigid singlespeed).
- Nov 10, 2013
- 464
- 41
- Tinnitus Since
- 2005
- Cause of Tinnitus
- Bad luck and bad genes
New Mercedes-Benz cars will play a short blast of white/pink noise just before an unavoidable crash, forcing the occupant's ears to turn off for a moment, preventing the hearing loss normally caused by the crash itself or airbags.
Source:
https://www.mercedes-benz.com/en/me...pink-noise-in-the-split-second-before-impact/
According to the site:
"When PRE-SAFE® detects that an accident is imminent, a pink noise signal is played through the sound system at a volume of around 80 decibels. The ear is then primed for the high level of sound that typically accompanies a collision."
I wonder if that actually does anything.
Source:
https://www.mercedes-benz.com/en/me...pink-noise-in-the-split-second-before-impact/
According to the site:
"When PRE-SAFE® detects that an accident is imminent, a pink noise signal is played through the sound system at a volume of around 80 decibels. The ear is then primed for the high level of sound that typically accompanies a collision."
I wonder if that actually does anything.
Wonderful technology answering the bell to ward off hearing damage due to air volume displacing high dB airbag deployment. Technology is watershed for two reasons....a. development of the sound to prepare the hearing for a larger sound...the understanding of the hearing reflex and b. the implementation which involves the creation of this sound independent of sound system volume and tying this to crash sensors. Bet it will become a common component of airbag systems for all automakers...however it takes integration with the vehicle sound system which lags in lower end vehicles. No doubt overtime this technology will be ubiquitous. Kudos to MB.
It sounds like the idea is to trigger the stapedial reflex before exposure to a loud sound, because that's how the ear "protects" itself from noise damage. Of course, this wouldn't create enough protection to prevent hearing loss from a sound over 140db (which, according to OSHA safety standards, is an unsafe level of sound at any duration), and thus will also likely not prevent exacerbation of tinnitus or hyperacusis.
A largely useless gimmick, in my opinion, but at least it means they're starting to acknowledge the issue.
I am glad you wrote 'in your opinion'. The only thing you wrote that was accurate. I worked in the industry. It always comes down to bang for buck.
Buck portends to marketing and liability. MB will get very limited marketing bounce out of this to defray high cost to bring this to the market. It is not a gimmick. All automakers would implement this technology to prevent getting sued for hearing damage due to airbag deployment. So all the PhD's that brought this technology disagree with your ignorant assessment. For that, I am grateful.
Buck portends to marketing and liability. MB will get very limited marketing bounce out of this to defray high cost to bring this to the market. It is not a gimmick. All automakers would implement this technology to prevent getting sued for hearing damage due to airbag deployment. So all the PhD's that brought this technology disagree with your ignorant assessment. For that, I am grateful.
Actually, everything in my post was accurate.
You can google the "acoustic reflex" to learn more about the stapedius muscle and how it attempts to protect your hearing.
If you disagree with me about safe levels of sound, I suggest speaking to your audiologist to become more informed. 140db is an unsafe level of sound at any duration, whether or not there is white noise playing in the background. This is why we wear hearing protection at firearm ranges.
My point to you Sen is your thinking is simplistic. You are a binary thinker. All or nothing. The world is the opposite, shades of grey with both mitigating and aggravating circumstances. No two vehicles...thousands of different configurations on the road, have the same sound signature during deployment. Guess what? No two vehicles, of the same model have the same internal sound signature due to airbag deployment. Of course you can't comprehend this.
So nobody can say with any certainty what the sound signature is for a given crash. So any speculation that this technology does no good is your anecdotal hearsay or rather heresy. MB went to a lot of trouble to bring it to market. It may not even help for certain higher speed crashes but it may help considerably for the majority of deployments with a given payload and speed. This determination is based upon data and your arm chair analysis isn't.
So nobody can say with any certainty what the sound signature is for a given crash. So any speculation that this technology does no good is your anecdotal hearsay or rather heresy. MB went to a lot of trouble to bring it to market. It may not even help for certain higher speed crashes but it may help considerably for the majority of deployments with a given payload and speed. This determination is based upon data and your arm chair analysis isn't.
Can you point out where in my post that I disagreed with this?
I said 80db of white noise in tandem with the stapedial reflex will not protect your hearing from 140db of sound. I did not make any comment whatsoever on the prevalence of airbag deployment at that sound level.
It appears you are arguing with me about a point that nobody made.
Strawman #2.
Can you point out where in my post that I said this technology "does no good"?
As I can recall I even pointed out how it is a good thing that the issue is being acknowledged by vehicle manufacturers. I did not state that this technology "does no good."
It is true that it will do no good in the case of a 140db+ deployment, because a 140db sound at any duration is unsafe unless you are properly wearing adequate hearing protection.
This raises an important question. What is the average sound level of an airbag deployment? We can determine roughly how useful this technology will be in the face of a deployment if we take an average sound level into account. If the average deployment rises to 140db or above, we can determine that, on average, it will not be helpful technology.
Sen,
In the interest of forum decorum, best you and I don't engage further because I can see we are miles away in terms of training and perspective. I could write a chapter on why your thinking is flawed in terms of the value of this technology. Suffice to say there is tremendous variation to the sound level of airbag deployment depending on number of airbags in a given vehicle, whether sensors don't deliberately fire a given airbag based upon sensor input...what stage level each airbag fires at, internal cabin size of a given vehicle, number of occupants within a given vehicle which affects acoustics and air volume level...and even huge variation in tolerance of a given person to sound level. A person with hyperacusis has a much higher probability to injury at higher sound levels versus a young, healthy person. So depending on the permutation stack up of different variables, the pink noise technology will have greater or less effectiveness. Your initial comment that this technology is a gimmick is absurd.
In the interest of forum decorum, best you and I don't engage further because I can see we are miles away in terms of training and perspective. I could write a chapter on why your thinking is flawed in terms of the value of this technology. Suffice to say there is tremendous variation to the sound level of airbag deployment depending on number of airbags in a given vehicle, whether sensors don't deliberately fire a given airbag based upon sensor input...what stage level each airbag fires at, internal cabin size of a given vehicle, number of occupants within a given vehicle which affects acoustics and air volume level...and even huge variation in tolerance of a given person to sound level. A person with hyperacusis has a much higher probability to injury at higher sound levels versus a young, healthy person. So depending on the permutation stack up of different variables, the pink noise technology will have greater or less effectiveness. Your initial comment that this technology is a gimmick is absurd.
Yes, my perspective acknowledges well established and scientifically demonstrated damaging levels of sound, while your perspective ignores them.
Why do you keep repeating this as if anyone disagrees?
The OSHA sound safety standards are based on sound levels levels that cause permanent threshold shifts in most people. There are very few exceptions to these rules, and there are certainly are not "huge variations in tolerance" to damage caused by sound, at least by any currently established metric.
I actually agree with you on the point that hyperacusics are more likely to experience worsened hyperacusis from levels of sound that would normally not cause hyperacusis in a healthy individual, but if you do some reading you'll find that all the current established literature on hyperacusis claims that hyperacusics are no more susceptible to hearing damage (or even to worsened hyperacusis) than anyone else. The Jastreboff model in particular vehemently disagrees with you on this.
More to the point, there is no evidence at all, outside of anecdotal claims, that individuals with hyperacusis are more likely to experience hearing damage from noise exposure than someone with healthy ears.
Which is why I proposed finding out the average sound level of an airbag deployment, so we can begin to determine the average effectiveness this technology would have in preventing damage to hearing. Obviously an average is not an absolute.
- Feb 17, 2017
- 10,400
- Tinnitus Since
- February, 2017
- Cause of Tinnitus
- Acoustic Trauma
The only problem with that is that 30 dB ear defenders won't offer much protection against a 160 dB airbag deployment...
@Bill Bauer I am using a small tablet pcb and not my regular pcb with keyboard so will give full reply tomorrow.
Bye for now
Michael.
Bye for now
Michael.
- Feb 17, 2017
- 10,400
- Tinnitus Since
- February, 2017
- Cause of Tinnitus
- Acoustic Trauma
Michael, I understand why someone would be against deactivating airbags. At the same time, I guess it is important to take into the account the impact T has on someone. I know that if T gets worse, I will want to commit suicide. It makes sense to die right then and there and not to drag it out. As for the chance that one may end up disabled, this is difficult to estimate. If the speed is high enough, one can get disabled after a crash involving an airbag. Disabled (possibly to the point of no longer being able to commit suicide) AND suffering from louder tinnitus. In any case, assuming a car crash is equally likely at all speeds, the chance of ending up disabled is the same with and without using airbags. If we assume that a car crash is more likely at a higher speed, then the chance of ending up disabled is higher when one uses airbags (+ as a bonus one gets louder T). So it seems that the only probability that falls when one uses airbags is the probability of dying. So the choice seems to be simple - if you would rather die than live with louder tinnitus, disable your airbags. Otherwise, don't disable them. This is just my opinion. Everyone ought to do what feels right to them. I am not set on doing this myself, but I am seriously considering it...
p.s.
As for the argument that someone else could be in the car with you during the crash: This is easy to solve - just don't let anyone ride in your car. You would have a good excuse - it is unsafe.
p.p.s.
Information for Canadians out there. The bad news is that Transport Canada requires you to submit an application where you declare that you suffer from scoliosis. The good news is that you don't need a doctor's note to confirm your statement...
https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/motorvehiclesafety/tp-tp13178-menu-124.htm
https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/motorvehiclesafety/tp-tp13178-page4_e-184.htm
- Nov 25, 2015
- 1,705
- Tinnitus Since
- 11/2015
- Cause of Tinnitus
- Large caliber rifles&machine guns, +30 years of loud clubs
You don't need any authorization to deactivate your own car airbags yourself
Perfectly legal
The issue arises when you want to ask someone else to do it - they need some legal authorization
You only need to disconnect the wires from the airbag computer to the airbags so that no current will ever reach and those cannot blow whatever happens
Perfectly legal
The issue arises when you want to ask someone else to do it - they need some legal authorization
You only need to disconnect the wires from the airbag computer to the airbags so that no current will ever reach and those cannot blow whatever happens
- Feb 17, 2017
- 10,400
- Tinnitus Since
- February, 2017
- Cause of Tinnitus
- Acoustic Trauma
@Bill Bauer
You mention some interesting points on why someone would want to disable the air bag in their vehicle and I understand it. As previously mentioned, this topic has been explored at length in this forum and I have written about it in my article: Hyperacusis, As I see it. Therefore, I am reluctant to return to it but have chosen to do so briefly, as you are new to tinnitus and my suggestions might be of some help.
The early stages of tinnitus can be quite traumatic particularly when it was caused by noise exposure. If hyperacusis is present it often adds to the distress. If a person is finding it difficult to cope which is understandable. Counselling (talk therapy) with a Hearing Therapist or Audiologist trained in the field of tinnitus management can help immensely. Similarly, advice and good counsel can be sought from people that are seasoned to the condition whom I refer to as "tinnitus veterans". There are many at Tinnitus Talk. There are also some people new tinnitus that show a maturity to this condition that's beyond their years. They are real asset and can bring fresh and new ideas to dealing with this affliction.
Whichever camp one chooses to seek advice, it will often be positive, uplifting and forward looking and will not feed into the fear, paranoia and scare mongering often purported by some individuals.
Michael
- Feb 17, 2017
- 10,400
- Tinnitus Since
- February, 2017
- Cause of Tinnitus
- Acoustic Trauma
Keep in mind that people have different personality types. Some people possess more inner strength than others. I have a neurotic personality. I remember scoring "99% neurotic" on some psychology test I took - that was before the onset of T. I know myself very well, and I know that once the volume gets high enough, I won't be able to cope.
In any case, I agree - T sufferers who are not neurotic and who have a history of displaying inner strength, should not disconnect their airbags and disable their fire alarms.
I have no doubt that you know yourself well but I believe you are stronger than you think. As time passes you will come to realize it. I advise you to read the positivity threads in this forum and the positivity documents in my article often.
All the best
Michael
