NCAA Mandates new ASTM Box Collar by Dec 2013

[PVJunkie]

Moving a pit and box collar are common. The new box collar is no more or less difficult to move to a new location than the ones used for the past 10 years. Being in the midwest we have moved our pit and collar twice in the same meet. If you have officials that resist the safest environment you should consider new officials.

If you are running 2 pits simultaneously you will need 2 collars. If the host facility can afford 2 identical pits I am sure the collar shouldn't be an issue.

[Decamouse]

Lets start of first with -- I do believe these type collars, if properly designed and manufactured, do decreasing potential injury severity in the box area. I have a fair understanding of the original designs and testing. The original box collars used foam that meet the wall pad imapct criteria -- that is not the criteria in the final ASTM std for box collars.

Big Question -- Have the current design on the market been "tested" to the referenced standard list in the Final ASTM std for this type box collar?

Believe it was ASTM 1292 - A Impact Attenuation of surfacing materials spec -- the g-max and HIC values for various areas/test locations are to be recorded.

With the Skydex Softbox this information g-max and HIC information has been included in the marketing information available for that product --

Would real blow if next NCAA season approaches and each vault location had to perform the testing - was a provision for "If the pole vault box collar is tested at its use site"

Would be nice to know beofre you buy what the gmax and HIC values for that manufacturers product should be (not the just what the standard requires - but how the product tested)

[Mister Ed]

Has anyone tried to accurately measure the height of the crossbar with one of these collars in place?

The one I have dealt with is secured with velcro and glue---it's on there pretty good. As installed, there is no way for your laser or measuring bar to get any purchase on the horizontal surface at the zero point. Over time, either the poles or the officials have peeled/torn it back just enough to get maybe 1/8" to rest on--with the pad pushing back against you the whole time. There is also some velcro between you and the flat surface.

Maybe the one I use was installed too close to the plant box, but be careful if you glue these down.
By looking at the pictures and specs, there is a real possibility that proper installation---which looks good on paper---actually precludes being able to measure the event.

[superpipe]

Big Question -- Have the current design on the market been "tested" to the referenced standard list in the Final ASTM std for this type box collar?

I would surely assume so. Pretty sure Gill has been in close contact with Jan and the ASTM people to insure they made the new collar to spec. It's not some "nobody" company making the new collar, it's Gill Athletics. Pretty sure they know what they are doing.

Has anyone tried to accurately measure the height of the crossbar with one of these collars in place?

The one I have dealt with is secured with velcro and glue---it's on there pretty good. As installed, there is no way for your laser or measuring bar to get any purchase on the horizontal surface at the zero point. Over time, either the poles or the officials have peeled/torn it back just enough to get maybe 1/8" to rest on--with the pad pushing back against you the whole time. There is also some velcro between you and the flat surface.

Maybe the one I use was installed too close to the plant box, but be careful if you glue these down.
By looking at the pictures and specs, there is a real possibility that proper installation---which looks good on paper---actually precludes being able to measure the event.

Not sure I follow here. If it's velcro, you can peel the collar off pretty easy, even with industrial velcro. I have 2" wide industrial velcro lining the entire perimeter of the vault box and under my collar. I have no problem lifting the collar off when taking measurements and you couldn't use stronger or more velcro than I have. As for velcro thickness, it's "null" for practical purposes, the loop side that is. The loop side ( the soft side ) of the velcro is what should be super glued around the plant box. If the hook side of the velcro is installed around the plant box, yes it's "stiff" enough to cause thickness above the runway. The loop side of the velcro should be installed around the plant box.

[Mister Ed]

I can't picture it exactly and won't see it until next indoor season. Just remember that I couldn't move it out of the way. May have been glued after being velcroed or really wide/tight velcro that you couldn't peel up from the middle.

[superpipe]

Big Question -- Have the current design on the market been "tested" to the referenced standard list in the Final ASTM std for this type box collar?

I would surely assume so. Pretty sure Gill has been in close contact with Jan and the ASTM people to insure they made the new collar to spec. It's not some "nobody" company making the new collar, it's Gill Athletics. Pretty sure they know what they are doing.

Sorry Decamouse. Didn't realize your background. Jealous beyond belief. I would have thought you'd have better access to that info than most. I made an earlier statement that it would be good to have a permanent label attached to any box collar that met the ASTM standard so officials and other interested parties knew. The more I think about it, the more it really should be required by the NCAA rule and the NFHS rule ( when it happens ). Biggest reason is the box collar that has been available for years now that "looks" exactly the same, but does not meet the new standard. Second biggest reason is any "non-obsessed" PV person, officials especially, won't know the difference between this new collar and any other one existing in the world and assume the facility has one that meets the rule, even more so since the actual rule references the ASTM standard spec which no official will have a copy on hand to read and verify the box collar at the current facility.

There really needs to be a label attached to the collar. Visually looking at the collar pics and vid on Gill's website indicates it has nothing written on the collar referencing the ASTM spec.

[AVC Coach]

During the testing phase of this product, what was the result when the pole tip hit the pad that hangs over into the box during a vault? Did it slide by or stick?

[rainbowgirl28]

During the testing phase of this product, what was the result when the pole tip hit the pad that hangs over into the box during a vault? Did it slide by or stick?

In the videos I have seen, it went down into the box with minimal resistance and didn't have a significant impact on the vault. But I am not speaking from personal experience...

[KirkB]

For my background re this topic, please refer to "How to avoid injuries from landing in the box?" http://www.polevaultpower.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=16700

That's one of my big questions too: Is there any physical or psychological impact due to the WINGS during the pole plant?

And will the pole hit the strikeplate in such a way that the collar won't impede the bend of the pole?

i.e. Will vaulters concede that it's OK, after they get over the initial adjustment period of the wings covering the sidewalls of the box?

I would be concerned that I couldn't place my pole in the left corner of the box (I'm a lefty), which is where I used to aim. Now, the wings will guide the pole to the center of the strikeplate. I'm not saying this is bad - I'm only saying it's different, and needs to be tested. It might even be BETTER, since the pole is now guaranteed to not hit the RIGHT corner of the strikeplate - where there's less room for the pole to bend. This needs to be tested by some independent, responsible governing body (NOT the manufacturers!).

1. We know that ASTM have not specified any usability tests - they only specify a missile impact test, to ensure that the material is dense enough so that it won't bottom-out upon impact by the vaulter.

2. If the NCAA has sponsored or endorsed any usability testing for this, they haven't made it public. This usability testing still needs to occur - with the SafetyMax+ or competitive products that meet the ASTM spec.

3. Gill will have already conducted their ASTM tests to ensure compliance, but I haven't heard of them conducting any usability tests ... yet.

I personally like the design of the wings - tapering from next to nothing to the full width at the pole bend cavity - and I SUSPECT that poles will slide down the floor of the box without any interference. However, with lives at risk here, this needs to be proven by adequate testing - not by subjective reports and hearsay from less than impartial "testers". I'm hopeful that we'll see some objective usability test results this year, now that the SafetyMax+ is available to test with.

New collars should be no problem, but I'm also concerned about the wings wearing down over time - by poles continuously glancing off of them. At some point they WILL be worn down (or decay) so much that the pole WILL be impeded if it strikes a bad spot (about halfway down the sidewall). But how to specify that? Because this is material-related (as opposed to usability-related), this sounds like a job for the ASTM!

As I mentioned above, I'm also concerned with the issue of the pole bending into the box collar, causing a potential safety hazard - rather than preventing one. Since the planes of the collar follow the planes of the box and (for pits that are designed to fit tightly around the box) the planes of the front buns and front apron. Being the middle tier on each of these planes, the collar SHOULD be OK IMHO, but REAL testing by REAL vaulters under REAL training and meet conditions is needed to verify this. Even if it can be mathematically proven that there's no possible way that the bent pole can touch the collar, thorough testing is still prudent - before blindly mandating this new NCAA rule.

Superpipe wrote:

There really needs to be a label attached to the collar.

That's not mandated in the ASTM specs, and your assumption seems to be that the manufacturer is responsible for conducting the ASTM tests. The specs only say:

Code: Select all

11. Instructions and Labeling
I l.l Each pole vault box collar shall be provided with instructions for proper assembly and installation.
I I .2 Each pole vault box collar shall be permanently labeled with the following items :
I 1.2.1 ldentification of manufacturer,
1 1.2.2 Model designation,
1 1.2.3 Specific warning on installation, and
11.2.4 A warning label limiting the intended use.

However, the Gill website http://www.gillathletics.com/store/product/safetymax-vault-box-collar does quote the ASTM F2949 spec. And there does appear to be some printing in the top-left corner of their collar. What does it say?

Kirk Bryde

[KirkB]

Taking a closer look at the pic of the SafetyMax+ on the Gill website, I notice now that the wings don't go all the way down to the pole slide (floor of the box). Thus, my concern re pole butts striking the wings and wearing them out are more unlikely than I first thought.

But also - unfortunately - my thinking re the wings "centering" the pole butt on the strikeplate is likewise unfounded. With the wings not going all the way down to the pole slide, it now appears to me that the butt can still hit a corner of the strikeplate.

An alternative design (one that I prototyped with a full size cardboard prototype in 2009) is to reduce the box dimensions to essentially follow the top-view dimensions of the box collar (the cavity could even be a bit narrower). Then, there wouldn't be any need for thick wings - a flat box collar (or one with short, thin wings) would suffice. This isn't a serious proposal TODAY, but once the winged box collar design becomes commonly accepted as a viable safety device that's proven to not impair the vault in any way, I can see this as a viable next step in the evolution of the integrated vault box and collar design.

For any of you that are skeptical, remember that the dimensions of the vault box were established well before the advent of the fiberglass pole, and probably even before the average vaulter was clearing much more than 8-10 feet. If we started with a brand new design - with no history behind us - we'd design the box much differently today, with athlete safety (elimination of hard landing surfaces and edges) as our first concern.

Kirk Bryde

[altius]

Good to see you back old son!!

[Decamouse]

Dilemia question -- Current G-max for referenced test is 200 -- ASTM is considering lowering to 160!! -- Since no published or listed test results for any currently advertised box collars-- would this mean there might be no collars available that meet the test criteria when NCAA says you need one?