New Box Collar Rule Interpretation (USTFCCCA)

[dj]

Good morning,

What's interesting is... I'm not sure ours (ETSU) has the number and we just bought it a couple of weeks ago!

I'll check this morning...

Maybe I blasted the company so badly they sent me the old none comply one...?

Hopefully it will have the number.. But the front edge seam did come open in the first 15 minutes of use... Just a 4" wide broken stitch..

Dj

[dj]

ours does have the number-- 11-2013 or II-2013

[Decamouse]

Quick check to see if collar meets basic dimension and design requirement

box collar front zoom.png (213.55 KiB) Viewed 16131 times

If with the box collar place properly - and the front top plane opening at 23 inches -- can the pole tip slide freely the complete length of the pole slide/side wall intersection -- hint: if standing at your take-off spot -- you can not see that point -- it is covered -- then it does not meet what ASTM std requires it to

The other area is does the pole bend cutout interfere with pole bend and is the opening the correct size -- that takes a little more work - I will document how next week

[Vaultref]

DecMouse... Who is the manufacturer of that pit in your picture? looks like one from AAE.

[Decamouse]

You are correct - that is an AAE pit -- will be working their meet Friday

[Decamouse]

Had time yesterday before a meet to take a lot of measurements and pictures - the winged box currently being sold as "Complies with ASTM F2949-12" - it does not meet the dimensional requirements at the runway end (pole bend area does meet the std) -- the pictures I have seen, including pictures of newly delivered collars show the same front design -- the top surface is supposed to be the narrower Opening) and the bottom where it rests on the box is supposed to be the same width or wider - read the std if you have a question.

cropped4210.jpg (109.28 KiB) Viewed 16058 times

collar is 48 wide -- minus the 23 inches for the opening -- 25 inches for rest or each side needs to be 12.5 -- and it does cover or prevent the pole from "freely" sliding the first couple inches along each side -- so -- NCAA needs to decide what to do now -- ASTM vote is end of Feb. -- sure raises questions about it or why a manufacture was aware of this topic being raised and it appears to proceed with business as normal -- I will say appears since I do not sit in on their meetings - questions in August and September about this - this collars are made in October and November or later

cropped4220.jpg (90.1 KiB) Viewed 16058 times

[Pvcoachk]

Ok. I see your point,technically...but practically, any kid who puts their pole tip at that point (right front corner or right left corner) is probably not vaulting safely and will need the padding protection around the box? Ive never seen a successful pole plant at those 2 spots? The tip should make contact in the back 1/2 of the box? Right? That plant was way off and unsafe from the beginning? The point is to protect kids from the killer hard edge of the box? I haven't seen any problems with it so far that were not outweighed by the protection offered by the pad. But I see your point, technically. I can't see yanking ours out and leaving the naked edge exposed. That would be like yanking out my seat belts because they wrinkle my new suit. Are you saying there is a better model that is compliant? Please post a picture of that model.

[Decamouse]

Agree with everything you said -- This is a manufacturer/NCAA issue to fix -- if you label that it complies it needs to comply - otherwise who is going to decide which parts need to be complied with -- the fact is the NCAA says it must meet the standard -- standard has specific dimensional requirements - fix the design -- as for the better model -- that is part of the kicker here - manufacture has a patent on the design -- so they need to get it correct

[Pvcoachk]

Okay. I see what you're saying. At first it sounded like you were saying the product is no good and should be pulled for from use on a technicality. My experience has told me that it works very well and enhances safety. I would rather it covered a little more of the edge of the box than expose that corner. I see what you're saying. It should be dead on the specs.