| aspera | 10-02-2004 04:10 AM |
...some great posts on here. Cool.
I like how (pretty much) everybody agrees that frontal, side, and roof impacts are different...but interrelated. There also seems to be clear agreement that rally cars still have plenty of room to grow in addressing each problem. HANS-type devices for both occupants is needed to improve frontal impact survivability. NASCAR fence-type doors or some carbon/kevlar/foam touring car-type door would help side impacts.
I'd like to suggest that roof impacts might benefit from a two stage roll cage. The outer layer would absorb a hit and deform. Once all of the available distance is spent letting the cage absorb impacts the inner layer would absorb the impacts. The inner layer would be rigid. This might be a little bit heavier, but maybe that means that roll cage weight needs to be judged seperately by the FIA.:)
My personal opinion is that distance=safety. Mills sat low and to the rear of the car. That distance from the roof and the windshield may have saved his life. Increasing those distances, as well as the distances from the doors, increases safety.
Taken to the extreme, you end up with the Codriver in a Formula car position and an exo-cage. The exo-cage sounds worse than it could be. Two bars that look like roof rails might almost double the strength of the side edges of the roof. They wouldn't need to look any more awkward than a roof scoop or Safari snorkel.
I like how (pretty much) everybody agrees that frontal, side, and roof impacts are different...but interrelated. There also seems to be clear agreement that rally cars still have plenty of room to grow in addressing each problem. HANS-type devices for both occupants is needed to improve frontal impact survivability. NASCAR fence-type doors or some carbon/kevlar/foam touring car-type door would help side impacts.
I'd like to suggest that roof impacts might benefit from a two stage roll cage. The outer layer would absorb a hit and deform. Once all of the available distance is spent letting the cage absorb impacts the inner layer would absorb the impacts. The inner layer would be rigid. This might be a little bit heavier, but maybe that means that roll cage weight needs to be judged seperately by the FIA.:)
My personal opinion is that distance=safety. Mills sat low and to the rear of the car. That distance from the roof and the windshield may have saved his life. Increasing those distances, as well as the distances from the doors, increases safety.
Taken to the extreme, you end up with the Codriver in a Formula car position and an exo-cage. The exo-cage sounds worse than it could be. Two bars that look like roof rails might almost double the strength of the side edges of the roof. They wouldn't need to look any more awkward than a roof scoop or Safari snorkel.
| gbaker | 03-02-2005 10:43 AM |
[QUOTE=AndyRoo]...Never heard of the ISAAC system, looks interesting. Anyone on here used or seen one?[/QUOTE]We can put you in touch with Isaac users who rally.
| speedyHAM | 03-02-2005 11:38 AM |
For everyone who thinks they should make the cage rigid-
Nothing is rigid. Things will either bend and absorb energy in doing so, or they will break as in brittle fracture. Breaking takes very little energy if it is in a brittle type fracture. Shock loads need something to move to absorb the energy. A cage has to bend to do that. Even in moderate impacts the cage will be bent a little. The only way around this is to make the cage so strong and heavy that it moves whatever it impacts out of the way. Pretty hard to do with a Hincklestien (the rocks on the side of the road that Petter hit) since they are designed to keep tanks on track. Pretty hard to do with a mountain side as well. The cage did what it was designed to do- it absorbed the energy of the crash while saving the occupants lives.
Rally is dangerous. It always wil be as long as there are drivers and/or co-drivers in the car and/or spectators standing inches from the sides of the roads.
Nothing is rigid. Things will either bend and absorb energy in doing so, or they will break as in brittle fracture. Breaking takes very little energy if it is in a brittle type fracture. Shock loads need something to move to absorb the energy. A cage has to bend to do that. Even in moderate impacts the cage will be bent a little. The only way around this is to make the cage so strong and heavy that it moves whatever it impacts out of the way. Pretty hard to do with a Hincklestien (the rocks on the side of the road that Petter hit) since they are designed to keep tanks on track. Pretty hard to do with a mountain side as well. The cage did what it was designed to do- it absorbed the energy of the crash while saving the occupants lives.
Rally is dangerous. It always wil be as long as there are drivers and/or co-drivers in the car and/or spectators standing inches from the sides of the roads.
| MY98STI | 08-12-2005 01:57 AM |
Hello people,
I am having a little trouble finding and pics or vids of this crash can anyone help me??
Cheers
Steven
I am having a little trouble finding and pics or vids of this crash can anyone help me??
Cheers
Steven
| Chromer | 08-12-2005 09:19 AM |
[QUOTE=speedyHAM]For everyone who thinks they should make the cage rigid-
Nothing is rigid. Things will either bend and absorb energy in doing so, or they will break as in brittle fracture.[/QUOTE]
The third option is that they can transmit the load to somewhere else, which then either bends or breaks. Having a more rigid roof structure would transmit the bending forces elsewhere in the cage, likely the geometrically opposite position in the cage. Maybe the immediate "survival cell" from seat bottom, to the roof, and from the a pillar to the main hoop, and from side to side should be much more stiff, and the mounting to the rest of the car (front and rear strut towers, floor) should be more deformable... Just an off-the-cuff thought.
Nothing is rigid. Things will either bend and absorb energy in doing so, or they will break as in brittle fracture.[/QUOTE]
The third option is that they can transmit the load to somewhere else, which then either bends or breaks. Having a more rigid roof structure would transmit the bending forces elsewhere in the cage, likely the geometrically opposite position in the cage. Maybe the immediate "survival cell" from seat bottom, to the roof, and from the a pillar to the main hoop, and from side to side should be much more stiff, and the mounting to the rest of the car (front and rear strut towers, floor) should be more deformable... Just an off-the-cuff thought.
| RaceComp Engineering | 08-12-2005 11:24 AM |
Man this thread has come back from the dead !!!!! :lol: :D almost a year later.
mw
mw
| RaceComp Engineering | 08-12-2005 11:47 AM |
Man this thread has come back from the dead !!!!! :lol: :D almost a year later.
mw
mw
| aspera | 08-12-2005 11:52 AM |
[QUOTE=RaceComp Engineering]Man this thread has come back from the dead !!!!! :lol: :D almost a year later.
mw[/QUOTE]
I say they make the cage out of whatever material this thread is made of. It is indestructable!
:lol:
mw[/QUOTE]
I say they make the cage out of whatever material this thread is made of. It is indestructable!
:lol:
| bsp | 08-12-2005 01:07 PM |
Yeah, I remember watching this rally. That crash really was scary.
| Subaruski | 08-12-2005 01:51 PM |
man i cant find the pics? i'm i stupid. is the 04 crash or something new?
| Chromer | 08-12-2005 02:36 PM |
Doh! Dumb me for not looking at the date...
| BREWPUBEAVER | 08-12-2005 02:47 PM |
this thread would be so much better with pictures
| flatfourwgn | 08-12-2005 03:06 PM |
[QUOTE=aspera]...some great posts on here. Cool.
...
I'd like to suggest that roof impacts might benefit from a two stage roll cage. The outer layer would absorb a hit and deform. Once all of the available distance is spent letting the cage absorb impacts the inner layer would absorb the impacts. The inner layer would be rigid. This might be a little bit heavier, but maybe that means that roll cage weight needs to be judged seperately by the FIA.:)
...
[/QUOTE]
I remember reading this thread a while back, when I was just browsing. Finally getting my Suby so I figured it's time to post my $0.02.
I believe the cage design is fine, just that the nature of the impacts and types of objects it hit resulted in the worst case scenario. If we were to go ahead with this "exo-cage", the result would ultra stiff 3400lb rally cars which would turn the occupants' insides to mush on a heavy impact and would have exponentially more energy that will need to be dissipated, prolonging the "accident event".
If it's hard for some to realize it... tough. Motorsports are dangerous, especially rallying. They don't post the warning signs for spectators for no reason and I would be happy to sign the waiver form in order to compete. There's a bit of skill involved and a lot of luck, good or bad.
...
I'd like to suggest that roof impacts might benefit from a two stage roll cage. The outer layer would absorb a hit and deform. Once all of the available distance is spent letting the cage absorb impacts the inner layer would absorb the impacts. The inner layer would be rigid. This might be a little bit heavier, but maybe that means that roll cage weight needs to be judged seperately by the FIA.:)
...
[/QUOTE]
I remember reading this thread a while back, when I was just browsing. Finally getting my Suby so I figured it's time to post my $0.02.
I believe the cage design is fine, just that the nature of the impacts and types of objects it hit resulted in the worst case scenario. If we were to go ahead with this "exo-cage", the result would ultra stiff 3400lb rally cars which would turn the occupants' insides to mush on a heavy impact and would have exponentially more energy that will need to be dissipated, prolonging the "accident event".
If it's hard for some to realize it... tough. Motorsports are dangerous, especially rallying. They don't post the warning signs for spectators for no reason and I would be happy to sign the waiver form in order to compete. There's a bit of skill involved and a lot of luck, good or bad.
| CirrusWRX | 08-12-2005 05:38 PM |
Ironic bumpage given that Rally Deutschland 2005, the next WRC event, is in 2 weeks where this crash occurred last year...
PS - to find the video of this crash, search in the motorsports forum for the "got wing" thread - in there somebody posts a link to the last Rally where Solberg lost the trunk (again) and nosed into the ground and nearly lost it after a jump. Somewhere on that thread somebody has a link to the henklestein (sp?) crash. SCARY! Can't believe Mills made it out practically uninjured.
PS - to find the video of this crash, search in the motorsports forum for the "got wing" thread - in there somebody posts a link to the last Rally where Solberg lost the trunk (again) and nosed into the ground and nearly lost it after a jump. Somewhere on that thread somebody has a link to the henklestein (sp?) crash. SCARY! Can't believe Mills made it out practically uninjured.
| M. Hurst | 08-12-2005 05:44 PM |
[QUOTE=flatfourwgn]I believe the cage design is fine, just that the nature of the impacts and types of objects it hit resulted in the worst case scenario. If we were to go ahead with this "exo-cage", the result would ultra stiff 3400lb rally cars which would turn the occupants' insides to mush on a heavy impact and would have exponentially more energy that will need to be dissipated, prolonging the "accident event".
If it's hard for some to realize it... tough. Motorsports are dangerous, especially rallying. They don't post the warning signs for spectators for no reason and I would be happy to sign the waiver form in order to compete. There's a bit of skill involved and a lot of luck, good or bad.[/QUOTE]
The human body can withstand, without serious injury, 100G impacts if supported properly, but supporting the body with a containment seat and head and neck support doesn't do any good if the occupant is impaled by the collapsing cage or hit in the head by a tree trunk from a 30G impact.
Most impact speeds and forces in rally cars are relatively low compared with other froms of racing, and excessive deformation / intrusion, are occuring with impacts and forces that would be considered light in other froms of the sport.
Rally cars need stouter cages so they can take advantage of new developments in occupant restraint, this is not just my opinion, but also that of safety consultants to the FIA.
Mike Hurst
Technical Director
Rally-America
If it's hard for some to realize it... tough. Motorsports are dangerous, especially rallying. They don't post the warning signs for spectators for no reason and I would be happy to sign the waiver form in order to compete. There's a bit of skill involved and a lot of luck, good or bad.[/QUOTE]
The human body can withstand, without serious injury, 100G impacts if supported properly, but supporting the body with a containment seat and head and neck support doesn't do any good if the occupant is impaled by the collapsing cage or hit in the head by a tree trunk from a 30G impact.
Most impact speeds and forces in rally cars are relatively low compared with other froms of racing, and excessive deformation / intrusion, are occuring with impacts and forces that would be considered light in other froms of the sport.
Rally cars need stouter cages so they can take advantage of new developments in occupant restraint, this is not just my opinion, but also that of safety consultants to the FIA.
Mike Hurst
Technical Director
Rally-America
| aspera | 08-12-2005 07:41 PM |
I was going to post a response, but the Rally-America Technical Director (quoting FIA safety consultants, no less) got there first. I wish the rest of life was like this. It reminds me of a Woody Allen movie where the director of the film appears to solve and argument between guys waiting in a movie line.
I recently was fortunate to attend the Cowley County Fair in Southern Kansas. I hadn't seen a demolition derby in years, but really enjoyed it. The 'final' had 21 cars and lasted 50 minutes! Now of course impact speeds were very low, but I think there are still a few things to be learned from Skeeter and Bubba. First, there is a steel beam at bumper level on the driver's side. That pretty much takes care of all side impact worries right there. If instead, OEM bumper beams were used on each side of the car, the total weight added should be less than 100lbs. Each beam usually weighs about 25lb or so, I think.
They also allowed a lot of movement of the driver when the car was hit. This was uncontrolled movement (bad), but it allowed the driver to absorb the hit over a longer period of time (good). If the drivers were in rigid circle track-like race seats, they would really need to take some aspirin at the end of the night.
Other little things were just neat. The exhaust were just headers through the hood. That created a suction the pulled hot air, steam, or fire from the engine bay. The stacks also blocked the hood from sliding towards the driver's helmet. It also kept the exhaust from getting smashed under the car. The hoods were chained to the car. Bumpers were also tethered, I think. Compare that to 2 tiny Sparco hood pins and stock hinges.
I don't think very much car prep stuff would really transfer, but I'd really like to see some classy French FIA guys at a demo derby. They could teach the good ol' boys and maybe learn a thing or two.
I recently was fortunate to attend the Cowley County Fair in Southern Kansas. I hadn't seen a demolition derby in years, but really enjoyed it. The 'final' had 21 cars and lasted 50 minutes! Now of course impact speeds were very low, but I think there are still a few things to be learned from Skeeter and Bubba. First, there is a steel beam at bumper level on the driver's side. That pretty much takes care of all side impact worries right there. If instead, OEM bumper beams were used on each side of the car, the total weight added should be less than 100lbs. Each beam usually weighs about 25lb or so, I think.
They also allowed a lot of movement of the driver when the car was hit. This was uncontrolled movement (bad), but it allowed the driver to absorb the hit over a longer period of time (good). If the drivers were in rigid circle track-like race seats, they would really need to take some aspirin at the end of the night.
Other little things were just neat. The exhaust were just headers through the hood. That created a suction the pulled hot air, steam, or fire from the engine bay. The stacks also blocked the hood from sliding towards the driver's helmet. It also kept the exhaust from getting smashed under the car. The hoods were chained to the car. Bumpers were also tethered, I think. Compare that to 2 tiny Sparco hood pins and stock hinges.
I don't think very much car prep stuff would really transfer, but I'd really like to see some classy French FIA guys at a demo derby. They could teach the good ol' boys and maybe learn a thing or two.
| cooleyjb | 08-12-2005 08:17 PM |
[QUOTE=M. Hurst]The human body can withstand, without serious injury, 100G impacts if supported properly,
[/QUOTE]
Ya know there are a few crew chiefs in Indy that have said their drivers just weren't the same after 130+ G impacts. I believe C. Fittipaldi's was one of them.
I'm glad someone with legitimate title has come in and said that the cage shouldn't fail and this one did and that's bad.
[/QUOTE]
Ya know there are a few crew chiefs in Indy that have said their drivers just weren't the same after 130+ G impacts. I believe C. Fittipaldi's was one of them.
I'm glad someone with legitimate title has come in and said that the cage shouldn't fail and this one did and that's bad.
| [email�protected] | 08-12-2005 09:53 PM |
[QUOTE=cooleyjb]Ya know there are a few crew chiefs in Indy that have said their drivers just weren't the same after 130+ G impacts. I believe C. Fittipaldi's was one of them.
I'm glad someone with legitimate title has come in and said that the cage shouldn't fail and this one did and that's bad.[/QUOTE]
are you referring to Christians crash at Surfers Paradise in 97-98?
i built the tub that he was in for that season. I was working at Swift Engineering at the time. i got to do the demo on the chassis when it was returned for inspection. its amazing he is still alive after the damage that chassis took.
i think i still have a few *borrowed* parts from that car. :)
Tom
I'm glad someone with legitimate title has come in and said that the cage shouldn't fail and this one did and that's bad.[/QUOTE]
are you referring to Christians crash at Surfers Paradise in 97-98?
i built the tub that he was in for that season. I was working at Swift Engineering at the time. i got to do the demo on the chassis when it was returned for inspection. its amazing he is still alive after the damage that chassis took.
i think i still have a few *borrowed* parts from that car. :)
Tom
| WRXedUSA | 08-13-2005 01:25 AM |
I believe the video was on WRC.com during rally time. I have it on DVD. It was violent. 28G is what it registered.
The Baumholder stages have been removed for 2005. I hope that Petter can stay on the road. He set good times last year.
The Baumholder stages have been removed for 2005. I hope that Petter can stay on the road. He set good times last year.
| cooleyjb | 08-13-2005 05:21 AM |
[[email�protected]]are you referring to Christians crash at Surfers Paradise in 97-98?
i built the tub that he was in for that season. I was working at Swift Engineering at the time. i got to do the demo on the chassis when it was returned for inspection. its amazing he is still alive after the damage that chassis took.
i think i still have a few *borrowed* parts from that car. :)
Tom[/QUOTE]
very cool.
not sure which race off the top of my head.
130+G's is insane
i built the tub that he was in for that season. I was working at Swift Engineering at the time. i got to do the demo on the chassis when it was returned for inspection. its amazing he is still alive after the damage that chassis took.
i think i still have a few *borrowed* parts from that car. :)
Tom[/QUOTE]
very cool.
not sure which race off the top of my head.
130+G's is insane
| flatfourwgn | 08-13-2005 12:24 PM |
[QUOTE=M. Hurst]The human body can withstand, without serious injury, 100G impacts if supported properly, but supporting the body with a containment seat and head and neck support doesn't do any good if the occupant is impaled by the collapsing cage or hit in the head by a tree trunk from a 30G impact.
Most impact speeds and forces in rally cars are relatively low compared with other froms of racing, and excessive deformation / intrusion, are occuring with impacts and forces that would be considered light in other froms of the sport.
Rally cars need stouter cages so they can take advantage of new developments in occupant restraint, this is not just my opinion, but also that of safety consultants to the FIA.
Mike Hurst
Technical Director
Rally-America[/QUOTE]
Indeed, excellent points and I may have over-exaggerated with the 'turning the insides to mush' bit. However, not many motorsports have as many irregular objects along the race course as rallying. On a road course, you're confined to the gravel traps, tire barriers, concrete barriers... to the point where they're known variables; very different from a tree or tank killer.
I am not saying that the status quo is sufficient. I will be the first to admit that driver safety is paramount and would applaud an organizing body that promotes safety development. It's just that rallying provides a very unique challenge. Most forms of motorsport only have one occupant, making it significantly easier to build a survival cell. Building a survival cell in essentially a compact car for 2 people is difficult, so maybe we should rethink the rules or WRC? Maybe we should go the route of a fully structural carbon shell (think single-seaters) with a built-in steel rollcage and bolt-on front/rear subframes as opposed to using the production shells? However, that would go against the current cost cutting measures by the FIA... and would kill rallying by making it inaccessible.
This only touches the tip of the iceberg... and not even in that much detail. I would be happy to discuss this further.
Cheers,
Andy K
edit: we could also look at Markko Martin's 'endo' wreck in Argentina (I believe) a few years ago. 6th gear 180+mph front flips over a crest... cage survived intact... maybe more fuel for the fire :(
Most impact speeds and forces in rally cars are relatively low compared with other froms of racing, and excessive deformation / intrusion, are occuring with impacts and forces that would be considered light in other froms of the sport.
Rally cars need stouter cages so they can take advantage of new developments in occupant restraint, this is not just my opinion, but also that of safety consultants to the FIA.
Mike Hurst
Technical Director
Rally-America[/QUOTE]
Indeed, excellent points and I may have over-exaggerated with the 'turning the insides to mush' bit. However, not many motorsports have as many irregular objects along the race course as rallying. On a road course, you're confined to the gravel traps, tire barriers, concrete barriers... to the point where they're known variables; very different from a tree or tank killer.
I am not saying that the status quo is sufficient. I will be the first to admit that driver safety is paramount and would applaud an organizing body that promotes safety development. It's just that rallying provides a very unique challenge. Most forms of motorsport only have one occupant, making it significantly easier to build a survival cell. Building a survival cell in essentially a compact car for 2 people is difficult, so maybe we should rethink the rules or WRC? Maybe we should go the route of a fully structural carbon shell (think single-seaters) with a built-in steel rollcage and bolt-on front/rear subframes as opposed to using the production shells? However, that would go against the current cost cutting measures by the FIA... and would kill rallying by making it inaccessible.
This only touches the tip of the iceberg... and not even in that much detail. I would be happy to discuss this further.
Cheers,
Andy K
edit: we could also look at Markko Martin's 'endo' wreck in Argentina (I believe) a few years ago. 6th gear 180+mph front flips over a crest... cage survived intact... maybe more fuel for the fire :(
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét