Was Sauber's Roll Bar Sufficient?
#1
Posted 28 September 1999 - 01:02
Advertisement
#2
Posted 28 September 1999 - 14:55
What really amazed me was that the roll bar was completely ripped off; not only the roll bar itself, but also the structure where it is mounted to. I always thought that this was an integral part of the monocoque??
Does anyone remember the crash of Gugelmin in France (in the Leyton-House)? He did a full looping over I think Bergers car, landed with full force on the roll bar and slid quite a few metres up-side down on the tarmac before coming to rest. The roll bar wasn't broken, as a matter of fact he did start the race again afterwards!
Zoe
#3
Posted 28 September 1999 - 17:49
#4
Posted 29 September 1999 - 00:46
#5
Posted 29 September 1999 - 15:40
#6
Posted 30 September 1999 - 13:24
...Under the load, deformation must be less than 50mm, measured along the loading axis and any structural failure limited to 100mm below the top of the rollover structure when measured vertically.
- Test for the principal roll structure (rear): A load equivalent to 12kN laterally, 45kN longitudinally and 60kN vertically, must be applied to the top of the structure through a rigid flat pad which is 20cm in diameter and perpendicular to the loading axis.
During the test, the roll structure must be attached to the survival cell...
- Second roll structure (front): A vertical load of 75kN must be applied to the top of the structure through a rigid flat pad which is 10cm in diameter and perpendicular to the loading axis...
I think a big study on this year structure weakness is necessary. In M. Schumacher crash, the tube was broken about 30 cm (10 in), behind the pedals in the middle on the survival cell, now in a less hard accident another security element fails. Is it a problem of these particular cars?, or a desing problem?
#7
Posted 30 September 1999 - 15:28
#8
Posted 01 October 1999 - 04:54
#9
Posted 04 October 1999 - 12:17
#10
Posted 09 October 1999 - 06:34
It's the mode of failure that is critical and I think in this case the design parameters imposed by the FIA are to simplistic.
A two stage failure would be more effective in protecting the driver. If the top portion of the roll hoop were constructed of a deformable material it would provide a shock absorbing feature that would allow the lower portions to survive and shield the driver.
Also the survival collar should be made active and extend above the driver when a severe impact or overturn is detected. This would provide much superior protection to the present systems and demonstrate the FIA's commitment to driver survival better than it's present policy of strewing chicanes all over the WDC circuits.
#11
Posted 15 October 1999 - 16:02
Q. Pedro, after that spectacular roll on the first lap at the Nurburgring it's nice to see you here. How did you feel on the day after that race?
Pedro Diniz: Not very well, really! I am happy to be here, too. As everyone saw on TV, what happened in that race was not very nice. It was a racing accident -- I think Alexander [Wurz] reacted automatically to avoid Damon Hill's car, which had virtually stopped in the first corner. The only worrying thing is that the roll hoop should not have broken off the way it did. It could have been very dangerous and I was very lucky. Only a few weeks ago a similar thing happened [at the same corner] in a Formula 3 race, and the guy involved is now completely paralyzed. The FIA will have to look into the whole thing and try to make the roll hoops safer, because that could have been very serious for me.