Next Steps In Safety

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
User avatar
subcritical71
97
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 7:04 pm
Location: USA-Florida

Re: Next Steps In Safety

Post

Manoah2u wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 2:43 pm
7) I don't know what can prevent a Massa-like event, sans a windscreen. You can never protect against all eventualities though, no matter how many precautions you take.
The Halo helps a lot in that already, and the improved helmets also help. I don't really see much need right now, except indeed a windscreen could fix but you're really losing the soul of F1. also, if you implement a windscreen, grosjean could not have gotten out. so no, that's not an option.
I didn't think Grosjean went through the side of the Halo (between halo and car), didn't he go out the top but had to navigate the rail that was in the way? Would a helmet even clear that gap?

User avatar
Big Tea
153
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2017 7:57 pm

Re: Next Steps In Safety

Post

I think that whatever the barrier, it is the deflection angle that needs to be considered. Hitting parallel is going to be bad due to rapid deceleration, so if it is possible, it should be angled to deflect from parallel (like a castle wall is angled to deflect a cannon ball), but the car should not be 'bounced' back on t the track to collect other cars.
Although we would know the angle the car is passing down that section of road, it would not be possible to place barriers at angles to it unless the run off becomes unseasonably wide at the far end. The alternative would seem to be a barrier that collapses in a controlled manner.

I think I recall seeing barrier filled with water, where the impact is transferred to squishing water through small openings. This presumably would automatically create the angle by deflating?

This seems like the best option to me, but there are probably many problems with it that do not come readily to mind ( such as freezing etc)

Has anyone here had any real experience with these water filled barriers?
We are standing on the shoulders of Giants. So don't kick.

User avatar
nzjrs
106
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:21 am
Location: Austria

Re: Next Steps In Safety

Post

Big Tea wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:04 pm
I think that whatever the barrier, it is the deflection angle that needs to be considered. Hitting parallel is going to be bad due to rapid deceleration, so if it is possible, it should be angled to deflect from parallel (like a castle wall is angled to deflect a cannon ball), but the car should not be 'bounced' back on t the track to collect other cars.
Although we would know the angle the car is passing down that section of road, it would not be possible to place barriers at angles to it unless the run off becomes unseasonably wide at the far end. The alternative would seem to be a barrier that collapses in a controlled manner. I think I recall seeing barrier filled with water, where the impact is transferred to squishing water through small openings. This seems like the best option to me, but there are probably many problems with it that do not come readily to mind ( such as freezing etc)

Has anyone here had any real experience with these water filled barriers?
Well I think the Grosjean crash is already an example of an impact at an uncommon impact angle, no? The extreme example is Indycar of course where the distribution of impact angles is a bunch of shallow impacts until someone catches a spin up into the bank at perpendicular!

I think angle of impact is actually a dangerously variable thing to put in a design brief.

User avatar
Big Tea
153
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2017 7:57 pm

Re: Next Steps In Safety

Post

nzjrs wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:08 pm
Big Tea wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:04 pm
I think that whatever the barrier, it is the deflection angle that needs to be considered. Hitting parallel is going to be bad due to rapid deceleration, so if it is possible, it should be angled to deflect from parallel (like a castle wall is angled to deflect a cannon ball), but the car should not be 'bounced' back on t the track to collect other cars.
Although we would know the angle the car is passing down that section of road, it would not be possible to place barriers at angles to it unless the run off becomes unseasonably wide at the far end. The alternative would seem to be a barrier that collapses in a controlled manner. I think I recall seeing barrier filled with water, where the impact is transferred to squishing water through small openings. This seems like the best option to me, but there are probably many problems with it that do not come readily to mind ( such as freezing etc)

Has anyone here had any real experience with these water filled barriers?
Well I think the Grosjean crash is already an example of an impact at an uncommon impact angle, no? The extreme example is Indycar of course where the distribution of impact angles is a bunch of shallow impacts until someone catches a spin up into the bank at perpendicular!

I think angle of impact is actually a dangerously variable thing to put in a design brief.
Thats why I thought of a 'water cushion' type. It would always be a 'V' shape into the mid section, whic would collapse and hold the car for fractions, until the water ran out.
We are standing on the shoulders of Giants. So don't kick.

Jolle
Jolle
221
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: Dordrecht

Re: Next Steps In Safety

Post

Big Tea wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:04 pm
I think that whatever the barrier, it is the deflection angle that needs to be considered. Hitting parallel is going to be bad due to rapid deceleration, so if it is possible, it should be angled to deflect from parallel (like a castle wall is angled to deflect a cannon ball), but the car should not be 'bounced' back on t the track to collect other cars.
Although we would know the angle the car is passing down that section of road, it would not be possible to place barriers at angles to it unless the run off becomes unseasonably wide at the far end. The alternative would seem to be a barrier that collapses in a controlled manner.

I think I recall seeing barrier filled with water, where the impact is transferred to squishing water through small openings. This presumably would automatically create the angle by deflating?

This seems like the best option to me, but there are probably many problems with it that do not come readily to mind ( such as freezing etc)

Has anyone here had any real experience with these water filled barriers?
The problem is force and angles with the high speeds of a straight. A barrier which is safe for a sharp angle impact (like Grosjean did) will have to be so stiff that it can take the load of a 800kg car at 250 km/h and reduce that to zero within but not less than two meters. If a car hits at the same speed at an angle of only a few degrees, the force would be very small, but enough to have the car bounce back into the traffic. if you "grab" this car somehow, you won't be able to do this within the two meters and the car will either spin or grab the whatever you put up there that it will rotate in such a violent matter, that that will exceed maximum G. It's a difficult one and a potential no-win situation.

User avatar
Big Tea
153
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2017 7:57 pm

Re: Next Steps In Safety

Post

Jolle wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:14 pm
Big Tea wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:04 pm
I think that whatever the barrier, it is the deflection angle that needs to be considered. Hitting parallel is going to be bad due to rapid deceleration, so if it is possible, it should be angled to deflect from parallel (like a castle wall is angled to deflect a cannon ball), but the car should not be 'bounced' back on t the track to collect other cars.
Although we would know the angle the car is passing down that section of road, it would not be possible to place barriers at angles to it unless the run off becomes unseasonably wide at the far end. The alternative would seem to be a barrier that collapses in a controlled manner.

I think I recall seeing barrier filled with water, where the impact is transferred to squishing water through small openings. This presumably would automatically create the angle by deflating?

This seems like the best option to me, but there are probably many problems with it that do not come readily to mind ( such as freezing etc)

Has anyone here had any real experience with these water filled barriers?
The problem is force and angles with the high speeds of a straight. A barrier which is safe for a sharp angle impact (like Grosjean did) will have to be so stiff that it can take the load of a 800kg car at 250 km/h and reduce that to zero within but not less than two meters. If a car hits at the same speed at an angle of only a few degrees, the force would be very small, but enough to have the car bounce back into the traffic. if you "grab" this car somehow, you won't be able to do this within the two meters and the car will either spin or grab the whatever you put up there that it will rotate in such a violent matter, that that will exceed maximum G. It's a difficult one and a potential no-win situation.
I realise this is dragging on a bit, but just being theoretical, pressure regulated vents. Is the 'hit' is soft, the air is allowed to vent and the 'bag' collapses, but if it is a hard strike, the volume and speed of venting provides more constriction and it deflates more slowly giving a harder cushion. ???
We are standing on the shoulders of Giants. So don't kick.

smellybeard
smellybeard
-3
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 2:34 pm

Re: Next Steps In Safety

Post

Big Tea wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:27 pm
I realise this is dragging on a bit, but just being theoretical, pressure regulated vents. Is the 'hit' is soft, the air is allowed to vent and the 'bag' collapses, but if it is a hard strike, the volume and speed of venting provides more constriction and it deflates more slowly giving a harder cushion. ???
Gasses are compressible and if you don't let the gas escape fast enough, the energy will be stored in the compressed gas and the impact will be reflected with the stored energy intact. This is why we use pneumatic tires.

Jolle
Jolle
221
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: Dordrecht

Re: Next Steps In Safety

Post

Big Tea wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:27 pm
Jolle wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:14 pm
Big Tea wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:04 pm
I think that whatever the barrier, it is the deflection angle that needs to be considered. Hitting parallel is going to be bad due to rapid deceleration, so if it is possible, it should be angled to deflect from parallel (like a castle wall is angled to deflect a cannon ball), but the car should not be 'bounced' back on t the track to collect other cars.
Although we would know the angle the car is passing down that section of road, it would not be possible to place barriers at angles to it unless the run off becomes unseasonably wide at the far end. The alternative would seem to be a barrier that collapses in a controlled manner.

I think I recall seeing barrier filled with water, where the impact is transferred to squishing water through small openings. This presumably would automatically create the angle by deflating?

This seems like the best option to me, but there are probably many problems with it that do not come readily to mind ( such as freezing etc)

Has anyone here had any real experience with these water filled barriers?
The problem is force and angles with the high speeds of a straight. A barrier which is safe for a sharp angle impact (like Grosjean did) will have to be so stiff that it can take the load of a 800kg car at 250 km/h and reduce that to zero within but not less than two meters. If a car hits at the same speed at an angle of only a few degrees, the force would be very small, but enough to have the car bounce back into the traffic. if you "grab" this car somehow, you won't be able to do this within the two meters and the car will either spin or grab the whatever you put up there that it will rotate in such a violent matter, that that will exceed maximum G. It's a difficult one and a potential no-win situation.
I realise this is dragging on a bit, but just being theoretical, pressure regulated vents. Is the 'hit' is soft, the air is allowed to vent and the 'bag' collapses, but if it is a hard strike, the volume and speed of venting provides more constriction and it deflates more slowly giving a harder cushion. ???
Any soft (as in not solid) hit at a shallow angle will grab and rotate a formula car. At speeds in excess of 250 km/h is deadly.

User avatar
Big Tea
153
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2017 7:57 pm

Re: Next Steps In Safety

Post

smellybeard wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:38 pm
Big Tea wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:27 pm
I realise this is dragging on a bit, but just being theoretical, pressure regulated vents. Is the 'hit' is soft, the air is allowed to vent and the 'bag' collapses, but if it is a hard strike, the volume and speed of venting provides more constriction and it deflates more slowly giving a harder cushion. ???
Gasses are compressible and if you don't let the gas escape fast enough, the energy will be stored in the compressed gas and the impact will be reflected with the stored energy intact. This is why we use pneumatic tires.
Yes, I used the wrong word as we were speaking of water-filled. I said 'air' my mistake.
We are standing on the shoulders of Giants. So don't kick.

Diesel
Diesel
74
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 11:27 pm
Location: ...

Re: Next Steps In Safety

Post

smellybeard wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 9:52 pm
Diesel wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 9:39 pm
The steel barriers absolutely should not "distort", that's when they become dangerous.
Steel barriers absolutely should and must distort - that's the only way they can absorb energy in a collision. It's fundamental and if you don't like it, you should consider moving to a parallel universe. If you want a rigid, unyielding barrier, you need an indy-style ferroconcrete wall.
Perhaps on public roads, but not on F1 tracks. Armco is not being used in F1 for it's energy absorbing qualities, the barriers are there to deflect/retain the cars, not absorb them... What's your answer for what happened last weekend? Was the barrier working as intended? What about the barrier Robert Kubica hit that bent in such a way he hit the next section head on, which then entered the car and severed his hand, was that working as intended? In both examples the distortion of the barrier was a direct contributor to a near fatal accident.
"Unbelievable how silly this Formula 1 is these days, with this stupid overtakes."
—Sebastian Vettel, 2012 US GP

Manoah2u
Manoah2u
426
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 1:07 pm

Re: Next Steps In Safety

Post

To be fair, why wasn't there a tyre barrier in front of the steel armco barrier? Even just a single pile in front would have done a lot to absorb energy and more likely prevent what happened in the end. two piles of tires in front would - i think - have done quite a lot. now i'm not advocating tires along the entire track, but in circumstances like how this barrier is placed and angled to the track, you'd improve safety by a huge margin by having a line of tires to tackle.
Dumpster sounds so much more classy. It's the diamond of the cesspools.

Manoah2u
Manoah2u
426
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 1:07 pm

Re: Next Steps In Safety

Post

subcritical71 wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 9:59 pm
Manoah2u wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 2:43 pm
7) I don't know what can prevent a Massa-like event, sans a windscreen. You can never protect against all eventualities though, no matter how many precautions you take.
The Halo helps a lot in that already, and the improved helmets also help. I don't really see much need right now, except indeed a windscreen could fix but you're really losing the soul of F1. also, if you implement a windscreen, grosjean could not have gotten out. so no, that's not an option.
I didn't think Grosjean went through the side of the Halo (between halo and car), didn't he go out the top but had to navigate the rail that was in the way? Would a helmet even clear that gap?
you're right, initially, from what i first saw i thought he went through the side but that's indeed impossible.
still, a windscreen would bring a bunch of other problems with it.
Dumpster sounds so much more classy. It's the diamond of the cesspools.

smellybeard
smellybeard
-3
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 2:34 pm

Re: Next Steps In Safety

Post

Diesel wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 10:53 pm
Perhaps on public roads, but not on F1 tracks.
Sorry boss, F1 tracks are part of the same universe and subject to the same laws of physics as public roads.

User avatar
El Scorchio
38
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2019 11:41 am

Re: Next Steps In Safety

Post

smellybeard wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 9:30 pm
El Scorchio wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 8:58 pm
Nope- horizontally! And THB my diagram is pretty rotten. it would be adding a third horizontal strip over the gap between the two existing strips so they'd overlap. two at the back with one at the front sitting between them. Very simple but I'm finding it hard to explain well!
I don't understand that at all. Over the joint between left and right strips? - That's horizontal. Joining strips that are above and below each other is vertical. Joining all the strips so they form one broad barrier would stiffen up the barrier too much - too much steel per metre of barrier - it would never distort enough to absorb an impact safely. If you want that kind of barrier, you'd be better off with an indy-style wall.
Depends which way you choose to describe it. I'd say you lay it horizontally over the existing horizontal barriers. Anyway. Semantics.

smellybeard
smellybeard
-3
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 2:34 pm

Re: Next Steps In Safety

Post

El Scorchio wrote:
Tue Dec 01, 2020 11:31 pm
Depends which way you choose to describe it. I'd say you lay it horizontally over the existing horizontal barriers. Anyway. Semantics.
Well, the way I describe things with an up and down relationship is vertical and left and right is horizontal.
I think a fundamental misunderstand is more likely the problem than semantics.