High Halo

[PlatinumZealot]

The armco seems to be good if it doesnt separate granted if you hit it at the right angle!!

The Armco design could be greatly improved if enough effort goes into it. The steel rails will plastically deform at yield granting energy absorbtion, but at the unfortunate consequence of creating a a gulliotine of death for whatever gets between them. The improvement would be based somewhat on retaining toughness, and energy absoption without deflecting and slicing things in two.

[PlatinumZealot]

Been thinking about making the Halo look better and probably function better too.
The main gripe about the Halo is that is looks awful on the car.
The second thing is that the views of the driver and from the on-board camera are pretty much gone to crap.

To see if I can at least fix the viewing problem while keeping the same concept, I designed the "High Halo."

It is basically a stretched Halo; it has a higher canopy to give a better views and also give a better escape if the car rolls over. The design is not perfect though, getting into and out of the car could be trickier... perhaps It should be made even taller?

Better views - the driver can see up Eau Rouge now..



Poor view - can't see sh**

[Bonker T]

i do think a high halo would structurally be quite a bit weaker.

[graham.reeds]

Armco is fine as long as the frontal impact area is substantially wider than the gap between the layers.

Ie: A touring car hitting that exact point at the same angle and similar energy probably would not have pierced the barrier.

[wesley123]

Would the aeroscreen have protected Grosjean today?

Why wouldn't it have?

Would the impact with the aeroscreen shown in the thread, with the vertical supports midway back along the screen and no front support, have deflected the armco barrier? Or would the barrier have broken the plastic and then lodged under the hoop and so made the space available to exit much smaller? Would broken pieces of the plastic have become lethal "knives" that would be flying towards the driver or even just bent around by the armco and so presenting "teeth" to the driver as he was trying to evacuate from the tub?

These are the sorts of questions that would need to be answered to know whether the aeroscreen would have been as good as the halo.

The aeroscreen requires a halo-type device to provide the real strength to the device, so that tells us that the screen part is not as strong as the halo is on its own.

The key issue with the aeroscreen is: does it present an increasing risk of driver injury in the even of an impact leading to structural failure of the plastic in the screen? Sure, it's "bulletproof" plastic, but we are talking about loads orders of magnitude higher than any bulletproof plastic will be designed to handle.

Then there is the other question: is the issue that the barriers aren't good enough? It appears that armco type barriers are not suitable unless faced with something else to prevent penetration by the tub. A triple layer of tyres with conveyor belt fronting would probably have been enough to prevent the penetration and the impact forces that caused the car to fail. A cheap thing to add to any such barrier. Would that have resulted in a driver loading that exceeded the 54g received by Grosjean? Perhaps. But it would have been without the fire.

I mean, there sure are a load of questions, but as far as I know they both were designed to the exact same specifications. Doesn't the aeroscreen use the same material as is used by aircraft? They have no issue dealing with a birdstrike at quite some higher speeds

[Just_a_fan]

I mean, there sure are a load of questions, but as far as I know they both were designed to the exact same specifications. Doesn't the aeroscreen use the same material as is used by aircraft? They have no issue dealing with a birdstrike at quite some higher speeds

Bird strike is nothing compared to steel. A bird is squishy and turns in to soup on impact. The steel armco absolutely doesn't do that.

[i70q7m7ghw]

Armco is fine as long as the frontal impact area is substantially wider than the gap between the layers.

I imagine Robert Kubica would disagree.

[wesley123]

I mean, there sure are a load of questions, but as far as I know they both were designed to the exact same specifications. Doesn't the aeroscreen use the same material as is used by aircraft? They have no issue dealing with a birdstrike at quite some higher speeds

Bird strike is nothing compared to steel. A bird is squishy and turns in to soup on impact. The steel armco absolutely doesn't do that.

This birdstrike also happens at vastly higher speeds.

[Just_a_fan]

I mean, there sure are a load of questions, but as far as I know they both were designed to the exact same specifications. Doesn't the aeroscreen use the same material as is used by aircraft? They have no issue dealing with a birdstrike at quite some higher speeds

Bird strike is nothing compared to steel. A bird is squishy and turns in to soup on impact. The steel armco absolutely doesn't do that.

This birdstrike also happens at vastly higher speeds.

Yes, and the bird is still squishy and turns to soup. The steel armco still doesn't.

[wesley123]

Bird strike is nothing compared to steel. A bird is squishy and turns in to soup on impact. The steel armco absolutely doesn't do that.

This birdstrike also happens at vastly higher speeds.

Yes, and the bird is still squishy and turns to soup. The steel armco still doesn't.

The armco gives in as well, it's designed to do so to lessen the impact, the car has a crumple zone as well. Regardless of how it deforms, it takes energy away from the impact.

The force that a birdstrike has on a canopy is larger due to the vastly higher speeds.

[Jolle]

This birdstrike also happens at vastly higher speeds.

Yes, and the bird is still squishy and turns to soup. The steel armco still doesn't.

The armco gives in as well, it's designed to do so to lessen the impact, the car has a crumple zone as well. Regardless of how it deforms, it takes energy away from the impact.

The force that a birdstrike has on a canopy is larger due to the vastly higher speeds.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_stri ... strike.jpg

It’s about the energy. So... 1kg bird at 800km/h or 745 kg F1 car with 220 km/h.

I think it’s pretty safe to say that the bird has about the same energy is a F1 car hitting a static object around 1-2km/h.

[wesley123]

Yes, and the bird is still squishy and turns to soup. The steel armco still doesn't.

The armco gives in as well, it's designed to do so to lessen the impact, the car has a crumple zone as well. Regardless of how it deforms, it takes energy away from the impact.

The force that a birdstrike has on a canopy is larger due to the vastly higher speeds.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_stri ... strike.jpg

It’s about the energy. So... 1kg bird at 800km/h or 745 kg F1 car with 220 km/h.

I think it’s pretty safe to say that the bird has about the same energy is a F1 car hitting a static object around 1-2km/h.

Impact force will be significantly reduced for the F1 car compared to the bird due to the crashbox, parts breaking off as designed and Armco giving in. With a jet it's bird vs. jet. Sadly enough, assumptions as to how the crashbox, armco etc. lessen the impact are difficult to make. So indeed, assuming a static object with nothing giving in, the car would be subject to a larger amount of energy.

[Jolle]

The armco gives in as well, it's designed to do so to lessen the impact, the car has a crumple zone as well. Regardless of how it deforms, it takes energy away from the impact.

The force that a birdstrike has on a canopy is larger due to the vastly higher speeds.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_stri ... strike.jpg

It’s about the energy. So... 1kg bird at 800km/h or 745 kg F1 car with 220 km/h.

I think it’s pretty safe to say that the bird has about the same energy is a F1 car hitting a static object around 1-2km/h.

Impact force will be significantly reduced for the F1 car compared to the bird due to the crashbox, parts breaking off as designed and Armco giving in. With a jet it's bird vs. jet. Sadly enough, assumptions as to how the crashbox, armco etc. lessen the impact are difficult to make. So indeed, assuming a static object with nothing giving in, the car would be subject to a larger amount of energy.

like flipped upside down hitting a concrete wall. Wasn't it Campos who came to his demise that way?