Chassis Improvements - Grosjean accident

[Xwang]

In my opinion fuel cell was disrupted by armco fixation bar that in this picture. And I believe that no fuel cell were designed from a botton impact like this.
https://f1tcdn.net/images/news/2020/grosjean-wreck.jpg

I agree with you!

[SiLo]

Looking at the pictures, where is the fuel cell? it's certainly not on the back half of the car. There is still a lot of bulk behind the drivers seat, are we sure it was pulled apart there?

[Just_a_fan]

The density of petrol is about 750-770kg/m^3 depending on air temperature, which is why they go by weight and why it's best to fill your car up early in the morning, so 105kg is about 135-140litres which is 29.7-30.8gallons.

That's Imperial gallons, not the smaller US gallon. About 35-36 of those.

Bleugh.. Americans.

I know, they get everywhere!

[jjn9128]

Looking at the pictures, where is the fuel cell? it's certainly not on the back half of the car. There is still a lot of bulk behind the drivers seat, are we sure it was pulled apart there?

The fuel cell is a rubber/kevlar bladder which sits behind the driver following the shape of the mandatory seat back. The bladder has to meet a number of physical requirements like ballistics tests. It has to be integral to the safety cell and also has to be surrounded by a crushable structure to further prevent piercing.

6.3 Crushable structure :
The fuel tank must be completely surrounded by a crushable structure, which is an integral part of the survival cell and must be able to withstand the loads required by the tests in Articles 18.2.1 and 18.3.

[SiLo]

Looking at the pictures, where is the fuel cell? it's certainly not on the back half of the car. There is still a lot of bulk behind the drivers seat, are we sure it was pulled apart there?

The fuel cell is a rubber/kevlar bladder which sits behind the driver following the shape of the mandatory seat back. The bladder has to meet a number of physical requirements like ballistics tests. It has to be integral to the safety cell and also has to be surrounded by a crushable structure to further prevent piercing.

6.3 Crushable structure :
The fuel tank must be completely surrounded by a crushable structure, which is an integral part of the survival cell and must be able to withstand the loads required by the tests in Articles 18.2.1 and 18.3.

https://scarbsf1.files.wordpress.com/20 ... l_tank.jpg

https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/ ... L-FLOW.jpg

Thanks Jin. Looking at the pictures again I'm almost 100% certain that the fuel cell is still there attached to the car and contained within the safety cell. There is a lot of bulk behind the driver seat still where it would be.

[jjn9128]

Thanks Jin. Looking at the pictures again I'm almost 100% certain that the fuel cell is still there attached to the car and contained within the safety cell. There is a lot of bulk behind the driver seat still where it would be.

Yep, the fuel cell is still there but half of the back of the safety cell was ripped off by the engine mounts, exposing it somewhat. Gary Anderson summed it up quite well, he also has some experience forensically analysing this sort of crash wreckage rather than just our guesses from the pictures.

[Hoffman900]

That's Imperial gallons, not the smaller US gallon. About 35-36 of those.

Bleugh.. Americans.

I know, they get everywhere!

Well considering our size vs your cute European countries, hard for us not to be!

I know the ballpark density of gas, was trying to lock in what they're using for my own knowledge.

[Just_a_fan]

Bleugh.. Americans.

I know, they get everywhere!

Well considering our size vs your cute European countries, hard for us not to be!

Yeah, European countries have "been there, done that". It was just a long time ago.

Anyway, the volume of fuel in an F1 car is quite impressive, especially when they're supposed to be "fuel efficient" these days. They carry about 50% more fuel than my Range Rover Sport and only go 190 miles on it!

[Big Tea]

I know, they get everywhere!

Well considering our size vs your cute European countries, hard for us not to be!

Yeah, European countries have "been there, done that". It was just a long time ago.

Anyway, the volume of fuel in an F1 car is quite impressive, especially when they're supposed to be "fuel efficient" these days. They carry about 50% more fuel than my Range Rover Sport and only go 190 miles on it!

But people pay to see them, you have to fund your self (and avoid cameras)

[Radley]

- what happened to the in-car fire extinguisher system?

- was the fire from the oil coolers?

- remember Simona DeSilvestri's accident/fire in Indy car? Gorsjean was lucky it was the first lap as the medical car was right behind. Simona was in a burning car for a minute and a half because they didn't release the fire truck right away as cars were still on track.

[Jolle]

- what happened to the in-car fire extinguisher system?

- was the fire from the oil coolers?

- remember Simona DeSilvestri's accident/fire in Indy car? Gorsjean was lucky it was the first lap as the medical car was right behind. Simona was in a burning car for a minute and a half because they didn't release the fire truck right away as cars were still on track.

That the medial car was there was a nice bonus. F1 has fire stations all around the track (marked by the orange barrier). Trained firefighters in full gear, next to the regular marshals are on scene within seconds (as they were with Grosjean)

[Edax]

Sure there would be better solutions like the Indy safer wall, but I am afraid that would not be economical to operate on a track like this.

The only thing I did not like was that the monocoque wedged itself between the rails. But it seems that there was no vertical fixation between the rails. That should be solvable with a couple of bolts.

Cheap tyres and a conveyor belt facing would have done a reasonable job of absorbing impact energy and preventing penetration of the armco. But to think that a country such as Bahrain couldn't afford to throw some Tecpro barrier up in front of that section of armco seems a bit unlikely.

https://www.racefans.net/wp-content/upl ... 3-43-1.jpg

Of course for one location you’re right . Zandvoort was recently updated, but there they only used Tecpro at specific locations, for the rest they used Armco. Lining a complete circuit with Tecpro is a huge cost factor.

Perhaps they should have anticipated a high impact crash at that location. The accident was much harder because the wall was angled towards the track because of the exit road. That could warrant additional protection.

Overall I think these accidents are hard to foresee. You can anticipate on cars missing a corner or losing it on exit. But the way Grosjean violently crossed the track and bumped in to Kyviat, that could happen on any point on a track and send off cars at very strange angles. If you take these kind of scenario’s into account, I guess you can find weak points in any circuit.

Perhaps a much better investment would be a warning light that there is a car next to you, like most road cars have in their mirrors nowadays. I think we see at least one crash per raceweekend because someone misses a car in his blind spot. In this case it would have prevented Strolls rollover as well.

[Jolle]

Sure there would be better solutions like the Indy safer wall, but I am afraid that would not be economical to operate on a track like this.

The only thing I did not like was that the monocoque wedged itself between the rails. But it seems that there was no vertical fixation between the rails. That should be solvable with a couple of bolts.

Cheap tyres and a conveyor belt facing would have done a reasonable job of absorbing impact energy and preventing penetration of the armco. But to think that a country such as Bahrain couldn't afford to throw some Tecpro barrier up in front of that section of armco seems a bit unlikely.

https://www.racefans.net/wp-content/upl ... 3-43-1.jpg

Of course for one location you’re right . Zandvoort was recently updated, but there they only used Tecpro at specific locations, for the rest they used Armco. Lining a complete circuit with Tecpro is a huge cost factor.

Perhaps they should have anticipated a high impact crash at that location. The accident was much harder because the wall was angled towards the track because of the exit road. That could warrant additional protection.

Overall I think these accidents are hard to foresee. You can anticipate on cars missing a corner or losing it on exit. But the way Grosjean violently crossed the track and bumped in to Kyviat, that could happen on any point on a track and send off cars at very strange angles. If you take these kind of scenario’s into account, I guess you can find weak points in any circuit.

Perhaps a much better investment would be a warning light that there is a car next to you, like most road cars have in their mirrors nowadays. I think we see at least one crash per raceweekend because someone misses a car in his blind spot. In this case it would have prevented Strolls rollover as well.

It might be wise to not take driver behaviour into account. This time it was a Grosjean move, next time might be a blown tire or suspension failure.

[Just_a_fan]

Perhaps a much better investment would be a warning light that there is a car next to you, like most road cars have in their mirrors nowadays. I think we see at least one crash per raceweekend because someone misses a car in his blind spot. In this case it would have prevented Strolls rollover as well.

The light would be on constantly in the first few corners of the first lap and so wouldn't really help. How far away would the other car have to be to prevent the light coming on? 1ft, 3ft, 10ft?

Would there be a rule that if the light is on then you can't move left or right? In effect you've just mandated that everyone follows nose to tail through the first few corners.

[Jolle]

Perhaps a much better investment would be a warning light that there is a car next to you, like most road cars have in their mirrors nowadays. I think we see at least one crash per raceweekend because someone misses a car in his blind spot. In this case it would have prevented Strolls rollover as well.

The light would be on constantly in the first few corners of the first lap and so wouldn't really help. How far away would the other car have to be to prevent the light coming on? 1ft, 3ft, 10ft?

Would there be a rule that if the light is on then you can't move left or right? In effect you've just mandated that everyone follows nose to tail through the first few corners.

Apart from that, you have to take the drivers out of the equitation. This time it was one of Grosjean’s moves, next time it could be a deflated tire, suspension failure or broken front wing.

Also, strolls roll was more entertaining than dangerous