Peugeot 908 discussion

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

So if the tub and suspension failures show signs of being a recurring issue, does it mean that Peugeot might be screwed unless it's something that can be remedied by a simple fix?

If so, I hope that Peugeot has a good plan B. Of course, we don't know with 100% certianly that the car got airborne, but it seems that at the Paul Ricard test, a front suspension failure (like at Le Mans last year) is what caused this accident. And if both the PR and Gene accidents were caused by similar failures, that's not a good sign. Only reason at LM that Lamy didn't wreck is that he was probably going slow enough or down a straight when the mount point went completely and was able to save the car from further damage in an accident.

Of course, the new 908 isn't built around the same tub as the old 908, but they shared design influences. And if the failures are similar (and Peugeot has been mum on Gene's accident aside from describing it as a component failure), could it be a sign of an edemic design flaw?

Well it's in their best interest to rectify the issue. And frankly we really don't know enough about the nature of the two failures to even say they were related, much less related to what happened to the 908 Hdi. But, if I were a betting man...

Having said that, I really can't imagine this is an issue that's carried over. I mean surely a professional engineering organization such as Peugeot can tackle and correct issues as they come up such that they are solved once and for all.

[chernaudi]

Only issue is that Sebring is only about 3 weeks away, and Sebring is much tougher on a car than Paul Ricard, which is one reason why in recent times past that Audi has tested there, including a 28 hour endurance test after the 12 Hour last year and a 24 hour test previous to the event.

With Peugeot being mum about both accidents and rumors that both were caused by similar issues, I agree Mike that is in the Pug camp's best interest to fix the issue, as it clearly makes no sense at all to race a potentially unsound car--IMSA and the ACO would doubtlessly frown upon it, and even if they give Peugeot the green light, you can injure a driver (which thankfully hasn't happened in either accident), and of course, flush the investment of a basically new car down the drain very quickly, which Peugeot has done twice.

And one must consider the competitive ramifications of this. If as it may be suspected that it's a major design flaw, Peugeot might have to withdraw from Sebring, to leave Audi Sport and Oreca to fight it out with year old R15s and an equally ancient 908. Peugeot will likely get some manufacture points from Oreca, but it'll also make LM a do or die scinerio to try and regain lost ground. And if Peugeot are still having issues then, they can kiss LM and the ILMC good bye for 2011.

But it depends on the part(s) that failed. If it's a suspension part, that can be beefed up, but if it's the tub of the mounting in the tub, that's a big time issue that can't be quickly fixed, especially in this time frame where Peugeot would at best have less than two weeks to find a solution. At least E-I and DSC make it clear that Minassian's big one was appearntly the result of a mount failure, and that Gene's accident was caused by a failure similar in nature and severity, even if it wasn't the exact part that gave way. And each day that's lost in trying to fix this is a day effectivly gained by Audi as Peugeot's advantage in track time is being erroded away.

And this is a concern as Sebring is the ILMC opener, and if the Pug can't survive at Paul Ricard, imagine what Sebring might have in store...

[The Badger]

Originally Posted by Simmi

Twice as in twice the car has gone airborne in a matter of months.

Twice with the new fin ? I wasnt aware of that .

[Graham Goodwin]

Chernaudi - You are falling into the trap of coming up with what seems to be a plausible position and then marshalling shards of 'evidence' to support it.

One thing is absolutely for sure - no self respecting factory effort would ever risk a known design fault put their car at risk of harming their drivers (or others) Factories are in this thing for engineering and marketing purtposes - that scenario serves neither.

On the subject of the dorsal fin - that was designed to do a very specific job and of the accidents we know of with the new LMP cars (more than two - not all Peugeots) what we DON'T know is whether any tested the concept.

Why might we be seeing these accidents? Consider this - the cars are down on power - teams are looking to close as much as possible of the gap to the 2010 pace - so everyone is pushing the new cars very, very hard, perhaps at times harder than the 2010 cars.

In summary - first things first the 908 is clearly a car capable of looking after its drivers when things do go wrong - our sources have described both Gene's accident and Nic's as HUGE accidents, Gene's in particular and both drivers avoided any lasting injury - probably the biggest advance in racecar design in recent years is the fact that we can write about accidents like this without rather more serious consequences for the drivers.

Secondly its clear that this latest accident is a cause for concern and a major blow to Peugeot's preparations. That's almost as important an issue and a factor as any perceived design fault - A fault (if there was one) you can work on and design out - a lack of prep is difficult to catch up with - It's the latter issue that might be the more telling one in the early races this season.

And consider finally this - Albeit it was an entirely different accident but remember that Tomas Enge had a big one in the first test for the Lola Aston at Paul Ricard, writing off the first car. That car went on to win races and titles - It may be a little early yet to claim the sky is falling at Velizy!

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by Graham Goodwin

Chernaudi - You are falling into the trap of coming up with what seems to be a plausible position and then marshalling shards of 'evidence' to support it.

I think he's falling into that position on purpose to undermine any bit of information that we get in relation to Peugeot's endurance program and hail Audi as the second coming of the baby Jesus at the same time.

[Félix]

No serious endurance program with test mileage in the 5 figures has gone without writing off cars in huge crashes at the end of a straight line in the last 10 years. Peugeot, Bentley, Aston Martin, even Dyson when they ran their MGs a lot; it's part of "the game" and the same programs have been winning all the big races. Audi even lost Michele Alboreto almost exactly 10 years ago.

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by Félix

No serious endurance program with test mileage in the 5 figures has gone without writing off cars in huge crashes at the end of a straight line in the last 10 years. Peugeot, Bentley, Aston Martin, even Dyson when they ran their MGs a lot; it's part of "the game" and the same programs have been winning all the big races. Audi even lost Michele Alboreto almost exactly 10 years ago.

The only difference is that nowadays we find out about every single one of these incidents, while a few years ago the teams could have kept an accident that didn't harm a driver, but wrote off a car, relatively unknown to the media.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

Mechanical failures, especially suspension related, are easily the most disconcerting given their tendency to pitch the car into sudden yaw.

Indeed. Those who blame the fin for not doing its work, should have a look at Ortelli's crash in Monza 2008: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNkySVNNpog Do you really expect the car to stay on the ground and come to a gentle stop when a suspension parts fails at 300+ km/h?

[Lola T70]

Do we even know where on the track the accident happened?

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by Lola T70

Do we even know where on the track the accident happened?

No. Has to have been a very fast section, otherwise it couldn't have cleared the catchfencing.

[Lola T70]

Originally Posted by Victor_RO

No. Has to have been a very fast section, otherwise it couldn't have cleared the catchfencing.

Unfortunately things usually fail when it is fast with high load.

Nic is definitely okay?

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by Lola T70

Unfortunately things usually fail when it is fast with high load.

Nic is definitely okay?

Can't find any news anywhere, but in incidents like this I guess no news is good news.

[MulsanneMike]

Can someone point me to where Bruno Famin spoke, even if obliquely as to the why, of changing composites suppliers for the new 908? Additionally, is there anything official from Peugeot about the reason for the first failure? I'm being told something but need to confirm what they're saying first.

[Graham Goodwin]

Originally Posted by Victor_RO

Can't find any news anywhere, but in incidents like this I guess no news is good news.

I spoke to Peugeot Sport yesterday and reported on dsc that Nic is fine and will be at the team training camp this weekend.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

Can someone point me to where Bruno Famin spoke, even if obliquely as to the why, of changing composites suppliers for the new 908?

In French:

Pour ce qui est de la coque, nous avons changé de fournisseur.

Translation to English:

Regarding the tub, we have changed supplier.

source: http://www.86400.fr/articles/123-peu...dans-le-detail

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

Additionally, is there anything official from Peugeot about the reason for the first failure? I'm being told something but need to confirm what they're saying first.

According to l'Equipe (via EI forum), a suspension arm broke.

[chernaudi]

What has to be the concern is that Peugeot has written off two cars in violent high speed accidents that seem to have a similar theme to the failures. Suspension failures--be it within the suspension itself of the tub mounting--has to be a major concern.

Later 908 tubs used in '09 and '10 have had issues with pick up point failures, most notably Le Mans last year. And these are not garden varitiey tire failures, because Peugeot, who have Michelin as their supplier, use the PAX low tire pressure warning system, which most teams, Michelin supplied or not, use some variant of. What ever is breaking is clearly something important.

And as has been mentioned, with no photos and only the EI and DSC articles (both of which point toward a major suspension failure at high speed--possibly a mounting point), and Peugeot being mum on the cause of both accidents, all we have is just that.

But if the failures are of the nature of it being a pick up point failure, that's not good news, because it points to a possible design or production flaw.

What has to be the big concern is what does this mean to Peugeot's plans for Sebring. If they have to withdraw, that's points lost for the ILMC to Audi. If they have to use the old 908--which as we know isn't immune to such issues--that means that they'll have to fight like hell to keep Audi and the Oreca 908 behind them, as all the cars are of a similar spec, and the old Pugs have lost the air restrictor advantage that they had over the open cars.

And of course, if Peugeot are having these problems, at least they're still ahead of Aston Martin, which we don't know if that car has had any testing and may be doubtful for Sebring due to lack of development unless they enter the older cars.

Still, it has to be disconcerting, as Peugeot even switched from Dassault Systems to someone else to build up the tubs as it seemed that later tubs for the old 908 had the pick up point issues. Oddly, the older tubs have seemed to have gotten off scott-free. Either the older tubs were built differently, or the tubs are being subjected to areo and mechanical loads that the suspension mounts seem to be questionable as far as their ability to do their job.

Either way, if it is the pick up points that are the issue here, this isn't good for Peugeot, as it seems that there may be no quick fix that can be made before the cars ship out for Sebring.

[The Badger]

Half the problem is the carbon fibre itself . Its very hard to see a crack in CF , and afaik you cant do NDT on it .

Its probably stress fatigue thats causing the issue ..... and as <i said above , you cant see a crack in CF until its a monster crack .

Metal is a lot easier to detect , both visually and with NDT .

Perhaps a temp fix could involve bolting a metal doubler onto the pickup point to spread the load .

[Graham Goodwin]

The dsc article DOES NOT "point towards a major suspension failure at high speed"

There's a good reason for that - It's because I don't know whether that's true.

Even if I did I certainly wouldn't know whether it was in any way related to the tub or whether it was a component that had failed as part of what was, let's not forget, a 30 hour ENDURANCE test.

There's no problem with speculation - but please read my earlier post again - you are most certainly looking for anything that supports the notion that you have defined around this incident - even in this case implying content in an article that simply isn't there!

Please don't cross the line into believing that your opinion is necessarily factual.

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by Graham Goodwin

The dsc article DOES NOT "point towards a major suspension failure at high speed"

There's a good reason for that - It's because I don't know whether that's true.

Even if I did I certainly wouldn't know whether it was in any way related to the tub or whether it was a component that had failed as part of what was, let's not forget, a 30 hour ENDURANCE test.

There's no problem with speculation - but please read my earlier post again - you are most certainly looking for anything that supports the notion that you have defined around this incident - even in this case implying content in an article that simply isn't there!

Please don't cross the line into believing that your opinion is necessarily factual.

I've been told this morning that the failures have NOTHING at all to do with the issues Peugeot dealt with last year regarding the front suspension pickup points. Nothing at all. In fact I'm told that the first failure at the end of last year happened on the opposite end of the car. Regarding yesterday's issue, I'm told no failure. Beyond that I can't say.

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by Graham Goodwin

Even if I did I certainly wouldn't know whether it was in any way related to the tub or whether it was a component that had failed as part of what was, let's not forget, a 30 hour ENDURANCE test.

Plus we don't know at which point in the planned 30 hours the accident took place.

[gwyllion]

I would also like to add that EI did not write any articles on two 908 crashes. For both crashes the French sport news paper l'Equipe wrote an article and someone posted the content of the article on the EI forum.

Two articles did appear on the AUTOhebdo.fr website again citing l'Equipe as source: Une Peugeot 908 sort au Paul-Ricard and Peugeot : accident de Gené en 90X

[chernaudi]

It has to be a high speed accident because:

1--these parts don't break unless there's a huge load on them. It's very unlikely that the suspension collapsed or whatever happened in a 35 mph corner (and if it did, Nic probably would've saved the car like Lamy did at Le Mans), and

2--consider the viciousness of the accident. Nic's Pug cleared the guardrail and landed in the catch fencing. You don't do that by going "slow".

Of course, the car didn't have to get airborne in the spin or whatever to clear the barrier. Hitting a tire wall or another barrier at a high enough speed can cause the vehicle to ramp over the barrier. And you don't do that in a slow or even a medium speed corner. The Pug had to be going at a pretty good clip with it's front wheels turned for that to happen. Hence it could've been at the end of the Mistral, as it feeds into the fastest corner on the track, or maybe the beginning of the Mistral, as that's a fast corner as well. Or it could've snapped under braking at the end of the Mistral.

Either way, the result was obvoulsy an ugly accident.

Of course, this could have impact on Sebring depending on the nature of the part failure (tub or actual suspension component) and the turn around time to fit the improved parts on the Sebring cars, which takes us back to the nature of the failure. If it was a mount in the tub, there's little chance that Peugeot can fix that before they have to ship their cars out. If it's suspension, they can beef up the part that failed. There'll still be logistical issues (parts supply), but that's a helluva lot easier to deal with then having to mess with the tubs.

Either way, this has to be a big worry. Sebring is much tougher on cars than Paul Ricard. If it's rumored that the issue at LM was caused by bouncing the car off of one too many curbs too hard, parts of Sebring are so bumpy that you'll feel like your riding on a curb even if in the middle of the track. And of course, PR's curbs aren't very brutal by comparison to Sebring's or Le Mans'.

It'll be interesting to see what Peugeot's response is, considering how little time there is before Sebring and what could be at stake.

And of course, with the recent comments, it seems to be a mixture of good news/bad news. Good news is that it's not at tub failure. Bad news is that it seems to be something of a recurring issue and that it's not isolated to one end of the car.

That does take us back to the issue of the loads that the suspension has to deal with, as my translation of the article seems to be that the failure is where the wishbone connects to the tub mount. Similar but distinct from the LM issue. Same area of the car, but different component failure.

[gwyllion]

@chernaudi: Mike said no pickup point failure. Perhaps Minassian just lost control over the car. Please stop speculating.

I wonder what will happen when the new 908 beats the hell out of your favorite Audi in Sebring

[The Badger]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

It has to be a high speed accident because

No it doesnt ..... a part can fail at any time it likes ..... it recieves the most stress in high speed cuz of downforce , but it can fail when it likes .

[Graham Goodwin]

I give up!!!

I note no acknowledgment of the misattribution btw!

In short you don't know how, why or even where the accident happened but are quite happy to attribute the cause to a component and or design flaw about which you have no knowledge or corroboration - and in fact have sources confirming in some instances that your supposition is incorrect!

The incident btw took place after the test had been underway for several hours at high speed, in the Esses de la Verrerie - the first combination after the start finish straight - close to the site of Elio de Angelis's fatal crash and nowhere near the Mistral!

Please stop now!