Formula Ford Safety

[Maurotoro]

Hello, I am a motorsport student in cranfield and as an assignment I have to work on improving safety in Formula Ford. I was wondering if anyone who actually participates in any form of Formula Ford competition can tell me what are the aspects of safety that should be addressed. I welcome any comment.

[John Clucas]

Originally Posted by Maurotoro

Hello, I am a motorsport student in cranfield and as an assignment I have to work on improving safety in Formula Ford. I was wondering if anyone who actually participates in any form of Formula Ford competition can tell me what are the aspects of safety that should be addressed. I welcome any comment.

Firstly, let me say I am not an expert in safety, nor actually an FF racer. However my son has raced extensively in FF and many other single seaters - and has had some serious crashes, so I do have some knowledge.

I'm not sure what to recommend on the passive front. FF would undoubtedly benefit from a composite safety cell a la F1, Renault etc. BUT this would put up the cost to the point where FF would die. Indeed I am at a bit of a loss to recommend passive measures which would make a significant contribution without a cost impact that would be serious.

So I'll address it on another front. FF (and almost all motorsport) is supposed to be a non-contact sport. Accidental contact (wheel to wheel) can result in serious accidents affecting both cars - but is inevitable in open wheel formuli. Unfortunately, the design of the cars means that DELIBERATE, body to body, contact can result advantage (and accidents) and is, I regret to say, encouraged in some quarters, and is difficult to police. So I'd like to see changes to the car design to discourage such driving.

In particular the nose of the car should be designed so that the deliberate punt up the rear becomes impossible without disadvantage to the punter. However that does need a lot of thought. A soft or short nose would make accidental wheel contact (dangerous) more likely. Other options might encourage brake testing by the car in front. Definitely an exercise for the student!

[brakedisc]

For 2011 Duratec FF will adopt the FIA safety measures for spaceframe cars. This is serious stuff and will probably kill the formula. Costs are high enough without sending chassis to FIA test centres for crash testing.

[John Clucas]

Originally Posted by brakedisc

For 2011 Duratec FF will adopt the FIA safety measures for spaceframe cars. This is serious stuff and will probably kill the formula. Costs are high enough without sending chassis to FIA test centres for crash testing.

Absolutely agree. FF has just managed to reestablish itself as a (relatively) low cost entry level into the "serious" end of single seater motorsport. Put up costs significantly and people will choose "sexier" winged formuli.

[williamsf1]

You are 100% right John, and having seen Ben race in FF and F3 he has had some big ones!!!....
FF could be improved in the following areas without large cost increases... :-

- seats made from better material than hardware foam and race tape ( composite seat that supports the spine ala F1 spec, as it is the double impact stress of the current foam seats that are causing serious injury)

- increasing the minimum size of cockpit area (rules) so as to make it possible to add padded sections inside.... see inside a modern F1, its cheap and saves big injuries, this will also help taller drivers

- raised cockpit sides



most of the things JC has raised are rules related, or the lack of.... FF has some of the wildest driving standards going around! having seen brake testing on test days and worse or race days!!!

[davyboy]

John makes a number of good points here, the main one being that most safety improvements will significantly increase the cost of the car and running it and would likely result in the demise of the formula. It may sound crass and insensitive, but there's a great deal of truth in it.

Some ideas from me. Serious injury in Formula Ford usually occurs in one of three types of incident.

o Head on collision into a stationery object such as circuit banking.

o T-bone collision into the side of the car.

o Airborne rolling where the drivers head comes in contact with the scenery.


Without moving to a composite structure, you would need a more effective deformable front end on the car to handle high speed front end impact. This could improve the survival rate but obviously it doesn't eliminate it.

In terms of the side impact and airborne rotations, these could probably be handled by adopting bodywork along the lines of that used in karting [see the image below]. Of course it would need to be of a completely different structure and design, but what I'm getting at is how its enveloped so the wheels can't interlock and its crash tested. There is a downside to employing this however. It fosters more aggression in drivers because the hazzard of a crash is removed and results in more incidents.

In any event, I hope some of these thoughts help you.

[Maurotoro]

Thank you guys your feedback is very interesting, hope you keep it coming. You have given me some very neat ideas.

[John Clucas]

[QUOTE=davyboy;2566975]John makes a number of good points here, the main one being that most safety improvements will significantly increase the cost of the car and running it and would likely result in the demise of the formula. It may sound crass and insensitive, but there's a great deal of truth in it.

QUOTE]

Certainly don't wish to appear either insensitive (or crass) - recent tragedies (and near ones) naturally raise safety awareness, but can produce knee-jerk reactions rather than genuine safety improvements. Clearly the issue of wheel tethers needs to be looked at - and I should have raised that. Despite tethers there are still too many incidents where wheels become detached.

On the point of kart-like side pods, I have very mixed feelings for the reasons that you raise. Passive safety on karts is very poor compared with that on cars, and I understand the intense desire to prevent wheel to wheel contact there. On FF where passive safety is much better the balance of argument changes and I'm not convinced that such pods would yield a net improvement.

I regret to say that karting is where contact driving is learnt and (regretably) not stamped out, and sidepods and nosecones have been significant factor in that development.

[davyboy]

John I know you didn't mean to be crass at all... I was just endorsing your point that the cost of implementing safety mechanisms on a Formula Ford would likely kill the class. Who knows... maybe that will be eventually what happens... I hope not though.

I've been involved in karting [as a driver] for 27 years. Having started when there was no bodywork on karts, I can vouch for the fact that contact was far less than it is today because drivers knew how serious the outcome would be if they interlocked wheels - you just didn't do it. That moral hazzard has been removed today and contact is de riguer. I would honestly hate to see single seater racing go the same way but its a very likely outcome if bodywork to prevent wheel interlocking and side impact was introduced.

[John Clucas]

I think you may underestimate how "acceptable" deliberate contact has become in much of top-level car racing. Indeed the language says it all - dirty driving has become a "tap" a "nudge" or "rubbing". It's only rare in those formuli where the puntER is more likely to suffer than the puntEE - ie winged formuli. And while I don't share Stirling Moss's views on safety in general - I well understand his view that driving was more sporting in his day than it now is -as I suspect you do, for the reason you give - that the life-threatening consequences where unacceptable to everyone.

[brakedisc]

Interesting points regarding seats, and cockpit space. Under the new for 2011 Duratec FF these very areas have received a dispensation from the FIA regs so as to save the manufactures building wider cars.

[Maurotoro]

Can anybody tell me where I can find the 2011 Duratec FF regulations?

[Triple J Motorsport]

The regs won't increase the cost much they are:

10mm composite pannel both sides of cockpit

Carbon nose box

collapsable steering column

no crash testing just squeeze testing RF09 has passed this already


2010 cars will have retro kits available to be fitted in 2011

John hows Ben doing not seen him for ages.

[John Clucas]

Good to see they have not gone overboard. However, composites while having weight advantages over other alternatives, are expensive and may not be the most cost-effective solution. VD nosecones in fibreglass are (were) pretty pricey - carbon ones will be much more so. Can't believe that a more substantial fibreglass one wouldn't be cheaper (though heavier), if that is what is thought to be needed. Can't argue with collapsable steering columns.

Re Ben - times are hard but he keeps racing - mostly in GTs and sportscars, often in Spain. See www.benclucas.co.uk - it's always pretty up-to-date.

[Triple J Motorsport]

Well Ray and Mygale have a seperate composite nose box only VD incorporate it in the nose cone.

Had some big ones in my SJ01 (sister car to Ben's) and my Rays and never destoryed the nose box.

[John Clucas]

Originally Posted by Triple J Motorsport

Well Ray and Mygale have a seperate composite nose box only VD incorporate it in the nose cone.

Had some big ones in my SJ01 (sister car to Ben's) and my Rays and never destoryed the nose box.

Ben did destroy a nosebox when he had a VERY big accident at Silverstone. However that is what is supposed to happen and Ben escaped pretty much unscathed. Of course it is always possible to envisage bigger accidents and hence the desire for even greater crash protection -but, however unpalatable the balance might be, someone has to judge the compromise between cost and safety. A tough call - but one that has to be made nevertheless.