Tarmac run-off's versus gravel traps
Discussion
Massa's recent accident and the subsequent discussion has thrown up the question of whether the now popular tarmac run-off areas are indeed better than the old gravel traps.
The trend for tarmac run-offs enable drivers to get away with running off the track more often than not because it means they can carry on braking and steering and therefore avoid the accident they would otehrwise have had. This is obviously a good thing.
However, in Massa's situation he was already unconscious and therefore a passenger in his car. He had no ability to apply the brakes effectively or apply any steering lock. Fortunately the tyre barrier worked well, but had there been a gravel trap instead of tarmac run-off then the impact would have been reduced.
Isn't an out of control car (ergo, nobody is in control of it), the exact situation when the circuit design needs to effectively bring the vehicle to a safe (as possible) stop?
I belive in Surtee's crash, after he hit the barrier his foot was still flat on teh throttle. It was only because the was beached in the gravel trap that a marshall was able to kill the engine. Had that been a tarmac run-off, the car could well have carried on carreering further around/across the track and creating another situation for a potential accident.
What are your thoughts?
The trend for tarmac run-offs enable drivers to get away with running off the track more often than not because it means they can carry on braking and steering and therefore avoid the accident they would otehrwise have had. This is obviously a good thing.
However, in Massa's situation he was already unconscious and therefore a passenger in his car. He had no ability to apply the brakes effectively or apply any steering lock. Fortunately the tyre barrier worked well, but had there been a gravel trap instead of tarmac run-off then the impact would have been reduced.
Isn't an out of control car (ergo, nobody is in control of it), the exact situation when the circuit design needs to effectively bring the vehicle to a safe (as possible) stop?
I belive in Surtee's crash, after he hit the barrier his foot was still flat on teh throttle. It was only because the was beached in the gravel trap that a marshall was able to kill the engine. Had that been a tarmac run-off, the car could well have carried on carreering further around/across the track and creating another situation for a potential accident.
What are your thoughts?
Hi there!
I think ,in general ,that the tarmac areas are better ,as they give more scope for a driver to regain control of his car.Instances where a driver has been unconscious or invalided are so rare as to be insignificant.
It was always unfortunate to see a drivers race over ,stranded in the gravel ,after a sometimes harmless off ,especially in the wet.(I know the gravel traps are at their least effective in the wet!)
I think ,in general ,that the tarmac areas are better ,as they give more scope for a driver to regain control of his car.Instances where a driver has been unconscious or invalided are so rare as to be insignificant.
It was always unfortunate to see a drivers race over ,stranded in the gravel ,after a sometimes harmless off ,especially in the wet.(I know the gravel traps are at their least effective in the wet!)
I agree, such an incident is so rare as to be statistically insignificant. There are however, other more common scenarios which can result in similar situations of a car travelling at speed with the driver having no control such as failed steering or brakes, collapsed suspension or a wheel falling off etc.
I'm just wondering if this area of safety has perhaps followed the statistical path of what type of incident is most likely to occur, rather than perhaps what type of incident poses the greatest danger?
I'm just wondering if this area of safety has perhaps followed the statistical path of what type of incident is most likely to occur, rather than perhaps what type of incident poses the greatest danger?
flemke said:
Tarmac surface won't catch the tyres and induce a roll-over the way that gravel will do.
I don't know why, but that used to be more of a problem years ago than it was in the last few years before tarmac tool over. Perhaps the gravel was different, or the traps were deisgned in such a way to minimise the issue?Could there be another way of slowing an errant car down which isn't gravel and doesn't depend on the driver still having control? Maybe an artificial 'long grass' or some-such?
This system may never be acceptable to the aesthetes of Europe:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safer_barrier
but AFAIK it has been very successful in minimising serious injuries to racing drivers.
Wondered when this kind of topic would appear.
I've always been a fan of the old catch fencing.
- It was very effective at stopping cars at any speed and it would do so gradually without a sudden stop - you wouldn't even need HANS (for this only, obviously walls and other cars etc. have a need for HANS, but you get my point). Cars usually only had minor damage as a result.
- It was also a very good way of stopping a driver from taking a shortcut, as the car would get trapped in the catch fencing. It was a major motivational factor in judging an overtake or defense - Spa 2008 would've been impossible for instance.
- The multiple layers could also stop cars repeatedly going off at the same point, so it wasn't a once-only thing.
- AFAIK I think it was discontinued because of car fires (like the F1 turbos at the time). It takes a few minutes to get the driver out. But Turbo fires/car fires seem to be a thing of the past, not making this an issue. Can anyone remember the last fire? Also fire marshalling is much more rapid and professional these days.
- They catch things like stray wheels too...
- The car is never launched in the air like can happen with a gravel trap.
I've always been a fan of the old catch fencing.
- It was very effective at stopping cars at any speed and it would do so gradually without a sudden stop - you wouldn't even need HANS (for this only, obviously walls and other cars etc. have a need for HANS, but you get my point). Cars usually only had minor damage as a result.
- It was also a very good way of stopping a driver from taking a shortcut, as the car would get trapped in the catch fencing. It was a major motivational factor in judging an overtake or defense - Spa 2008 would've been impossible for instance.
- The multiple layers could also stop cars repeatedly going off at the same point, so it wasn't a once-only thing.
- AFAIK I think it was discontinued because of car fires (like the F1 turbos at the time). It takes a few minutes to get the driver out. But Turbo fires/car fires seem to be a thing of the past, not making this an issue. Can anyone remember the last fire? Also fire marshalling is much more rapid and professional these days.
- They catch things like stray wheels too...
- The car is never launched in the air like can happen with a gravel trap.
entropy said:
The problem with gravel traps are that a flat bottemed car will just skate over the gravel at high speed whereas in a perfect world with the brakes properly applied by the driver tarmac can offer better friction from the tyres.
I realise this too. But what if gravel traps where progressively raised or banked, just like the corner of an Oval? Friction would be much more guaranteed, wet or dry even with a car taking to the air. mattikake said:
catch fencing.
Valid points, but I seem to remember problems with catch-fencing poles being a potential hazard to the driver's head (particularly relevant currently), and the fencing hindering the driver's escape from the cockpit (or marshals'/medics' access to him). Also takes a long time to re-instate the fencing after an incident.ETA: I take your point about fire being rare nowadays, but FM was badly injured before he left the circuit. If he had then been entangled in catch fencing it would have delayed the work of the first medic on the scene.
Edited by forsure on Tuesday 28th July 01:58
mattikake said:
I realise this too. But what if gravel traps where progressively raised or banked, just like the corner of an Oval? Friction would be much more guaranteed, wet or dry even with a car taking to the air.
Interesting idea but I fear single seaters will easily risk digging into the gravel which could in turn risk pitching the car into a roll.flemke said:
This system may never be acceptable to the aesthetes of Europe:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safer_barrier
but AFAIK it has been very successful in minimising serious injuries to racing drivers.
More suited for oval racing. The tracks alter different barriers to suit the IRL and stock car racing because different cars will generate different forces and impacts eg. SAFER barrier for Indy 500 will work better the Indycars but that same barrier may not dissipate the required energy for NASCAR/Brickyard 400http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safer_barrier
but AFAIK it has been very successful in minimising serious injuries to racing drivers.
forsure said:
Valid points, but I seem to remember problems with catch-fencing poles being a potential hazard to the driver's head (particularly relevant currently), and the fencing hindering the driver's escape from the cockpit (or marshals'/medics' access to him). Also takes a long time to re-instate the fencing after an incident.
Eternal problem with catch fencing: how high?where did i see that they have different colored areas in the run off as the surface became gripier? was it assen?
gravel was shown to have its issues when Schumacher broke his leg and skidded over the top of the gravel, the new run off areas are a good idea but should offer some more deterrence of using them like having polystyrene signage that can cause "some" damage or block rads a bit.
it looked like the tarmac wasnt flat either when massa crashed which may have taken some energy but surely would of reduced the effectiveness of the braking?
gravel was shown to have its issues when Schumacher broke his leg and skidded over the top of the gravel, the new run off areas are a good idea but should offer some more deterrence of using them like having polystyrene signage that can cause "some" damage or block rads a bit.
it looked like the tarmac wasnt flat either when massa crashed which may have taken some energy but surely would of reduced the effectiveness of the braking?
How about and electro-magnetic 'trap' which would of course require every car to have a sufficient amount of metal in it's structure to work.
It'd be able to retard the car at a pre-set level and also stop the car from rolling over, it might even be able to stop errant wheels & other metal debris?
It'd be able to retard the car at a pre-set level and also stop the car from rolling over, it might even be able to stop errant wheels & other metal debris?
Adamantium said:
where did i see that they have different colored areas in the run off as the surface became gripier? was it assen?
gravel was shown to have its issues when Schumacher broke his leg and skidded over the top of the gravel, the new run off areas are a good idea but should offer some more deterrence of using them like having polystyrene signage that can cause "some" damage or block rads a bit.
it looked like the tarmac wasnt flat either when massa crashed which may have taken some energy but surely would of reduced the effectiveness of the braking?
You mean Paul Ricard - although i think others have started to use the same system now. gravel was shown to have its issues when Schumacher broke his leg and skidded over the top of the gravel, the new run off areas are a good idea but should offer some more deterrence of using them like having polystyrene signage that can cause "some" damage or block rads a bit.
it looked like the tarmac wasnt flat either when massa crashed which may have taken some energy but surely would of reduced the effectiveness of the braking?
Adamantium said:
where did i see that they have different colored areas in the run off as the surface became gripier? was it assen?
Paul RicardThe track is known for its distinctive black and blue runoff areas known as the Blue Zone, which is used instead of gravel traps of other circuits, the runoff surface consists of a mixture of asphalt and tungsten. Should that not prevent the car from stopping, there is the Red Zone, a more abrasive run off area, which would require a car to return to the pits for a new tyre. Also, rather than a tyre barrier, a Tecpro barrier.
it was in an issue of The Marshal: Incorporating Rescue & Resuscitation a couple of years ago
Forums | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff