Formula one safety

[Dr Jekyll]

How did they stop F1 cars bursting into flames after accidents?

Is it that the general structure is stronger, the fuel tanks designed differently, the circuits designed so impacts are less, or what?

[TheEnd]

From what i remember, the tanks are some sort of rubberised cut-proof bags.
Maybe self sealing too.

[eliot]

They use fuel cells located centrally behind the driver. ATL make them.

[Scuffers]

combination of stuff, in no specific order:

not putting the tanks round the outside of the car
making the tanks multi-layered bag type fuel cells
better heat shielding/materials around the tank/engine/etc
better crash structures
better barriers/run-off areas

the list goes on.

[Airbag]

Not using insane fuels...

[Eric Mc]

Add to that automatic fuel pump cut off switches switches and fuel line de-couplers - both which prevent fuel flowing after an accident. The last time an F1 car burst into flames following a crash (as opposed to a refuelling cock-up) was Gerhard Berger's Ferrari crash at Imola in 1989.

Edited by Eric Mc on Monday 10th August 07:17

[Rude-boy]

It would appear that there are also some fail safe features built into the car's electronics to shut everything down in a set of perversely unusual circumstances exist. For example we learnt that Massa's engine had shut itself down before it even hit the barrier as the car's brain had decided something was not right when comparing where the car was on the track, the path it was taking and the driver's inputs.

[Adamantium]

Rude-boy said:

It would appear that there are also some fail safe features built into the car's electronics to shut everything down in a set of perversely unusual circumstances exist. For example we learnt that Massa's engine had shut itself down before it even hit the barrier as the car's brain had decided something was not right when comparing where the car was on the track, the path it was taking and the driver's inputs.

I was wondering if they had systems like that, pretty impressive stuff if the engine can shut down from something like that before the impact.

[Ponk]

That's not true, i'm sure you could here Massa's foot jammed on the gas after it hit the barrier.

[zac510]

Maybe it had engaged anti-stall (ie clutch in) at least. Not shutting-down per se but cutting the horsepower.

[Eric Mc]

The engine was definitely revving as the car was embedded in the tyre wall.

[jonnylayze]

I agree - my initial thought was that the throttle had stuck open. In hindsight I wondered whether Massa had braked instinctively with his left foot when semi conscious - he certainly didn't have the brake fully on - while still keeping his right foot on the throttle (even if it was only resting on there when he lost consciousness.

[NewMetalSystem]

Adamantium said:

Rude-boy said:

It would appear that there are also some fail safe features built into the car's electronics to shut everything down in a set of perversely unusual circumstances exist. For example we learnt that Massa's engine had shut itself down before it even hit the barrier as the car's brain had decided something was not right when comparing where the car was on the track, the path it was taking and the driver's inputs.

I was wondering if they had systems like that, pretty impressive stuff if the engine can shut down from something like that before the impact.

If that is the case, how do they decide? Does this mean that everytime a driver cuts the chicane, or lifts off the throttle down the straight and moves off the racing line when being lapped, or brakes to avoid a collision, that the engine dies? There has to be an awful lot more to it than that.

[Adamantium]

I imagine within the telemetry there would be set limits that would allow for an off but a massive impact/sudden lack of steering input wildly inaccurate inputs beyond the preset amounts for a small off and oversteer would allow the auto clutch to kick in.

[skinny]

that might have happened before but the stock ECU doesn't have that sort of functionality now.