Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site cbosgd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!wivax!decvax!harpo!floyd!vax135!ariel!hou5f!hou5a!hou5d!hogpc!houxm!hocda!spanky!burl!we13!ihnp4!cbosgd!cad
From: cad@cbosgd.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.flame
Subject: Racing, Fiberglass and 55 MPH
Message-ID: <67@cbosgd.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 27-Jun-83 14:37:04 EDT
Article-I.D.: cbosgd.67
Posted: Mon Jun 27 14:37:04 1983
Date-Received: Thu, 30-Jun-83 03:13:39 EDT
Organization: Bell Labs, Columbus
Lines: 72


	The point was raised recently that fiberglass car bodies
offer little protection to passengers in an accident.  A counter-
point was made saying that Formula I and Indy cars have mostly
fiberglass bodies and their drivers frequently (but not always)
survive tremendously horrific crashes.

	There is some truth to both views -- but not alot.  Fiberglass
bodies panels do not offer as much protection as, say steel panels.  This
is obvious.  However, in a accident, most of the force is absorbed in
the chassis of the vehicle and the design of this is what is critical.
The Corvette, a car known for its fiberglass body, still has a strong steel
chassis under that covering and therefore can still absorb (and dish
out) damage quite well.

	Formula I race cars do provide a counter example, but not
exactly as mentioned.  In Formula I racing, reducing the weight of
the vehicle is a critical factor in increasing the speed.  The steel chassis
(or monocoque) was abandoned long ago as too bulky.  A number of
things have been used since, namely aluminum, layered fiberglass and 
most recently, carbon fiber.  The last is perhaps the most dramatic
advance in automotive materials in recent years.  It is considerably
lighter than steel but stronger as well.  I am not a materials expert
so I cannot say exactly what the carbon fiber process entails, but it 
has been shown to be a considerable improvement on the sturdiest
composite fiberglass currently in use.  Unfortunately, it is more
expensive than fiberglass right now, but perhaps with better production
techniques the cost will come down.

	As to the strength of carbon fiber monocoques, last year's grim
examples give proof to the claims of strength.  The Ferrari 126C racing
car was made of composite fiberglass with aluminum bracing.  In several
horrific crashes the car was seen to disintegrate quite badly around
the driver, especially in the front around the legs of the driver.
In Gilles Villeneve's case, when his restraint system failed and he was
thrown from the vehicle, carbon fiber would not have saved him.  However,
when his teammate Didier Pironi crashed a few weeks later at Hockenheim
shattering both legs so badly amputation was briefly considered, a stronger
monocoque may well have meant the difference between walking away and
being carried off close to death.  This was dramatically demonstrated
at the next Formula I race in Holland when Rene Arnoux slammed head-on
into a earthen wall at 170 mph after having a wheel sheer off.  He was
badly stunned by the impact and bruised an ankle, but shook it off and
was walking by day's end.  His car, a Renault RE30, has a completely
carbon fiber chassis with lightweight fiberglass body panels.
(Ironically, Ferrari went on to win the constructors championship despite
having one driver killed and another grievously injured.)

	Automobile racing is a dangerous business but very often useful
products are developed.  I think the research that has gone into
carbon fiber and other strong lightweight materials is one of those
benefits that racing pays back to the automotive industry.  Perhaps
someday all our vehicles will be built of sturdy materials and have
workable safety equipment in them so that we need not fear taking to
the roads.

			Until then, buckle up, drive slowly,
			and get your speed thrills on the track.

			---> Chuck A DeGaul <---

P.S.  As long as they continue to market vehicles that cannot protect
	their passengers from injury (and large cars are not the answer,
	you Caddie owners) then I'm all for 55 mph.  I'm for 45 mph for
	that matter.

P.P.S.  Some years ago, a big automaker built a new prototype.  It was
	expensive, built to withstand a 50 mph crash, last 30 years, and
	was pretty much as safe as you could want.  They could not see the
	profit in building a vehicle that might be the only car you'd
	ever have to own, so they cancelled research on it.  Anyone
	remember this?