FSAE Safety

[ausracing]

Hi,

So thought I should start a thread based on improving safety in the competition.

The basis is not workshop safety (using tools, machining) as that should be covered extensively by your uni (though always good to remind new members) but for car safety (chassis structures, suspension, fire), testing and competition track layouts and how we can improve these.

Be good if we can keep it to new ideas and solutions rather than past problems and issues.

An example of this would be to make fire extinguishers located on the car compulsory. Especially for large testing tracks and few people to marshall the entire track.

With the new set of major rule changes in 2017, posting ideas here could help SAE make changes for the better. Accidents with racing cars is always going to happen but if we can reduce the risk and severity of those incidents everyone will go home happy and alive.

Cheers,

[Pat Clarke]

Ryan,
Extinguishers used to be compulsory in the cars, but the danger from one coming loose was deemed unacceptable. Instead, they mandated the 5 second exit rule, compulsory multi layer fire protection clothing and the provision of marshalls with extinguishers at regular intervals around the course.
Fire is probably the biggest threat in FSAE and we have had some doosies over the years, but fortunately no serious burns.

Lithium battery fires from EV cars are more worrying because of the severe lung damage from the fumes and because they are difficult to extinguish.

I recall only two serious injuries at FSAE events (not counting the collateral damage done at the afterparty) and both were to bystanders who were hit by cars or parts of cars. There have been some narrow escapes though!
The only really serious injury to a driver that I recall happened a few years ago at private testing in Scotland, so your point about the increased dangers at private testing is well made. Unfortunately, the SAE cannot enforce rules for private practice.

One thing I will assure you is that the rules committee are very serious about safety. With the Rules Committee centered in the US and the well known practice of ambulance chasing lawyers in that country, safety is possibly the most important thing on their agenda.

Pat Clarke.

[ausracing]

Thanks for your response Pat. I have no doubt that the rules committee is serious about safety, just thought that some fresh ideas could help.

Interesting about the extinguishers though. Coming loose is definitely a concern but if it was internal the risk would be lower and there is a lot of quick release systems, such as
http://rvdailyreport.com/products/ma...-extinguisher/

The presentation you gave, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adtfBliMb74 for FSG design review, is a great start for safer testing practices.
I like that FSG brought in the rule regarding safe test locations but it is quite vague in what is considered safe and whether a team would breach it. Maybe set run off distances (for example a 75m straight with hairpin at the end must have 25m of run off before wall) would help? Pretty hard to decide with track surfaces and car speed but might help give teams an idea of how to design a safe track layout since most universities don't teach it.

[CWA]

Hi Ryan,

I commend the interest you seem to have in improving safety. I know safety was something that many members of my team (including me) had low on their radar during FSAE. If it wasn't for the diligence of event organizers, technical regulations and our uni supervisors, our FSAE experience may not have been so smooth.

I know you said you did not want to focus on past issues, but has something happened to make you think the events / regulations are not safe enough? A proactive / preemptive approach seems to have its uses when changes to the norm bring about new risks (as Pat mentioned, the more common use of batteries), but considering everything else, the organizers do seem to have a pretty good grasp of things.

Whilst the mindset of continuous improvement often has its places and I certainly approve, 'if it aint broke don't fix it' must apply a little bit too. Most safety improvements I've ever seen implemented seem to have been in response to something specific, either preemptive response to known changes as above, or reactive response to specific instantaneous failures in the process.

I have low experience in this area of organisation, but perhaps considering what has been up to now a pretty effective system and trying to make it 'safer' when it is fairly considered 'safe enough' could carry its own risks?

[ausracing]

Mainly fires but also some improvements in track layout at comp would be good to see. The below is my own view and doesn't represent the team's views.
Mentioned this in another thread but in some SAE tracks tyres and concrete walls are located on the outside of the track in braking zones. Fair to say at every comp at least one team has a suspension component failure (Wishbone, brakes, wheel centres) and for that to happen whilst braking and then hitting a wall could be dangerous. Even oil spill (which can be hard to see) or rain could enable a car to slide into the barriers under braking.
The map attached is FSUK 2014, with tyre barrier locations marked in grey. The track can be altered such that it still retains similar corners but can avoid braking zones and track crossovers. The track doesn't show the placement of the barriers at Maggotts and National Hairpin. The one at Carters is the one I have the biggest issue with. I haven't seen the 2015 track

http://events.imeche.org/docs/defaul...d.pdf?sfvrsn=0

Safety improvements have long been associated with leaving processes in place until something goes wrong. OH&S is one of those issues that people often forget about when nothing bad goes wrong and then something does. Reading a number of workplace incidents and you will see this is the case. Just because no-one has been hurt in an event doesn't mean someone won't be in the future.
For an example of things staying the same and someone gets hurt is Bianchi's crash. For years F1 had tractors and other vehicles on track while cars drove around under yellow flags. There was no specific speed, just enough to show that the driver acknowledged the incident. This meant for differing views on what was considered 'slowing'. In the rain, this becomes even more vague. There had been so many other incidents in other categories (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAgydlreM2E) that waving a yellow flag and slowing down weren't sufficient in preventing these incidents. The virtual safety car is a step towards improvement. It took someone getting hurt before anything was changed.

The organisers and SAE of all the events have made fantastic efforts to make the driving of the cars safe, especially in refueling bays and overtaking lanes and providing marshalls and flags.
It helps that events like Michigan and West have a huge area to work with.

I understand the distaste for 'OH&S' and the 'OH&S gone mad' is a pretty common phrase here in Aus.

[mdavis]

If you're concerned about courses, at least in the US, teams can talk to local regions of the SCCA. They have course designers that are more than likely willing to help. For those not in the US, or with no personal connection to an regional autocross group, this is the best resource I know of, and one I read before designing any autocross courses: http://www.houscca.com/solo/courses/...sign_4-1-2.pdf

Replace SCCA course design rules with FSAE course design rules, use lateral and longitudinal accelerations that are appropriate, and you've got a really good resource for course design that pretty much anyone can follow.