For the love of all things good, but subframe connectors on your cars
04-05-2006, 07:27 AM
#1
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the love of all things good, but subframe connectors on your cars Well, in about 40 minutes I'm leaving to go to my cousin's funeral. Last Thursday night, he and a friend (His friend was driving) were going home from hanging out with other friends. Somehow, the driver fell asleep or took a corner too fast or something, but the car slammed right into a tree. When it hit, it bent in the middle like an upside down V. The driver received minor injuries, but my cousin (Who was wearing his seat belt) was thrown throw the passenger side T-Top, hitting the same tree the car hit with his head. Luckily, his death was almost instant.
My theory is, if they were SFCs on the car, it wouldn't have crumpled like it did, and my cousin would still be here. So, for the love of your life (And your friends' life), but SFCs on your car. It's a really horrible feeling knowing that your cousins life could have been saved with $200.
My theory is, if they were SFCs on the car, it wouldn't have crumpled like it did, and my cousin would still be here. So, for the love of your life (And your friends' life), but SFCs on your car. It's a really horrible feeling knowing that your cousins life could have been saved with $200.
04-05-2006, 08:56 AM
#2
I'm sorry to hear of your cousins passing. It's even worse when it's someone so young.
If I may make a suggestion though, SFC's probably wouldn't have done much in an accident like you describe. In bending (from the side) is the weakest part of an SFC. They do well in torsion (twisting) and front to rear (on end), but from the side they will kink just like the chassis. The cars chassis very likely has far more resistance to bending loads than the SFC's do. They will add some extra strength in that direction, but probably not enough to handle a heavy impact. I'm going to suspect that a full cage and racing seat belts would have been required in this case (simply based on your statements), and even that's not always 100%.
Again, I don't want to take anything away from the first part of this discussion. Your cousin will be in my thoughts. I just don't want anyone to get the idea that SFC's are a miracle safety cure either. They may help somewhat, but when you are dealing with the amount of energy that's involved in an automobile crash, they are not nearly as strong as you'd think (in relation to the energy/power involved).
Godspeed.
If I may make a suggestion though, SFC's probably wouldn't have done much in an accident like you describe. In bending (from the side) is the weakest part of an SFC. They do well in torsion (twisting) and front to rear (on end), but from the side they will kink just like the chassis. The cars chassis very likely has far more resistance to bending loads than the SFC's do. They will add some extra strength in that direction, but probably not enough to handle a heavy impact. I'm going to suspect that a full cage and racing seat belts would have been required in this case (simply based on your statements), and even that's not always 100%.
Again, I don't want to take anything away from the first part of this discussion. Your cousin will be in my thoughts. I just don't want anyone to get the idea that SFC's are a miracle safety cure either. They may help somewhat, but when you are dealing with the amount of energy that's involved in an automobile crash, they are not nearly as strong as you'd think (in relation to the energy/power involved).
Godspeed.
04-05-2006, 02:50 PM
#7
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks guys, but apologies for even starting this thread in the first place. My dad had told me it was a Trans Am, but I just saw pictures of the car. It was a Grand Am, and there's no chance in hell that SFCs would have helped.
Link to pictures, if anyone wants to see. It's pretty ugly.
Again, thanks for the kind words.
Link to pictures, if anyone wants to see. It's pretty ugly.
Again, thanks for the kind words.
Trending Topics
04-07-2006, 08:33 PM
#10
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks guys. My immediate family has taken it pretty well, but my aunt and uncle and a few of my other cousins are pretty shaken up. His high school friends (Graduated 5 years ago) were also in bad shape.
Mods, you can lock this thread if you feel it's too OT.
Mods, you can lock this thread if you feel it's too OT.
04-07-2006, 10:31 PM
#15
TECH Resident
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Youngstown, Ohio
Posts: 847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry for your loss. But I think the only subframe connectors that might have any chance of holding the shape of the car would be double diamonds. The two-point sfc's would probably snap like a pencil under that kind of force. The DD have the middle bar going across the floor pan to the other sfc in the weak area.
04-08-2006, 08:08 AM
#17
TECH Regular
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Down Under
Posts: 400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I too am sorry for your loss and will pray for you and your family.
Speaking as an automotive engineer, there is nearly nothing that could have saved him in terms of chassis bracing. The only thing that MAY have helped would be a 10 point roll cage. The impact forces to tear a car apart like that are unbeliveably high. There is no way you can design a passenger car to handle an accident like that with the forces seen at impact. especially from the side (the weakest point).
During an impact cars are designed to "absorb" the energy by deforming the metal in a predetermined fashion. The more the metal around you is deformed, the softer the impact on the occupant. However, keeping the occupant restrained and unaffected by the metal deformation is another hard task and can only be designed for a few circumstances (mainly front and offset front impacts) and even then, the speed at which it becomes no longer effecitve was far surpassed in your cousins vehicle.
I guess what im saying is, in the automotive community, it is awful to see people die in the cars you or your co-workers have designed portions of and in some way feel responsible. Saftey is #1 priority however there is no way to handle cases such as this, To design cars with that much structural integrity (i.e. weight+$$) would put the automotive companies out of buisness (as if they werent headed that way anyhow)
Im not trying to justify anything, it is horrible what has happened.
Speaking as an automotive engineer, there is nearly nothing that could have saved him in terms of chassis bracing. The only thing that MAY have helped would be a 10 point roll cage. The impact forces to tear a car apart like that are unbeliveably high. There is no way you can design a passenger car to handle an accident like that with the forces seen at impact. especially from the side (the weakest point).
During an impact cars are designed to "absorb" the energy by deforming the metal in a predetermined fashion. The more the metal around you is deformed, the softer the impact on the occupant. However, keeping the occupant restrained and unaffected by the metal deformation is another hard task and can only be designed for a few circumstances (mainly front and offset front impacts) and even then, the speed at which it becomes no longer effecitve was far surpassed in your cousins vehicle.
I guess what im saying is, in the automotive community, it is awful to see people die in the cars you or your co-workers have designed portions of and in some way feel responsible. Saftey is #1 priority however there is no way to handle cases such as this, To design cars with that much structural integrity (i.e. weight+$$) would put the automotive companies out of buisness (as if they werent headed that way anyhow)
Im not trying to justify anything, it is horrible what has happened.
04-08-2006, 12:16 PM
#18
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(I don't want the thread closed, I just thought that you guys might feel it was OT)
The car hit head on, and when the crash was described to me, my dad said the car bent in the middle, making the roof straight up and down, facing the tree. he said my cousin went through the roof, and I assumed the only way for someone to go through the roof of a car was a glass T-Top. Of course, he also told me it was a trans am, but it turns out it was a grand am. Once I saw the pictures I knew my theory held no water, but from the original description of the crash, it sounded like SFCs could have helped by keeping the car from bending in the middle.
The car hit head on, and when the crash was described to me, my dad said the car bent in the middle, making the roof straight up and down, facing the tree. he said my cousin went through the roof, and I assumed the only way for someone to go through the roof of a car was a glass T-Top. Of course, he also told me it was a trans am, but it turns out it was a grand am. Once I saw the pictures I knew my theory held no water, but from the original description of the crash, it sounded like SFCs could have helped by keeping the car from bending in the middle.
