Door Opening "X" Bars as Side Protection

Greg Amy

Administrator
I know we've hashed this out here in the past; I tried to find the relevant topics but could not. However, we had one hell of a troubling incident this weekend that I wanted to relate, and to caution.

At yesterday's NARRC Runoffs at LRP, ITA Integra driver Richie Hunter spun in West Bend, a very fast sweeper corner leading up to the bridge. He stopped driver's right (normal line is driver's left), with the passenger side of the car facing oncoming traffic and the two front wheels in the grass. As he sat there, perpendicular to the traffic, two or more cars passed by safely before another car t-boned him directly in the middle of the passenger door.

For reference, most fast ITA cars are going about 80-85 through that section.

The damage was sobering. Richie managed to drive the drive the car back into the pits, but you could hear a pin drop except for the mass sharp inhales and "oh my gods" and "holy shits" as he drove by: his passenger door was COMPLETELY driven into the car, bent in half, and up against the exhaust tunnel and his right arm. A casual observer would note the right door was simply missing altogether.

Richie's OK; he got his bell rung good, and he said he was momentarily knocked unconscious (I think he was just knocked silly, but it's really hard to tell with him anyway...) He also complained of right arm pain, but he's been checked out and I personally saw him as we were packing up and he looks fine.

But post-race we all got a good look at the car. As described the door was completely destroyed, hammered well into the car. The passenger-side rollcage/intrusion protection had completely failed.

Richie had the venerable "X" bar on the passenger side, one diagonal tube, with two other tubes welded to that to make an "X". That structure failed. Your first thought is probably that the welds failed, but you would be wrong: all welds seemed to hold. The primarily structural failure was on the first main diagonal bar, which simple tore apart at its center in tension. Then, the two triangular "halves" of the X-bar system hinged inwards where they were welded to the main the front hoops, tearing the two tubes partially off. To imagine this, think of the old Western saloon doors that swing to each side; the X-bar tube separated in the center, then allowed the other car to penetrate in the middle, tearing each half at the vertical tubes they were attached to. The door then came off of its hinges and latches, bending as it penetrated through the "swinging door".

The forces of the crash were so hard that the main hoop, front legs, and main plane diagonal bar were bent as well.

And lest you think this was some big heavy car, it was a Miata, I believe a SMMAITAC. So, what, 2380#...?

Similarly to my Watkins Glen incident two weeks ago, the Miata punched right through the center of the door, almost leaving the rocker panel completely intact. Because of the design of the nose of the Miata and the significant lowering one can do with an Integra, the main side structure of the car, the rocker panel, was ineffective at providing crash protection.

I bring up this subject as a point of interest for current and future builds. I've been a proponent of the X-bar system in the past, as I believe a well-built one can work. However, this incident was sobering. Richie has the "standard" multi-tubes-with-verticals-NASCAR-bars on the driver's side, but for that and 180 degrees of rotation I firmly believe Richie would not be alive today. I certainly could not see a passenger surviving a crash like this on the street: there was just no place for a breathing human to be.

From this I take three main points.

First, the basic x-bar system by itself may not be adequate. Since there is only one whole diagonal bar in that design the tensile forces are only resisted by one tube. I would recommend one of two directions if you pursue the X-bar: either bend two tubes in "U" shape and weld them together at the center, or weld plates completely across the intersection to increase the cross-sectional area of the main point of tension. Or both. I've linked a (poor) photo of our Integra from the Watkins Glen wreck to demonstrate what I mean.

Second, creating a single-plane x-bar is probably not a good idea. This x-bar is subjected to bending and tensile forces; tubing works better in compression. If this x-bar had extended outwards in a "pup tent" type of fashion into the door, it may have withstood the punching forces better.

Third, we need to give serious consideration to design based on who we race with. As noted, the only thing between Richie and the nose of that Miata was his factory door and his rollcage x-bar. The 'Teg's rocker panel was nothing more than a footnote in that crash, as the Miata with its shark nose drove up and over it.

Finally (yes, I know this is four), there was door glass everywhere inside that car. Richie got showered by it. I am a clear proponent now of recommending - possibly requiring - removal of door glass. Fortunately, Richie was wearing a face shield with eye protection.

We have no photos, at Richie's request. But I hope I've described this satisfactorily to you. This si something we need to hash over; while I hope no one is subjected to this in the past, we need to prepare for it.

Greg

displayimage.php
 
Last edited:
By your description of the force of impact, it sounds like the cage did a good job of absorbing the energy. Is there really a design that's practical in weight and material cost that can withstand any possible impact ? And how should it look after an incredible impact ? I wouldn't expect it to look like it did before the accident.:shrug:

The bending and breaking is absorbing energy that would otherwise transfer to the driver. Had the bar broke upon a 20 mph impact, I would look to see if inferior materials were used. But at 80 mph, what would you expect ?

The design you show does appear to be a stronger way to make an X. I'm sure that at an 80 mph direct impact there would be some failure somewhere in that construction too.
 
Perhaps a 16ga. cover welded to the complete permiter of the door bars to act as onr giant gusset ala NASCAR would help. It would add a lot ostrength to that area.
 
my car had seen it's share of impacts, a couple pretty solid side ones as well.

it's not just miatas that impact much higher than the rocker panel, a VW got into my drivers door once, completely destroyed the door, got into the door bar, but left the rocker panel untouched.

as i get ready to possibly build another car, i'll be real interested in where this discussion goes. i'm no structural expert by any means, but isn't it a "rule" that the bigger the bend you put in a bar, the weaker it becomes at the point of the bend since you have to stretch/thin the metal to make the larger outside radius? with that in mind, the x-bar pictured above looks like a pretty big bend relative to the traditional nascar bars. the plates welded at the intersection counter this, as the bars are pushed inward the stress is placed upon 4 whole rows of welds, but is it enough? either way, i see the quality of the welds and material used in those plates to be the key to safety in that design.

travis
-who had a "traditional" x-bar on the passenger side, but nascar bar on the drivers side.
 
Greg, I was in T&S when Hunter’s car drove down pit lane. We were all laughing at the hay bail stuck to the front of the car, and then the air left the room as we realized the car was caved in and the door was against the driver. In a room full of jolly ladies, there were certainly a lot of holy shits going around.

I am glad to hear he is OK. I have always thought the glass in the door was a dumb idea. I have the X bar you describe with the three pieces. I had planned on added a diagonal across the roof and gussets elsewhere this winter. I will add an upgrade to the x bar also.

Good topic.
 
The thought of the passenger side collapsing is interesting, but we would never want this to happen on the drivers side... I am now thinking about what I should do to upgrade my drivers side bars...

Raymond
 
My biggest fear has always been getting T-boned, mainly only the driver side, since I always thought I had crush space on the passenger side but from this example its pretty obvious thats not enough space.

displayimage.php


My cage has the standard X plus a horizontal bar at the bottom, but as you mentioned due to the height of the miata the horizontal bar wouldn't have done anything. If I had a vertical bar on each side of the X, say about a foot from the center on either side, with taco gussets, how effective do you think that would be in a situation such as this? I think it would be fairly efficient because you would have two continuous bars(horizontal and one of the x bars) plus the two half bars of the x all having to bend in unison.

red = bars, blue = gussets

displayimage.php
 
This is one of the three dimensional x braces that I did. It was then gusseted. It seems like what Greg was talking about.
 

Attachments

  • Roll Cage RX7 4.jpg
    Roll Cage RX7 4.jpg
    96.1 KB · Views: 180
Thanks for bringing this up again, Greg. It's a big issue.

Submitted for consideration...

cage07.jpg


cage08.jpg


K

EDIT - Those bars project outward a couple of inches...
 
Sandro has excellent photos that basically shows typical configurations of both the nascar and the x style.

i have the nascar type on both sides and i think they go deeper into the door than Sandro is showing but that may just be perspective. mine go right up to the reinforcing bar in the door and you have to give a good slam to latch the door. i do not have as many cross braces as Sandro is showing. that looks quite well done.

with regards to the more bends, i think you need to look at how the hit takes place and what happens. i am not a structural engineer either but i know if if i put a 2x10 on its side, and i walk over it, it will bend a lot. if i put it on edge and walk on it, there is no deflection noticed.

when we bend a bar into the door, there is a lot of compressive forces that come into play when it is hit, for the x-bar, there is lot more tension forces taking place. i think the bent bars spread the force into the rest of the cage/hoop as well.

and for the extreme example, how much force would it take to "ben" a 1.5" bar that is 36" long when laying on its side vs. to compress it from its end?

now i will freely admit that i have no idea which is better at dissipating the force of impact to lessen the g's felt by the driver. Sandro's cage may be the best of both worlds. give up energy in all the space you can on the passenger side cause you can give up the space and lessen the g's felt by the driver. and where space is a major premium, you need the prevent intrusion on the driver side and know that you will feel more g's in the impact.

greg, thanks for a detailed description of what happened and let us know he was alright.
 
We did a nascar style on both side though much less than Sando. The upper bar lines up perfectly with the stock anti intrusion bar.
 

Attachments

  • 22.JPG
    22.JPG
    45.4 KB · Views: 115
my bar goes all the way into the door and touches the door beam in a spot or two, have to slam the door to get it closed. Whole goal was to get the bars as far away from me as possible, allowing for the most crumple room.

displayimage.php


I had considered doing the same on the passenger side, but thought I would have enough crumple room. Now I wish I at least had a little protrusion into the door, only for the sake of being able to remove the glass, for the reason Greg mentioned above.
 
As an EX-circle tracker, I've had my share of T-bones & got hurt several times. And those were less than 60mph. Turn 1 at Sebring is a blind, 100mph turn. We built as strong door bars as we could. You can't see from the pics, but there are as many triangles in the bars as could get. All three horizonals are bent different. And the center bar will HOPEFULLY deflect front bumpers down. As with any cage, you can find a weak point with mine. If you see something that we overlooked, please let me know. When people talk about the cage adding weight, consider this..... my car is just 50lbs over the minimuim WITH 3/4 tank of gas (stock) & the spare tire still in the trunk. I'm glad that Richie is OK. But I'm supprised that no-one has gotten hurt because of building to the rules. If you can just open your door & STEP into your seat, IMO you don't have enough protection. I'm more worried about WALKING away from a crash than walking away with a placque. Sorry about the soapbox, but we just had this talk at our district meeting recently.
 

Attachments

  • 100_2563.jpg
    100_2563.jpg
    94.3 KB · Views: 234
  • 100_2564.jpg
    100_2564.jpg
    93 KB · Views: 148
  • 100_2565.jpg
    100_2565.jpg
    93.6 KB · Views: 145
  • 100_2566.jpg
    100_2566.jpg
    89.6 KB · Views: 141
Well I am glad Richie is OK. I am the one who built the cage in Richies car. I wish Rich had let poeple photo the damage as that is the only way we all learn. I think the Taco shell idea would solve that failure mechanism. I also think that foam filling the door would be the lightest and safest fix. The foam would absorb the energy and distribute the load over a larger area. I think this is common in Rally cars in Europe. All my Rally car customers have the Taco shell setup as they are required to have an X brace on both sides. Ultimately, Nascar bars on both sides would be best. Most of you guys just do not want the extra weight and cost. The other thing to remember is that you want the car to absorb energy in the impact, not you. Nascar got to the point that the cars were built so well that the car survived most any crash. Unfortunately the drivers were not. Its a balancing act between rigidity and crash worthyness. In one of Dick Shines early cages I built, the driver hit the wall in the oval at NHIS and rolled down into oncoming traffic. He was rearended so hard the drivers floor tore under the seat. We had built the rear to be so rigid it transfered to much energy into the drivers area. From the rear shock towers to the back of the main hoop was fine. Not a great design in that application. As always I am happy to build what the customer wants. Unless its a real disaster. Lets all try and learn from this. I wish crash testing was not so expensive.
Chris Howard
HowardMotorsports
 
Chris, glad you posted here. I am pleased to hear that you built Rich's cage. You built my cage and I am very confident in it. The design, from what I saw, in Rich's car is the same as mine. I now see that your work will allow a driver to walk away under such severe conditions. Kudos. I'll be ringing you this winter for some 'extra' bars.
 
Chris built our cages in the Audi's as well.... Very well built IMO.

We have the standard "X" bars like sandro does in both drivers side and passenger side. Many other people I know have the same thing... I think that it is obvious we need to make an upgrade or two. One thing we have wanted to do forever as put in a petty bar. Now I am also thinking that we should weld in a few "Taco's" (is that the real name for the sheet of metal reinforcing the area where the X is formed?). Do you think this would do the trick, or do people really think that it is necessary to take out what is already in the cars and put in NASCAR bars?

Raymond
 
RSTPerformance;274129is that the real name for the sheet of metal reinforcing the area where the X is formed? Raymond[/quote said:
thats just what I call them because when done like the picture below they look like a taco

b27.jpg
 
I think something here is being overlooked. We are looking at the car's damage and thinking it's bad to see a car THAT damaged, even though the driver escaped without injury. We should be looking at the car as a sacrificial anode in that the structure successfully absorbed the force of impact which allowed the driver to survive.

The X-brace and stock sheet metal deformed (I don't like using failed here as it really did it's job) during the impact. During impact the structural pieces deformation absorbed a significant amount of energy. That energy absorbed was not transferred to the driver.

Now if said driver had NASCAR bars on the passenger side the structure, in theory, would have deformed much less (that is the arguement here, right?). That means the load would be transferred elsewhere and ultimately to the driver. Not a good scenario either.

I want a structure that protects me from intrusion, but not at the expense of my bodies G-loading. The FIA has performed a lot of impact studies and requires impact test on as raced monocoques and shells as part of vehicle homologation. I should look into getting more information on this.

I'm actually a fan of impact absorbing structures and foam as used on FIA cars, Rolex Daytona Prototypes, and NASCAR COT. It is unfortunate that this safety technology has not trickled down to the club level yet, at least not here in the USA.

Unfortunately I don't know anyone besides Crawford Composites or DOW making such structures and foam, respectively.

Also, I spoke with the RaceTech folks last year at the PRI show about their seats with the integrated seat back bracing mounts (I think this is the Viper seat). They tested the seat to @ 45 G load where the FIA only requires something in the 20 G range. Customers have sustained upwards of 85 G impacts without significant driver injury. Something to think about.
 
Yes, gusset is the correct term, but there are a WIDE variety of gussets out there. That style is commonly referred to as a Taco Gusset because of the shape/form.

Kudos to Chris for building a great cage that kept the driver safe. The chassis' are expendable. Glad the driver came through it OK

I'll reiterate (sp?) what Chris said... it is sometimes close to pulling teeth to get guys to upgrade from the minimum. PLEASE stop trying to save money on the cage end. I've had guys request that I NOT put any gussets in because they didn't want to spend the money. How about using those HoHo's for 2 weekends instead of new shoes every race ;)

It's a shame there aren't any pics as they would have taught us something.
 
Back
Top