Evolution Dynamics Pikes Peak Build
I've rolled over in a car with a HANS device in a much more minor type version of this crash (a 15' drop into a ditch with a single roll at about 45mph) and I felt like the head restraint seats did more than the HANS. I don't think HANS devices had to do all that much in this particular crash though...the primary function of them is to protect in severe frontal impact crashes where the car stops suddenly. That said, all the components of the 'safety net' work best in conjunction with the other bits.
Dave
Head & Neck devices have been mandated since 2009 at PPIHC as a result of the Nate & Brandye crash in 2008. They were wearing them and it saved their lives - 80 mph to a dead stop just about instantly when they center punched a huge tree just a few turns off the start line.
I've rolled over in a car with a HANS device in a much more minor type version of this crash (a 15' drop into a ditch with a single roll at about 45mph) and I felt like the head restraint seats did more than the HANS. I don't think HANS devices had to do all that much in this particular crash though...the primary function of them is to protect in severe frontal impact crashes where the car stops suddenly. That said, all the components of the 'safety net' work best in conjunction with the other bits.
Dave
I've rolled over in a car with a HANS device in a much more minor type version of this crash (a 15' drop into a ditch with a single roll at about 45mph) and I felt like the head restraint seats did more than the HANS. I don't think HANS devices had to do all that much in this particular crash though...the primary function of them is to protect in severe frontal impact crashes where the car stops suddenly. That said, all the components of the 'safety net' work best in conjunction with the other bits.
Dave
Newbie
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, TX
A friend of mine received a call today. The caller accused me of spreading lies. The two lies I've been accused of spreading are that the cage failed and that Yuri's upper torso and head were outside the cage during the flip.
Well, the "cage failed" is a matter of opinion because some people will say that the safety equipment on any crash you are still breathing after was successful. I consider safety equipment a system. The entire system can be successful even if one component fails. In the case of Foley's car, I feel the cage failed, the belts failed (because the seat moved), the seat and mount failed and Yuri's helmet saved the day. Only because he was lucky.
The second statement is a fact. I've attached eight screen grabs from the heavily watched video and three cropped photos from the "My Life at Speed" Facebook album. They show both driver's and passenger's arms outside the cage during two different flips in the last three photos and the first eight show Yuri's helmeted head, shoulder and arm outside the cage.
I've also been accused of photo manipulation. Don't believe me? Capture the frames yourself from the video.
My purpose on posting these is not to defame Evolution Dynamics. It's to get competitors to reconsider building cars to the minimum spec. And not just a Pikes Peak, but for time trials, road racing, and other hillclimbs. Please look at any car you get in with a critical eye. Learn what a GOOD cage is and what makes it good.
Well, the "cage failed" is a matter of opinion because some people will say that the safety equipment on any crash you are still breathing after was successful. I consider safety equipment a system. The entire system can be successful even if one component fails. In the case of Foley's car, I feel the cage failed, the belts failed (because the seat moved), the seat and mount failed and Yuri's helmet saved the day. Only because he was lucky.
The second statement is a fact. I've attached eight screen grabs from the heavily watched video and three cropped photos from the "My Life at Speed" Facebook album. They show both driver's and passenger's arms outside the cage during two different flips in the last three photos and the first eight show Yuri's helmeted head, shoulder and arm outside the cage.
I've also been accused of photo manipulation. Don't believe me? Capture the frames yourself from the video.
My purpose on posting these is not to defame Evolution Dynamics. It's to get competitors to reconsider building cars to the minimum spec. And not just a Pikes Peak, but for time trials, road racing, and other hillclimbs. Please look at any car you get in with a critical eye. Learn what a GOOD cage is and what makes it good.
Evolved Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,171
Likes: 1
From: Falls Church, VA
some good points made, but I'm not sure it's reasonable to expect a cage to contain occupant's arms. seeing someone's head outside the cage really hammers home the significance of the luck element.
Newbie
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
From: Earth
Guard rail may not have helped. JML and Miikka Anttila back in 09 went over the armco and had a similar incident.
The cage failed. plain and simple. If you look at the FIA cage used in the JML Portugal incident HERE you can see that the cars cage did not expose the crew to the extent this incident did. As well you will notice that the body panels stayed on the car. This prevented the occupants limbs from being outside the car and the carnage from getting into the car. The WRC cars are stronger, lighter and faster than the Evo in this thread. Weight savings and minimum rules should never be put at a higher priority than the occupants safety. As I said to Jari a couple days ago, I am happy to see they are ok and wish them the best of luck with recovery. I do have issues with the opinion of the builder. My opinions are in line with the "criticism" voiced by others on this form (and others) and will not repeat them (beading a dead horse).
I would like to add that the images and discussion about the incident are beneficial to the sport IF we can look at it with the viewpoint of LEARNING about what can be done to improve safety in the future.
Owner/Builder:
Good workmanship (welding, materials)
Poor design for a dual occupant
Poor seat mounting
Poor panel retention
Good Driver seat, poor Navi seat.
The cage failed. plain and simple. If you look at the FIA cage used in the JML Portugal incident HERE you can see that the cars cage did not expose the crew to the extent this incident did. As well you will notice that the body panels stayed on the car. This prevented the occupants limbs from being outside the car and the carnage from getting into the car. The WRC cars are stronger, lighter and faster than the Evo in this thread. Weight savings and minimum rules should never be put at a higher priority than the occupants safety. As I said to Jari a couple days ago, I am happy to see they are ok and wish them the best of luck with recovery. I do have issues with the opinion of the builder. My opinions are in line with the "criticism" voiced by others on this form (and others) and will not repeat them (beading a dead horse).
I would like to add that the images and discussion about the incident are beneficial to the sport IF we can look at it with the viewpoint of LEARNING about what can be done to improve safety in the future.
Owner/Builder:
Good workmanship (welding, materials)
Poor design for a dual occupant
Poor seat mounting
Poor panel retention
Good Driver seat, poor Navi seat.
We are glade to see that both co-driver and driver are okay and made it though this horrific crash with not serious injuries.
After hearing about this crash and seeing the videos/pictures online I have thought about doing an up date on my personal cars roll cage for a little added safety and peace of mind as it is very minimal right now. Safety is not something one should skimp on or cut corners with
Thanks,
Dallin
After hearing about this crash and seeing the videos/pictures online I have thought about doing an up date on my personal cars roll cage for a little added safety and peace of mind as it is very minimal right now. Safety is not something one should skimp on or cut corners with
Thanks,
Dallin
Last edited by RallySport Direct; Aug 17, 2012 at 08:15 PM.
the picture embargo was because lots of media people are interested in them and pikes peak people have rights to them as well (so those photographers who took pictures trying to sell them to me, you can't 
)
since 100's of people were taking pictures of the wreckage, i'm going to share what i have of the wreckage with a professional analysis of what exactly happened.
we didn't build it to "rally spec" because its not a rally car. if pikes peak thought it was a "rally" i'm sure they would use "rally rules". our cage was built to NASA specs, which was 95% of what pikes peak required. pikes peak had us add some additional gusseting in the halo above the occupants to 100% in compliance with their requirements.
from the start, the car rolled in the air to land directly on the passenger side roof line. this was the most severe impact as the car had a lot of momentum flying off the mountain. coincidentally, this is EXACTLY where your rally cages have additional structure that we argued about a few months ago. its clear from the pictures that even with the car falling 100ft down, and landing directly on that point, that a NASA cage is pretty f'ing strong.
here you can see the passenger side forward bar buckled under the load, but with the added gusseting to the A pillar, and the additional tube bracing it with the strut tower, the forward bar didn't "collapse" and crush the passenger.
the worst damage done to the car was the OEM b pillar buckling inward and hitting the seat.
it actually hit it so hard it ripped the seat out of the floor along the front edge.
this is where Yuris shoulder injury occured. thankfully it was only a dislocation and nothing more. i know hes in a lot of pain, but it could have been MUCH worse.
also, Yuris helmet went back and hit the roll hoop brace and cracked his helmet when the seat ripped out the floor (it was anchored by 1/8" steel plate welded to the OEM floor pan and also had large fender washers backing it from the underside). this is why he was care flighted out of the area as the first responders have certain procedures for injurys they see. in that case they took the safest route which we thank them for even though the hospital visit cleared him of head injuries.
you can see that in addition to the OEM b pillar collapsing inward, the NASCAR bars helped keep it from intruding into the passenger any farther. i believe they saved him from much more injury. also the seat ripping up and "giving" to the b-pillar also might have saved him from further injury.
last from that picture you can see the main roll hoop buckled outward. since i had so much triangulation at that node, it didn't completely collapse. i had the required brace back to the strut, and an additional optional brace going diagonally to the driver side rear strut.
here you can see that the "shape" of the roll hoop stayed largely intact and was still very stable due to the triangulation within it.
the driver side floor impacted pretty hard and was pushed upward under jeremys feet. thankfully it didn't puncture it, and you can see the NASCAR bars on his side sustained some impacts as well.
the top of the roll hoop took a lot of impacts from the rolling
the front of the car was relatively unscathed as well. the engine, transmission and tranfercase all appear to be ok from first looks.
the oil pan had a dent on the front edge, and didn't start leaking oil until they dragged it all the way up and the tow truck picked it up from it, when it finally punctured.
the entire body of the car came off the car:
roof, rear lexan, front windshield glass, all the doors, front fenders, hood, front and rear bumper, and even the trunk.
the fuel cell was completely untouched thankfully.
when the passenger side rear door came off, it pulled the fire extingisher cord, releasing the extinguishant on the occupants feet and engine bay.
the car required 350ft of cable to pull it out which means it traveled around 120-150 yards.
hopefully that shows some insight into how a NASA cage handles 14 rollovers, a 100ft flight down a 45 degree slope into a rock field. honestly i never wanted to test the strength of my cage, but i followed the rules and it save jeremy and yuris life. so i don't want to hear about how rally cages are built better.
)since 100's of people were taking pictures of the wreckage, i'm going to share what i have of the wreckage with a professional analysis of what exactly happened.
we didn't build it to "rally spec" because its not a rally car. if pikes peak thought it was a "rally" i'm sure they would use "rally rules". our cage was built to NASA specs, which was 95% of what pikes peak required. pikes peak had us add some additional gusseting in the halo above the occupants to 100% in compliance with their requirements.
from the start, the car rolled in the air to land directly on the passenger side roof line. this was the most severe impact as the car had a lot of momentum flying off the mountain. coincidentally, this is EXACTLY where your rally cages have additional structure that we argued about a few months ago. its clear from the pictures that even with the car falling 100ft down, and landing directly on that point, that a NASA cage is pretty f'ing strong.
here you can see the passenger side forward bar buckled under the load, but with the added gusseting to the A pillar, and the additional tube bracing it with the strut tower, the forward bar didn't "collapse" and crush the passenger.
the worst damage done to the car was the OEM b pillar buckling inward and hitting the seat.
it actually hit it so hard it ripped the seat out of the floor along the front edge.
this is where Yuris shoulder injury occured. thankfully it was only a dislocation and nothing more. i know hes in a lot of pain, but it could have been MUCH worse.
also, Yuris helmet went back and hit the roll hoop brace and cracked his helmet when the seat ripped out the floor (it was anchored by 1/8" steel plate welded to the OEM floor pan and also had large fender washers backing it from the underside). this is why he was care flighted out of the area as the first responders have certain procedures for injurys they see. in that case they took the safest route which we thank them for even though the hospital visit cleared him of head injuries.
you can see that in addition to the OEM b pillar collapsing inward, the NASCAR bars helped keep it from intruding into the passenger any farther. i believe they saved him from much more injury. also the seat ripping up and "giving" to the b-pillar also might have saved him from further injury.
last from that picture you can see the main roll hoop buckled outward. since i had so much triangulation at that node, it didn't completely collapse. i had the required brace back to the strut, and an additional optional brace going diagonally to the driver side rear strut.
here you can see that the "shape" of the roll hoop stayed largely intact and was still very stable due to the triangulation within it.
the driver side floor impacted pretty hard and was pushed upward under jeremys feet. thankfully it didn't puncture it, and you can see the NASCAR bars on his side sustained some impacts as well.
the top of the roll hoop took a lot of impacts from the rolling
the front of the car was relatively unscathed as well. the engine, transmission and tranfercase all appear to be ok from first looks.
the oil pan had a dent on the front edge, and didn't start leaking oil until they dragged it all the way up and the tow truck picked it up from it, when it finally punctured.
the entire body of the car came off the car:
roof, rear lexan, front windshield glass, all the doors, front fenders, hood, front and rear bumper, and even the trunk.
the fuel cell was completely untouched thankfully.
when the passenger side rear door came off, it pulled the fire extingisher cord, releasing the extinguishant on the occupants feet and engine bay.
the car required 350ft of cable to pull it out which means it traveled around 120-150 yards.
hopefully that shows some insight into how a NASA cage handles 14 rollovers, a 100ft flight down a 45 degree slope into a rock field. honestly i never wanted to test the strength of my cage, but i followed the rules and it save jeremy and yuris life. so i don't want to hear about how rally cages are built better.
you guys got lucky. You built your car well, but I don't think your cage was as good as it could have been.
Here is an off done by one of the ford WRC drivers who as you can see in the video had a similar accident to yours.
what is notable is the post accident pictures. Notice how the WRC cage prevented any major intrusion into the cockpit area, unlike your design.
I hope next time you build a stronger cage. Better yet, I hope that decision is taken out of your hands and mandated in rules changes for all competitors at future Pikes peaks events.
Newbie
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
From: US, Colorado
the picture embargo was because lots of media people are interested in them and pikes peak people have rights to them as well (so those photographers who took pictures trying to sell them to me, you can't )
since 100's of people were taking pictures of the wreckage, i'm going to share what i have of the wreckage with a professional analysis of what exactly happened.
here you can see the passenger side forward bar buckled under the load, but with the added gusseting to the A pillar, and the additional tube bracing it with the strut tower, the forward bar didn't "collapse" and crush the passenger.
the worst damage done to the car was the OEM b pillar buckling inward and hitting the seat.
it actually hit it so hard it ripped the seat out of the floor along the front edge.
this is where Yuris shoulder injury occured. thankfully it was only a dislocation and nothing more. i know hes in a lot of pain, but it could have been MUCH worse.
)since 100's of people were taking pictures of the wreckage, i'm going to share what i have of the wreckage with a professional analysis of what exactly happened.
here you can see the passenger side forward bar buckled under the load, but with the added gusseting to the A pillar, and the additional tube bracing it with the strut tower, the forward bar didn't "collapse" and crush the passenger.
the worst damage done to the car was the OEM b pillar buckling inward and hitting the seat.
it actually hit it so hard it ripped the seat out of the floor along the front edge.
this is where Yuris shoulder injury occured. thankfully it was only a dislocation and nothing more. i know hes in a lot of pain, but it could have been MUCH worse.
Clearly you can see his arm, holding that paper, is under the vehicle.
The 2nd crack is from the rock his helmet bounced off of on the OUTSIDE of the cage also.
That missing bar is what caused your passenger containment failure. Clearly you can see it pushed his upper body forward enough to exit the vehicle.
you can see that in addition to the OEM b pillar collapsing inward, the NASCAR bars helped keep it from intruding into the passenger any farther. i believe they saved him from much more injury. also the seat ripping up and "giving" to the b-pillar also might have saved him from further injury.
His seat tearing up is what caused his head to dangle outside the cage. God saved him when you look at the still frames.
last from that picture you can see the main roll hoop buckled outward. since i had so much triangulation at that node, it didn't completely collapse. i had the required brace back to the strut, and an additional optional brace going diagonally to the driver side rear strut.
here you can see that the "shape" of the roll hoop stayed largely intact and was still very stable due to the triangulation within it.
hopefully that shows some insight into how a NASA cage handles 14 rollovers, a 100ft flight down a 45 degree slope into a rock field.
Last edited by J. Fast; Aug 18, 2012 at 12:51 AM.
.....
so are you guys saying if a few extra bars were placed, the driver and passenger would have walked away with out any injuries/bruises??
DID YALL WATCH THE VIDEO??
the cage was OBVIOUSLY good enough. driver and passenger are fine.
i dont know why every one is trying to criticize kevin and his cage. i agree, there could have been a few more points taken care of for more safety, but come on....DRIVER AND PASSENGER ARE FINE! that was a serious wreck...way more serious then other "comparison" videos posted in this thread.
so are you guys saying if a few extra bars were placed, the driver and passenger would have walked away with out any injuries/bruises??
DID YALL WATCH THE VIDEO??
the cage was OBVIOUSLY good enough. driver and passenger are fine.
i dont know why every one is trying to criticize kevin and his cage. i agree, there could have been a few more points taken care of for more safety, but come on....DRIVER AND PASSENGER ARE FINE! that was a serious wreck...way more serious then other "comparison" videos posted in this thread.
Last edited by 05VIII; Aug 18, 2012 at 01:12 AM.
Newbie
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
From: US, Colorado
.....
so are you guys saying if a few extra bars were placed, the driver and passenger would have walked away with out any injuries/bruises??
DID YALL WATCH THE VIDEO??
the cage was OBVIOUSLY good enough. driver and passenger are fine.
i dont know why every one is trying to criticize kevin and his cage. i agree, there could have been a few more points taken care of for more safety, but come on....DRIVER AND PASSENGER ARE FINE! that was a serious wreck...way more serious then other "comparison" videos posted in this thread.
so are you guys saying if a few extra bars were placed, the driver and passenger would have walked away with out any injuries/bruises??
DID YALL WATCH THE VIDEO??
the cage was OBVIOUSLY good enough. driver and passenger are fine.
i dont know why every one is trying to criticize kevin and his cage. i agree, there could have been a few more points taken care of for more safety, but come on....DRIVER AND PASSENGER ARE FINE! that was a serious wreck...way more serious then other "comparison" videos posted in this thread.
All of the critical physical injuries and serious head contact sustained was from the occupents exiting the cage envelope. Is that the intention? Is that good enough? So what can be learned from this and what can be improved up? You get that from criticism. The most humble of race professionals willl take this evidence, study and consider, and collaborate on what can be improved upon to aid in the advancement of the sport and future safety.
Newbie
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
From: US, Colorado
Yes, I have. Again, this resonates very loud to me because I own, and am the builder of a racecar who's primary intended use is for the peak. I did not buy it, I built it. I built my cage to the PPIH rulebook (NASA spec) and followed the Time Attack minimum cage requirement. Clearly, that's inadequate as demonstrated by the information provided in this thread. I've made my own observations and in seeing with my own eyes I realize I made some compromises that aren't worth the risk. Consequently, I'm going to cut out my racecars door bars, tear off the roof, swap the seats and... re-evaluate the entire project to make my vehicle stronger and improve safety.
FYI, my opinions on the crash do not come from scrutinizing race cages. However, I've been involved with building prolly 15-20. I alway look at cages and make my own silent assesments and keep a short list of places... I know I don't want to sit. My opinions come from my actual day to day 9 to 5. For the past 3 years I've been employed as a Chief Structural Defect and Reconstruction Engineering Consultant. I asses structural failures in bridges and buildings, identify the cause of said failures, develop an improvement strategy, provide a fix, and supervise and inspect the repairs. I'm very familiar with metal and dynamic deformation processes and can say with absolution I know the compromised points of this structure. I suppose if you really wanted to look at it closely for the sake of engineering argument you could have KevinD draw a free body and energy transfer diagram with compression and tension arrows based on each impact zone depicted in the still frames. We could follow the arrows throughout the cage to see where the cage is out of balance and energy transfer is dead heading, and why his initial assesment might change given the still imagry.
FYI, my opinions on the crash do not come from scrutinizing race cages. However, I've been involved with building prolly 15-20. I alway look at cages and make my own silent assesments and keep a short list of places... I know I don't want to sit. My opinions come from my actual day to day 9 to 5. For the past 3 years I've been employed as a Chief Structural Defect and Reconstruction Engineering Consultant. I asses structural failures in bridges and buildings, identify the cause of said failures, develop an improvement strategy, provide a fix, and supervise and inspect the repairs. I'm very familiar with metal and dynamic deformation processes and can say with absolution I know the compromised points of this structure. I suppose if you really wanted to look at it closely for the sake of engineering argument you could have KevinD draw a free body and energy transfer diagram with compression and tension arrows based on each impact zone depicted in the still frames. We could follow the arrows throughout the cage to see where the cage is out of balance and energy transfer is dead heading, and why his initial assesment might change given the still imagry.