Energy absorbing barriers on hold

DAYTONA BEACH, Fla. -- The SAFER (Steel And Foam Energy Reduction) barrier system that debuted at last month's Indianapolis 500 at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway will be modified but will remain in place for August's Brickyard 400 NASCAR Winston Cup race.

But the system's designer said Tuesday that widespread use of the barriers -- which consist of steel tubing and foam pads placed in front of concrete walls -- at other Winston Cup venues should not be expected for more than a year.

Dr. Dean L. Sicking of the University of Nebraska said following some three weeks of use for Indy Racing League practice and qualifying and the 500-mile Memorial Day Indy car race his belief that the SAFER barrier system was the best "soft wall" technology possible was confirmed -- but that it would need additional testing and development before it could be used across the board at other race tracks.

However, it would see its first use by Winston Cup cars at the Aug. 4 Brickyard 400 at IMS, NASCAR senior vice president George Pyne confirmed.

"The barrier was designed to be modified between open wheel racing and stock car racing by inserting one additional energy absorber (foam pad) in the system every 10 feet," Sicking said. "That is the only change from open wheel to stock car racing (and) we are looking at and researching the possibility of eliminating the need for that changeover."

Even though the stock car record qualifying speed at Indy is 181.072 mph by Brett Bodine, the size and weight of the cars create different impact angles that must be addressed by additional padding, which extends the barrier off the wall to a depth of as much as 26 inches from the previous, bare concrete surface.

Sicking said the biggest problem with adapting the SAFER system to other race tracks was that it was designed for the wide radius of turns at IMS. By fitting the barriers, which consist of four 20-foot straight steel tubes welded together atop each other, connected with sliding insert joints and bolted to the wall in front of foam pads, to shorter radius corners they would have to be curved.

"The design we currently have cannot be adapted to tracks with corners with radiuses of less than 800 feet," Sicking said. "Radiusing (curving) the tubes would have a stiffening effect on them (and) any time you're stiffening up the system we have some significant concerns.

"We have a question if the joint design that we have would still function in a curved application and the energy management (foam) system for the barrier needs to be different for the two types of cars.

"We are trying to solve all the problems at once, but it is going to take a fair amount of testing and a significant amount of modeling. Once we get that solved we are hopeful that the process can be completed in fairly short order.

"In terms of a time period, we are close to mid-summer right now. I don't believe it will be possible to solve those concerns this season (but) we would be really hopeful of that a year from now.

"From a research standpoint we are trying to attack all of the problems at once. We think the appropriate way to get a barrier that is optimized for all tracks and all vehicles is most prudent to go after all the safety issues at the same time -- the short radius, both vehicles as well as the operational difficulties we identified at IMS -- so basically we're focusing on the whole issue on the research side."

From the beginning of its installation at IMS earlier in the spring, Sicking had maintained that the barrier system would have to virtually be custom-fit to each specific race track that wanted to use it. After analyzing the data collected in a handful of 200-plus mph crashes by the roughly 1,500-lb. Indy cars he concluded that several things would have to be determined before the system could see broader use by 3,400-lb. stock cars which go up to about 3,600-lbs. when the driver is added.

Sicking did confirm, after analyzing accidents at Indianapolis both prior to and after the installation of the barriers that the SAFER barrier resulted in a dramatic reduction in the g forces exerted in the crashes.

Drivers Eliseo Salazar and Robby McGehee crashed at Turn 3, backwards in virtually the same spot, at the same angle and nearly the same speed, Sicking said.

"Salazar suffered season ending injuries and had to undergo surgery for a torn aorta after experiencing a peak force of 115 g's," Sicking said. "McGehee's peak g was about 75 and he was back attempting to qualify for the race a little more than a week later."

So far this season -- the first in which crash data recorders are mandated in NASCAR's three national touring series: Winston Cup, Busch and Craftsman Truck the range of crash impacts has been from 25-70 g's, NASCAR vice president for corporate communications Jim Hunter said.

He said accidents suffered by Johnny Benson in the Busch Series at the Richmond International Raceway short track, Dale Earnhardt Jr. in the Winston Cup race at the 1.5-mile Texas Motor Speedway and Ricky Hendrick at the 1.5-mile Las Vegas Motor Speedway had registered among the highest g loads.

Earnhardt Jr. was not injured but Benson missed four Winston Cup events and Hendrick missed six Busch Series races after they suffered rib and shoulder injuries, respectively.