G. Savage/ Engineering Failure Analysis 17(2010)92-115 ren. Unlike the former, the Lotus chassis followed the previous"cut and fold "methodology simply replacing the pre-bonded luminium skins with a hybrid composite of carbon and Kevlar reinforced epoxy. As such they can be considered to have followed a technological cul-de-sac"and the mclaren chassis must be recognised as the forerunner of those used today In 1980 the reputation of composites with respect to impact loading was very poor as a result of problems experienced in aero-engine components in the early 1970s and some dramatic in-service failures of early race car components. Indeed lany designers of repute expressed grave doubts as to the suitability of such brittle materials in what is a highly stressed application. Despite the reservations of many of their competitors, the McLaren MP4/1, the first carbon fibre monocoque rac- ing car(Fig. 16) proved so successful that it was soon copied, in one form or another, by every other team. The 1981 season became something of a"war of attrition"for McLaren with a number of cars being accidentally crashed everal times during both testing and racing. It became clear that in addition to improved mechanical properties and lower weight of the composite chassis, the damage caused by accidents was constrained in the locality of the impact. Repairs could be executed quickly and effectively with little or no loss in performance. the ability to sustain and undergo repair to minor damage is all very well, but what concerned the designers most was the ability to withstand a major collision. At the 1981 Italian Grand Prix, John Watson lost control of his McLaren and smashed violently into the barriers. He was able to walk away from the debris unscathed(Fig. 17). This incident went a long way to removing the doubts in the minds of those uncon- vinced of the safety of carbon fibre composites under high strain rate loading. The energy absorbing properties of composites have subsequently made a great contribution to the safety record of the sport. The next major advance in chassis construction occurred in 1983 at one of the smaller teams. The German AtS team developed a tub fabricated inside female composite tooling. The two halves of the structure were made from woven fabric reinforced prepreg and joined at the centre line( Fig. 18). Female moulding makes far more efficient use of the available aero- dynamic envelope since only a minimum of secondary bodywork is needed to cover it. It also provides an opportunity to Fig. 16. The first carbon monocoque Mclaren MP4/1(1980) Marlboro Fig. 17. MP4/1 chassis following large impact.ren. Unlike the former, the Lotus chassis followed the previous ‘‘cut and fold” methodology simply replacing the pre-bonded aluminium skins with a hybrid composite of carbon and Kevlar reinforced epoxy. As such they can be considered to have followed a ‘‘technological cul-de-sac” and the McLaren chassis must be recognised as the forerunner of those used today. In 1980 the reputation of composites with respect to impact loading was very poor as a result of problems experienced in aero-engine components in the early 1970s and some dramatic in-service failures of early race car components. Indeed many designers of repute expressed grave doubts as to the suitability of such brittle materials in what is a highly stressed application. Despite the reservations of many of their competitors, the McLaren MP4/1, the first carbon fibre monocoque rac￾ing car (Fig. 16) proved so successful that it was soon copied, in one form or another, by every other team. The 1981 season became something of a ‘‘war of attrition” for McLaren with a number of cars being accidentally crashed several times during both testing and racing. It became clear that in addition to improved mechanical properties and lower weight of the composite chassis, the damage caused by accidents was constrained in the locality of the impact. Repairs could be executed quickly and effectively with little or no loss in performance. The ability to sustain and undergo repair to minor damage is all very well, but what concerned the designers most was the ability to withstand a major collision. At the 1981 Italian Grand Prix, John Watson lost control of his McLaren and smashed violently into the barriers. He was able to walk away from the debris unscathed (Fig. 17). This incident went a long way to removing the doubts in the minds of those uncon￾vinced of the safety of carbon fibre composites under high strain rate loading. The energy absorbing properties of composites have subsequently made a great contribution to the safety record of the sport. The next major advance in chassis construction occurred in 1983 at one of the smaller teams. The German ATS team developed a tub fabricated inside female composite tooling. The two halves of the structure were made from woven fabric reinforced prepreg and joined at the centre line (Fig. 18). Female moulding makes far more efficient use of the available aero￾dynamic envelope since only a minimum of secondary bodywork is needed to cover it. It also provides an opportunity to Fig. 17. MP4/1 chassis following large impact. Fig. 16. The first carbon monocoque McLaren MP4/1 (1980). 100 G. Savage / Engineering Failure Analysis 17 (2010) 92–115