[vinit.merchant]

Actually the surveyor's observations are not very accurate either. As a layman, we figured out these a few posts ago.

One of the observations by Mr. Shetty.

It is supported by a bent forward backrest of Co-Passenger's Seat (front Left) due to impact received from a unbelted passenger on rear left seat.

In the following initial batches of photos, the passenger seat is in the correct place and not bent forward as mentioned above.

Initial pictures
http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/attach...1101wa0027.jpg
http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/attach...1101wa0026.jpg


Whereas the picture from the service centre as uploaded on FB, and the basis of his observation
http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/attach...61429057_o.jpg


Again his observations would be based on what is shown to him. In this case, the condition in which the car is shown to him.
It may not necessarily be the condition in which the car was brought in.

[Doge]

I think we should wait for Ford to announce what has actually caused this mishap. While the third party surveyors words sound quite casual and sarcastic, even unprofessional to some, there's no denying that the pictures posted by the third party due suggest that the car did hit a culvert or something.
I'm not blaming the OP yet but I felt right from the beginning that there weren't enough pictures and maybe something is being concealed.
In op'ies defense, if the cause of the accident seems to be so obvious, why is Ford taking so much time? If I was ford,I'd be in a hurry to announce that the test indicated that the axle broke due to driver's negligence.

[Vid6639]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

From what I have read so far it is not clear at all what his assignment was, this particular car or another. The way he phrased it has at least the grammatical suggestion he was assigned to survey this particular car.

He has clearly mentioned in his post in the very first line that he went to survey a Ford Figo car for total loss which is when he saw the Ecosport parked there.

I think you missed this point.

Trust me, its not far fetched. Check some of my other post where I talk about my very good friend and spanner mate Peter back in the Netherlands. He is a full time (classic) car valuer, expert and surveyor. His reputation about integrity and expertise is what makes him valuable and gets him his business and customers. He never posts on social media on what he sees and experiences.

Jeroen, this is offtopic and not the matter of discussion whether it is professional or not.

Your point is definitely valid but giving an example of Netherlands where the laws might be more stringent vs that of India is pointless IMO.

Let's not digress and argue whether the actions of the surveyor are ethical or not. That is not the topic here.

[drpullockaran]

I just got back from seeing a professor at an engineering college in the automobile section. It was to do with my Junkinidica which is languishing in a consumer court case for the past 15 years (yes 15 years) and tomorrow it enters the National Consumer Disputes Redresal Forum. On a passing note I mentioned this episode of the Ecosport. He is of the firm opinion after seeing the graze marks on the bumper that it is impossible for the bumper to be from the same car if it had hit the culvert at the beginning of the concrete structure. If the graze on the concrete structure started after the initial lip of concrete then it is doubtful other metal parts of the car would have escaped. As mentioned previously if the wheel had hit the culvert with the rolling tread first, the car would have rotated on its center of mass and damaged the bumper extensively.

Looks like somebody with intimate knowledge about vector of forces and subsequent trajectories need to assess this incident and not some free lancing Tom, Dick or Harry and that includes me. First and foremost a picture of the culvert is in order. Someone help with an image, please.

[PrideRed]

Originally Posted by drpullockaran

I just got back from seeing a professor at an engineering college in the automobile section. It was to do with my Junkinidica which is languishing in a consumer court case for the past 15 years (yes 15 years) and tomorrow it enters the National Consumer Disputes Redresal Forum. On a passing note I mentioned this episode of the Ecosport. He is of the firm opinion after seeing the graze marks on the bumper that it is impossible for the bumper to be from the same car if it had hit the culvert at the beginning of the concrete structure. If the graze on the concrete structure started after the initial lip of concrete then it is doubtful other metal parts of the car would have escaped. As mentioned previously if the wheel had hit the culvert with the rolling tread first, the car would have rotated on its center of mass and damaged the bumper extensively.

Looks like somebody with intimate knowledge about vector of forces and subsequent trajectories need to assess this incident and not some free lancing Tom, Dick or Harry and that includes me. First and foremost a picture of the culvert is in order. Someone help with an image, please.

The people who experienced accident or seen the accident are the only one's who can give the accurate information, provided they are not lying . I don't think somebody with immense knowledge on physics can do anything here.
I would trust a person who has been with car and accident analysis business for ages rather than a person sitting in a room and giving theoretical explanation.
Let us come to reality, None of us here have seen the car and are just speculating. The owner of the car, the dealer, unofficial surveyor and tire manufacturer surveyor are the only people who have seen the car. While the owner of the car believes there has been manufacturing defect, the rest three parties have concluded this as an accident!

Again if it is indeed an manufacturing defect, I don't understand why would dealer push it as accident, they would whole heartedly accept it to cover under warranty as all the costs would be taken up by Ford rather than dealer.

[funkykar]

Wow! Loved the way the thread has been oscillating. Simply a good read.

The very first image of the first post makes me want to believe the owner's version of the story (unless its not a photo shopped image ). How can the car hit a culvert, sustain so much damage, burst tyre get back on road and still travel in straight line? The skid marks indicate that though.

Very good points given by the surveyor, but is it possible that the evidence may have been contaminated? The car was towed and taken to the service center. In this process or while car was resting in service center, anything could have happened.

Did the same surveyor visit the accident spot? If he did, did he or anyone else who visited the spot notice any damage on the culvert being spoken about? With the experience he has, if he had visited, am sure he would have noticed and taken pics. The culvert may still be in damaged state even now actually if anyone happen to take that road.

Whats more baffling is the off duty surveyor has concluded the case too. If he was on duty surveyor, its understandable due to targets or any other pressures.

What was the hurry here to give such a clean chit to manufacturer as well as being so sure that a sleepy driver caused it.

[rajeev k]

It is worthwhile to get to know the happening from the owner who is remaining incommunicado to us. At least Poornima Krishnan, who shared the case, should now come out with more details and the version of the owner or driver.

[MSAneesh]

I've been keenly following this thread and like all other BHPians here, would love to see this reaching a logical and authentic conclusion. A few observations and questions in my mind:

1) This model has 6 air bags, why none deployed? Was it since there was no direct impact on the body which impact sensors could pickup? Where are the side impact sensors placed for curtain airbags?

2)Did the axle break as designed, to create a crumple zone and reduce impact to the occupants?

3) Why did the alloy shear and not break starting the outer wall point of impact? Did it shear due to the dragging motion, think so.

4) The culvert wall on left side looks to be outside the road edge (or is it an illusion)? On the right side, it is clearly inside the road edge

5) The cement piece inside the tyre looks fishy....right after the (proposed) high velocity impact, the tyre side wall bursts, throwing the air out at high velocity...at the same time, a piece of concrete gets in through there?

6) Seat forward point is not valid, as a lot of BHPians here pointed out.

7) The ecosport seems to be quite a stable car, even after such a mishap, it managed to hold its line.

8) A quirky query: If the vehicle wheels are in the air(rotating), and the brake slammed, ABS in action, will the wheel lock or not?

[vsathyap]

I tried to see what happens when a car hits a culvert at speed and the closest video I could find is the one below:

https://youtu.be/mnI-LiKCtuE?t=7m18s

Fast forward the video to around the 7th minute and play it from there (7m18s to be precise). If you look at the end result for the car and compare the end result with that of the EcoSport, they look very similar - although the EcoSport appears in a much better condition mainly due to the speed and forces of the accident involved.

I'm speculating that the driver had turned the wheel towards the left (notice the curve on the road) and in doing so, managed to hit the culvert on the left by mis-judging the space on the left. This explains why the bumper seems to be so lightly damaged while the wheel took the full impact of the culvert.

This impact could have caused a deformation in the tyre and could have compromised its strength, specifically, the sidewalls. As the tyre manufacturer has already mentioned in their report, the tyre has burst (due to the impact) and this resulted in the axle/brakes/wheel rim assembly hitting the ground.

When the driver probably realized whats happening, (you travel 40ft in one second when you are going at 40kmph and its clear from the pictures the car has moved at least 80 feet from the culvert), he tried to steer to regain control of the veering car and this may have caused the alloys get wedged against the road surface and eat into it. Again, at speed, the shearing forces caused the alloy to tear and BITE into the tyre and finally causing the vehicle to grind to a halt.

The rest of the damage with the tie rods and drive shaft connectors, etc. seem to be a consequence of such massive forces acting in a short span of time. As far as the LH trim behind the wheel damage is concerned, it could have happened either a (A) the culvert itself or (B) the rims bending and hitting the LH trim.

Again - all this is a speculation.

[Rehaan]

Originally Posted by MSAneesh

1) This model has 6 air bags, why none deployed? Was it since there was no direct impact on the body which impact sensors could pickup? Where are the side impact sensors placed for curtain airbags?

I'd imagine so. The wheel broke away, therefore absorbing some of the impact, and therefore transferred less to the body-mounted airbag sensors.

Originally Posted by MSAneesh

2)Did the axle break as designed, to create a crumple zone and reduce impact to the occupants?

From what I've seen, the axle hasn't really broken. The CV joint has just popped out from the engine side:


This is what an axle looks like:

source

Originally Posted by MSAneesh

5) The cement piece inside the tyre looks fishy....right after the (proposed) high velocity impact, the tyre side wall bursts, throwing the air out at high velocity...at the same time, a piece of concrete gets in through there?

The physics of it don't sound fishy to me, though i was surprised it was still in there (at the service station).

Fact is, even without this piece of cement, the additional pictures told enough of a story.

Originally Posted by MSAneesh

7) The ecosport seems to be quite a stable car, even after such a mishap, it managed to hold its line.

Newton's first law. An object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.

Originally Posted by MSAneesh

8) A quirky query: If the vehicle wheels are in the air(rotating), and the brake slammed, ABS in action, will the wheel lock or not?

ABS will function similarly, however, the brakes now only have the rotational force of the wheel to overcome (since the road isn't applying any force). This means that even if the ABS is pulsing, the brakes have less resistance against them, and chances are the wheel might stop spinning. I'm talking about a non-driven wheel here.

Originally Posted by vsathyap

I tried to see what happens when a car hits a culvert at speed and the closest video I could find is the one below:

Can't say the video is similar to what happened here. In this case, the wheel clipped the culvert whilst running almost parallel to it. In the video it's hitting it almost square (though by definition that is also an "acute angle" )

The bumper would have grazed the culvert, but the edge of the tyre & wheel would have taken a more square impact. Even a tiny overlap could do this damage:


And once again, look at how much the tyre sticks out further than the front bumper:

[MSAneesh]

Originally Posted by Rehaan

ABS will function similarly, however, the brakes now only have the rotational force of the wheel to overcome (since the road isn't applying any force). This means that even if the ABS is pulsing, the brakes have less resistance against them, and chances are the wheel might stop spinning. I'm talking about a non-driven wheel here.

On second thought, my question was stupid!....As you said, the wheel will just stop(and it has to do so eventually in any braking situation).

What I was trying to ask was, once the wheel stops while in air, and then touches ground with the forward momentum of the vehicle(and brake pedal still pressed), does ABS let it roll instead of skid. I know I am going too hypothetical here.

[Jaggu]

Getting back to the thread after a while and wow! That seems to be a nudge on the culvert and wheel might have taken a bigger impact. But man that damage is catastrophic alright!

Terrible bad luck? I hope.

[sairamboko]

I have a question here. If the results/reports from Ford also indicates that the damages were due to accident and not because of faulty parts, can the owner get insurance coverage? Also will Ford slap a case on the owner for falsifying the facts and damaged the brand ?

[djpeesh]

Originally Posted by sairamboko

I have a question here. If the results/reports from Ford also indicates that the damages were due to accident and not because of faulty parts, can the owner get insurance coverage? Also will Ford slap a case on the owner for falsifying the facts and damaged the brand ?

Yes. Insurance covers accidental damage.

They can but they need to prove malafide intent. It'll be a long drawn out case.

[ecenandu]

Originally Posted by Rehaan

I'd imagine so. The wheel broke away, therefore absorbing some of the impact, and therefore transferred less to the body-mounted airbag sensors.

Good analysis, Rehaan. Good reasoning backed with evidences.

Originally Posted by vinit.merchant

One of the observations by Mr. Shetty.

Good point Vinit, that observation was indeed wrong since we have evidence to prove other wise.

Originally Posted by drpullockaran

Looks like somebody with intimate knowledge about vector of forces and subsequent trajectories need to assess this incident and not some free lancing Tom, Dick or Harry and that includes me. First and foremost a picture of the culvert is in order. Someone help with an image, please.

Of the two plausible causes regarding the accident
1. Due to axle giving away.
2. Due to external impact.

With the evidences available to us, photographs and a reasonable analysis from a surveyor one can conclude which could be the plausible cause for the accident.

For me, the plausible cause would be most likely due to an external impact.

I had an accident few years back when an indica hit my car, the front right wheel took the brunt of the impact and the lower wishbone was bent not as bad this ecosport.

Here is the details of the accident


And regarding the explanation given by the driver, from my personal experience, mostly it will be really hard to know what exactly happened. In the above accident, I went the next day to the accident spot to do more investigation, that is when I took those pictures. It is then, I concluded that the indica would have hit me at 90 degrees. All I could remember was seeing two headlight coming towards me and I turned to the left, but I was looking towards the left side of the road by then.

Originally Posted by drpullockaran

Looks like somebody with intimate knowledge about vector of forces and subsequent trajectories need to assess this incident

Ah, debate between theoretical knowledge Vs Practical experience. But in this case, I believe it will not matter much. More photographs from the accident scene would be more helpful. Especially of road with the marks from the broken alloy wheel.