2010 USF1 Chassis

[Jan_83]

Has anyone seen the video on USF1's Youtube-Channel? (http://www.youtube.com/user/USF1Team)
They are building a chassis in that video with none lifted Cockpit-Sidewalls.
Do you know whether that is a test chassis or a gap in the rules? What do you think on this?

[scarbs]

The cockpits raised sides are non structural and are bonded on later.

[Jan_83]

Is there anywhere a photocollection of a whole chassisproduction process. Didn't find anything. And i just can not believe that the sidewalls are bonded on later. Is that right?

[WhiteBlue]

You better believe it considering the source. Scarbs is probably the most active user with regular direct access to F1 engineers and technical directors.

[ESPImperium]

Yup, Scarabs and WhiteBlue are right, the chassis of the car is bonded, infact theres up to 90% of a F1 cars chassis is bonded, depending on how elaborate the construction method is.

The simplier the chassis construction is, the more they can bond to it, hence why most teams go thrugh multiple chassis revisions each season, the chassis gets warped over time, or indeed after too many crashes, unusable. Last year the teams as a whole binned arround 5 or 6 chassis on the in season in racing, many more are binned for use on crash test rigs as well.

They [chassis] are the single biggest conponent for a team to design, and construct. The team formarly known as Toyota, who were one of the biggest on chassis revision, with up to 10 chassis a season in 2005-2007 and about 8 a season in 2008 & 2009 allegidly said that a chassis costs roughly $600,000 to build without the design costs factored in on top.

My figures may be wrong, but the fact that the chassis are simply glued and bonded in most areas is just simply mind boggeling.

[marcush.]

bonding is not so spectacular for carbon ,in fact it is the logic solution .the tub itself consists of an aray of at least several pieces as can be seen in the pics.
Top and bottom half ,front bulkhead ,middle bulkhead ,seat backbulhead and the rear bulhead as an interface to the engine .
Screw type attachment is not easy with carbonfibre ,and of course each screw is an enemy of assembly stiffness so you would not have the rear bulkhead srew in if there was a means of putting the tank bag inside otherwise safely.
So why not bond the sideprtection on later ,as the cockpit opening is to be finshed anyways as can be seen in the pics of the USF! monocoque ,and same goes for the lotus chassis published somewhere.
I´m a bit baffled by the simplicity of the mold itself for the monocoque really.to me the mold looks very flimsy indeed with very view reinforcements and very unsophisticated locating means in form of laminated in steel bobbins a la modelmaking in the 80s when modelmaking was boats and foundry service...

[xpensive]

...I´m a bit baffled by the simplicity of the mold itself for the monocoque really.to me the mold looks very flimsy indeed with very view reinforcements and very unsophisticated locating means in form of laminated in steel bobbins a la modelmaking in the 80s when modelmaking was boats and foundry service...

What was put together on top of that dust-bin in the USF1-video, didn't xactly look like a chassis-tub to me either,
more like two pieces of bodyparts? Not that it's gonna matter in a few weeks.

[Jan_83]

Yup, Scarabs and WhiteBlue are right, the chassis of the car is bonded, infact theres up to 90% of a F1 cars chassis is bonded, depending on how elaborate the construction method is.

Yea. I know that most of it is bonded. Just wondered about the sidewalls. It's only, that I would make them in one piece with the chassis topside. Due to safety considerations. Though... there will hardly be big forces on that part of the cockpit sides... So you convinced me.

[marcush.]

...I´m a bit baffled by the simplicity of the mold itself for the monocoque really.to me the mold looks very flimsy indeed with very view reinforcements and very unsophisticated locating means in form of laminated in steel bobbins a la modelmaking in the 80s when modelmaking was boats and foundry service...

What was put together on top of that dust-bin in the USF1-video, didn't xactly look like a chassis-tub to me either,
more like two pieces of bodyparts? Not that it's gonna matter in a few weeks.

please forgive me that statement being made in the usF1 context as other molds i saw look no different-see molds of Lotus -SA/Formtech etc..
To show of the mold halfs in the demolding area and not in a cleanroom is maybe a bit seatoffthe pants but straightforward in my eyes ..after demolding,fiting and cleaning the molded parts they go back into a clean area for bonding.In the video you can actually see that the parts have seen some cleaning already ,the video does
NOT show the demolding of the part ,as can be easily seen :the removable parts (to cater for backcuts)of the molds are not present .

[xpensive]

Yup, Scarabs and WhiteBlue are right, the chassis of the car is bonded, infact theres up to 90% of a F1 cars chassis is bonded, depending on how elaborate the construction method is.

Yea. I know that most of it is bonded. Just wondered about the sidewalls. It's only, that I would make them in one piece with the chassis topside. Due to safety considerations. Though... there will hardly be big forces on that part of the cockpit sides... So you convinced me.

Now that I think about it, why wouldn't you integrate the the raised sidewalls with the tub itself?
That practice should in all probability help increase the tub's stiffness. Scarbs?

[scarbs]

As the cockpit opening is the weakest part of the tubs structure, the team want to make that area as strong as possible. Thus the line of the tub is designed with that in mind, with the best shape and lay up to create the strength it needs. the cockpit sides are bonded on later (as is the roll structure). To design the tub with this shape in mind from the start, would create a complex mould with odd load paths to suit the mandatory sides. of course bonded part may subsequently contribute to tub stiffness.
I have never seen an f1 tub with these sides part of the primary structure.

[xpensive]

As the cockpit opening is the weakest part of the tubs structure, the team want to make that area as strong as possible...

This is of course why USF1 makes their tub without a cockpit opening?

Sorry about that one, couldn't help it. Thanx for the enlightment, scarbs.

[scarbs]

lol

[WhiteBlue]

The USF1 method is in fact a huge improvement on what Ferrari used 1999.

Ferrari investigates tub failure
Ferrari is investigating why one of its F399 chassis tore in half during an accident in a historic race at Laguna Seca in the United States. Technical director Ross Brawn said: “We have got the car back at the factory and we are looking at it. Although it’s the same model as the one Michael had his accident in [at Silverstone in 1999], it’s a very different sort of accident. In Michael’s he had a front impact and the wheel came back into the cockpit and that’s what broke his leg. With this one – as far as I understand – the car went backwards into a barrier and the wheel became stuck in the barrier as the car spun around it, putting a tensile load on the car.” The ’99 Ferrari was torn in half.

Autosport Magazine

Very scary to think they did the split that way.

[Ray]

Very scary to think they did the split that way.

I thought they had to modify that chassis for Kroymans to fit and that was why the tub broke?