USF1 -- F1's All-American Challenger

[raceman]

First attempt at a USF1 livery. Tried to keep it simple. Didn't really want stars and stripes all over it. Based it on the All american racers/Gurney F1 cars. Eagle decal at front reminds me of the Jordan cars from the early 90's when it had the snake head following to the rest of the car.

nice livery BTW - that eagle on the nose looks just killing



hanmer, you are fantastic =D>

[Richard]

Dude! The whole team is fictional until a car is proven to exist.

Odd, because we've seen more of this team than any of the other new teams.

Virgin have given us a moody rock star photo. Lotus gave us a pic of an old wind tunnel model. Campos have given us a for sale sign.

Meanwhile USF1 give us a video tour including live real talking staff, crash testing of their nose, and assembly of their tub. Admittedly Mr Windsor has rather soured the taste with his impression of Phil "the Greek" Windsor.

[Richard]

This shows how Americans are, they go their own way on things and don't follow the rest.

Its how F1 used to be before the big manufacturers sterilised everything. Its nothing to do with being American, but being a garagista.

Have a read of the Tyrrell page on wiki. Six wheel cars, fan assisted downforce, and water cooled brakes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrrell_Racing

[djos]

First attempt at a USF1 livery. Tried to keep it simple. Didn't really want stars and stripes all over it. Based it on the All american racers/Gurney F1 cars. Eagle decal at front reminds me of the Jordan cars from the early 90's when it had the snake head following to the rest of the car.

nice livery BTW - that eagle on the nose looks just killing



hanmer, you are fantastic =D>

Motion seconded, that is a stunning design!!! =D>

[marcush.]

eagle =D> iloved those gurney AAr cars especially the Bruns designed last one .
competition Number on turning vane -this is a very nice touch ,and really catching my attention i like it .

rest of the livery is a bit 70s stile ...very cool indeed . =D> =D>

[xpensive]

But best of all are the Argentinian colors, who could have guessed?! =D>

[scarbs]

I’ve been pondering transverse gearbox layouts. Firstly longitudinal gearboxes, these have been standard in F1 for over ten years with little variation in fundamental layout.
.
Longitudinal
The clutch feeds directly into the input shaft (at a height of 58mm above RP – i.e. crank centreline), the input shafts along the centre line of the car, 85mm above this lies the lay shaft, the 7 gears are arranged along these shafts, separated by the dog ring\collars. The dogs are on the side faces of the gears, and the dog ring uses internal teeth to engage against the gears.
We know the minimum width of a gear 12mm, although the higher gears may be narrower, from recent F1 dog ring\collars I own, I know these are around 10mm wide. Hence a run of gears would be around 125mm Long. Bearing in mind the largest possible diameter gear due the crank centreline would be slightly less 116mm, allowing for clearance perhaps 110mm dia. The larger gears are placed on the lower input shaft and nearer the engine, thus making the gearbox taper towards the rear.
To turn the differential, the cluster needs to turn the drive 90-degrees, its does this via a cross shaft with a bevel gear and then in turn the differential via a ring gear.
From the gearboxes I’ve seen the length from engine face to axle line is around 300-350mm.
.
Transverse
A transverse box turns the drive 90-degrees far earlier, in fact between the clutch and the input shaft. This makes the input shaft wider as it needs to mount the bevel gear. The lay shaft could then placed either above or behind the input shaft (or any angle in between). Placing it above is an interesting proposition, this mimics the style used for performance motorbike engines, making for an extremely short gearbox. Thus the gearbox could be as sort as the maximum gear diameter (110mm), potentially allowing a engine face\axle line length of just 200-250mm. However the width of the ‘box ahead of the differential would be wide, allowing for the bevel gear, casing and bearings it could be over 200mm wide over a length of 150mm.
.
.
I can’t see that extreme shortness is called for in current F1, although it allows for a longer slimmer fuel tank, it would shift the major engine\gearbox masses very close to the rear axle line pushing the weight distribution backwards. For a new F1 car that has yet to mature into a light design with flexibility for lots of ballast, this could compromise the still relatively forward weight bias, notwithstanding the new narrower front tyres.
Additionally, from an aerodynamic perspective, pushing the relative wide engine and its exhausts towards the rear tyres is undesirable. Modern F1 aims for minimum cross section in between the wheels to reduce drag, hence the “V“ noses (Red Bull) and super slim rear ends. This would explain why the CAD images showed the exhausts laid out so far forwards in the car. But overriding for me is the compromise in DDD design (admittedly only an issue for 2010, as they’re banned thereafter). The bulk ahead of the axle will ruin the inlet flow for the diffuser.

[cooper-climax]

Sorry to post this image again, but there's a gearbox on the back of the engine here. Even if someone can see enough of it to work out some meaningful detail, Of course the question remains whether it is the new G/B, or one supplied by Cosworth with the CA2006?

[Pandamasque]

@ hanmer
Great job. But this shade of blue is nor Argentinian nor US. It's a French racing color. US should be darker I think.

[countersteer]

@ WilliamsF1..."IRL Cars have a hydraulic system for the front suspension that can be controlled by the driver at all times with something like this "

Sorry, the image didn't come through. I'm not aware of any system on the front of the car. I think you are referring to the "weight jacker". That is an electronically controlled hydraulic device that "jacks" the right rear (and right rear only). It essentially raises the ride height at the right rear.

It's use is limited to oval racing. The driver has control over it at all times using it to alter the balance of the car to compensate for tire wear, fuel load, etc. etc.

[ringo]

I’ve been pondering transverse gearbox layouts. Firstly longitudinal gearboxes, these have been standard in F1 for over ten years with little variation in fundamental layout.
.
Longitudinal
The clutch feeds directly into the input shaft (at a height of 58mm above RP – i.e. crank centreline), the input shafts along the centre line of the car, 85mm above this lies the lay shaft, the 7 gears are arranged along these shafts, separated by the dog ring\collars. The dogs are on the side faces of the gears, and the dog ring uses internal teeth to engage against the gears.
We know the minimum width of a gear 12mm, although the higher gears may be narrower, from recent F1 dog ring\collars I own, I know these are around 10mm wide. Hence a run of gears would be around 125mm Long. Bearing in mind the largest possible diameter gear due the crank centreline would be slightly less 116mm, allowing for clearance perhaps 110mm dia. The larger gears are placed on the lower input shaft and nearer the engine, thus making the gearbox taper towards the rear.
To turn the differential, the cluster needs to turn the drive 90-degrees, its does this via a cross shaft with a bevel gear and then in turn the differential via a ring gear.
From the gearboxes I’ve seen the length from engine face to axle line is around 300-350mm.
.
Transverse
A transverse box turns the drive 90-degrees far earlier, in fact between the clutch and the input shaft. This makes the input shaft wider as it needs to mount the bevel gear. The lay shaft could then placed either above or behind the input shaft (or any angle in between). Placing it above is an interesting proposition, this mimics the style used for performance motorbike engines, making for an extremely short gearbox. Thus the gearbox could be as sort as the maximum gear diameter (110mm), potentially allowing a engine face\axle line length of just 200-250mm. However the width of the ‘box ahead of the differential would be wide, allowing for the bevel gear, casing and bearings it could be over 200mm wide over a length of 150mm.
.
.
I can’t see that extreme shortness is called for in current F1, although it allows for a longer slimmer fuel tank, it would shift the major engine\gearbox masses very close to the rear axle line pushing the weight distribution backwards. For a new F1 car that has yet to mature into a light design with flexibility for lots of ballast, this could compromise the still relatively forward weight bias, notwithstanding the new narrower front tyres.
Additionally, from an aerodynamic perspective, pushing the relative wide engine and its exhausts towards the rear tyres is undesirable. Modern F1 aims for minimum cross section in between the wheels to reduce drag, hence the “V“ noses (Red Bull) and super slim rear ends. This would explain why the CAD images showed the exhausts laid out so far forwards in the car. But overriding for me is the compromise in DDD design (admittedly only an issue for 2010, as they’re banned thereafter). The bulk ahead of the axle will ruin the inlet flow for the diffuser.

here's the Xtrac transverse gearbox,


It's hard to really tell how wide this thing is, but as you say it would be pushing the engine towards the wheels if the gearbox is shorter. Exhaust exits would also have to be placed wider apart, clear of the cylinder banks since the engine will be so close to the rear wing.
One way to keep the weight up front, is to have the drive shafts at an angle towards the rear of the car when viewed from a plan view.
I don't think the DDD will be obstructed much from this gearbox, if they manage to keep it away from the wheel centerline by the means that i mentioned above, even though it has a pretty steep rear end.

[FW17]

@ WilliamsF1..."IRL Cars have a hydraulic system for the front suspension that can be controlled by the driver at all times with something like this "

Sorry, the image didn't come through. I'm not aware of any system on the front of the car. I think you are referring to the "weight jacker". That is an electronically controlled hydraulic device that "jacks" the right rear (and right rear only). It essentially raises the ride height at the right rear.

It's use is limited to oval racing. The driver has control over it at all times using it to alter the balance of the car to compensate for tire wear, fuel load, etc. etc.

The weight jacker is just left front/right rear weight bias, but the actual gizmo is on the right front part. It's where the spring/shock assembly goes together, on the rocker [mechanism that transfers weight through the pushrod that goes out to the wheel. The weight jacker compresses or decompresses the spring. We also have two sway bars on the front and rear that control the car's roll from side to side. And you can either stiffen them up or soften them.


The jacker is also not electronically controlled but a complete manual system


My point is what ever adjustment to the ride height required during a stop is better and more efficient if contolled by driver rather than the pit crew.

[FW17]

here's the Xtrac transverse gearbox,
Image

It's hard to really tell how wide this thing is, but as you say it would be pushing the engine towards the wheels if the gearbox is shorter. Exhaust exits would also have to be placed wider apart, clear of the cylinder banks since the engine will be so close to the rear wing.
One way to keep the weight up front, is to have the drive shafts at an angle towards the rear of the car when viewed from a plan view.
I don't think the DDD will be obstructed much from this gearbox, if they manage to keep it away from the wheel centerline by the means that i mentioned above, even though it has a pretty steep rear end.

That gear box looks like it is 6 inches from the engine face to the center of the axle

[segedunum]

Odd, because we've seen more of this team than any of the other new teams.

Yer. Unfortunately we haven't seen the bits that matter and haven't heard that they have actually built a complete car yet or even attempted a crash test.

[marcush.]

the FIA technical F1 regulations state gear width is minimum 12mm ,so with a two shaft layout the limits for clusterlength are obvoius ,if you don´t depart with the
current double fork gear engagement.

so we are for a seven gear cluster at 7x12mm=84 + two roller bearings at 10mm +4 shiftrings at say 8mm you get a very optimistic count of 136mm plus 3mm mm each side for the casing equates to 142mm at the widest point whereas we have heard that currently the diffs are 90 mm wide .and we should not forget we need to transfer the force from the input shaft to the gearcluster and from the gear cluster to the diff... so this will lead inevitably to further added millimeters..


as can be seen on this picture :
http://www.gurneyflap.com/Resources/DSC_3294.jpg
http://www.gurneyflap.com/Resources/DSCF1440.jpg

the 412T2 of 1995 had a quite long bellhousing
the gearcluster blocked the airflow massively in the back of the car..