tough choice.... both are brilliant....I think Mr.Newey is the correct person to ask? or would anyone prefer Ross Brawn?
well usually its a 60:40 weight distribution.... but in racing cars its usually a 50:50 balance.... so i assume that it should be somewhere like 54:46 would be appropricate... but obtaining this is very tough i thinkThe really interesting question is where do you want your CG to be?
I guess he´s not available for that sort of questions..raymondu999 wrote:You forgot to include Byrne
says who?mach11 wrote:well usually its a 60:40 weight distribution.... but in racing cars its usually a 50:50 balance.... so i assume that it should be somewhere like 54:46 would be appropricate... but obtaining this is very tough i think
n smikle wrote:I don't even think they design for centre of gravity.
I can't speak for the f1 teams but If I were designing an F1 car, think I would just make everything as low and as light as possible. When the design is done THEN I would just check what the Cog is, and if I can improve it later on, I just make the offending parts lower and lighter. That's how I would do it.
DaveKillens wrote:It's natural to assume that every nut, bolt, and component planned for a car build is taken into consideration during the design phase. Then, once the car is finally constructed, then the numbers should match up. I do believe it is critical to allocate weight during the design process.
How do you find the center of gravity on any object? Hang it by a rope (or suitable cable). Take a photograph of it, and then change to another location to hang the car. Repeat, and where the two centerlines intersect, is the actual and true center of gravity.
Paul Kirk wrote:DaveKillens wrote:It's natural to assume that every nut, bolt, and component planned for a car build is taken into consideration during the design phase. Then, once the car is finally constructed, then the numbers should match up. I do believe it is critical to allocate weight during the design process.
How do you find the center of gravity on any object? Hang it by a rope (or suitable cable). Take a photograph of it, and then change to another location to hang the car. Repeat, and where the two centerlines intersect, is the actual and true center of gravity.
You might be right using your hanging technique but I can't get my head around it.(for CoG height).
The way we used to find CoG height, and fore & aft distribution, was to weigh all 4 corners at horizontal, (at the axles), then at 45 degrees, and with calculations, would arive at the answers. This should be done with the driver in situ once you're getting down to the nitty-gritty!
PK.
DaveKillens wrote:It's natural to assume that every nut, bolt, and component planned for a car build is taken into consideration during the design phase. Then, once the car is finally constructed, then the numbers should match up. I do believe it is critical to allocate weight during the design process.
How do you find the center of gravity on any object? Hang it by a rope (or suitable cable). Take a photograph of it, and then change to another location to hang the car. Repeat, and where the two centerlines intersect, is the actual and true center of gravity.
n smikle wrote:I don't know about you.. but I have done some machine designs already. And I know you can't predict where the Cog will be before you model the machine (not talking about simple boxy symmetrical stuff here). You have to model the car first, find where the CG lands then you adjust the model to get it where you want. Obviously you design it to get the Cog in a certain ballpark, like putting the heaviest obejects near the centre etc. but you can't predict it. You have to model the car then get where it is.RH1300S wrote:Why would they do that? If they designed everything to be as low as possible then everyone would be driving a pan-cake and lying flat in the car. It's CofG would be low, but compromised in other areas such as aero, geometry and packaging.n smikle wrote:I don't even think they design for centre of gravity.
I can't speak for the f1 teams but If I were designing an F1 car, think I would just make everything as low and as light as possible. When the design is done THEN I would just check what the Cog is, and if I can improve it later on, I just make the offending parts lower and lighter. That's how I would do it.
Of course they design with CofG in mind. To say they don't is like saying they build a car with no particular objective, when it's finished they check the CofG - then modify all the geometry to suit the CofG they seem to have discovered by accident.
The CofG location has a fundamental importance in the way a car uses it's tyres. Like everything else in the car the CofG height & location is about making choices and having design obejctives then setting out to achieve them.
You may know where you want the CoG to be. But can't just predict where it's going to be bore you start modeling the car, there are so many parts! You guys make it sound so easy. It's not easy..Almost impossible to know the exact location without making(on the computer) the whole car first. Even when people build the car it might not even match exactly what is on the computer.
n smikle wrote:I don't know about you.. but I have done some machine designs already. And I know you can't predict where the Cog will be before you model the machine (not talking about simple boxy symmetrical stuff here). You have to model the car first, find where the CG lands then you adjust the model to get it where you want. Obviously you design it to get the Cog in a certain ballpark, like putting the heaviest obejects near the centre etc. but you can't predict it. You have to model the car then get where it is.RH1300S wrote:Why would they do that? If they designed everything to be as low as possible then everyone would be driving a pan-cake and lying flat in the car. It's CofG would be low, but compromised in other areas such as aero, geometry and packaging.n smikle wrote:I don't even think they design for centre of gravity.
I can't speak for the f1 teams but If I were designing an F1 car, think I would just make everything as low and as light as possible. When the design is done THEN I would just check what the Cog is, and if I can improve it later on, I just make the offending parts lower and lighter. That's how I would do it.
Of course they design with CofG in mind. To say they don't is like saying they build a car with no particular objective, when it's finished they check the CofG - then modify all the geometry to suit the CofG they seem to have discovered by accident.
The CofG location has a fundamental importance in the way a car uses it's tyres. Like everything else in the car the CofG height & location is about making choices and having design obejctives then setting out to achieve them.
You may know where you want the CoG to be. But can't just predict where it's going to be bore you start modeling the car, there are so many parts! You guys make it sound so easy. It's not easy..Almost impossible to know the exact location without making(on the computer) the whole car first. Even when people build the car it might not even match exactly what is on the computer.
+1 and of course you are not starting from zero there ,at least that was true for all but the toaster fabrications in USA.and even those had enough experience to have an ideo what the components will end up in weight.xpensive wrote:I disagree, with modern solid model design tools you almost to the point where you will be, as long as you know your components.
A "portable" rig for calibrating push rod load cells, perhaps?raymondu999 wrote:actually saw this photo in the RB6 thread. Credits go to imightbewrong for the photo's original poster. Could this be a measuring of COG?!
