Best of technical F1 stuff 2010

[747heavy]

very nive overview about the technical developments in 2010 so far.

Caution !!11 this is a 36 MB download, but worth it. IMHO

http://www.f1-forecast.com/pdf/F1%20Sea ... on%203.pdf

[marcush.]

it´seems a quite good summary..except of:


RP prototyping : SLS is called stereolithograhy....NO

SLA is stereolithographie

SLS is selective laser sintering wich is the interesting area as you can do Polyamid parts with glass or even carbon fill achieving strength as PA66 GF35
see CRP windform xt

then there is FDM fused Deposit Modeling wich is only for some materials like ABS

[747heavy]

it´seems a quite good summary..except of:


RP prototyping : SLS is called stereolithograhy....NO

SLA is stereolithographie

SLS is selective laser sintering wich is the interesting area as you can do Polyamid parts with glass or even carbon fill achieving strength as PA66 GF35
see CRP windform xt

then there is FDM fused Deposit Modeling wich is only for some materials like ABS

You are probably right with this Marcus.
To be honest I don´t know,
and I have not read the whole article, just scaned it quickly, and thought it´s a good summery.

[marcush.]

it´seems a quite good summary..except of:


RP prototyping : SLS is called stereolithograhy....NO

SLA is stereolithographie

SLS is selective laser sintering wich is the interesting area as you can do Polyamid parts with glass or even carbon fill achieving strength as PA66 GF35
see CRP windform xt

then there is FDM fused Deposit Modeling wich is only for some materials like ABS

You are probably right with this Marcus.
To be honest I don´t know,
and I have not read the whole article, just scaned it quickly, and thought it´s a good summery.

don´t worry I scanned it only as well but that one catched me instantly ..you know modelmakers can be a bit nitpicky..

[747heavy]

latest version August 2010:

http://www.f1-forecast.com/pdf/F1%20Sea ... on%204.pdf

[riff_raff]

747heavy,

Thanks for the link!

Sadly it was mostly aero stuff, and being a mechanical engineer, all that aero tech doesn't really interest me. But that's just how F1 is now. A bunch of aero weenies copying whatever they saw the previous weekend, scabbing on a multitude of spoilers, flaps, winglets, etc. with absolutely no regard to aesthetics. It's just sad to see.

Here's one thought that I had reading through it. With the current 2.4 V8 engines and gearboxes being so physically small and compact, why hasn't any designer tried extending the composite tub structure further aft around the engine and transaxle so that it incorporates the rear suspension attachments. The full composite structure would be stiffer, and would not add much weight. The engine and trans would also benefit, since those structures would not have to accommodate the deflections imposed by chassis loads. The fully stressed engine and trans made sense when the engine was physically much larger and heavier, but maybe that's not still the case.

riff_raff

[747heavy]

good points riff_raff, don´t know the answer to this.
termal stress is maybe one reason, you cant run the carbon tube close to the side
of the engine, as the exhaust is in the way.
If you take a closer look at the Renault engine installation, you will see, that they run two carbon struds from the bellhouse/engine interface towards the monocoque, passing some of the suspension loads straight to the chassis, making the engine "semi" stressed - IMHO

[riff_raff]

747heavy,

Open wheel chassis design is all about torsional stiffness. A small cross section 2.4L V8 aluminum engine structure would seem to have a much lower MOI than a larger cross section carbon composite monocoque structure, even considering the openings required for the exhaust headers.

One of the biggest concerns with suspension set-up is consistency. A continuous, single piece chassis structure from front to rear, including all attachments for aero devices and springs/dampeners, would be very desirable.

As for temperatures, there are resin systems (BMI) that are good up to over 500degF.

Regards,
riff_raff

[xpensive]

@ riff and Jumbo;

If the doomsday-scenario of 1.6 liter turbo I-4s from 2013 and on will become reality, I think you might see just that,
semi- or even non-stressed Fisher-Price engines with the xtended carbon-fibre tub around it?

[noname]

In the current age of frozen engine, designed as a stress member and with strict requirements as far as the mass and location are concerned, weight penalty related with extending the chassis may offsets benefits Riff_Raff pointed, although, as Renault example suggests, it's not a bad idea.

[747heavy]

end of year edition season 2010
600+ pages F1 tech, aero, engine & mechanical
good summary of the season - IMHO

caution it´s a 35MB download

Enjoy & Merry Christmas and all the best in 2011

http://www.f1-forecast.com/pdf/F1%20Sea ... pdates.pdf