Curb modification at Monza

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
Post Reply
puttenham
0
Joined: 10 Sep 2007, 03:14

Curb modification at Monza

Post

Where can more information be obtained regarding the FIA decision to raise the curb height on one or two curbs during the F1 race weekend at Monza?

I find it odd that the change seemed to affect Ferrari the most.

I find it more odd, based on Ferrari's close relationship with FIA, that the change took place at all.

Finally, some type of quick setup, super-concrete must have been used as no failure took place given the shape of the "gator teeth", the stress riser is the root fillets between the teeth and the impact loading during the race.

puttenham
puttenham

User avatar
checkered
0
Joined: 02 Mar 2007, 14:32

Post

You mean this (link)? It seems

like the drivers were requesting the changes and had been doing so for quite some while. And so, the officials at Monza decided to act on it very late indeed. Not the first time this has happened there, if my recollection serves me. I can't tell if it was because of the changes, but Kimi certainly was told to keep off some of the kerbs after Massa's rear susp failure. From there on he lost around .5 secs (in the mid sector alone) per lap to the McLarens.

User avatar
mini696
0
Joined: 20 Mar 2006, 02:34

Post

If you believe some of the rumours, it was Ferrari who were requesting the changes the strongest due to McLarens ease of riding the current kerbs.

mx_tifoso
0
Joined: 30 Nov 2006, 05:01
Location: North America
Contact:

Post

mini696 wrote:If you believe some of the rumours, it was Ferrari who were requesting the changes the strongest due to McLarens ease of riding the current kerbs.
It seems that it backfired on them and they shot themselves in the foot. :x

Is it believed that the raised curb height has something to do with Massa's rear suspension failure or has the reason not been publicised yet?
Forum guide: read before posting

"You do it, then it's done." - Kimi Räikkönen

Por las buenas soy amigo, por las malas soy campeón.

User avatar
Ciro Pabón
106
Joined: 11 May 2005, 00:31

Re: Curb modification at Monza

Post

puttenham wrote:...

Finally, some type of quick setup, super-concrete must have been used as no failure took place given the shape of the "gator teeth", the stress riser is the root fillets between the teeth and the impact loading during the race.
Welcome, puttenham, thanks for informing us that Monza changed the kerbs on the chicane.

I hate chicanes, they seem to me a poor solution to overtaking (crashing the cars once in a while!) and simple curve design. I've argued for them to be replaced by continous spirals like curve number one at China, more interesting for the chassis and aerodynamic designer, but that's another theme, that doesn't bring many comments when I "thread to death" over it... :wink:

For normal road conditions, you can open a fresh concrete road to traffic in 12 hours with normal accelerators, like calcium chloride (CaCl2) or less corrosive, more modern ones, like Rapid-1 or Quikcrete. "Accelerating" - FHWA

I'm pretty sure about this: damage to the road is proportional to the fourth power of the load. Road damage due to dynamic tyre forces - Potter & al.

So, a truck, that weighs 100 times what an F1 car does, causes 100^4, or 100 million times the damage. This means normal road conditions are much, much harder than anything that can happen during a race.

Next time you stop on a highway, walk to the edge of the road and wait for a loaded truck to pass, to feel how the earth literally trembles: that gives you a "feeling" of the forces involved.

Again, I recommend never to drive heavy machinery over a racing track, except for truck races, of course. That's one of the reasons, the other being safety, why access roads are built around a track.

The passage of a single truck causes more damage on the surface than all the damage made by all the other racing cars during the life of the track, to the extent that, when designing the track, many times you do not take in account the number of "standard axles" that the light vehicles (cars) represent, because its number is insignificant when calculated.

However, that doesn't answer your question: you ask specifically for the "stress risers". At different "layers" of the concrete, the stresses are different. The "fourth power" rule is based on the stresses on a continous medium made of layers, like a cake or a layered jell-o, and is valid a few centimeters "down" into the concrete, asphalt or soil.

When you calculate surface forces, they are proportional to the load, and the impact increments that amount three or four times. Again, when you think of a 50 tons truck, even if the "ribs" in the concrete multiply the force by 3 because they diminish the available surface and then, the impact gives you 3 times that force, you still have a "safey margin" of 10 or more over "normal road conditions". Besides, racing cars have wide tyres.

Or so I think... :)

Also, you wouldn't believe what guys like Mikey_s in this forum can do with "simple" materials like concrete and asphalt, whose technology is centuries old. Calcium chloride has been in use since 1870's.
Ciro

Belatti
33
Joined: 10 Jul 2007, 21:48
Location: Argentina

Post

Interesting...
One question Ciro, do you know what happened in (i think) 2005 canadian GP, where the asphalt in the hairpin began to crack?

And one opinion, a chicane from 340Kph to 70Kph is OK. (see Lewis braking-oversteering-overtaking for more info)
A chicane from 240Kph to 120Kph is boring and useless.
"You need great passion, because everything you do with great pleasure, you do well." -Juan Manuel Fangio

"I have no idols. I admire work, dedication and competence." -Ayrton Senna

User avatar
Ciro Pabón
106
Joined: 11 May 2005, 00:31

Post

No, I don't know, but as it was the first resurfacing in 10 years, I assume it is the same cause of most cracks in asphalt: ageing of asphalt (Mikey_s wrote something on that here) or less than able base (poor drainage). After the resurfacing they had adherence problem, I see:

Image

Well, I don't know either if "full stop" chicanes are more demanding, I know that the fine art of "stomping on the brakes with finesse" must be that: an art. I don't like it particularly, but, hey, I don't like opera and some people do, no problem. Anyway, with all due respect, I dare to say that "kerbed" chicanes are the closest that racing has to speed bumps: c'mon, I think we can do better. :)

All I know is that most chicanes I know are made to "update" an older track that was built with long straights, so people won't kill themselves at the end of the main straight with modern, faster cars, or so I think, but I've already said I hate them.

It's like limiting RPMs, or putting restrictor plates: a blatant case of tracks not adapting to cars becoming faster year after year. Just take a look at the width of many tracks and the persistent complains about overtaking... sigh... while people invest a couple of billions on cars, they invest pennies on tracks AND on track and road design research. While car technology flows to cars, track technology does not "descend" to roads. Who cares about it?

Sorry, sorry, here I go again. I better shut up.
Ciro

Post Reply