About rims...

[Conceptual]

[img::]http://www.2020hindsight.org/manila_ima ... l17909.jpg[/img]

Would it be possible to completely eliminate the suspension components of an F1 car by using these type rims? The design incorporates all suspension travel within the rim, and I'm sure that the rims could be "tuned" to different courses.

That way, you could have solid "wings" where the current suspension is with the knuckle attached to the end of it so camber could also be adjusted.

Is this possible under current regulations?

Chris

[tomislavp4]

Didn´t michelin try something simular some time ago? The tire looked like the rim you posted and worked similar to it but used standard rims...

Not in f1, on regular (audi i think) car

[Tom]

I remember a similar topic about a year ago here, I'm sure Michelin Manchild and Ciro were heavily involved. I'll see if I can't dig it up.

Here we go, trip down F1T memory lane. viewtopic.php?p=20406&highlight=#20406

[Carlos]

It would be great if new members would read the material that others have already researched and posted. If they have something to add, it would be an advantage to add it to what we have already discussed, then there would be a continuity to subjects. This doesn't appeal or occur to some people.

Chris - No this is not within F1 rules. Read the rules. Read the threads.

[Conceptual]

It would be great if new members would read the material that others have already researched and posted. If they have something to add, it would be an advantage to add it to what we have already discussed, then there would be a continuity to subjects. This doesn't appeal or occur to some people.

Chris - No this is not within F1 rules. Read the rules. Read the threads.

So, it is required to read through hundreds of pages of past threads before posting?

I'm sorry for having a thought, Carlos, and not cross-referencing it with F1T before posting an idea. I'm sure that the research for the next idea may take me a few months to post by your regulations.

Thanks.

Chris

[tomislavp4]

I´m sure Carlos didn´t mean anything bad Chris
and if you think about it, you´re both right I guess

Back to the rim, it´s weights more than the standard rims that´s for sure so you´ll have more unsprung weight and less place for the brake components but you´ll get rid off the a-arms shocks an all that... AND to adjust the stifness you must change the whole rim

Is it worth it? Maybe if you´re desperate to free some space (not talking about f1) otherwise, I´d go with standard set up...

[modbaraban]

So, it is required to read through hundreds of pages of past threads before posting?

I've found a useful function. Check it out, Chris!

CLICK

[Conceptual]

I´m sure Carlos didn´t mean anything bad Chris
and if you think about it, you´re both right I guess

Back to the rim, it´s weights more than the standard rims that´s for sure so you´ll have more unsprung weight and less place for the brake components but you´ll get rid off the a-arms shocks an all that... AND to adjust the stifness you must change the whole rim

Is it worth it? Maybe if you´re desperate to free some space (not talking about f1) otherwise, I´d go with standard set up...

I would think that the overall weight equasion would actually save instead of add more. The fact that to adjust stiffness by changing rims would be the entire point. Mid-race suspension adjustments do not happen now, but could using those types of rims. And about sprung weight, technically with these rims, using a "wing" protrusion to attach the knuckle to would mean that only the tyre and the spokes of the rim itself would be unsprung, and that would be a huge increase over what they do now. Especially with the front rim air extractors that the teams seem to be adopting, the aero efficiency, unsprung weight, overall weight, downforce generating sq cm increase and the fact that most suspension travel happens in the tyre sidewall anyway, I dont see much negative about this.

And Mod and Carlos. I know there is a search function. I used it for the few months that I read this forum before joining. I dont feel that this board is so busy that it is a bad thing to post a new thread even though there is an existing one. I have seen several new threads by newcomers that the first reply to the poster is a complete paraphrase that answers all of the dimensions of the question in a few paragraphs, instead of reading through 9+ pages of argument and discussion just to get the nuts and bolts that I am after.

If I am losing acceptance because of this, I can look elsewhere. Remember, when I first came here I said that my biggest attraction was the communities tendancy to actually answer questions instead of ridiculing them. Carlos made no attempt to paraphrase a thread from the past, his post was simply made to tell me what I should be doing instead of doing what I want, and that is ask questions, and then Mod came and reiterated the same by posting an almost belittling link to the search function.

If I am required to use the search and do research on past topics, I really didnt need to join F1T. I joined to ask questions and to discuss topics. If that is undesireable to the community here, then I can go back to being just a browser instead of a contributor.

Its not that big of a deal to be honest, I just thought this forum was different, but I'm starting to think that it is really not...

Chris

[Tom]

Carlos, I think you were unfair with your point, the original thread wasn't easy to find it you were't around in March 2006 and there was little clue in the title. I found it because I remembered it was one of Ciro' first posts so I looked through all posts by him from the first he made.

Regarding the Roverwheel/Tweel/inserthorrificallyhomosexualnamehere I think its good in principle (the one Chris mentioned is of course the wheel from the Mars Rover) but I need to know more. Is it affected by hard braking and accelerating, how will you control roll, is it affected by bump steer, is it strong enough to undergo the loads placed on it by a high perfomance vehicle?

I expect many of the problems can be solved but some won't.

[Carlos]

[IMG:640:426]http://img359.imageshack.us/img359/7939/360301yh8.jpg[/img]

That front wheel picture is from the old thread. Handle's brake torque on the front. Not power and torque from an F1 engine. Increase the amount of material to handle those forces. It will weigh a lot more than a current F1 wheel, tire and suspension links. A lot more. Like Tomislavp4 pointed out.

modbaraban - Thanks for pointing out the search function. I never noticed it before and I've got over 700 posts. You pointed it out in a humourous way that didn't make me feel like a nit. Thanks.

Chris. Your right. Lot's of times a newcomer with 2 or 3 posts asks a question and get an answer that runs to a couple of paragraphs. But your not a newcomer. You have over 70 posts.

Nine pages? No. One page. Easy and quick to read.

EDIT

Thanks for the link Tom.
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mer/spotlight/wheels01.html

I didn't see this picture. It wasn't up or replaced for most of the life of this thread. I just assumed it was a tweel. The tweel thread was before my time but I remembered it because I have read the forum contents.

ME BAD

Its a rim with a metal side and a thin rubber tread. It doesn't flex at all. It has a swing arm, suspension and steeringhead inside the wheel. Scale it up and it's got to, just got to be heavier than a current F1 assembly with a lot more unsprung weight. Tom are you sure that's what Chris posted?

[IMG:400:261]http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/2563 ... 2brcu1.jpg[/img]

So the above is what Chris posted?

[IMG:1280:960]http://img523.imageshack.us/img523/7955/jul1409ng8.jpg[/img]

Now this is an F1 sidecar rig - Forget the tire. See all that stuff crammed inside the wheel? Thats a 12 inch wheel ... all that thingy stuff has got to be real heavy. Isn't that in the NASA wheel? I think I can see it in there.

Sorry Chris. Your picture's been down most of the day. I didn't even see it. So how could I comment with accuracy? I couldn't. I got it all wrong. It's your thead. I'll leave it to you and stay off it.

[Tom]

I looked at the link for the missing pic and saw it ended in 'roverwheel'

Now I don't think Rover have been so ingenuitive reacently, so I typed it into google and found its from a Mars Rover.

If designed well the Tweel can still be light, I also typed tweel into google and wiki and found its being used on bicycles. I don't know if there are many keen cyclists here (I'm infamous here for downhill mountain biking...on a tourer) but weight in the wheels on a bike is not a good thing, it makes leaning into corners alot slower for one thing. I think they're working on it quite hard. Of course even bikes can produce a massive amount of torque (lowest gear provides enough to rotate the whole vehicle around its rear wheel axis, assuming the pilot can summon the strength) but bike torque and F1 torque are a million miles apart. Just watch the Spyker driveshaft exploding at Suzuka last year, imagine how much energy was going through it.


Carlos, this topic should be renamed 'reinventing the wheel' which would spiral way out of control without a calm and experienced participant. I recomend you stay.

Chris's picture:
[img::]http://www.2020hindsight.org/manila_ima ... l17909.jpg[/img]
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:7hi ... l17909.jpg

[Ciro Pabón]

Sorry for the intromission, OOT, but what about a "Related Threads" function?

I've seen it in other forums, that use a different forum "engine". I've suggested it a couple of times in the "What would you add to F1Technical" thread.

We could do it in a rudimentary way, by creating an user named, for example, "Related Threads", with no password or with a public one. Anyone could log in as that user and add a post to any thread, to include in one place all the related links. That would give more "depth" to the forum, specially for people who stumble on it through googling.

Also, anyone could add more links to related threads into that post, editing it in the name of that "user". I'll try to illustrate in a few minutes.

At least in my case, you wouldn't believe how many searchs I make (in the net, not in the forum) that end displaying an F1Technical thread in the first page of Google.

I find this fact truly remarkable for such a small forum like this, so I imagine that a "related threads thingie" would give those people in the same position another level of "digging" down the forum.

Now, a little on thread, as Conceptual post shows, there are people actually reinventing the wheel, (friendly pun intended ) but can you believe someone obtained a patent on the wheel?

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn9 ... ralia.html

[Conceptual]

Funny, that Aussie!

Anyways, a bit more insight:

http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mer/gallery/vi ... 01_190.mpg

It's only a few minutes, but it explains alot of function. I dont see why the outer lip couldnt be uncreased by about 12mm, and have a tubeless tire attached to it. It looks in the video to really handle the "drop" tests of the rover, and all of its sensitive equipment.

I really think that these would give an advantage. What keyword would I search in the tech regs that would show me that eliminating the susmension and replacing it with a piece of solid bodywork, and putting the entire suspension in the rim of the car would be illegal?

I look forward to using the search feature, but I dont know what specifically to search for.

Chris

[tomislavp4]

Here´s one more problem: the brake disc will hit the outher lip when moving up/down, so you´ll be forced to use smaller diameter discs...

[mx_tifoso]

Here´s one more problem: the brake disc will hit the outher lip when moving up/down, so you´ll be forced to use smaller diameter discs...

Not only that, but what about heat related problems, heat dissipation, venting/cooling, etc. And caliper size will be affected as well (?).

Just a thought.