F1technical.net

hardingfv32 wrote:This is a wonderful way around the rules and the test used to enforce them. BUT, how does this system work when the car is on track? What is providing the upward force to flex the splitter? Contact with the ground??

Yeah, I'd like to know a bit more about how it works. Is the idea that the flow across the top of the tea tray will "level" it so that it becomes parallel to the road? Is there not going to be some pressure pulling the tea tray into the ground as well here? Would that not make it a little unstable?

The see-saw effect is created on track simply by contact with the ground....

I was under the impression that the plank had to be one piece along its length. If not then that's an easy way to ban this practice. Other than that what scarbs has said makes perfect sense.

Do we know anything about the wear rate of the materials use in F1 for the plank?

Brian

Strangely there is no FIA specification for that either!
Although Jabroc, a laminated Beech wood product is\was common. One of the contemporary planks I saw was nothing like wood, more like a vinyl wood product. Yyou know the type used to make fake wooden chunky garden furniture, like picnic benches. There's some wood in there, probably as filler, but it feels for all the world like plastic. Very slippery and not likely to wear quickly from abrasion.

Mods can you move my comments into here. I can't be bothered to type them over again.

I basically said Scarbs' Idea has sound movement to it but for it to be legal there can be no mechanical pivot point; no pins, springs, chains, sliders etc as per the rules on moveable body work. It can only be a form of deformation.. i.e pure flexing of the materials involved. I also said we need to know the context of this motion, when during the race does it happen and what causes the upward motion of the bib.

OK Scarbs. Lets do some calculations on your proposal. Some numbers will bring things into perspective. Anybody else who is willing to do some number crunching, welcome.

I will get the rules, and technical regs and try to get some material properties.

scarbs wrote:Strangely there is no FIA specification for that either!
Although Jabroc, a laminated Beech wood product is\was common. One of the contemporary planks I saw was nothing like wood, more like a vinyl wood product. Yyou know the type used to make fake wooden chunky garden furniture, like picnic benches. There's some wood in there, probably as filler, but it feels for all the world like plastic. Very slippery and not likely to wear quickly from abrasion.

If your theory is correct then the ideal plank material will have low stiffness so it can flex easily. Your see-saw theory would require the plank to bend in two different directions within a fairly short length.

The plank could easily be non-isotropic. In fact the material properties along the length of the plank could vary in terms of abrasion resistance vs flexibility. The front half of this 1 meter plank would need good abrasion resistance and the back half would need good flexibility.

A slightly pivoty mount at the rear of this front plank would also help achieve the necessary flexibility.

A calculation would be interesting, but I don't see anything that intuitively strikes me as a show-stopper for this theory. Let me put it this way-- Regardless of whether or not RB and others are doing this now, is there any reason not to do it going forward?

MIKEY_! wrote:I was under the impression that the plank had to be one piece along its length. If not then that's an easy way to ban this practice. Other than that what scarbs has said makes perfect sense.

Your thinking needs to be more flexible...

Is the plank not bonded to the car along its entire length.

MIKEY_! wrote:Is the plank not bonded to the car along its entire length.

My memory from previous rule readings (yes I'm a nerd) is that the plank is required to be connected to the underside of the car with fasteners in 8 or 10 specified locations.

To maintain a flexed splitter position/angle the nose of the splitter must stay in contact with the ground, not just hit it once and a while. This would cause too much wear on the plank. The teams go to a lot of effort to keep the cars off the plank. Would we not see constant smoke from the planks? The planks simply do not hold up well to constant contact. Have we heard of any rumor of some new miracle material?

In the case of the RB you also have a strut very close to the leading edge of the splitter. This will bend if you apply enough force, but that is just going to increase the wear of the plank.

Brian

Yes. What Scarbs says only makes sens if he is relying on that flexibility to reduce the wear on the plank when it hits the ground more often due to running a lower ride height + rake.

Basically reducing wear on the plank. Now we can calculate this to see if it is practical. I am not really familiar with wear rate calculations - never really done them, but if we imagine the road as big piece of sand paper, will Scarb's flexing floor reduce the wear that much? how much % will a flexing floor reduce the abrasive forces? It needs to be calculated.

This is my approach.

1. Find out how much the bib needs to deflect so the front wing can come close to the ground.

2. Check out the other side of his "see-saw." After all to see-saw the opposite side has to move in the other direction - a big belly hanging down under the drirver's seat? Separation of laminates? There is not much thickness between the driver's butt and the road. So

3. After touching the ground how much force is on it and how much more the bib deflects and to investigate the wearing down of the plank with the speeds and forces involved.

Then finally see if it all makes sense.

I need somebody else to try the calculations because Honestly I have never really finished a proper calculation no F1 tech. Any one familiar with wearing of woods?

Fascinating. As i was reading through Scarb's post, the smile on my face just kept growing; by the end of it i was shaking my head in wonder & amazement. It's this that I love about F1 so very much!

Brilliant Scarbs!




Just a question, do the regs state that the plank must be one continuous piece?

n smikle wrote:Yes. What Scarbs says only makes sens if he is relying on that flexibility to reduce the wear on the plank when it hits the ground more often due to running a lower ride height + rake.

Basically reducing wear on the plank. Now we can calculate this to see if it is practical. I am not really familiar with wear rate calculations - never really done them, but if we imagine the road as big piece of sand paper, will Scarb's flexing floor reduce the wear that much? how much % will a flexing floor reduce the abrasive forces? It needs to be calculated.

This is my approach.

1. Find out how much the bib needs to deflect so the front wing can come close to the ground.

2. Check out the other side of his "see-saw." After all to see-saw the opposite side has to move in the other direction - a big belly hanging down under the drirver's seat? Separation of laminates? There is not much thickness between the driver's butt and the road. So

3. After touching the ground how much force is on it and how much more the bib deflects and to investigate the wearing down of the plank with the speeds and forces involved.

Then finally see if it all makes sense.

I need somebody else to try the calculations because Honestly I have never really finished a proper calculation no F1 tech. Any one familiar with wearing of woods?

some of what you say makes sense(I can't comprehend 2 but agree with points 1 & 3) but, and this is the big but, we all know the RB7 runs ALOT of rake, yet the plank is worn as much 20 cm back from the tip, if not more,than it is at the tip. As Scarbs' article states with extreme rake you would expect to just wear a wedge out of the tip of the plank. As we all know now, if you pass an FIA test you're legal, so ,they're legal, but it certainly looks to me as though the plank is flexing.

you can fit metal skid blocks\mountings, to the plank. These will help reduce wear somewhwat. Assuming they dont spark too much, some in the leading edge will do nicely to reduce wear and keep the splitter tipped up when on track.