I’ve been thinking on floor regs, would it be advantageous to to have the underfloor flex downwards?
I would assume that the flexing floor tests are carried out with a mass placed on top of the floor and measure any deflection downwards. Would the tests be able to be carried out by suspending a mass from the underside of the floor though, they’d need some pretty strong sticky tape to test that.
I’m thinking of a double skinned floor, where the top half is rigid enough to pass the static FIA tests and the bottom half is much more flexible where I don’t think tests could be carried out. With all of the energy under the floor would there be enough of a vacuum to deform the bottom half of the floor enough to give any advantage?
FIA 3.5.1 Floor Body wrote:
e. Its complete surface, when intersected with any X-plane must produce only a single section that is continuous, closed and with all parts of the section visible from either above or below.
f. Its complete surface, when intersected with any Y-plane must produce only a single section that is continuous, closed and with all parts of the section visible from either above or below. Two such sections will be permitted outboard of Y=595, provided:
i. these two sections are not closer than 50mm to each other on any Y-plane, except for a transition between one and two sections that is contained within two Y-planes up to 10mm apart.
ii. the rearward-most point of the forward-most section is aft of XF=1700.
I feel these regulations try to encourage a solid floor but don’t go as far as to say that.
I’m not suggesting a double skinned floor with a void in between, more of a carbon sandwich where the lower half would deform to create a void, I know there would need to be a way to allow air in and out of the void. As for the X/Y cross sections, if a floor was theoretically cross sectioned couldn’t the team just claim it has been cut, structural integrity blah blah blah that why there’s now a gap?
I don’t have answers and it might be a terrible idea, but could it be done and would it be advantageous?