What about carbon nano-tubes. Not sure how they could be used but aren't they supposed to be the new thing for light and strong materials.
The dangers of carbon fibre?
- Thread starter FB
- Start date
the_roadie
Banned
Who gives a monkeys anyhow? The rules are the rules and if they dictate that thou shalt use some material then thou shall, and if they dictate that thou shalt not use it, then thou shalt not.
This is too easy for words, and I can't see how some people find it difficult.
As for the argument about reversing progress or going old-school, sorry boys and girls, but that's a load of cobblers as well.
Teams have universally shown that they can develop the most outrageous technological enhancements whether the rules dictate for or against carbon nanotobes, Buckyballs, graphene, titanium, tungsten, carbon-fibre, fibreglass, mag-alloy, aluminium, steel, cast iron or even bloody granite.
As for carbon-fbre shards flattening tyres, well that's a risk you know in advance and accept that you take in F1 racing if you drive over them, the same as us peasants take driving over crash debris every day.
It's overdue time for a dose of reality all round.
In F1 as in life there are risks, embrace or accept them, and if you can't then ship out because you have no place there.
Surely it is not beyond the means of man to develop a carbon composite that doesn't turn into sharp shards when it shatters, after all they did it with glass didn't they...?
I dunno they put a man on the moon but they can't develop roundy edge broken stuff....
I dunno they put a man on the moon but they can't develop roundy edge broken stuff....
Possible if a thin sticky film covered the carbon then it would hold it together like anti-theft glass.
They should do that then, actually I was thinking the same thing as you
Has a piece of carbon fibre ever pierced a visor? We know that they puncture tyres and can cause damage to some parts of the car but this happens so rarely that it's not much of an issue.
the_roadie
Banned
Fenderman - oh god no, just a bit pissed off about people whining about "unfair" all the time when all they have to do is read the rules (which are freely published for the entire planet to read if they can be bothered) and come up with something ingenious, or if they can't manage that, something at least competitive.
In my post I wasn't meaning people here, I meant the teams and drivers. They want to do it, they're paid to do it, so let them go and do it without bitching about every little detail.
In my post I wasn't meaning people here, I meant the teams and drivers. They want to do it, they're paid to do it, so let them go and do it without bitching about every little detail.
Fenderman
Rooters Reporter
Fair play, the_roadie. 
the_roadie
Banned
Well actually there's an answer to that - a couple actually.
Firstly the glass vs carbon fibre thing.
Both glass fibres and carbon fibres are brittle sharp and spiky and individually have all the strength of a wet tissue paper - no use whatsoever.
When you line them up and bind them together in a matrix (using some sort of epoxy-type glue) then they become particularly strong - the whole becomes massively stronger than the sum of the parts.
Carbon fibres are intrinsically stronger than glass ones, a bit like the difference between metal poles and wooden poles.
Second is their behaviour when broken.
When you (i.e. an F1 driver) breaks either fibreglass or CF panels you still get sharp bits at the broken edges and retention of the shape of the bit broken off, but because the carbon fibres are stronger than glass fibres broken CF bits are more effective at puncturing tyres than broken fibreglass bits.
You can bend fibreglass comparatively easily compared to CF, it has more "give".
Going back to my original post the_roadie what reason is there for some rule changes to limit the areas of CF to where strength is most important and use materials less likely to fracture into shards where light impacts are likely to occur?
I never actually mentioned fibre glass and I think that fibre glass would be crap on an F1 car it just would not have the strength to do the job, I meant glass that shatters into tiny harmless pieces that do not puncture tyres or a way of holding the parts together once broken like laminated glass does, surely a final coat of material in the form of a thin film of plastic could be applied over the CF to accomplish this...
A kind of contained explosion if you will..
A kind of contained explosion if you will..
the_roadie
Banned
FB I guess the problem is that when metal parts are hit they tend to bend before they break off so they're less likely to break off in the first place. As they crumple under impact they absorb energy, whereas CF is more rigid so all the energy goes into snapping it off.
For that reason and in terms of the bits most likely to suffer impact damage I'm not sure whether you'd want, say, the front wings to be metal and the sidepods to be CF or vice versa.
Mephistopheles, my apologies, when you mentioned glass in the same frame as CF I jumped to the conclusion that your reference to glass included fibreglass.
going back, carbon fibres are stronger than glass fibres, and if they were made as "soft" as glass fibres (as you said) they wouldn't be carbon fibres !
there's also the thing (I propose for discussion) that coating CF panels in a film to mimic the "catching" behaviour of laminated glass wouldn't work because the CF bits would still break off and still be as big and as sharp but with an added plastic film on one side or the other. No difference.
I suppose you could wrap the car in a large condom-like tarpaulin to catch any bits that break off,.....
For that reason and in terms of the bits most likely to suffer impact damage I'm not sure whether you'd want, say, the front wings to be metal and the sidepods to be CF or vice versa.
Mephistopheles, my apologies, when you mentioned glass in the same frame as CF I jumped to the conclusion that your reference to glass included fibreglass.
going back, carbon fibres are stronger than glass fibres, and if they were made as "soft" as glass fibres (as you said) they wouldn't be carbon fibres !
there's also the thing (I propose for discussion) that coating CF panels in a film to mimic the "catching" behaviour of laminated glass wouldn't work because the CF bits would still break off and still be as big and as sharp but with an added plastic film on one side or the other. No difference.
I suppose you could wrap the car in a large condom-like tarpaulin to catch any bits that break off,.....
The danger of metal front wings is that they are the part most likely to be broken off and sent off flying towards another driver or car. Would you really want a piece of aluminium or similar flying towards you? At least with carbon fibre you know it's going to break up on impact.
Fully expecting to be shot down, but aren't the teams restricted to a form of carbon fibre by the myriad rules?
I know to a degree they could revert to a previous technology, but are there not regs in place that hinder forward development as keenly as banning certain historic solutions.
Surely the hearty discussion, for the FIA would be to find some likely central function to examine and develop on the bleeding adage of technology. It could be a simple allocation of media rights revenues, help manage team spending and ensure that F1 kept using the best and safe test technology.
So, I guess my feeling if, no, I think F1 should only operate in forwards gears. I don't see material development as fundamentally part of an F1 team, they are more engineering and xploitation.
I know to a degree they could revert to a previous technology, but are there not regs in place that hinder forward development as keenly as banning certain historic solutions.
Surely the hearty discussion, for the FIA would be to find some likely central function to examine and develop on the bleeding adage of technology. It could be a simple allocation of media rights revenues, help manage team spending and ensure that F1 kept using the best and safe test technology.
So, I guess my feeling if, no, I think F1 should only operate in forwards gears. I don't see material development as fundamentally part of an F1 team, they are more engineering and xploitation.
They could always employ a safety car after a crash so that any carbon shards can be swept off the circuit...
Oh, hang on, that would cause engines to overheat and fail, wouldn't it Helmut?
Oh, hang on, that would cause engines to overheat and fail, wouldn't it Helmut?
GeoffP, this is the FIA rules with regards to materials and composites.
ARTICLE 15 : CAR CONSTRUCTION
15.1 Permitted materials :
15.1.1 The following is the list of permitted materials. These are the only materials permitted to be
used in the construction of the Formula One Car provided only that in all cases the material is
available on a non‐exclusive basis and under normal commercial terms to all competitors.
Permitted materials :
1) Aluminium alloys.
2) Silicon carbide particulate reinforced aluminium alloy matrix composites.
3) Steel alloys.
4) Cobalt alloys.
5) Copper alloys containing ≤ 2.5% by weight of Beryllium.
6) Titanium alloys (but not for use in fasteners with <15mm diameter male thread).
7) Magnesium alloys.
8) Nickel based alloys containing 50% < Ni < 69%.
9) Tungsten alloy.
10) Thermoplastics : monolithic, particulate filled, short fibre reinforced.
11) Thermosets : monolithic, particulate filled, short fibre reinforced.
12) Carbon fibres manufactured from polyacrylonitrile (PAN) precursor.(*)
13) Carbon fibres manufactured from polyacrylonitrile (PAN) precursor which have :
‐ A tensile modulus ≤ 550GPa.
‐ A density ≤ 1.92 g/cm3.
‐ Unidirectional or planar reinforcement within their pre‐impregnated form, not including three dimensional weaves or stitched fabrics (but three dimensional preforms and fibre reinforcement using Z‐pinning technology are permitted).
‐ No carbon nanotubes incorporated within the fibre or its matrix.
‐ A permitted matrix, not including a carbon matrix.
14) Aramid fibres.
15) Poly(p‐phenylene benzobisoxazole) fibres (e.g. “Zylon”).
16) Polyethylene fibres.
17) Polypropylene fibres.
18) E and S Glass fibres.
19) Sandwich panel cores: Aluminium, Nomex, polymer foams, syntactic foams, balsa wood, carbon foam.
20) The matrix system utilised in all pre‐impregnated materials must be epoxy, cyanate ester, phenolic, bismaleimide, polyurethane, polyester or polyimide based. (*)
21) The matrix system utilised in all pre‐impregnated materials must be epoxy, cyanate ester or bismaleimide based.
22) Monolithic ceramics.
[Materials marked (*) are permitted only for parts classified as either front, rear or side impact
structures, side intrusion panels or suspension members as regulated by Articles 15.4.3, 15.5.3,
15.4.6, 15.4.7 and 10.3 of the Technical Regulations respectively.]
Exceptions :
1) All electrical components (e.g. control boxes, wiring looms, sensors).
2) All seals & rubbers (e.g. rubber boots, o‐rings, gaskets, any fluid seals, bump rubbers).
3) Fluids (e.g. water, oils).
4) Tyres.
5) Coatings and platings (e.g. DLC, nitriding, chroming).
6) Paint.
7) Adhesives.
8) Thermal insulation (e.g. felts, gold tape, heat shields).
9) All currently regulated materials (e.g. fuel bladder, headrest, extinguishant, padding, skid block).
10) Brake and clutch friction materials.
11) All parts of engines homologated according to Appendix 4 of the Sporting Regulations.
ARTICLE 15 : CAR CONSTRUCTION
15.1 Permitted materials :
15.1.1 The following is the list of permitted materials. These are the only materials permitted to be
used in the construction of the Formula One Car provided only that in all cases the material is
available on a non‐exclusive basis and under normal commercial terms to all competitors.
Permitted materials :
1) Aluminium alloys.
2) Silicon carbide particulate reinforced aluminium alloy matrix composites.
3) Steel alloys.
4) Cobalt alloys.
5) Copper alloys containing ≤ 2.5% by weight of Beryllium.
6) Titanium alloys (but not for use in fasteners with <15mm diameter male thread).
7) Magnesium alloys.
8) Nickel based alloys containing 50% < Ni < 69%.
9) Tungsten alloy.
10) Thermoplastics : monolithic, particulate filled, short fibre reinforced.
11) Thermosets : monolithic, particulate filled, short fibre reinforced.
12) Carbon fibres manufactured from polyacrylonitrile (PAN) precursor.(*)
13) Carbon fibres manufactured from polyacrylonitrile (PAN) precursor which have :
‐ A tensile modulus ≤ 550GPa.
‐ A density ≤ 1.92 g/cm3.
‐ Unidirectional or planar reinforcement within their pre‐impregnated form, not including three dimensional weaves or stitched fabrics (but three dimensional preforms and fibre reinforcement using Z‐pinning technology are permitted).
‐ No carbon nanotubes incorporated within the fibre or its matrix.
‐ A permitted matrix, not including a carbon matrix.
14) Aramid fibres.
15) Poly(p‐phenylene benzobisoxazole) fibres (e.g. “Zylon”).
16) Polyethylene fibres.
17) Polypropylene fibres.
18) E and S Glass fibres.
19) Sandwich panel cores: Aluminium, Nomex, polymer foams, syntactic foams, balsa wood, carbon foam.
20) The matrix system utilised in all pre‐impregnated materials must be epoxy, cyanate ester, phenolic, bismaleimide, polyurethane, polyester or polyimide based. (*)
21) The matrix system utilised in all pre‐impregnated materials must be epoxy, cyanate ester or bismaleimide based.
22) Monolithic ceramics.
[Materials marked (*) are permitted only for parts classified as either front, rear or side impact
structures, side intrusion panels or suspension members as regulated by Articles 15.4.3, 15.5.3,
15.4.6, 15.4.7 and 10.3 of the Technical Regulations respectively.]
Exceptions :
1) All electrical components (e.g. control boxes, wiring looms, sensors).
2) All seals & rubbers (e.g. rubber boots, o‐rings, gaskets, any fluid seals, bump rubbers).
3) Fluids (e.g. water, oils).
4) Tyres.
5) Coatings and platings (e.g. DLC, nitriding, chroming).
6) Paint.
7) Adhesives.
8) Thermal insulation (e.g. felts, gold tape, heat shields).
9) All currently regulated materials (e.g. fuel bladder, headrest, extinguishant, padding, skid block).
10) Brake and clutch friction materials.
11) All parts of engines homologated according to Appendix 4 of the Sporting Regulations.
tooncheese, thanks for that - where's the box I tick to proclaim myself as a technological desert?
the_roadie
Banned
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
- Article