Which teams have NASA tech in their cars?

[herowassenna]

Dear old Nigel Mansell was being interviewed on the BBC yesterday during qualifying.
They were trying to get information out of him due to his being the Fia steward at this race.

He wouldn't give too much information on the current situation with blown diffusers, but he mentioned about some teams using Nasa developed carbon fibre which is heat resistant.

Does anybody know anything about this?

[fourWheelDrift]

Originally Posted by herowassenna

Dear old Nigel Mansell was being interviewed on the BBC yesterday during qualifying.
They were trying to get information out of him due to his being the Fia steward at this race.

He wouldn't give too much information on the current situation with blown diffusers, but he mentioned about some teams using Nasa developed carbon fibre which is heat resistant.

Does anybody know anything about this?

The shuttle leading edges are made from Reinforced Carbon Carbon (RCC) which is inredibly heat resistant. I think the braked discs are made of the same stuff. As I understand it a component is made in a fairly conventional carbon composite and then it is heat treated to convert the resin to carbon giving a heat resistant carbon component with a special and very strong internal structure.

[Hubble]

Originally Posted by fourWheelDrift

The shuttle leading edges are made from Reinforced Carbon Carbon (RCC) which is inredibly heat resistant. I think the braked discs are made of the same stuff. As I understand it a component is made in a fairly conventional carbon composite and then it is heat treated to convert the resin to carbon giving a heat resistant carbon component with a special and very strong internal structure.

Additionally gas is fed through the material at high temperature to form carbon in the pockets created by the primary heating phase (used to reduce the binder to carbon)

[St00ge]

http://joesaward.wordpress.com/2011/...t-is-possible/

???

[wnut]

Originally Posted by St00ge

http://joesaward.wordpress.com/2011/...t-is-possible/

???

"It seems that the idea of having composite exhaust piping has already been blocked by the FIA, as far as I can understand it (as this is not stuff that is announced publicly)."

This is just plain sad - pinnacle of engineering indeed. Even the piping is regulated!
This is the type of stuff that should be being developed inside the engines. Not bloody batteries!

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by wnut

This is the type of stuff that should be being developed inside the engines. Not bloody batteries!

That's going to be one hell of an expensive engine!

This stuff may get you a tenth of a second off your lap time, but I would imagine that it's a long way off becoming a standard fitting on a Kia Picanto or any other road car for that matter. Another unnecessary expense that possibly only the 'geekier' side of F1 would ever know about. It doesn't send out the same message that things like KERS do. Nor would it have the same impact on a road cars performance.

[JamesH]

Originally Posted by Marbot

That's going to be one hell of an expensive engine!

The ford Zetec engine cost £4billion to develop. (And that is/was pants when first out), but was put in to road cars costing much less.

It's the initial development that costs the money - once you mass produce you get the price right down, and this sort of materials tech is what *could* make F1 engines more relevant to road cars.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by JamesH

It's the initial development that costs the money - once you mass produce you get the price right down, and this sort of materials tech is what *could* make F1 engines more relevant to road cars.

Well the 'Zetec' engine isn't that much different to any other road car engine out there. It's still made from the same basic things that engines have been made from for a long time. Mainly due to costs. Does Mr Average really need carbon composite pistons in his 1.6 diesel? Ferrari 458...maybe, but not necessary.

I think the reason for the restrictions on 'unobtainium' products in F1 engines is quite a good one.

[luke g28]

I disagree.

These are the sort of things that f1 should be developing. Yes the very first uses of it are going to be very expensive for minimal gains, but you have to start somewhere and without change progress is impossible.

[chillibowl]

are we talking about developing new concepts here or simply applying technologies and materials from other areas and bringing it into F1. surely borrowing is more cost effective and in no way diminishes f1 as the pinnacle if those ideas are being borrowed from truly advanced projects like the ones that come out of NASA.

on a slightly different note are there any people with NASA/ESA experience working in F1?

[JamesH]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Well the 'Zetec' engine isn't that much different to any other road car engine out there. It's still made from the same basic things that engines have been made from for a long time. Mainly due to costs. Does Mr Average really need carbon composite pistons in his 1.6 diesel? Ferrari 458...maybe, but not necessary.

I think the reason for the restrictions on 'unobtainium' products in F1 engines is quite a good one.

But what if using those materials in a road car engine improved fuel consumption by 5%. Then it would be worth developing (if possible) in to a mass market product, hence becoming 'obtanium'. F1 could be a place where stuff like this could be tried, to see if it is worthwhile doing.

I'm thinking that a composite exhaust system could be made for road cars - much lighter, and you can make it in to shapes that are not possible in metals. That may immediately give you some advantage over the usual materials.

Remember that until fairly recently titanium was pretty unobtainable, as was carbon fibre! Now the cars are made almost exclusively from them, and both are making slow inroads in to more road friendly cars.

[Tim Falce]

I haven't completely read the thread so sorry if I'm repeating anything but I was under the impression that NASA are using carbon fibre (and other technology) developed in F1, correct me if I'm wrong.

[JamesH]

Here is an article from BBC on F1 technology that has moved to other areas.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14046449

Not exhaustive by any means!

[fourWheelDrift]

Originally Posted by Tim Falce

I haven't completely read the thread so sorry if I'm repeating anything but I was under the impression that NASA are using carbon fibre (and other technology) developed in F1, correct me if I'm wrong.

I think technology has probably crossed in both directions .

The thread started out with Reinforced Carbon Carbon used for shuttle leading edges and F1 brake discs, NASA certainly had it before F1 although who invented it I don't know. On the shuttle the infamous tiles are used where the temperature is below 1260 Centigrade, anywhere that get's hotter than that it's RCC, maximum temperature on the shuttle is over 1500 C, that's hot enough to melt most rocks!

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by JamesH

But what if using those materials in a road car engine improved fuel consumption by 5%. Then it would be worth developing (if possible) in to a mass market product, hence becoming 'obtanium'. F1 could be a place where stuff like this could be tried, to see if it is worthwhile doing.

What if it doesn't? What if the only real benefit you get is from using 5% more fuel?

Originally Posted by JamesH

I'm thinking that a composite exhaust system could be made for road cars - much lighter, and you can make it in to shapes that are not possible in metals. That may immediately give you some advantage over the usual materials.

I suppose that you would have to weigh the cost of such a system against the advantages to be had from it. Currently, 'mild steel' seems to be the material of choice, because its cheap, light enough and does the job just fine in 99.9% of most road car applications. And has done for some time now. Again, it may gain you a little more street cred on your Ferrari 458.

Originally Posted by JamesH

Remember that until fairly recently titanium was pretty unobtainable, as was carbon fibre! Now the cars are made almost exclusively from them, and both are making slow inroads in to more road friendly cars.

Carbon fibre is still expensive stuff, and probably doesn't have enough of a benefit on most road cars to outweigh the cost of them being made entirely from it. Aluminium is far cheaper, and has a very good cost/weight ratio.

Carbon fibre isn't perfect, either. It can absorb water, degrade due to oxidation and heat. It will also lose its strength over time, and minor knocks and scrapes don't often show just how much weaker the material has become.

[Hubble]

Originally Posted by fourWheelDrift

I think technology has probably crossed in both directions .

The thread started out with Reinforced Carbon Carbon used for shuttle leading edges and F1 brake discs, NASA certainly had it before F1 although who invented it I don't know. On the shuttle the infamous tiles are used where the temperature is below 1260 Centigrade, anywhere that get's hotter than that it's RCC, maximum temperature on the shuttle is over 1500 C, that's hot enough to melt most rocks!

RCC has been used on aircraft brakes since the 80's

[neiltb]

and therefore on the shuttle from the late 70s at the latest.