1.

0 Design History and Usage The past half-century has seen a progressive development of the chassis styles used in top line Motorsport. Formula 1 represents the peak of both human skill and technological advancement as this is echoed by the chassis and material development as much as engine and computational advancement.

When Formula 1 began in post-war Europe, the mostly German and Italian teams used basic space frame chassis, which comprised of a series of beams that formed the shape of the car and contained the engine, driver, suspension and other car sub-systems. Figure 1 below shows a typical space frame chassis.

Figure 1 Space Frame Chassis

During the early 1950s, these types of chassis were suitable for Formula 1 racing, however towards the end of the 1950s the engine power had increased as had cornering speeds, both of which necessitated an increase in both the strength of the chassis and an increase in safety as speeds increased.

An increase in the torsional rigidity was also required as suspension development increased. Torsional rigidity is the chassiss resistance to torsional deflection under loading. As will be showed later, chassis stiffness is a very important factor in the handling and performance of a top level racing car.

-1-

In the late 1950s Colin Chapman, the chief designer of Lotus, introduced the monocoque chassis to Formula 1 by placing thin plates around the bars of the space frame chassis, which acted as shear panels in effect. This increased stiffness without increasing mass.

Soon after in 1961, Chapman used a complete tub in the design of the Lotus 49 (See Figure 2). The tub was constructed entirely from aluminium sheeting and it marked an evolution of the space-frame; it weighed less, was stiffer with a smaller frontal area.

Figure 2 Lotus 49 [12]

In 1978 Lotus created an aluminium honeycomb chassis, which, like the 49, was a fully enclosed monocoque. However, instead of just using aluminium panels, Lotus used sheets of aluminium honeycomb with consisted a hexagonal honeycomb with skins of thin sheet aluminium, which gave a very good increase in torsional stiffness without increasing the weight of the chassis.

The 1970s also heralded the introduction of the aero revolution into Formula 1. The use of wings and ground effects dramatically increased the loadings through the chassis and the speeds, which as en effect put a greater emphasis on a strong and safe chassis. In the early 1980s, the chassis designers were finding that the aerodynamic loads were flexing

-2-

the chassis, which not only reduces the effectiveness of such devices, but also accelerated fatigue failure.

In 1981, John Barnad from the McLaren, together with the American company Hercules Aerospace, designed and constructed the first carbon fibre Formula 1 chassis, the MP4/1 (See Figure 3). The performance gain over the conventional aluminium honeycomb chassis was amazing, and subsequent developments lead to the MP4/4 winning 15 out of 16 races in 1988 in the hands of Alain Prost and Ayrton Senna.

Figure 3 The McLaren MP4/1

2.0 Mechanical and Physical Requirements As pointed out briefly in section 1, there are three basic requirements for the chassis of a Formula 1 car that make Carbon Fibre the ideal material for the design and construction.

2.1 Weight As Newtons second law of motion dictates, the force required to accelerate an object is directly proportional to its mass. Since motor racing comes down to maximising the acceleration in the required direction, it follows that reducing mass is one of the best ways of improving acceleration. This not only applied to straight-line acceleration, the cornering performance of a racing vehicle is a function of the weight transfer; the less weight that can be transferred, the better the allowable traction on corner exit.

-3-

2.2 Torsional Stiffness As discussed earlier, the torsional stiffness (or rigidity) of a vehicle affects its handling. Suspension systems are designed with the assumption that the chassis is rigid and that any motion under loading is from the suspension components (springs, dampers and tyres). If the chassis is not sufficiently stiff, it will deflect and render the suspension design flawed.

The vehicle can only accelerate as quickly as the wheel (or wheels) with the lowest available traction will allow it. Therefore it is of paramount importance to ensure that the car remains balanced under all conditions. One of the biggest factors governing this is the ability to control weight transfer. The ability to control the lateral weight transfer distribution comes only if the chassis is stiff enough to transmit the torques [5].

Deakin et al. performed a study to show the effect of chassis stiffness on the handling and balance of a car. Figure 4 shows the difference in front to rear lateral load transfer distribution for a range of chassis stiffness with the overall roll stiffness of 5000 Nm/deg. The results assume a 50:50 weight distribution front to rear and the same front and rear centre of gravity heights.

100 Front load transfer as % of total load transfer 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Front roll stiffness as % of total roll stiffness Chassis stiffness 100 Nm/deg Chassis stiffness 300 Nm/deg Chassis stiffness 600 Nm/deg Chassis stiffness 1000 Nm/deg Chassis stiffness 2000 Nm/deg Chassis stiffness 4000 Nm/deg Chassis stiffness 8000 Nm/deg Chassis stiffness 16000 Nm/deg

Figure 4 - Lateral Load Transfer from a racing car with Roll Stiffness of 5000 Nm/deg for 50:50 Weight Distribution [5] -4-

Figure 4 shows how the front load transfer changes for different values of front:rear roll stiffness. In a rigid chassis, a change in relative roll stiffness of 10% will give a 10% change in the total load transfer characteristics. Therefore, the relationship will be purely linear for a completely rigid chassis. As this never occurs the figure reflects the relationship for different values of chassis stiffness and shows how it will become linearised as the stiffness increases.

The stiffer the chassis, the more predictable the car becomes and the quicker it can be driven. As the weight transfer increases into a corner, the driver expects the car to roll at the same rate, however a car without adequate stiffness will be very unpredictable and therefore much harder to drive.

2.3 Safety Given the extremely high speeds (the highest speed recorded in 2004 was 369.7 km/h) the sports governing body, the FIA, set regulations governing prerequisite chassis strengths and absorption ability. In a high-speed impact, it is important that the chassis absorb as much of the energy as possible and reduce the acceleration on the drivers body.

The main impacts that the FIA test are side, front, rear and top impact and for each test, certain results must be achieved for the chassis to be allowed to race. The side impact test (16.3, FIA 2004 Formula 1 Regulations) for example, involves the following [6]:

The resistance of the test structure must be such that during the impact: The average deceleration of the object, measured in the direction of impact, does not exceed 20g. The force applied to any one of the four impactor segments does not exceed 80kN for more than a cumulative 3ms. The energy absorbed by each of the four impactor segments must be between 15% and 35% of the total energy absorption. Furthermore, all structural damage must be contained within the impact absorbing structure.

-5-

Figure 5 below shows the four measurement points for the side impact test on a development Ferrari chassis that weighs just 31.6 kg.

Figure 5 Ferrari Carbon Fibre Chassis after the FIA Side Impact Test

3.0 Carbon Fibre vs. Other Materials The main attraction of carbon fibre for Formula 1 chassiss is the amazing strength and stiffness for its weight. No other (appropriate) material comes close to carbon fibre in terms of specific weight and stiffness.

Figure 6 shows the specific stiffness (the rigidity of the material for every unit of its weight) as a function of the specific stiffness of high stiffness carbon fibre.

As can be clearly seen, carbon fibre has a specific stiffness in the order of 2-3 times that of conventional metals such as steel and aluminium.

-6-

Stiffness Per Unit Weight

120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Steel Carbon Fibre (High Strength) Carbon (High Stiffnes) Kevlar Aluminum Glass

Figure 6 Stiffness per unit Weight for Common Engineering Materials [13]

The same analysis with strength shows that carbon fibre has a specific strength over ten times that of basic steel.

Steel Carbon Fibre

Tensile Strength Density Specific Strength 1.30 7.90 0.17 3.50 1.75 2.00 Table 1 Specific Strength [9]

Combining the increased strength and stiffness properties of carbon fibre compared to conventional metals and alloys, it is by far the best material for the construction of Formula 1 chassis, not to mention other critical components of the car. The following table shows the increase in stiffness through chassis development since the 1950s. (Please note, values are only approximate)

Chassis Type Stiffness (Nm/deg) Weight (kg) Space Frame 1100-1400 Lotus 25 3250 Aluminium Honeycomb 6100-8100 MP4/1 20000 Modern F1 Chassis 29000-35500 35-40 Table 2 Stiffness and Mass for Different Chassis Types [7] & [8]

-7-

While quantifying the ability of a material is hard to quantify, the Charpy and Izod tests estimate the amount of energy per unit of distance. Most Mild Steels can absorb around 1.5 J/cm whereas some forms of carbon fibre have been shown to absorb around 6.09 J/cm.

4.0 Carbon Fibre Manufacturing Carbon fibre belongs to the carbon-carbon (CC) group of materials, which is a generic class of composites similar to the graphite/epoxy family of polymers.

Carbon fibre can be made by a number of methods in many different forms and as a result, their mechanical properties can be tailored to suit the required application. Figure 7 below shows the multiformity of carbon fibre and carbon-matrix composites.

Figure 7 Different forms of Carbon Fibre and Carbon-Matrix Composites [1]

Generally, all carbon fibres are manufactured by the thermal decomposition of different organic fibre precursors. The most commonly used precursors are fibres of: Polyacrylonitrile (PAN) Cellulose (Rayon) Pitch Fibres

Carbon Fibre used in F1 is generally PAN based and as such, Rayon and Pitch-based carbon fibre will not be discussed here.

Normally, PAN is copolymerised with a small amount of another monomer in order to lower its glass transition temperature and increase control of its oxidation. Figure 8 below lists the monomers copolymerised with PAN and their structures.

-8-

Figure 8 Monomers Copolymerised with PAN Carbon Fibres [2]

A typical precursor fibre will be 93-95% acrylonitrile and the rest a combination of one more of the above monomers. PAN decomposes below its melting point, and as a result it is normally extruded into filament form by a spinning process.

Solution Spinning was the first process used, but it required a great deal of solvent and as a result a new method was required.

Melt-assisted spinning is the best method for converting PAN fibres to carbon fibre with excellent mechanical properties. BAST Structural Materials, INC., developed this method by there the acrylonitrile copolymer is polymerised in an aqueous suspension.

Then, after polymerisation, the copolymer is purified and dewatered before extrusion. Extrusion involves the solution being pumped through a spinnerette containing a large number of small (approximately 100 microns) capillary holes.

Figure 9 shows a basic schematic of the melt-assisted spinning process.

-9-

Figure 9 Melt-Assisted Spinning Process [2]

The PAN polymer is extruded into a steam-pressures solidification zone. After passing through, the fibre is stretched and fried. His process has an advantage over non-melting processes as it reduces solvent use, wastewater and creates a more uniform cross section.

After the forming process the PAN precursor fibres are heat treated to secure their final properties. This is accomplished by heating the PAN precursor fibres (usually to 220280C) at tension from anywhere between 30 minutes and 7 hours. The time taken and temperature is dependant on the composition and the size of the fibre. Figure 10 below shows a schematic of the heat treatment process.

Figure 10 The Heat Treatment Process 2]

- 10 -

The principal reactions that occur during this step (generally referred to as oxidation) are cyclization of the nitrile groups, dehydration of the saturated carbon-carbon bonds and, of course, oxidation. Many smaller structures result, but overall, the final structure of the PAN based carbon fibre is shown in Figure 10.

Figure 10 The Structure of PAN-based Carbon Fibre [2]

Many studies have been performed to find the relationship between grain size and the subsequent mechanical properties. These studies have shown that the PAN based carbon fibres appear to have extensively folded an interlinked turbostratic layers of carbon with an interlayer spacing considerable larger than that of graphite. They show a low degree of graphitisation, and the turbostratic layers are not highly orientated with the fibre axis. [3] Figure 11 below shows two models of PAN microstructure developed from the studies into the effect of microstructure on mechanical properties.

Figure 11 Microstructure of a PAN based Carbon Fibre [3]

- 11 -

After the production process, the carbon fibres can be used to form different weaves. As F1 chassis are predominantly laminated, only the will be discussed. However, it should be noted that other forms of carbon fibre weaves to exist, as shown in Figure 7.

There are two principal weaves used in laminated. Plain weave (Figure 12a) uses basic cross-hatching and is commonly used for plat surfaces (i.e. panels). Satin weaves (Figure 12b) produce smooth fabrics that have good drape and are ideal for use when there are depressions and bends in the macroscopic shape of the end product. This makes them ideal for areas of an F1 chassis that have complex, aerodynamically driven shapes.

Figure 12 Weaves used for Laminates [4]

The laminate structure has an obvious inherent drawback in the sense that its strength is unidirectional. The strength of the laminate in any given direction is a function of the yarn strength and the volume fraction of yarn in that direction. In general, the properties off-axis are hard to predict. As one would expect, this produces a laminate with low out of plane tensile strength. As the strength lies is mostly in tension/compression, most of the resistance to deformation lies alone these planes also.

- 12 -

5.0 Building the Chassis A modem day Formula 1 chassis is comprised of three individual layers; the outer skin, the core and the inner skin. The inner and outer skins are multiple layers of carbon fibre laminates as discussed in Section 4.

The core is a made of honeycomb, which constructed of very thin material divided into cells as shown in Figure 13. It has excellent shear resistance and an extremely high energy absorption that dramatically improves the crash safety of a Formula 1 car.

Figure 13 Honeycomb Cells

The first step in constructing the chassis involves an extremely accurate female mould of the outer shape of chassis (accurate to 50 microns) being produced by a large multiaxis CNC (Computer Numerical Control) machine.

From the female, the carbon fibre laminate sheets (which are pre-impregnated with an epoxy resin) are layed up on top of each other, with careful observation to the direction of the weave. The direction of the weave is dictated by the direction of the particular loads in that area. Depending on the region of the chassis and the strength required, the number of layers can vary significantly.

Once the outer skin is completed, it is placed in a large autoclave and cooked under pressure to squeeze the layers together, which is known as de-bulking. [11] Figure 14 over the page shows the Renault F1 autoclave. After the inner skin is finished, the layer of honeycomb is added, and then the outer skin is layed up in the same fashion. The surface finish from a carbon fibre chassis is amazingly smooth, as required to reduce aerodynamic drag. Figure 15 shows the surface finish of a base Renault R24 chassis.

- 13 -

Figure 14 Renault Autoclave [11]

Figure 15 The Renault R24 Underside [10]

- 14 -

6.0 References [1] Buckley, J. D., Carbon-Carbon Overview in Carbon-carbon Materials and Composites (ed. J Buckley, Noyes Publication, USA) pp. 1-15 (1993).

[2] Edie, D. D., and Diefendoft, R. J., Carbon Fiber Manufacturing in Carbon-carbon Materials and Composites (ed. J Buckley, Noyes Publication, USA) pp. 19-39 (1993).

[3] Edie, D. D., and Stoner, E. G., Effect of Microstructure and Shape on Carbon Fiber Properties in Carbon-carbon Materials and Composites (ed. J Buckley, Noyes Publication, USA) pp. 41-69 (1993).

[4] Burns, R. L., Manufacturing and Design of Carbon-Carbon Composites in Carbon-carbon Materials and Composites (ed. J Buckley, Noyes Publication, USA) pp. 197-222 (1993).

[5] Deakin, A., Crolla, D., Ramirez, J. P. and Hanley, R., The Effect of Chassis Stiffness on Race Car Handling and Balance, SAE Technical Paper, 00MSV-5 (2000).

[6] 2004 Formula One Technical Regulations, Federation Internationale de I Automobile (2004).

[7] Wright, P., Formula 1 Technology (Society of Automobile Engineers), (2001).

[8] Matchett, S., Chariot Makers: Assembling the Perfect Formula 1 Car (Orion), (2004)

[9] Carbon Fibre, http://www.f1technical.net/article3.html (accessed on November 1st 2004).

[10] Scarborough, C., http://scarbsf1.com/chassisconstruction.html (accessed on November 1st 2004).

[11] Producing the Composites R24, http://www.f1technical.net/feature682.html (accessed on November 1st 2004). - 15 -

[12] Grand Prix Cars Lotus-Climax 25, http://www.ddavid.com/formula1/lotus25.htm (accessed on November 1st 2004).

[13] http://www.f1mech.co.uk/manufacture.htm (accessed 1st November 2004).

- 16 -