Like Tree109Likes

F1 prototype 2017

Reply

Old 04-17-2017, 09:50 AM
  #1  
Tech Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
G-rem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Belgium
Posts: 751
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default F1 prototype 2017

Hi everyone,

I repost this to not make it disappear under the flow of messages in the "1/10 R/C F1's...Pics, Discussions, Whatever..." thread, and also to post updates

So, here is the story:

as I got bored waiting for the 3Racing FGX 2016, I decided to make my own car based on what I would like to see on a 1/10 F1 RC. So I learned on YouTube how to use Solidworks and then I designed the car. It was a very stunning experience, which took some times (started in february 2017) but now the first "real" prototype is here (3D printed parts, thanks Shapeways), and I'm pretty proud of my work

So here are the main specs of my car:
- 200mm wide (no other option due to technical reason, but as the real F1 are 2m wide, that's ok)
- fully belt driven rear transmission (from motor to transmission axle then from transmission axle to gear diff), so there is no "classic" pinions or spurs
- Spec-R gear diff with Xray T4 gear diff holders
- rear indepedent suspension, based on the 3Racing FGX (only one shock at the rear on the pictures but there will be 2)
- rear anti-roll bar ready
- monoshock front suspension (not sure of the result, I took my inspiration from what it's been done on large scale 1/5 F1), but I also developed a more classical front independent suspension with 2 shocks that fits under the body
- fully adjustable rear suspension (camber, toe, caster,...); Awesomatix style
- fully adjustable front suspension (Awesomatix style)
- 2 positions for the battery: longitudinal (as shown on the pictures) with winglets for ESC and RX, but transversal is also possible
- 3 ways to mount the servo: fixed to the chassis and to the upper plate (as shown on pictures), fixed (chassis) or floating (upper plate)
- use of traditional front and rear wing (like Montech, Serpent,...)

















All my creations are protected by copyright!

Regards,
G-rem

Last edited by G-rem; 10-03-2017 at 03:45 AM.
G-rem is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2017, 09:55 AM
  #2  
Tech Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
G-rem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Belgium
Posts: 751
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Some reactions from the "1/10 R/C F1's...Pics, Discussions, Whatever..." thread: (thank you all guys!)

Originally Posted by Mr Brooksy View Post
G-rem, that is cool! Seriously great work. I love the thought you've put into it and the detail.

Further progress reports will be exciting to see! Thanks so much for sharing!
Originally Posted by Scott_T View Post
Very cool G-Rem, nice to see an awesome scratch-built car.

Only question is - do sensored motors run OK in reverse? I honestly don't know. Or would it be easier to spin the motor around the other way?

Look forward to seeing more progress.
Originally Posted by disaster999 View Post
Sensored motors runs fine in reverse.
Originally Posted by wtcc View Post
G-Rem you old genius Nice work!

Please leak more details like how the monoshock works.

Also: Was there no way to make the rear motormount lower?
Originally Posted by lagcisco View Post
G-rem is my hero! Great looking work
G-rem is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2017, 09:58 AM
  #3  
Tech Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
G-rem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Belgium
Posts: 751
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

My answer to the questions and reactions above:

Originally Posted by G-rem View Post
Originally Posted by wtcc View Post
G-Rem you old genius Nice work!

Please leak more details like how the monoshock works.

Also: Was there no way to make the rear motormount lower?
Thanks!

The monoshock works in a simple way: 1 front rocker where both left and right susension links are connected; so that it acts as a dampening system and also like an anti-roll bar.
Normally, there is some lateral play on the rocker to manage one-wheel bump but guys who runs large scale 1/5 F1 always lock that play. It results in a milder front end (for 1/10, I assume I'll have to choose very good front tyres as most of time we lack some steering).

As I said, I'm not sure of the result, maybe on track it will be a complete disaster, that's the reason why I also developed a more conventional independent front suspension, with 2 rockers ant 2 shocks. We'll see how it works when I hit the track

Regarding the rear motor mount, the position of the motor is almost good (the final version of the main chassis won't have that big cut under the motor, but only a more classical "not-opened" cutout), and I was obliged to make such a big "arch" above in order to match the height of the opposite parts as the solder tabs of the motor have to pass under...Did you see any improvement for that?

Originally Posted by disaster999
Sensored motors runs fine in reverse.
Good point! I didn't think about that, but that won't be a problem at all as WTCC did the same for its custom FF car:

Originally Posted by wtcc
Ok, now there is one thing, which nearly killed this project for me. And I thought I could not come up with a solution. But looking at this problem now, it wasn`t a problem at all and even gave me a deeper understanding about sensored brushless motors. What am I blabbering about ( ) is that with the front-middle-motor-configuration we turned the motor around 180°. So it turns in the wrong direction. For unsensored and brushed motors this is not a problem. Just switch plus and minus cables or A & C. But a sensored motor will not turn with just changing cable position or the esc will even tell you there is a problem and do nothing. There are three steps to make a sensored brushless motor of any make switch its rotating direction:
1. Switch cable position A & C on the motor side
2. Switch sensor cable pin position: pin #2 with pin #4 on the motor side. Don't be afraid here. Just count the wires from left to right. If you did it wrong nothing will happen. Then bring it back in the original order and just count from the other side and voilá it works! Just don't change the most outter pins: pin #1 with pin #6 that is plus and minus
Here is an overview:
Pin#1 - ground potential (minus)
Pin#2 - sensor phase C
Pin#3 - sensor phase B
Pin#4 - sensor phase A
Pin#5 - motor temperature sensing
Pin#6 - sensors feeding +5.0V
R/C Tech Forums - View Single Post - Tamiya FF03

[EDIT]: I finally decided to switch the motor position, makink it a 180° turn, in order to not have to deal with electronic modification in the sensor

Regards,
G-rem
G-rem is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2017, 10:08 AM
  #4  
Tech Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
G-rem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Belgium
Posts: 751
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

And now, here are the updates:

In the V2, I corrected some minor issues that I could put under the light of the 3D printed prototype assembly and I also decided to make some improvements to the existing parts:
- 180° swap motor position in order to deal with the 2-belts drive transmission without having to deal with electronical arrangements as above
- battery position lowered by 1mm
- 0,5mm lower position for the front and rear lower arms on the main chassis, in order to widen the setup window of the car
- adjustment of the steering bellcrank
- front lower arms monobloc part as reinforcement
- rear shocks reinforcement part on the upper plate
- ...

Pictures!!!

1) Longitudinal + monoshock front suspension:












2) Transverse + front independent suspension with 2 shocks:









All my creations are protected by copyright!

If you have any questions, remarks, or if you think about improvements, feel free to tell me!

Regards,
G-rem
luppix, wtcc and DavidNERODease like this.

Last edited by G-rem; 10-03-2017 at 03:54 AM.
G-rem is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2017, 12:37 PM
  #5  
Tech Master
iTrader: (1)
 
wtcc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,482
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

No questions, just Likes
G-rem likes this.
wtcc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2017, 01:14 PM
  #6  
Tech Regular
iTrader: (1)
 
josecarlo1129's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Las Vegas/ Bahrain
Posts: 434
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Way to go, G-rem. I can still remember the FGX thread and all the modifications we did.

Cheers!
G-rem likes this.
josecarlo1129 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2017, 01:37 PM
  #7  
Tech Fanatic
iTrader: (13)
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Arizona
Posts: 973
Trader Rating: 13 (100%+)
Default

Very nice design. My only comment is why two belts? Why not the more traditional gear set at the motor output? Gear meshes are more efficient than a belt. In fact, you could do two gear meshes and get rid of the belts altogether.
glennhl is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2017, 02:02 PM
  #8  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (36)
 
jlfx car audio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: jackson,tn
Posts: 3,643
Trader Rating: 36 (100%+)
Default

Love the overall design as well , but will have to agree with the single belt idea . just for the reason to get more ratio options. Even with a small 60t spur it will keep cg low.
jlfx car audio is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2017, 06:54 PM
  #9  
Tech Initiate
 
luppix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 23
Default

Only Applause!!!
luppix is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2017, 01:07 AM
  #10  
Tech Champion
 
Roelof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Holland
Posts: 7,335
Default

Nice car but is it legal to race? In Europe only a straight solid axle at the rear and a kingpin suspension in the front is alowed by rules.
Roelof is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2017, 04:04 AM
  #11  
Tech Master
iTrader: (2)
 
texastc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Forney Texas
Posts: 1,650
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

That is slick as snot!

That is Texan for that's awesome.
G-rem likes this.
texastc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2017, 05:44 AM
  #12  
Tech Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
G-rem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Belgium
Posts: 751
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by glennhl View Post
Very nice design. My only comment is why two belts? Why not the more traditional gear set at the motor output? Gear meshes are more efficient than a belt. In fact, you could do two gear meshes and get rid of the belts altogether.
Originally Posted by jlfx car audio View Post
Love the overall design as well , but will have to agree with the single belt idea . just for the reason to get more ratio options. Even with a small 60t spur it will keep cg low.
Thanks for your comments, guys!

Initially, my main objective when I designed the car was to have at least the main transmission belt driven (from transmission axle to gear diff). That was how I built my previous 3Racing FGX conversion, and it worked great, so I decided to stick to it (mainly for internal gear ratio and compatible parts reasons, like the Spec-R 34t Xray style gear diff).

I know the genuine transmission of the FGX is gears driven, but when I had the car, I didn't like it much as it was, mainly because it was too noisy and the internal gear ratio was absolutely ridiculous (2,7:1)! With small motors like we are used to in F1 class, that is simply impossible to reach convenient ratios. Plus this kind of transmission uses more space than my belt drive transmission...

Then, I had to deal with very little space at the rear: the general design is already far from classic "pan-style" F1 regarding rear weight distribution (as everyone know, with a RWD, the most at the rear the weight, the better), so I tried to put the motor position the most at the rear that I could, and I was obliged to choose a belt transmission also for the motor-to-transmission axle junction. The problem is that my spur gear would have collided with my upper arm... (the smallest spur gear I could find is the Arrowmax 64p 70t, with Tuning Haus pinion gears (up to 70t also!!)).

But I won't have any problem to adjust my ratio at the track as I've already done ratio calculation with a 15/34 internal ratio, which means I will have to deal with "pulley motor" from 16t to 20t.

Originally Posted by Roelof View Post
Nice car but is it legal to race? In Europe only a straight solid axle at the rear and a kingpin suspension in the front is alowed by rules.
Absolutely not! But I know it and that is not a problem as it was not the point at all: current rules are too much restrictive and my idea was to get a 1/10 F1 RC car as close to the real F1 in term of realism (I really, really hate how classic F1 pan-design looks on track in terms of "behaviour": they look awful in turns,...where mine is leaning on the curve just like real cars!). Drivers at my track are all nitro guys, so no problem, and F1 is my secondary class as I am a Pro 10 guy

Thanks again for your comments and do not hesitate to continue to share your opinion!

Regards,
G-rem
G-rem is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2017, 02:41 PM
  #13  
Tech Master
iTrader: (1)
 
wtcc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,482
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

We are brothers in mind. F1 should be a fast class not what it is now. This class should be top level racing with aero and awesome suspension. I know not many agree on this. But it doesn't matter as long as G-rem builds his dream machine and shares his dreams with us
MantisWorx, G-rem and Antimullet like this.
wtcc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2017, 10:06 AM
  #14  
Tech Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
G-rem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Belgium
Posts: 751
Trader Rating: 2 (100%+)
Default

News!!!

I went back in the design of the transmission in order to try if I could use a more conventional one (pinion + spur gears and belt drive). Well, it seemed to be a good idea:
- regarding space, it is feasible, very close but it works! In fact that was how I drove my custom 3R FGX conversion last year and it performed pretty well.
- I was able to put the battery back due to the more compact rear end. Which is always a good new!

The main challenge was to determine which spurs and pinions I could use. Conclusions are good: the internal gear ratio is 15/34 or 16/34 (but this one seems very hard to put in place, so I think 15/34 will be the way to go).
I can use pinions from 50t to 70t and spur gears from 70t to 80t (64dp); which give me a range of ratio from around 2 to around 3.5. Not bad if you take into account the very limited space

Other change is the lower floor. The aim is mostly aesthetic, but I tried to draw it so that I can, hopefully, get some aero gain. In fact, there are two separate plates of 1mm on the main chassis, which will allow me to get some clearance in corners.
In addition to the floor, I designed a new rear diffusor, to match new 1:1 car regulation

I also considered to use only one upper plate for both front monoshock setup and independant setup.

As you can see on the pictures below, there are some stiffners between the upper plate and the main chassis: in front, in the middle and at the back (plus the ones that support the servo, if I use the fully locked setup). And the side floors act like longitudinal stiffners (even if it is only 1mm), so I decided to go for a 2mm main chassis in combination with a 2mm upper plate. I'm afraid a 2,5mm main chassis would be to much for low grip asphalt racing...

To sum-up, here are the main features of this third prototype:
- 2mm upper and lower deck with multiple stiffners in order to adjust car's stiffness.
- 200mm wide.
- belt driven rear transmission (15/34 internal gear ratio and range of ratio from 2 to 3.5, ideal for 21.5t blinky or 17.5t/21.5t boosted).
- Spec-R gear diff with Xray T4 gear diff holders.
- rear indepedent suspension, based on the 3Racing FGX (2 on-board shocks).
- rear anti-roll bar ready.
- monoshock front suspension or "classical" front independent suspension with 2 shocks.
- fully adjustable rear suspension (camber, toe, caster,...); Awesomatix style.
- fully adjustable front suspension (Awesomatix style).
- 0,5mm lower position for the front and rear lower arms on the main chassis, in order to widen the setup window of the car.
- 2 positions for the battery: longitudinal with winglets for ESC and RX to close the lower floor, or transversal. Battery is also 1mm lower on the main chassis.
- 3 ways to mount the servo: fixed to the chassis and to the upper plate (as shown on pictures), fixed (chassis) or floating (upper plate).
- traditional front and rear wing (like Montech, Serpent,...) compatible.
- front lower arms monobloc part as reinforcement.
- rear shocks reinforcement part on the upper plate.
- lower floor + rear diffusor.

Pictures!!!

1) Longitudinal + monoshock front suspension:
















2) Transverse + front independent suspension with 2 shocks:











All my creations are protected by copyright!

I would like to thank everyone who participates in this discussion by giving me opinions, advices,... that really helped me to improve my first designs. So do not hesitate to tell me if you have any questions, remarks, or if you think about any improvements!

Regards,
G-rem

Last edited by G-rem; 10-03-2017 at 04:03 AM.
G-rem is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2017, 11:17 AM
  #15  
Tech Elite
 
JayL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ca
Posts: 3,001
Default

Longitudinal motor in middle of car "spur" on the diff, "pinion" on the motor, direct contact?
MantisWorx likes this.
JayL is offline  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service