Formula Ford

[silente]

Hi everybody!

I was looking around a bit to find some tech info about recent formula ford cars.
I am from Italy and we don't have these cars racing here, but i have seen they are pretty popular around the world, especially in UK, Australia, USA (maybe).

I have experience in race engineering with different kind of cars, like formula 3, formula abarth, CN prototypes and some touring cars. But i have never worked with Formula Ford cars.

I donwloaded the rules book of the british series, i guess all the series around the world have nearly the same regulations (at least from a technical standpoint). But now i have seen that for 2012 the car are going to change quite a lot, with more powerful engines, sequential gearboxes, different rims, etc.

I would like to collect some informations on these cars such as:

- general performace (above in term of maximum lateral and longitudinal accelerations with the different tyres they use around the world, i can look for lap times on the results)

-basic informations about power curves of the engines (it could be amazing to have info on the new 2012 spec engines, but i know it could be quite hard)

-Some tyre data, i know it's quite impossible to get curves (except from Avon, although their data seems a little bit strange to me) but at least some basic informations like rolling radius, vertical stiffness.

-Maybe some recorded data logging data?

I would be very interested to talk with somebody using these cars to ask some questions about how they works, which kind of settings they use, which company build parts for them.

Last, i have read that ford is willing to give data to whoever will ask about the things they are going to keep fixed, like rims, basic gearbox (and engines?)
Does anybody know where to ask for them?


Thank you very much for your help!

[silente]

Ok i probably have been asking to specific questions here.

I try with an easier one.

I read through the technical regulations of Formula Ford and, except from the indication about lateral roll hoops, protection structures and impact actenuator, i didn't find anything talking about tubings minimum criteria, strength etc.

Does anybody know if there is any clear indication of something like a minimum diameter and thickness (or section area) for these tubings or any criteria about any force the must be able to face?


Thanks

[Jersey Tom]

I'm quite curious... if you don't have these cars racing in Italy, why the high interest in all the technical specifics?

Also curious what you found strange about the Avon data. I'll admit I haven't downloaded and taken a look at it myself (yet).

[silente]

I have fallen in love with them looking to some video on youtube showing their races and the battles they normally have (UK and Australian FF)
Moreover, in Europe it is quite uncommon to have a non-spec series which is so popular and with so much cars racing.
Third, it is not an aero car, so it is more interesting for me (mechanical engineer) to have fun on a car not influenced by aerodynamics (not in a dramatic why at least).

It could be really nice to design a Formula Ford. Probably i would never have the possibility to build it, but in the mean time it could be a good exercise and a chance to learn more about a series i didn't know before.
Something, i would say, similar to what you do in FSAE or what you (JT) did with your blog about a F.1000 racer.

I am honestly thinking to devote some of my spare to time to do something like that. This is one of the main reasons why i would like to know more and more about these cars.

About Avon: i noticed that all of their tires don't show a peak in cornering force vs slip angle graph. This is something i noticed also when i was working on AVON FSAE TYRE data from TTC.

All the other brands i saw show a peak at a certain slip angle and then a negative slope of the curve.
I wonder why they don't have such a feature. I don't say it is absolutely bad: maybe for less experienced drivers it could be a good feature. But at least it is different than any other tyre i have seen, and probably it produces a lot more resistance when cornering because of the big slip angles they need to reach peak forces.

Also Radial AVON TYRES (for example their F3 tyres) show that feature on their CF vs SA graphs...at least the ones they show on their website. In this case, moreover, they show the graph only till 7 SA degrees, but apparently the force is still growing at that point.

What do you think about it?

[Jersey Tom]

About Avon: i noticed that all of their tires don't show a peak in cornering force vs slip angle graph. This is something i noticed also when i was working on AVON FSAE TYRE data from TTC.

All the other brands i saw show a peak at a certain slip angle and then a negative slope of the curve.
I wonder why they don't have such a feature. I don't say it is absolutely bad: maybe for less experienced drivers it could be a good feature. But at least it is different than any other tyre i have seen, and probably it produces a lot more resistance when cornering because of the big slip angles they need to reach peak forces.

Also Radial AVON TYRES (for example their F3 tyres) show that feature on their CF vs SA graphs...at least the ones they show on their website. In this case, moreover, they show the graph only till 7 SA degrees, but apparently the force is still growing at that point.

What do you think about it?

I'd say that behavior can at times be typical of certain types of tires when tested on a flat track.

Doesn't necessarily mean you'll get to those slip angles when on the race track. Also need to bear in mind they are just presenting you with fitted / reduced data... we have no idea what the actual test data looked like.

[silente]

AVON doesn't give a model (not only at least), but also numbers. Of course they have probably been filtered before.

But this is not the case ot TTC data.

Anyway, loosing informations about the peak position with load, camber etc. is like loosing some very important indication on how you would like to build your car, don't you think? Moreover i math model buil up on similar data seems to produce even worse results.

Nobody knows anythink also about FF chassis regulations? Is it possible that they don't specify anithing about chassis tubings material, except from roll hoops?
Nothing about thickness, loads etc?

[Jersey Tom]

Just downloaded some of the Avon data off their site. Certainly has been processed already in one manner or another. Bear in mind Dunlop supplies FF stuff in the UK now I think. Perhaps they have something.

Either way, let us assume that the Avon data is all you have. Is it all-encompassing? No. Still plenty to get started with and get close on some basic fundamental parameters. Even with heaps of tire data there are still things which require track testing.

[silente]

Could i ask to someone who has more experience/knowledge than me about that (actually you JT or anyone else who want to discuss this topic) what you would look at among that data (or to other Tyre data like TTC) to exctract useful informations to design a race car?

[leisurehound]

PM me. I have a FF in the states (we race on slicks) and have some info I can share. Am also a former CART indy car engineer.

[Jersey Tom]

Could i ask to someone who has more experience/knowledge than me about that (actually you JT or anyone else who want to discuss this topic) what you would look at among that data (or to other Tyre data like TTC) to exctract useful informations to design a race car?

Not going to get into much detail here.. but to start off, start simple. Start with a bicycle model of your car - for which there are really only two design parameters to set. Read through RCVD, the stability and control sections, look at what the important parameters are. Tack them down, and move on. Build a piece at a time.

It's easy to get bogged down and mislead by chasing too many things at once, particularly early on. It's a trap that many people (myself included) have fallen into. As a side anecdote, I think one of the most basic things my FSAE team goofed on was diving into all this BS of camber curves, springs and bars, Ackermann, etc... without having any firm fundamental grasp on the actual response of something as simple as a bicycle model.

Then again, the expert level knowledge just wasn't available. Year after year of the blind leading the blind.