EXOTIC PISTON & ROD COMBO

Fresh off the machining centers.

Here's a sneak peak at what my CNC guy has been doing. He's basically obsessed with making the finest piston and rods with a F1 heritage. He's a big F1 fan and has connected with some in the know European suppliers.

Here's some pics. I am sure there will be "critics." But this level of machining and development is not usually shared, so this I would say is a big treat for da little guys.







FANUC Fo-Shizzay!!

 

but how is i supposed to get mah cranks in there?

and...what material???

its purty though

 

Final rod will have a separate cap with rod bolts.

The material is aluminum based. Can't say more right now.

 

Beedle bearings with a multy piece crank, like the old opposed Porsche's, I like it.

 

LOL, like Jr. drag motor on steroids.

 

Remind me of this:

***Notice how rod cap area was re-enforced? Tell your friend that***

 

Beefy.

There's an area of the rod that's more highly stressed than the big end though.

 

Most of rod (not F1) failures I have seen are found at the rod cap area. If you look at the skirt of the rod up to the piston pin, there is not a whole lot room for weak point. Thus, making this Cosworth rod one of the best design in F1 racing.

 

Can you point me examples of this. Would like to see more info on this.

Thanks.

 

It's alway cool to see what has made it off the drawing board!!

Hopefully some of the cool stuff that is posted up here is eventually available to the consumer market!

 

I always thought H beam was stronger than I beam? hmm Also I don't like the sharpness to the bottom of the skirts. Pretty though.

 

My PC crashed over the week-end. I'll see what I can find.

 

H beam is theoretically stronger in tension because there is more material.

I beam is theoretically stronger in compression as the compression load localizes on the edges.

Our strategy is to make an I-beam that does both. Can't really do that with an H-Beam.

 

Here ya go. Follow link for whole story:

"Another challenge faced when chasing such high revs were the connecting rod and big end bearings, which displayed their weaknesses very publicly when Nico Rosberg's failed spectacularly in Malaysia. The rods are titanium and, unlike some other manufacturers, still have separate shell bearings. Initially, the rev limit was reduced to ensure the life of the engines while the problem was tackled at the factory. The problem is ensuring the big end adopts the correct shape under load to achieve an even surface pressure across the bearing face with an uninterrupted film of oil. Extensive work on the rod design, bearing specification and choice of engine oil allowed the full 20,000rpm to be built up to again as the season progressed and confidence grew. This is indeed an impressive feat, when you consider that the piston has an equivalent mass of about 2.5 tonnes at 20,000rpm. With peak gas loads greater than 65kN, and peak inertia loads verging on 60kN, there is little wonder the connecting rods can stretch as much as 0.6mm during a single cycle.
The location of the rod is entirely determined by the little end and the piston. 'If you attempt to move the connecting rod along the crank pin there is a surprising amount of movement,' notes Jilbert. 'Like all these things, it's the detail in the design that matters.'
The crankshaft turns in a chambered crankcase running at 300-500millibars depression to reduce windage losses. To keep it in balance at 20,000rpm the crank has balance weights made from Densamet, a tungsten alloy that is normally found on the end of missiles."

http://www.racecar-engineering.com/a...f1-engine.html

 

Very cool!

Looks like its obviously not going to hold a std ringpack. So its going to be a 2 ring design?

Can you share what the available rod lengths would be?

Also MOTU are you the one thats doing the research on the material expansion with the piston design?

 

This is a cool pic from the article you linked.

I am completely aware of BE bore distortion. We'll be testing that to come up with the final config. Bearing eccentricity comes into play among other things.

 

Collaborative design. It's a good team. I've got some good insider info on design, and my CNC guy has good CAD/CAM and material knowledge.

When you are creative, starting with a blank slate with 1,000% design freedom can lead to something beautiful.

 

i'm suprised you don't see more fractured rod cap design in some of these highend rods.

or would they not benefit from something like that?

 

Fractured is best suited for powdered metal apps.

 

oh ok. i know they are used alot in diesel applications

 

The rod you posted doesn't look anything like the rod from the article. Are you sure the pic you posted is of an F1 app.? It looks too beefy...


Nice to see the progress Rocket. What kind of G's are you expecting this to handle?

 

out of curiosity. what bore, stroke and deck height were these designed for? also what max RPM?

 

It is indeed. Most if not all F1 piston designs are fairly similar looking. The rod is where it determine the winner. Try to break the rod on this one. LOL

 

Sorry for the confusion. The rod pic I posted came from a retired V10 F1 Cosworth car; and yes, it is totally different from the one in the article. I posted that pic just to show "Master of the Universe" the "look-a-like" between his design and the one in the pic. The article is to give him an idea of Cosworth's rod design.

 

I thought if the rod cross sectional areas are the same, and the material used is the same, there is no difference in rod strength in tension or compression?