Leadership Team SLR No.77 Posted July 5, 2004 Leadership Team Share Posted July 5, 2004 Arnie, It would not be very polite to name a person who made an honest statement to me during a private conversation on the subject of wing qualities and weights, excepting to say that he (or she) has been a very satisfied customer of yours and merely made a number of observations. I have not rubbished or otherwise the quality, weight or value of DiTP products. I merely state that there are differing products available, at different qualities and cost. It is not a slur on the quality of a particular product if it is not the lightest available - although you may beg to differ on this opinion. I feel you may be mis-guided to some extent if you believe that in order for DiTP product to be the best, it must be the shiniest, and the lightest, and the strongest, and so on. You may as well include price (cheapest, that is ) if that is the direction which you are going. An alternative wing may be lighter, but not as strong. Is it better or worse? Rather subjective I fear? RIF is producing some excellent components for the 7, as is Joachim, as are Caterham, as is Tillett, and yourself included, prior to the demise of DiTP. Being pre-preg does not automatically make one product vastly superior to another, but more the total product concept, applying a suitable manufacturing method for the purpose of the product. Just because it's produced the same way as a Formula 1 part doesn't always make it the best - but it will for a particular application. You are knowledgeable more than most that in the racing world the specification and design brief of a component destined for F1 differs massively to that needed for a race such as LeMans? Just my 2-penneth Stu. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V7 SLR Posted July 5, 2004 Share Posted July 5, 2004 Damn... missed RIF off my appreciation list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dobuy Posted July 5, 2004 Share Posted July 5, 2004 The biggest difference is that you can't buy DiTP carbon as it is no longer available, makes the discussion some what moot 🙆🏻 Duratec Se7en, built in Dubai, pics here! Keep it sunny side up and out of the kitty litter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFA Posted July 5, 2004 Share Posted July 5, 2004 You canb buy DiTP carbon, Its just that only airboxes are left! Stu, When Activa is up and running, come for a factory tour. I'll convince you otherwise. ANd on the price subject, like I say we will be destroying the market for all our competitors escept RiF (because he's a decent chap and we do not really have significant product overlap). Ex Fat Arnie Hauling Less Lard.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre Gillet Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 Another reason for going for carbon would be that it is more resistant to sand chipping than paint. Is it a proven fact ? If the answer is yes, I might go for rear carbon wings. Would these need some 3M transparent film protection too ? If the answer is yes, could it be done by the carbon bits manufacturers? Pierre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre Gillet Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 Edited by - Pierre Gillet on 18 Sep 2004 08:27:01 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chelspeed Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 It's a lot more resistant than GRP. The lower leading edge of my CF rear wings are in pretty good nick, the GRP ones were well poorly. Probably more resistant than paint but no evidence, guess different paints will vary too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chelspeed Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 Oops now I've done it too..... Edited by - Chelspeed on 18 Sep 2004 10:45:09 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metal mickey Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 Arnie - when do you anticapate Activa being up and running? Mike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre Gillet Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 Arnie, active Activa 😬 😬 😬 Pierre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulD Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 I wouldn't believe anyone who tells you that carbon fibre is more resistant to stone damage than glass fibre. All composites are really poor in this respect. The thinner (lighter) you make the component, the more likely it is to be damaged. Areas on racing cars that are prone to stone damage will have a few plies of glass, kevlar or dyneema before any carbon plies. These fibres are much less brittle than carbon and can absorb more energy before they break. In areas that are really under fire, the only solution is to laminate in a "ply" of titanium or stainless-steel foil. BTW, glass fibre isn't all bad (only chopped strand mat with polyester resin is). Glass fibre is used in a few, specific, areas of current F1 cars because it's poperties for that application are better than carbon (strain to failure and lower stiffness). Glass pre-preg costs significantly more than carbon pre-preg! Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFA Posted September 18, 2004 Share Posted September 18, 2004 Paul, I think that while your point is technically correct, the point being made refers to painted or gelcoat finished chopped mat GRP from which Caterham have their GRP wings made. Grahams point is, and the whole reason I got into this composites line 10 (ish) years ago is solely because proper autoclave formed non wet layup carbon wings retain their cosmetic appearance almost infinately longer than those of the GRP construction mentioned above with no need for protective film so long as they are not laquered. Carbon, using the more expensive resin systems has a very shiny generally flaw free finish and remains so without the need for any film to protect it. The wet layup wings on the market (non Caterham) continue to use gelcoat and hence offer no better stonechip resisitance than the GRP type. Paul, If Ferrari really are paying so much for prepreg GRP, I can put you in touch with my supplier who sells it at around 2/3 the price of Z-preg, or 1/3 the price of decent LTM26. Micky/Pierre, we take the factory formally on 1st October, and building work and installation of the clave and oven etc means production will be running on or before October 25th. We intend to make a big batch of parts to fit Caterhams using the DITP moulds that week and we will also be making a seat very similar to a Tillet except it will be 100% carbon and about 1/2 the weight of a Kevlar Tillet as a result. I'll publish prices (read much lower than DITP) on the website and will notify all parties who have registered interest by email when we are ready to take orders (probably Oct 18th) for 2-3 week delivery. Ex Fat Arnie Shameless Site Manager Approved Commercial Link here Edited by - EFA on 18 Sep 2004 23:05:04 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulD Posted September 19, 2004 Share Posted September 19, 2004 Arnie, I suspect that you are right, that a lot of it is down to resins. The epoxies used in pre-pregs are a lot tougher than old polyesters. For road car rear wings, laminating in a 0.5mm piece of Ti in the area where the standard stone guards go would make a very nice product. As for galss pre-preg prices, "structural" glass fibres such as S-glass & R-Glass are a lot more than E-glass - similar price to M46J! Paul Edited by - PaulD on 19 Sep 2004 07:12:07 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joachim Westermann Posted September 19, 2004 Share Posted September 19, 2004 EFA (road whore), can you show me please a cracked wet laminated wing from "stonechips”? Do you know how much numbers of very reasonable brilliant looking wet laminated wings up to date are sold? 😬 Regards Joachim www.mog-racing.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre Gillet Posted September 19, 2004 Share Posted September 19, 2004 In fact my point comes from the following : 2 years ago I had my rear wings repainted (pearlescent ruby) and I fitted carbon stone guards supplied by Caterham. While the latter are now slightly damaged, the paint of the leading edge of the wing and of the spots above the guards is ruined. If the resin of the guards is epoxy, it becomes obvious that this epoxy resin is more resistent than the polyurethane varnish of my paint. My conclusion would be to use carbon wings made with epoxy resin rather than polyester resin that might not be more resistent than polyurethane varnish 🤔 Pierre Edited by - Pierre Gillet on 19 Sep 2004 09:16:03 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Mill Posted September 19, 2004 Share Posted September 19, 2004 Hi EFA "Autoclave cured pre-preg provides the best weight/strength ratio which is why is is used exclusively in high strength/low mass applications such as F1 cars and aeroplane wings etc." Not quite true - I have been around the factory at DG Flugzeugbau (who make the DG range of sailplanes) and they don't use any pre-preg. I don't have any axe to grind on this one - I used to be a director of a CF moulding company which was 100% pre-preg - I just wanted to put the record straight. Colin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFA Posted September 19, 2004 Share Posted September 19, 2004 OK I was talking Airbus when referring to aviation then. So "almost exclusive"... Ex Fat Arnie Shameless Site Manager Approved Commercial Link here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Mill Posted September 19, 2004 Share Posted September 19, 2004 Hi EFA I think it would be missleading to suggest that pre-preg and the best of wet layup gave vastly different resin/fibre ratios. I think Joachim may be right about going to Germany to see how to do wet layup right - they do do it very well indeed. As for stone impact resistance I'd say that its more down to epoxy resin than anything else. Colin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre Gillet Posted September 19, 2004 Share Posted September 19, 2004 Are MOG using epoxy for their rear wings ? Pierre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulD Posted September 19, 2004 Share Posted September 19, 2004 I understand that airbus are pushing very hard on RTM for the A380 & A400 . Hand laid-up pre-preg components are too expensive for comercial aircraft for the small improvement in mechanical characteristics that you get. Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CageyH Posted September 19, 2004 Share Posted September 19, 2004 I would hope that Airbus would be pushing very hard for the RTM application on A380, as it is due to fly sometime next year.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henk Posted September 20, 2004 Share Posted September 20, 2004 EFA. If you can supply prepeg 1/3 the price of LTM 26 i would most interested in purchasing from you. Please mail me ,regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chelspeed Posted September 20, 2004 Share Posted September 20, 2004 > I wouldn't believe anyone who tells you that carbon fibre is more resistant to stone damage > than glass fibre. I don't need anyone to tell me this, I saw it for myself. Of course it was probably just the gelcoat damaged as Arnie said, but as far as Caterham owners are concerned gelcoat or paint damage is damage (we're all tarts really). The wing may still be structurally sound but if it's grit blasted with stone chips then it's damaged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now