Composites Design Pres 2023diplas 1-2

PYRIUS
DESIGN EVENT CENTAURUS RACING 2022-23

CENTAURUS RACING PYRIUS
TARGETS AERODYNAMICS
𝒅𝐹𝑊 = 1533,93mm
GOALS
𝒅𝑈𝑇 = 330,72mm
𝒅𝑅𝑊 = 883,52mm
1) OVERALL MASS
Weight Target
Step 1: Weight Target | Suspension

Step 2: Approximate Area/kg | Aerodynamics
Step 3: Experiments for weight/area ratio | Composites
𝑾𝒆𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒕 𝑽
∙ 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 + ∙ 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 ∙ 𝝆
𝑨 𝑨
14 kg
2) OVERALL INERTIA
𝑐𝑎𝑟
𝑪𝒐𝑮𝑥−𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑠 1540𝑚𝑚 × 0,53 = 816,2𝑚𝑚
• 𝑰1 = 𝑀𝐹𝑊 ∙ 𝑑𝐹𝑊 2 = 8,43 kg・m2

• 𝑰2 = 𝑀𝑈𝑇 ∙ 𝑑𝑈𝑇 2 = 0,51 kg・m2
• 𝑰3 = 𝑀𝑅𝑊 ∙ 𝑑𝑅𝑊 2 = 2,55 kg・m2
𝑰 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = 𝑰1 + 𝑰2 + 𝑰3 = 11,5 kg・m2
COMPOSITES & MANUFACTURING

PYRIUS
REAR WING

INTAKE SHROUD
AERODYNAMICS
SIDEPODS
FRONT WING
ASSEMBLY
CENTAURUS RACING
REAR DIFFUSER
SIDEWINGS
SPLITTER
NOSECONE
FRONT WING AERODYNAMICS
RIBS to minimize skin displacements FRONT WING SUPPORTS

(Transmit the loads from the skin to the spars) Easier disassembly
(Give the wing its cambered shape) Hollow Flaps
FLAP SUPPORTS
PRINCIPAL RIBS MAIN SPARS

Pass through 3 elements for extra stiffness Minimize bending stresses
Also serve as struts without adding extra weight (Designed to have great bending strength)
LIGHTWEIGHT •Stiff front wing that

satisfies the criteria that
•Compatible with the have been set by the
competition's rules •Achieve a construction
that adds as little weight aerodynamics'
as possible department
RULES STIFFNESS
LONGER RESEARCH PERIOD
The most pronounced influence on LAP TIMES among all the

aerodynamic devices
Increases the Yaw Inertia in the z-axis

CONCEPTS
Cramped Airfoil Profile

XPS FOAM
ROHACELL FOAM Big-budget concept
Carbon Spar
I-BEAM Highly - intricate
SPARS & RIBS Final Concept

HOLLOW First Concept
Swan Supports
FIRST CONCEPT
Struts
Carbon Tubes
XPS Foam (SPARS) STIFFNESS
Swan Supports WEIGHT
FINAL CONCEPT
Carbon
Tube
Aluminum
CHECKS Supports
Main Element
Ribs
Principal Ribs
• FSG RULES T8.4.1 / T8.4.2

• AERODYNAMIC PRESSURE LOADS
CONCEPTS COMPOSITES & MANUFACTURING

Main Element Rib Right Rib 1/2/3
2x
2x
Left Rib 1/2/3 2x
2nd Main Element

2x Rib
2x Flaps
Aluminum Supports Supports
2nd ME
4x
Aluminum
Supports ME
Carbon
Swans
4x
1st Element 2x
2nd Element 3rd Element Endplate 3rd Element
Endplate Rib Endplate Rib Rib Support Rib
2x 2x 2x 2x
XPS FOAM Endplate
Main Element Spar
Main Element 2nd Spar

2x
ME PVC Foam
3rd Element Spar
2x
2x
1x Main Element Tube ME 2nd PVC Foam
INNER PARTS COMPOSITES & MANUFACTURING

FEA RESULTS
6 4
FSG RULES T8.4
• SUBCASE 1: 200N Force Distributed over an area of

225cm2 located at the center of the Main Element.
• SUBCASE 2: 200N Force Distributed over an area of 2
225cm2 on the Main Element located next to the left support. 5 3
11 7 8
225cm2 on the Main Element located next to the left
endplate.
225cm2 on the Main Element located between the 3rd and 4th
element at the left half of the wing near the endplate.
• Subcase 5: 50N Node Force at the frontmost and topmost 10
point of the left endplate.
• SUBCASE 6: 50N Node Force at center of the diveplate. BCs 9
• SUBCASE 7: 50N Force at the tip of the left 4th flap.
• SUBCASE 8: 50N Force at the tip of the left 5th flap.
• SUBCASE 9: 50N Force located at the middle of the left 4th
flap.
• SUBCASE 10: 50N Force located at the middle of the left 5th
flap.
• SUBCASE 11: 50N Force at the frontmost point of the left 1
vortex tube.

SUBCASE 1 - DISPLACEMENTS SUBCASE 6 - DISPLACEMENTS
SUBCASE 2 -
DISPLACEMENTS SUBCASE 7 - DISPLACEMENTS
SUBCASE 8 -
DISPLACEMENTS
SUBCASE 3 -
DISPLACEMENTS
SUBCASE 9 -
DISPLACEMENTS
SUBCASE 4 -
DISPLACEMENTS SUBCASE 10 -
DISPLACEMENTS
SUBCASE 11 -
DISPLACEMENTS
SUBCASE 5 -
DISPLACEMENTS
FEA RESULTS COMPOSITES & MANUFACTURING

Air Pressure LOADS
DISPLACEMENTS
Max Value: 1.40mm
COMPOSITE STRESSES
Max Value: 17.88mm
STRESSES
Max Value: 13.75mm
FABRICS
SPREAD TOW → LOW CRIMP → GOOD MECHANICAL PROPERTIES / AIRFLOW
-45|45 BIAXIAL → ZERO CRIMP → ENHANCE -45|45 DIRECTION → LESS WASTE
2x2 TWILL → AVERAGE CRIMP/DRAPABILITY → EXCELLENT MECHANICAL PROPERTIES

PARTS WEIGHT COMPOSITES & MANUFACTURING

INNER CORE TOTAL WEIGHT CARBON SKIN (gr.)

TOTAL WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION
(gr.)
1818,33
507,885
* The CARBON SKIN consists of the 1st Element, the 2nd,
3rd ,4th ,5th and the Main Element
EXTERNAL STRUCTURE TOTAL
WEIGHT (gr.)
2.361,185
2778,05 INNER CORE
EXTERNAL STRUCTURE
SUPPORTS (gr.)
3612,89 SUPPORTS
743,82

REAR WING AERODYNAMICS
PASSIVE DRS NO STRUTS

Weight Optimization because of DRS
POINT A
CARBON
RODS
for extra
stiffness
CHECKS
1) RULES
Distance of the point of application of the 50N force (POINT A) > Distance of the inertial force
applied to the COG of the wing.
𝑚
Inertial Force = 3,3 𝑘𝑔 × 2𝑔 = 64,75𝑁 𝑔 = 9,81 𝑠2
MRULES = 𝑑1 × 50𝑁 = 0,923 × 50 = 46,15 𝑁𝑚

MINERTIAL = 𝑑2 × 64,75 = 0,589 × 64,75 = 38,13 𝑁𝑚
• MRULES Creates greater torque on the Supports.
• Greater forces than those generated by the inertial force exerted on the COG of the car when it
turns.
2) AERODYNAMIC PRESSURE LOADS
MAIN ELEMENT ADHESIVE (LOCTITE EA 9466)

ENDPLATES
CONNECTION
2nd ELEMENT BOLTS

3rd ELEMENT BOLTS

INCLINED SWAN SUPPORTS

HIDDEN BEHIND THE HOOP
LESS AERODYNAMIC DRAG
RESISTANT IN LATERAL LOADS
XPS FOAM
ROHACELL FOAM
CONCEPTS
FINAL CONCEPT
I-BEAM
SPARS & RIBS
HOLLOW
Weight Optimization on the Final Concept

(Only on the layers)
5
4 3.298
2.899
4.377
3
2
0.53 0.78 1.01
1
0
ENDPLATES DISPLACEMENTS SUBCASE 2 (mm)
Quasi – Isotropic WEIGHT (Kg)
Behavior

3rd ELEMENT
LEFT/RIGHT RIB
LEFT/RIGHT 2nd ELEMENT 2x
ENDPLATE RIBS
LEFT/RIGHT ME RIBS
2x
2x
2nd ELEMENT
MIDDLE
LEFT/RIGHT ME Endplate
SUPPORTING RIB
Rib
1x
2x
Swan Supports 2x
XPS Foam 1x
2nd Element Spar

1x
Main Element 2nd Spar

1x
Main Element Spar

1x

FEA RESULTS 4 5
FSG RULES T8.4
• SUBCASE 1: 200N Force Distributed

over an area of 225cm2 located at
the center of the Main Element.
• SUBCASE 2: 200N Force Distributed
over an area of 225cm2 on the Main
Element located next to the left
endplate.
• Subcase 3: 50N Node Force at the
frontmost and topmost point of the 3
1
left endplate.
• Subcase 4: 50N Node Force at the 2
frontmost and lowest point of the
left endplate.
• Subcase 5: 50N Node Force at the BCs: SID 1 – 4 holes on the Swan Supports, 2 holes
middle of the 3rd element. on the Carbon Rods Mounts
SUBCASE 2 - SUBCASE 3 -
Displacements Displacements
SUBCASE 1 -
Displacements
SUBCASE 4 - SUBCASE 5 -
Displacements Displacements

Air Pressure LOADS

CARBON FIBER
TYPE SELECTION
PREPREG > DRY FABRIC
DISPLACEMENTS
Max Value: 1.56mm
Superior Mechanical
Properties
COMPOSITE STRESSES
Max Value: 32.46mm
Imperative since the

wing has a nearly hollow
structure
STRESSES
Max Value: 46.30mm


INNER CORE TOTAL WEIGHT (gr.)

REAR WING FINAL WEIGHT (gr.)
555.65
2828,03
3298,96
SUPPORTS (gr.)
702,61
EXTERNAL STRUCTURE TOTAL WEIGHT

TOTAL WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION
(gr.)
1569,79
2040,71
CARBON SKIN (gr.)
741.33 INNER CORE EXTERNAL STRUCTURE SUPPORTS
ENDPLATE LAMINATION

UNDERTRAY AERODYNAMICS
MUFFLER SIDEWING
SPLITTER
REAR DIFFUSER
RADIATOR SIDEWING

SIDEWINGS AERODYNAMICS
TARGETS
Weight Lightweight
Balance - Stiff
Easy to
Manufacture – Cost
Least holes on Efficient
monocoque

PRELIMINARY RESEARCH
RADIATOR SIDEWING
Approx. 100gr lighter BUT not SPARS & RIBS

easily adjustable (CONCEPT)
Weight
1187,19 gr.
NEW
RADIATOR
XPS FOAM
(FINAL)
Weight
1281,02 gr.
FINAL CONCEPT
XPS FOAM
with lightweightings
of different orientations Spacing for the Radiator
CONCEPT SELECTION COMPOSITES & MANUFACTURING

CONNECTIONS
Larger contact area
* Creates Sharp TYPE 2
– less damage to
monocoque
edges inside the
monocoque ADHESIVE skin/core
*
SPACER CARBON TUBE
TYPE 1
BOLTS
TOP VIEW TOP VIEW CORE’S STRUCTURE

26,56%
25,48%
Weight
Reduction
LIGHTWEIGHTINGS RADIATOR SW
COMPOSITE MATERIALS
MUFFLER SIDEWING RADIATOR SIDEWING
XPS Foam XPS Foam
1x 1x
Front Tube Front Tube
1x 1x
Middle Tube Middle Tube
1x 1x
Rear Tube Rear Tube
1x 1x
Monocoque Rib Monocoque Rib
1x 1x

3
FEA RESULTS
2
FSG RULES T8.4
1
• SUBCASE 1: 200N Force
Distributed over an area of
225cm2 located at the front arc of
the skin.
• SUBCASE 2: 200N Force 5

Distributed over an area of
225cm2 located a bit further back 4
of the middle of the skin. 3
• SUBCASE 3: 50N Node Force at

the rearmost – topmost – inner 2
point of the skin ending. BCs
• Subcase 4: 50N Node Force at
the frontmost point of the Vortex 1
Tube.
• SUBCASE 5: 50N Node Force at

the rearmost point of the Vortex 5
Tube.
SW = SIDEWING 4

RADIATOR SW Muffler SW
SUBCASE 1
DISPLACEMENTS
SUBCASE 2
DISPLACEMENTS
SUBCASE 3
DISPLACEMENTS
SUBCASE 4
DISPLACEMENTS
SUBCASE 5
DISPLACEMENTS
META RESULTS COMPOSITES & MANUFACTURING


REAR DIFFUSER AERODYNAMICS
DIFFUSER
STRAKES
NOMEX CORE
For Stiffness
• DIFFUSER
PLIES OPTIMIZATION SKIN ORIENTATION CORE
CONCEPT 1 3 LAYERS 0|90 NOMEX – 3mm
CONCEPT 3 2 LAYERS 0|90 & -45|45 NOMEX – 3mm
CONCEPT 4 6 LAYERS 0|90 NO CORE
• STRAKES
PLIES OPTIMIZATION SKIN ORIENTATION CORE

WEIGHT TO DISPLACEMENT COMPARISON
DIFFUSER
Weight(kg)
SUBCASE 2 Displacement(mm)
SUBCASE 3 Displacement(mm)
3
2.5
2.5 2.334 2.33
2 1.83 1.78
1.55
1.5
1.685 1.685
1 1.22
0.5
0
Concept 1 Concept 2 Concept 3
* CONCEPT 4 DOES NOT PASS THE FSG T8.4

RULES REGARDING THE DISPLACEMENTS
+ 500gr. heavier

CONCEPT 2 > CONCEPT 1
• Weight
• Little displacement change compared to the weight loss
• Slightly better displacement

FINAL CONCEPT
BUT
• Many overlaps
FSG RULES T8.4
SUBCASE 1: 200 N Force distributed over an area of 225 cm2 located

at the middle of the rear part of the diffuser.
SUBCASE 2: 200 N Force distributed over an area of 225 cm2 located
at the right and rear side of the diffuser.
SUBCASE 3: 50 N Force at the tip of the rightmost and rearmost side
of the diffuser
SUBCASE 4: 50 N Force at the tip of the 2nd strake.
FINAL DIFFUSER SUBCASE 1 SUBCASE 2 SUBCASE 3 SUBCASE 4
DISPLACEMENT 1.33 1.83 2.50 0.07

COMPOSITE
95.39 128.43 71.32 8.37
STRESSES

SUBCASE 1 SUBCASE 3
SUBCASE 2 SUBCASE 4
PART
TOTAL AREA CORE ORIENTATIO
PART NAME PLIES WEIGHT
(mm2) (mm) NS
(gr.)
NOMEX – 2 x Mirror 0|90
DIFFUSER 649804.97
3mm (EC-XC110) 0|90
1430.49
NOMEX - 2 x Mirror 0|90

STRAKES 115805.19
3mm (EC-XC110) 0|90
254.94
TOTAL WEIGHT 1685.43 gr

SPLITTER AERODYNAMICS
1 LAYER OF KEVLAR
for energy absorption
CONCEPTS SKIN ORIENTATION CORE
1 2 LAYERS 0|90 3 mm PVC Foam

2 4 LAYERS 0|90 NO CORE
TOTAL AREA TOTAL

PART NAME CORE (mm) PLIES ORIENTATION
(mm2) WEIGHT(gr.)
4 x Plies 0|90
SPLITTER 110723.68 NO CORE 222,5
(EC-XC110) 0|90
• Weight
(CONCEPT 1 → 265gr.)
• Little displacement change compared to the weight loss

DIFFUSER AERODYNAMICS
SUBCASE 1: Pressures
SUBCASE 2: 50N Node Force located at the side of the splitter to
simulate shock loads
FINAL DIFFUSER SUBCASE 1 SUBCASE 2
DISPLACEMENT (mm) 0.05 0.12

COMPOSITE STRESSES
1.48 73.09
(MPa)
DISPLACEMENTS SUBCASE 1
DISPLACEMENTS SUBCASE 2

NOSECONE AERODYNAMICS
LAMINATION LAMINATION
2 Layers 2x2 Twill 4 Layers 2x2 Twill on the
Orientation: 0|90 edges
for extra stiffness for
mounting with the
monocoque
Cuts for FW Swan

SIMULATIONS Supports
Air Pressure Loads
Composite Stresses Displacements
NOSECONE MAX RESULTS

DISPLACEMENTS (mm) 0.17
COMPOSITE STRESSES (Mpa) 1.11

SIDEPODS AERODYNAMICS
LAMINATION
2 Layers 2x2 Twill
0|90
STIFF
by its own geometry

SHROUD AERODYNAMICS
CHECKS
LOAD
Fan Weight X Maximum Lateral

Acceleration
50N at the CoG of the Fan
5 x Plies 2x2 Twill
DISPLACEMENTS
Max Value: 0.80mm
COMPOSITE STRESSES
Max Value: 80MPa

INTAKE ENGINE & DRIVETRAIN
PLA - 3D Printed BELLMOUTH
Aluminium 7075 T6 SN
RESTRICTOR
Carbon Fiber
RESTRICTOR
Carbon Fiber
PLENUM
PLA – 3D Printed
MAP MOUNTING
Carbon Nylon -
3D Printed
BELLMOUTH
Carbon Nylon -
3D Printed
RUNNERS
Sandwich Structure
Carbon Fiber – PVC
Foam
PLATE

FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS
Mesh Quads and Trias

Volume mesh Tetras
Boundary Conditions
Fixed supports
Loadcase: Pressures from Engine
Sub-Team
Restriction from Engine Sub-Team

Displacement < 1mm

PLIES OPTIMIZATION CONCEPTUAL

• Core & Plies in Plate
• Different number of plies in Plenum &
Restrictor
CONCEPT 1 LAMINATION
RESTRICTOR 0|90, -45|45, 0|90, -45|45, 0|90
PLENUM 0|90, -45|45, 0|90, -45|45, 0|90, -45|45, 0|90
PLATE 0|90, -45|45, 0|90, PVC , 0|90, -45|45, 0|90
CONCEPT 2 LAMINATION FINAL:
RESTRICTOR 0|90, -45|45, 0|90, -45|45, 0|90 Concept 1
PLENUM 0|90, -45|45, 0|90, -45|45, -45|45, 0|90 Safety Factor
PLATE 0|90, -45|45, 0|90, PVC , 0|90, -45|45, 0|90
= 1.2
CONCEPT 3 LAMINATION
RESTRICTOR 0|90, -45|45, 0|90, -45|45, 0|90
PLENUM 0|90, -45|45, 0|90, -45|45, 0|90
PLATE 0|90, -45|45, 0|90, PVC , 0|90, -45|45, 0|90
INTAKE CONCEPT 1 CONCEPT 2 CONCEPT 3

DISPLACEMENT (mm) 0.86 1.07 1.24
COMPOSITE STRESSES
121.5 129.6 165.02
(MPa)
STRESSES (MPa) 61.1 69.17 73.7

CARBON WASHERS AERODYNAMICS
EQUATIONS
• 𝑭𝒊 = 0,75 ∙ 𝐹𝑝
• 𝑭𝒑 = 𝐴𝑡 ∙ 𝑆𝑝
• 𝑺𝒑 = 0,85 ∙ 𝑆𝑦
MAX DISPLACEMENT
FORCE (N) Between ALL Aerodynamic
(mm)
components and the BOLTS
70 0.25
PART NAME LAMINATE ORIENTATION
CARBON 10 LAYERS
WASHERS (Fibermax-C210T2)
0|90
MAX DISPLACEMENT = 0.25mm

LAMIINATE PROCESS ENGINE & DRIVETRAIN
MANUFACTURING METHODS COMPOSITES & MANUFACTURING

LAMINATE PROCESS AERODYNAMICS
MANUFACTURING METHODS COMPOSITES & MANUFACTURING

PYRIUS
CENTAURUS RACING HIGH STIFFNESS PYRIUS
SUSPENSION WISHBONES
WISHBONES
A-ARMS PUSHROD TIEROD

HIGH
STIFFNESS
CARBON A-
ARMS WITH
METAL JOINTS
LOW LIGHTWEIGHT
COMPLIANCE CONSTRUCTION
BIBLIOGRAPHY
FEA ANALYSIS
VALIDATION
EXPERIMENTS

Bonding Characteristics
Bond layer length= 25mm
Bond layer thickness= 0.2mm

Tensile Testing: Bonding Length
Bonding Length :
25mm
Max Force :
20.84 kN
Bonding Length :
30mm
Max Force :
30.04 kN
Bonding Length :
35mm
Max Force :
30.09 kN

Tensile Testing: Bonding Thickness
Bonding Thickness :
0.2mm
Max Force :
20.84kN
Bonding Thickness :
0.3mm
Max Force :
29.4kN
Bonding Thickness :
0.4mm
Max Force :
27.43kN

Tensile Testing: Roughness
Roughness of the insert:

oSmooth
oHorizontal striations with thickness
0.05- 0.1mm

Adhesive Application
Anti-diametric Holes
o Concentric bond
o No gaps
o Microscope observation | concept
selection
One hole Anti-diametric holes

Tensile Testing: Adhesive

Loctite 9461
oSuitable for aluminum and carbon

oHigh temperature resistance up to 100oC
oHigh shear strength
oGood gap filling
3M EC 9323
Loctite 4070

Carbon tubes: FEA
THEORETICAL FILLAMENT 80% -86|86

ORIENTATION
PRORITY: 0|90 WINDING 20% -12|12
STEP 1: simulate every tube separately:
Forces : every worst-case scenario (axial forces)
STEP 2: simulate the hole wishbone:
Forces: every worst-case scenario

(apex, braking turn-in and acceleration )

Carbon tubes: FEA Results

MAX FORCE(N) LENGTH(mm) DISPLACEMENTS(mm)
12-18 14-18 16-18
UPPER FORE 2507 324,31 0,3427 0,1817 0,1241
UPER AFT -2507 318,5 0,3301 0,1785 0,1201

FRONT
LOWER FORE 3146 345,78 0,3727 0,2017 0,1441
LOWER AFT -2250 345,75 0,3468 0,1833 0,1259
UPPER FORE 3610 272,37 0,4021 0,238 0,1535
UPER AFT 2588 213,84 0,2783 0,1695 0,1099

REAR
LOWER FORE 2989 334,39 0,3639 0,1992 0,1444
LOWER AFT -1437 327,32 0,1354 0,0743 0,0502
LENGTH(mm) MAX FORCE (N) DISPLACEMENTS (mm)

14-16 14-18 14-20 12-14 12-16
Front Pushrod 533,39 -1760 0,3762 0,1905 0,1199 - -
Rear Pushrod 335,76 -3166 0,4025 0,2119 0,1313 - -
Front Tierod 276,51 -3892 - - - 0,1289 0,0992
Rear Tierod 230,25 592 - - - 0,0533 0,0643
Suspension’s restrictions, max displacements:

oWishbones,pushrods:0.5mm
oTierods:0.1mm

Wishbones: FEA Results
Rear Lower Carbon A-Arms

Displacements 0.86
APPEX Stresses 173.3
Strains 0.06
Displacements 1.54
ACCELERATION Stresses 220.7
Strains 0.02
Rear Upper Carbon A-Arms
Displacements 0.13
APPEX Stresses 191
Strains 0.004
Displacements 0.96
ACCELERATION Stresses 63.8
Strains 0.00
Front Upper Carbon A-Arms
Displacements 0.05
BRAKING Stresses 59.2
Strains 0.00
Displacements 0.04
TURN-IN Stresses 41.4
Strains 0.00
Displacements 0.02
APPEX Stresses 23.6
Strains 0.00
Front Lower Carbon A-Arms
Displacements 1.2
BRAKING Stresses 362.4
Strains 0.017
Displacements 0.25
TURN-IN Stresses 170.23
Strains 0.013
Displacements 1.08
APPEX Stresses 319.52
Strains 0.015

Tensile Testing: Wall Thickness
Tube wall thickness

o 2mm
o 3mm
Adhesive Type
o Loctite 9461

Pushrod: Tensile Strength
Experiment layout:
oTensile machine
oExtension measuring device
Results
1st test subject:

30kN Load
2nd test subject:

To failure: 55kN

PYRIUS
CENTAURUS RACING HIGH STIFFNESS PYRIUS
SUSPENSION STEERING COLUMN
CONCEPT BONDING CARBON

BASED ON CHARACTERISTICS TUBE
LENGTH:
FEA D:30-35MM
30MM
TORSION THICKNESS; ORIENTATION:

TEST 0.2MM -45|45

FEA
ORIENTATION
FILLAMENT 100%
WINDING -45|45
oSurface & Volume mesh oForces applied on RBE2 set

Quad on surface, tetras as Moment=50Nm
volume oBoundary conditions (Ux=Uy=z=0)
Element Length=1 oAdhesive gap:0.2mm

RESULTS

TORSION TEST

PYRIUS
EXPERIMENTS MONOCOQUE
ALUMINIUM HONEYCOMB
3 specimens
Material: aluminum honeycomb 5052
Dimensions: 100mm x 100mm x 20mm

PRESECUTION OF EXPERIMENT
HYDRAULIC
TENSILE MACHINE
RESULTS
BEFORE AFTER

MATLAB DIAGRAMS
SPECIMEN 1
SPECIMEN 2
E = 586 MPa

3-POINT BENDING
2 specimens
Dimensions : 500mm x 275mm x 22.82mm
MONOCOQUE OUTER SKIN CORE INNER SKIN
LAMINATION Tw0, UD0, Tw45 ,Tw45, UD0,Tw0 Aluminum Honeycomb 20mm Tw0, UD0, Tw45 ,Tw45, UD90,Tw0

RESULTS & SIMULATION
SIMULATION
Force : 3850 N
1.35−1.22
ERROR: = 0.09%
1.35

TWILL 2x2
2 specimens
Material: Bidimensional Carbon Fabric 2x2
Dimensions: 250mm x 35mmx 0.32mm
Hooke’s Law
𝜎=𝛦×ε

SPREADTOW
2 specimens
Hooke’s Law
𝜎=𝛦×ε

PREPREG TWILL
2 specimens
Hooke’s Law
𝜎=𝛦×ε

PREPREG UD
2 specimens
Hooke’s Law
𝜎=𝛦×ε

PYRIUS
GOALS MANUFACTURING
RIGID & RELIABLE

PRECISE PARTS
COMPONENTS
MANUFACTURING
APPEALING PARTS
CONSISTENCY
GAIN LESS WEIGHT

DURING
MANUFACTURING

HAND LAY-UP & VACUUM MANUFACTURING PROCEDURES
RELEASE AGENT
DRY FABRIC CUTTING RESIN & HARDENER MIX
APPLICATION
APPLY PEEL
SEAL THE VACUUM BAG PLY/RELEASE LAMINATION
FILM/BREATHER
CREATE NEGATIVE LET RESIN CURE UNDER

PERFORM DROP TEST
PRESSURE VACUUM

VACUUM INFUSION MANUFACTURING PROCEDURES
DRY FABRIC RELEASE AGENT LAY FABRICS ON

CUTTING APPLICATION THE MOLD
CREATE NEGATIVE APPLY RELEASE

SEAL VACUUM BAG
PRESSURE FILM/BREATHER
APPLY RESIN FROM

PERFORM DROP
DESIGNATED LET RESIN CURE
TEST
POSITIONS

PREPREG LAY-UP MANUFACTURING PROCEDURES
APPLY PEEL
CUT PREPREG
LAMINATE PLY/RELEASE
FABRIC
FILM/BREATHER
PERFORM DROP APPLY NEGATIVE

SEAL VACUUM BAG
TEST PRESSURE
PROGRAM CURE INTO

AUTOCLAVE/OVEN AUTOCLAVE/OVEN

ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES HAND LAY-UP & VACUUM
ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
DOES NOT REQUIRE EASY TO GAIN EXTRA

MUCH EXPERIENCE WEIGHT
CAN BE APPLIED TO UNEVEN APPLICATION

ALL GEOMETRIES OF RESIN
CHEAPER/LESS
CONSUMABLES
REQUIRED

ADAVNTAGES/DISADVANTAGES VACUUM INFUSION
EXPERIENCE
LIGHTER PARTS
REQUIRED
PRECSISE RESIN
EVEN APPLICATION
CALCULATION
OF RESIN
NEEDED
“CLEANER” EASIER TO MAKE

PROCEDURE MISTAKES
CAN NOT BE
EASIER LAMINATION APPLIED TO
OF FABRICS DEMANDING
GEOMETRIES

ADAVNTAGES/DISADVANTAGES PREPREG LAY-UP
STIFFER REQUIRES
COMPONENTS EXPERIENCE
NO EXTRA WEIGHT MUST HAVE SPECIFIC

ADDED EQUIPMENT
ABLE TO CONTROL
DEMANDS HEAT
FINAL PROPERTIES &
RESISTANT MOLDS
TG
ABLE TO CONTROL
EXPENSIVE
EXACT FIBER TO
PROCEDURE
WEIGHT RATIO

WEIGHT CALCULATOR SPREADSHEET WEIGHT CALCULATOR
INSERT EXTRACT
RESIN/FABRIC
AREA/VOLUME
WEIGHT
EXCESS WEIGHT
LAY-UP & CORE FROM
MANUFACTURING
MANUFACTURING FINAL PART’S

PROCEDURE WEIGHT

WEIGHT CALCULATOR EXTRACT INFORMATION & OPTIMIZE RESULTS

MANUFACTURING EXPERIMENTS MONOCOQUE
MANUFACTURING
EXPERIMENTS
PIN
INNER CORE DEMOLDING/LAY-
UP
PVA RELEASE
NOMEX RELEASE
PVC FOAM AGENT/X SHAPE
HONEYCOMB FILM/ROUND CUT
CUT

MANUFACTURING EXPERIMENTS MONOCOQUE
MOLD’S DIMENSIONS TEST
CHECK
DIMENSIONS OF LAMINATION CURE IN OVEN
SPECIMENT
RECHECK
DEMOLD
DIMENSIONS

MDF MOLDS MONOCOQUE
SKETCH MDF PERFORM DRAFT ENSURE PART

MOLD ANALYSIS CAN DEMOLD

MDF MOLDS MONOCOQUE
CHEAP & EASY TO VAUNERABLE TO VERY

SUPPLY HIGH TEMPERATURES
DOES NOT HAVE SAME

EASY TO PROCESS
CTE AS CARBON FIBER

CARBON MOLDS MONOCOQUE
EXCELLENT THERMAL
HIGH COST
STABILITY
RESTRICITON
EQUAL CTE WITH
REGARDING MASTER
FINAL PART
MODEL
DIMENSIONAL EXPERIENCE
ACCURACY REQUIRED

FABRIC CUTTING MONOCOQUE
EXTRACT SURFACES ARRANGE THEM

3D CAD
(SURFACE FLATTEN) EFFICIENTLY
ACHIEVE HIGH USE 2D CUTTING PREPARE CAD

ACCURACY MACHINE SOFTWARE

LAMINATION MONOCOQUE
UPDATE
LAMINATION
SPREADSHEET
DEBULKING

LAMINATION MONOCOQUE

MANUFACTURING MONOCOQUE
PROCEDURE FOLLOWED DURING

MONOCOQUE MANUFACTURING
MDF MOLDS
LAMINATE CARBON MOLDS
CURE CARBON MOLDS
DEMOLD CARBON FIBER MOLDS
JOIN THEM WITH STEEL BULKHEAD MOLDS
LAMINATE 1ST SKIN
CURE 1ST SKIN
APPLY ALUMINUM HONEYCOMB CORE
LAMINATE 2ND SKIN
CURE 2ND SKIN
DEMOLD

AERODYNAMICS
FEMALE MOLD
SMOOTH OUTER
SURFACE
SHINY MOLD’S
FINAL AERODYNAMIC SURFACE
DEVICE
DIMENSIONAL WATER JET INTERNAL

ACCURACY STRUCTURE PARTS

ASSEMBLY AERODYNAMICS

INTAKE
INTAKE
3D PRINTED RUNNERS-
CARBON FIBER BODY ALUMINUM RESTRICTOR
BELLMOUTH

ASSEMBLY PROCESS INTAKE
ASSEMBLE
ASSEMBLE 2 MAIN BODY ASSEMBLE MAIN
RUNNERS-PLATE-
PARTS BODY-PLATE
BELLMOUTH
LEAKAGE TEST WITH ASSEMBLE INTAKE –

PLACE MAP SENSOR
WATER RESTRICTOR

PYRIUS
DRIVER’S INTERFACE ERGONOMICS
OCCUPANT FEASIBLE
PACKAGING DESIGN
USABILITY COMFORT
ADJUSTABILITY VISIBILITY
EASILY
CONSTRUCTED &
ASSEMBLED

DRIVER’S
FEEDBACK
ENGINE
COG TARGET
PACKAGING
RESTRICTIONS
ERGONOMICS
FSAE RULES
THEORY
TIMETABLE
ANTHROPOMETRIC MEASUREMENTS
& DRIVER’S SELECTION DRIVER’S FEEDBACK
FSAE RULES & MOCK - UP OPTIMAL POSITION OF

ERGONOMIC’S THEORY ERGONOMIC PARTS

ANTHROPOMETRIC MEASUREMENTS
Drivers' Measurements
Average
Driver's name: Kokkalis Tzortzis Tasos Krasonis
1. Weight 66 69 77 74 71.50
2. Height 161 178 178 178 173.75
3. Shoulder width 49 50 50 57 51.50
4. Back width 49 45 50 56 50.00
5. Lower back width 50 52 57 52 52.75
6. Chest width 44 46 55 54 49.75
7. Waist perimeter 82 82 91 95 87.50
8. Hip width 44 44 49 50 46.75
9. Hip perimeter 95 97 110 105 101.75
10. Elbow- hand length 45 47 50 50 48.00
11. Foot length 24 26 26 27 25.75
12. Sitting shoulder height 67 58 72 70 66.75
13. Sitting height 89 87 91 91 89.50
14. Shoulder - elbow length 27 40 40 40 36.75
15. Buttock-knee length 45 54 55 52 51.50
16. Knee- heel length 41 48 46 49 46.00
17. Neck length 12 14 14 10 12.50
18. Head height 22 22 22 22 22.00
19. Field of vision 101 105 103 114 105.75

DRIVER’S SELECTION
BODY TYPE
TRACK TESTING OBEDIENCE TO MEMBERS’ INSTRUCTIONS
HEIGHT: 170-180CM
DRIVING SKILLS AND RULES OF COMPETITION
WEIGHT: 60-70 KG

MOCK-UP MEASUREMENTS
Side impact
structure
Head Restraint
position
Clutch Lever
Visibility position
Pedal Box position

Steering wheel
& inclination
position & inclination
Visibility
Driver’s Seat
position &
Visibility
inclination
MANUFACTURABILITY
MOCK - UP ACCURACY
ACCURCYADJUSTABILITY

MOCK-UP MEASUREMENTS
PYRIUS
Driver's name Kokkalis Tzortzis Tasos Krasonis Average UNITS
1 Shoulders_angle 153 153 153 153 153.00 deg
2 Back_angle 135 135 135 135 135.00 deg
3 Hip angle 111 123 126 121 120.25 deg
4 Thigh_angle 151 147 154 0 113.00 deg
5 Knee angle 129 138 133 125 131.25 deg
6 Knee height 41 42 46 46 43.75 cm
7 Pedal Profile - Main Hoop 139 155.5 152.5 159 151.50 cm
8 Brake pedal angle 8 13 10 0 7.75 deg
9 Gas pedal angle 17 21 16 0 13.50 deg
10 Pedal profile height 17 17 17 17 17.00 cm
11 Foot height 27 24 22 14 21.75 cm
12 Foot distance 22 24 16 22 21.00 cm
13 Foot- hip distance 87 100 104 103 98.50 cm
14 Foot- Main hoop dinstance 127 138 135 134 133.50 cm
15 Elbow angle 114 101 121 115 112.75 deg
16 Elbow height 40 42 43 41 41.50 cm
17 Steering wheel height 51 50 50 54 51.25 cm
18 Steering_wheel_support _angle 50 46 156 136 97.00 deg
19 Steering_wheel_adjuster_mount_distance 0.8 0.8 2 5 2.15 cm
20 Steering_wheel_support_adjuster_height 0 0 9 9 4.50 cm
21 Steering_wheel _angle 25 11 90 90 54.00 deg
22 Steering_wheel_front_hoop_distance 26 21 20 20.5 21.88 cm
23 Steering wheel profile height 67 67 67 67.5 67.13 cm
24 Steering wheel efficient angle 92 75 76 119 90.50 deg
25 Steering wheel non-efficient angle 140 103 92 119 113.50 deg
26 Head restraint profile height 99.5 99.5 99.5 99.5 99.50 cm
27 Head restraint contact point - profile height 19 16 16 21 18.00 cm
28 Head_restraint_support_height 1 1 2 2 1.50 cm
29 Helmet - head restraint distance 6 4.5 4 4 4.63 cm
30 Head _restraint _support_distance 2.5 1.5 2 2 2.00 cm
31 Eye height 75 85 79 74 78.25 cm
32 Main hoop height 110 119.7 116.3 115.33 cm


ERGONOMICS DRIVER’S SEAT
COG TARGET
BACK POSITION
& INCLINATION
PERIPHERICAL
MEASUREMENTS VISION
THIGH ANGLE PEDALS’

DRIVER’S SEAT CONTROL
GEOMETRY AND DRIVER’S BODY

ADJUSTABLE TO
DESIGN TYPE ANY DRIVER

DESIGN PROCESS
Shoulders’ Angle
Back Angle
Thigh Angle
Upright Driving Position Reclined Driving Position
o No contribution to COG’s target o COG’s reduction by 1%.

o Uncomfortable driving position o Better driving position
o Field of vision 105˚ o Field of vision 135˚
Final -> Reclined Driving Position
Drivers’ Shoulder and Waist

measurements are used

Divided into parts

o Body
o Flange
Quadrilateral 2nd order

elements for shell meshing
Element Length 2 mm
BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
Fixed supports in all

translations and rotations at the
points where Seat and Monocoque
are mounted.

PLY OPTIMIZATION
CONCEPTUAL
o Core -> 3 mm Nomex
o Plies-> 3 plies of bidirectional carbon
DRIVER'S SEAT UPPER SKIN CORE LOWER SKIN
CONCEPT 1 3 layers of Carbon Twill 0|90 NOMEX of 3mm 3 layers of Carbon Twill 0|90
3 layers of Carbon Twill 0|90, - 3 layers of Carbon Twill 0|90, -

CONCEPT 2 NOMEX of 3mm
45|45 respectively 45|45 respectively
Body: 3 layers of Carbon Twill 0|90, Body: 3 layers of Carbon Twill

-45|45 respectively Flange: 5 0|90, -45|45 respectively Flange:
CONCEPT 3 NOMEX of 3mm
layers of Carbon Twill 0|90, -45|45 5 layers of Carbon Twill 0|90, -
respectively 45|45 respectively
DRIVER'S SEAT/EGRESS CONCEPT 1 CONCEPT 2 CONCEPT 3
DISPLACEMENT(mm) 0.17 0.17 0.17
COMPOSITE MAX STRESS(MPa) 11.69 12.17 12.16
DRIVER'S SEAT/TURN-IN CONCEPT 1 CONCEPT 2 CONCEPT 3

COMPOSITE MAX STRESS(MPa) 504.2 493 396.5
DRIVER'S SEAT/ACCELERATION CONCEPT 1 CONCEPT 2 CONCEPT 3

COMPOSITE MAX STRESS(MPa) 509 428.7 310.5
Final Concept 3
Turn-In and Acceleration Conditions formed the final concept

DISPLACEMENT
Egress
Acceleration
Turn - In

MANUFACTURING PROCESS
First Mold Process

o 2D XPS Foam Panels
o Assembly of panels
o Treatment and Testing by
drivers through the
manufacturing process
Second Mold Process

o Fiberglass and Vinylester Resin
o Prepreg Lay Up
COMPOSITES AND MANUFACTURING

CENTAURUS
CENTAURUS RACING
RACING PYRIUS
PYRIUS
ERGONOMICS
ERGONOMICS HEAD RESTRAINT
HEAD RESTRAINT
RULE
COMPLIANCE
DRIVER’S HEAD RIGIDITY
RESTRAINT
SAFETY
COMPATABILITY
WITH ALL
DRIVERS
COMPOSITE MATERIALS AND

MANUFACTURING
DESIGN PROCESS
Main Characteristics
o CONFOR™ foam CF42 (pink)

o Sandwich Structure Plate
o Height: 290mm
o Width: 160mm
o Volume: 1807cm³
Upper & Lower Supports ->

Aluminum 6082
Aluminum 6082
o Manufacturability
o Suitable for welding

CENTAURUS
CENTAURUS RACING
RACING PYRIUS
PYRIUS
ERGONOMICS
HEAD RESTRAINT
Quadrilateral 2nd order

elements for shell meshing
Element Length 1.5 mm
Boundary Conditions:
o Fixed Supports where Supports
and Chassis are mounted Loadcase: Distributed
o Bolts Force of 890N

MANUFACTURING
PLY OPTIMIZATION
CONCEPTUAL
o Plies of bidirectional carbon
HEAD RESTRAINT UPPER SKIN CORE LOWER SKIN
CONCEPT 1 5 layers of Carbon Twill 0|90 - -
CONCEPT 2 2 layers of Carbon Twill 0|90 PVC foam of 5mm 2 layers of Carbon Twill 0|90
HEAD RESTRAINT CONCEPT 1 CONCEPT 2
DISPLACEMENT (mm) 1.75 1.15
COMPOSITE MAX STRESS (MPa) 84.94 65.79
MAX STRESSES (MPa) 166.94 121.8
Final Concept 2

CENTAURUS
CENTAURUS RACING
RACING PYRIUS
PYRIUS
ERGONOMICS
HEAD RESTRAINT
RESULTS
o Displacements
o Composite Stresses o Stresses

MANUFACTURING

CENTAURUS
CENTAURUS RACING
RACING PYRIUS
PYRIUS
ERGONOMICS
ERGONOMICS STEERING
HEAD WHEEL
RESTRAINT
STABLE
STEERING
WHEEL
EASILY
ADJUSTABLE
DISCONNECTED

MANUFACTURING
ERGONOMICS STEERING WHEEL
DESIGN PROCESS
Launch Quick Release

PTT Button
Button
Handles Paddles
Paddles’ Assembly
Long paddles -> Bigger surface and

stability in turns
Handles
Shape of driver’s hands -> Stability

and confidence during driving

CENTAURUS
CENTAURUS RACING
RACING PYRIUS
PYRIUS
ERGONOMICS
ERGONOMICS STEERING
HEAD WHEEL
RESTRAINT
Mesh | quads and trias

Volume mesh | Tetras
BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
Bolts and Fixed support
400N of Distributed Force
Force is applied where the driver’s

hands touch the handles

MANUFACTURING
ERGONOMICS STEERING WHEEL
PLY OPTIMIZATION
CONCEPTUAL
o Core -> PVC
o Plies-> 4 plies of bidirectional carbon
STEERING WHEEL UPPER SKIN CORE LOWER SKIN
CONCEPT 1 2 layers of Carbon Twill 0|90 PVC foam 10-15mm 2 layers of Carbon Twill 0|90
2 layers of Carbon Twill 0|90, 2 layers of Carbon Twill 0|90,

CONCEPT 2 PVC foam 10-15mm
-45|45(x2), 0|90 -45|45(x2), 0|90
2 layers of Carbon Twill 0|90, 2 layers of Carbon Twill 0|90,
CONCEPT 3 PVC foam 10-15mm
-45|45 respectively -45|45 respectively
STEERING WHEEL CONCEPT 1 CONCEPT 2 CONCEPT 3

COMPOSITE MAX SHEAR(MPa) 27.08 28.65 24.27
COMPOSITE MAX STRESS(MPa) 115.49 117.09 113.98
Final Concept 3
Isotropic behavior

CENTAURUS
CENTAURUS RACING
RACING PYRIUS
PYRIUS
ERGONOMICS
ERGONOMICS STEERING
HEAD WHEEL
RESTRAINT

MANUFACTURING
ERGONOMICS PEDAL BOX
ADJUSTABILITY
PEDAL BOX
COMFORTABLE FOR ALL

DRIVERS

ERGONOMICS PEDAL BOX
Initial slope 13.5Ο

Initial slope 7.5Ο
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Pedal Pads
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sandwich panel
Brake Pedal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Throttle
|
|
| Pedal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Material Aluminum 7075

Drivers can support
their feet here,
during endurance Slopes are defined through
knee angle and pedals angle
measurements

ERGONOMICS FIREWALL
DRIVERS’ SAFETY
SPACE
SUFFICIENCY
TARGETS
EASY ACCESS TO
ENGINE BAY
DETACHABILITY

ERGONOMICS FIREWALL
4 parts
3 fixed parts
1 detachable part
PLY OPTIMIZATION
UPPER SKIN CORE LOWER SKIN
FIREWALL
2 layers of Carbon-Kevlar
5mm of PVC foam 2 layers of Carbon-Kevlar hybrid
hybrid

ERGONOMICS FIREWALL
THERMAL ANALYSIS
TEMPERATURE VALIDATION

ERGONOMICS DASHBOARD
Screen Switching Logger

Potentiometer
Traction Control
Shutdown Switch
Starter
Button
Maps Logger Activation Button
HEIGHT
MEASUREMENTS
CLEARANCE
DASHBOARD
ELECTRIC BUTTONS
POSITION
DRIVER’S FEEDBACK
EASY ACCESS

ERGONOMICS DASHBOARD
VISIBILITY
Dashboard position
Eye height
PLY OPTIMIZATION
UPPER SKIN CORE LOWER SKIN
DASHBOARD
3 layers of Carbon Twill 0|90 - -

ERGONOMICS CLUTCH LEVER
ERGONOMIC
S THEORY
TEMPLATE Clutch ENGINE’S

RESTRICTION
OPENING
Lever S
REDUCE
WEIGHT
`
ERGONOMICS CLUTCH LEVER
DESIGN PROCESS
Main Characteristics :
o Material : Carbon Fiber
o Smooth edges and faces
o Stiff to withstand the forces of the
clutch cable
o Groove to guide the cable and prevent
it from failing
o 40% lighter than the previous
aluminum one
MANUFACTURING PROCESS Compression Molding
Mold’s Surface Apply Release Lamination of

3D Print Molds Agent(PVA) fibers
Treatment
Compression Cure Final Part

Demold
Assembly

ERGONOMICS CONSISTENCY
STURDY COCKPIT
PARTS
MAXIMUM DRIVER RELIABLE BRAKING

CONSISTENCY SYSTEM
MINIMAL STEERING
WHEEL FREE PLAY
`

Composites Design Pres 2023diplas 1-2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Composites Design Pres 2023diplas 1-2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Composites Design Pres 2023diplas 1-2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PYRIUS

DESIGN EVENT CENTAURUS RACING 2022-23

Step 1: Weight Target | Suspension

• 𝑰1 = 𝑀𝐹𝑊 ∙ 𝑑𝐹𝑊 2 = 8,43 kg・m2

𝑰 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = 𝑰1 + 𝑰2 + 𝑰3 = 11,5 kg・m2

COMPOSITES & MANUFACTURING

COMPOSITES & MANUFACTURING

FRONT WING AERODYNAMICS

RIBS to minimize skin displacements FRONT WING SUPPORTS

PRINCIPAL RIBS MAIN SPARS

LIGHTWEIGHT •Stiff front wing that

LONGER RESEARCH PERIOD

The most pronounced influence on LAP TIMES among all the

Increases the Yaw Inertia in the z-axis

COMPOSITES & MANUFACTURING

FRONT WING AERODYNAMICS

Cramped Airfoil Profile

SPARS & RIBS Final Concept

Swan Supports WEIGHT

• FSG RULES T8.4.1 / T8.4.2

CONCEPTS COMPOSITES & MANUFACTURING

FRONT WING AERODYNAMICS

Main Element Rib Right Rib 1/2/3

Left Rib 1/2/3 2x

2nd Main Element

XPS FOAM Endplate

Main Element Spar

Main Element 2nd Spar

INNER PARTS COMPOSITES & MANUFACTURING

FRONT WING AERODYNAMICS

• SUBCASE 1: 200N Force Distributed over an area of

COMPOSITES & MANUFACTURING

FRONT WING AERODYNAMICS

SUBCASE 1 - DISPLACEMENTS SUBCASE 6 - DISPLACEMENTS

FEA RESULTS COMPOSITES & MANUFACTURING

FRONT WING AERODYNAMICS

Air Pressure LOADS

SPREAD TOW → LOW CRIMP → GOOD MECHANICAL PROPERTIES / AIRFLOW

-45|45 BIAXIAL → ZERO CRIMP → ENHANCE -45|45 DIRECTION → LESS WASTE

2x2 TWILL → AVERAGE CRIMP/DRAPABILITY → EXCELLENT MECHANICAL PROPERTIES

COMPOSITES & MANUFACTURING

FRONT WING AERODYNAMICS

PARTS WEIGHT COMPOSITES & MANUFACTURING

FRONT WING AERODYNAMICS

INNER CORE TOTAL WEIGHT CARBON SKIN (gr.)

PARTS WEIGHT COMPOSITES & MANUFACTURING

REAR WING AERODYNAMICS

PASSIVE DRS NO STRUTS

MRULES = 𝑑1 × 50𝑁 = 0,923 × 50 = 46,15 𝑁𝑚

2) AERODYNAMIC PRESSURE LOADS

MAIN ELEMENT ADHESIVE (LOCTITE EA 9466)

2nd ELEMENT BOLTS

COMPOSITES & MANUFACTURING

REAR WING AERODYNAMICS

INCLINED SWAN SUPPORTS

SPARS & RIBS

Weight Optimization on the Final Concept

ENDPLATES DISPLACEMENTS SUBCASE 2 (mm)

Quasi – Isotropic WEIGHT (Kg)