8080

[RichFox]

Tom

 El mirage we set 3records on my birthday! Rick with788 still maintains first points over Michele in 6060 by 1 point. Tim got a record of 149 by 1mph. I don.t think 8080 will be a big record setter.

8080 was scrutinized by a ad hoc group of "fact finders" they adjourned to a private meeting. to prepare their findings to present to the "tech committee" Which will eventually find its way to the board. just like they did with 5050.I believe there will rule changes. Which means streamliner specs.  (not the game  I have always admired!)

They followed Tims perfect run, found no marks, and had no negative comments.But the pall of doom is still
hangs heavy.

I could eliminate the skids with no ill effects. They create aero drag anyway.Dodge the

safety they provide!

What if a narrow tread was found to be the most efficient way to propell a optimized shape in a straight line? How will we ever know?

Shouldn't new ideas in a class that is supposed to represent the epitome of innovation be recognized as a means to create growth, advance progress and impart knowledge?

How many of these voters have ever had an original thought, and were able to build, drive, learn and improve the next design?.
 An original thought-----I don't use Acura gaskets on public toilets , because I know everybody else does and the seat is clean!    If I am stupid enough to believe this, I should have the right to save the store owner money, have a more confotable non wrinkle making seat, and probably not infect my Acura!

Jack Costella


 

 

         

[John Noonan]

Tom

 El mirage we set 3records on my birthday! Rick with788 still maintains first points over Michele in 6060 by 1 point. Tim got a record of 149 by 1mph. I don.t think 8080 will be a big record setter.

8080 was scrutinized by a ad hoc group of "fact finders" they adjourned to a private meeting. to prepare their findings to present to the "tech committee" Which will eventually find its way to the board. just like they did with 5050.I believe there will rule changes. Which means streamliner specs.  (not the game  I have always admired!)

They followed Tims perfect run, found no marks, and had no negative comments.But the pall of doom is still
hangs heavy.

I could eliminate the skids with no ill effects. They create aero drag anyway.Dodge the

safety they provide!

What if a narrow tread was found to be the most efficient way to propell a optimized shape in a straight line? How will we ever know?

Shouldn't new ideas in a class that is supposed to represent the epitome of innovation be recognized as a means to create growth, advance progress and impart knowledge?

How many of these voters have ever had an original thought, and were able to build, drive, learn and improve the next design?.
 An original thought-----I don't use Acura gaskets on public toilets , because I know everybody else does and the seat is clean!    If I am stupid enough to believe this, I should have the right to save the store owner money, have a more confotable non wrinkle making seat, and probably not infect my Acura!

Jack Costella

 Please forward this to your LSR buddies!

 

 

 

Jack,

            I’ve attached the CP estimate for 8080 with tail fin. The estimate is almost 6 full inches farther aft than 7070 was due to the tail fin. This reduces the required front weight to 30.5% at neutral stability or 275 pounds for a 900 pound total car weight. You had mentioned a CG position near the leading edge of the side window, which would be a couple inches forward of the estimated CP. This location also closely matches the skid position for greatest lateral stability contribution, another good design choice. The fin is clearly doing good things by pulling the CP aft, although it also raises the CP increasing the roll sensitivity to crosswinds.

            An interesting trade study would be to extend the rear overhang to create a similar area to the top mounted tail fin. Actually it would take less total area since the moment arm behind the CG would be longer. The small included angle at the trailing edge of your shapes keeps the boundary layer attached much farther aft than traditional shapes as evidenced by the almost complete lack of track dust drawn up into the turbulence. This would allow removal of the fin with no loss of directional stability. You could probably reduce the front weight by adding more surface out back and get better acceleration performance, especially for the short run at ElMirage. How much lighter could the car be if you were not trying to move the CG forward for stability?

            The ultimate tail would eliminate both the parachute tube and the push bar to leave a smooth sharp trailing edge. Could you get the engine exhaust over or between the rear tire(s) to avoid disturbing the laminar side panel flow? The flow field disturbance would probably be smaller and more symmetrical if the exhaust went out the top center instead of the side. Maybe as the rear body length extends it could be a set of moving air brake flaps strong enough to push directly on and contain the parachute stowage inside the body volume? This is starting to look a lot like parts of that streamliner from Montana? These air brake flaps could even have the skids on their lower surfaces and extend wider than your current maximum width to further improve roll stability. When they retracted to the closed position the skids would be near centerline and reduce complaints from others?

            Your list of benefits and changes incorporated into the 8080 vehicle is well done. Is the 200 pound increase all in safety equipment? Do the two rear tires mount on the same wheel with dual flanges, or are there actually two rear wheels as well? Does the 1 5/8 cage on 8080 have any plating over the outside? I agree that narrower track is good from a yaw moment reduction standpoint as long as the yaw stability is maintained by the CG-CP relationship to ensure that the vehicle keeps the nose pointed down track. If this condition is not part of the operation of the car a pencil rolling crash as the car tries to swap ends in accordance with the laws of nature will always result. Wide tracks are not a solution to improper weight and balance, as evidenced by the Bryant crash. What are you using for a tilt switch now? I believe this should be a car requirement as well since many times the car will be over before the driver can react and deploy chutes. Once an accident starts in these long narrow vehicles the most important thing that can be done to reduce damaging loads is keep the nose pointed down course to avoid the pencil roll and pole vault conditions and this requires a deployed chute as early as possible. Has Tim discussed the handling properties with SCTA officials so they can be comfortable that the car can get through the lights without hitting anything? This should go a long ways towards calming them down. Do you still have the small skids at the rear axle centerline like 7070? A single rear tire failure on 8080 could be very difficult to control since the remaining tire would now be offset (although less distance than a wider track would produce) and the roll resistance at the front is very low due to the narrow track. The good news is the pantograph front should not be too sensitive to the lean angle in terms of chamber steering. The down side skid will be producing drag that will yaw further into the turn radius and potentially tighten the turn, but for the long wheelbase it should be manageable.

            What led you away from the inline front wheel arrangement that was used on the NT3 788 car? It would seem to me that the smaller cross section out front would be lower aerodynamic drag than the pantograph linkage enclosure on 7070 and 8080. If the new approach evolved around the two wheeled application of 7070 it makes more sense, but for a four wheeled car application the inline arrangement should perform better. The walking beam with opposed spindles looks like good geometry development, did it work well? The rubber mounted bulkhead style suspension should work great for high frequency vibration isolation with minimal deflection.

            One of these days I am going to need a smaller, simpler land speed car than our current deal and the small displacement machines have always interested me. The design process to optimize the configuration and then building the actual hardware has been more fun than actually running the car for me. There will probably be plenty more thought and discussion go into this before any actual material or hardware is purchased.

            Let me know how things go at ElMirage this weekend.   

 

Thanks,
Tom

Yep Jacks teams were getting it done and done well.

J

[Papi]

It was really great being there with Jack for his B'Day and watching his vehicles dominate.
What a great moment in LSR History those of us witnessed on Sunday.

Michelle, Rick and Tim all did great and made Jack very proud. What a way to spend your birthday!

I feel very very lucky to be part of this sport where our modern legends are making history at every meet. 

[RichFox]

But it would appear that some people are not comfortable with the 8080 car ad wish to rule it out.

[roadsterswap]

SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION CATEGORY

This category is the pinnacle of the straightaway racer’s art. It contains two groups, the unlimited Streamliners and open wheeled Lakesters, running both blown and unblown, gas or fuel engines. These are all-out straightaway vehicles with non-stock engine blocks allowed.  Innovation is unlimited.  Modified production bodies are forbidden.

It is strongly recommended that all new vehicles be submitted for a pre-event inspection by appointment with the Technical Committee.  If not practical because of distance, photographs and drawings may be submitted to the Technical Committee Chairman:



STREAMLINER - /BFS, /FS, /BGS, /GS, /DS

This class is for the all-out land speed record car. Cars in this class must have at least four wheels, but they need not be arranged in a rectangular configuration. The design of the body is restricted only to the extent that at least two (2) wheels must be covered.

Engine classes allowed are W, AA, A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, XO, XF, XXF, XXO, & V4.

But it would appear that some people are not comfortable with the 8080 car ad wish to rule it out.

[RICK]

 This post is a little confusing, but I'm guessing that Tim's new suit fit well enough for him to set a new record???  Congrats.
   RICK

[willieworld]

dont make me laugh---last year all of jacks bikes were made illegal with the 20 degree tip rule --wonder who thought that one up  ( probibly the ones who had the bikes that would already tilt that far  GUESS WHO )---innovation is unlimited my a$$ ---do you know that those bikes held at least 12 records----now there are 3 cars running under the costella banner and with a swipe of a pen those could be disallowed also---and so could anything anyone of you original thinkers could build---willie buchta

[John Noonan]

dont make me laugh---last year all of jacks bikes were made illegal with the 20 degree tip rule --wonder who thought that one up  ( probibly the ones who had the bikes that would already tilt that far  GUESS WHO )---innovation is unlimited my a$$ ---do you know that those bikes held at least 12 records----now there are 3 cars running under the costella banner and with a swipe of a pen those could be disallowed also---and so could anything anyone of you original thinkers could build---willie buchta

Willie...I am not so sure you are correct here...

[bak189]

Many posts ago DW quote was '
"Boy, I am glad I am not involved in this one"

[John Noonan]

Many posts ago DW quote was '
"Boy, I am glad I am not involved in this one"

Well played...

[NathanStewart]

Since Rich edited this part out I'll add it back in:

Jack,

            I’ve attached the CP estimate for 8080 with tail fin. The estimate is almost 6 full inches farther aft than 7070 was due to the tail fin. This reduces the required front weight to 30.5% at neutral stability or 275 pounds for a 900 pound total car weight. You had mentioned a CG position near the leading edge of the side window, which would be a couple inches forward of the estimated CP. This location also closely matches the skid position for greatest lateral stability contribution, another good design choice. The fin is clearly doing good things by pulling the CP aft, although it also raises the CP increasing the roll sensitivity to crosswinds.

            An interesting trade study would be to extend the rear overhang to create a similar area to the top mounted tail fin. Actually it would take less total area since the moment arm behind the CG would be longer. The small included angle at the trailing edge of your shapes keeps the boundary layer attached much farther aft than traditional shapes as evidenced by the almost complete lack of track dust drawn up into the turbulence. This would allow removal of the fin with no loss of directional stability. You could probably reduce the front weight by adding more surface out back and get better acceleration performance, especially for the short run at ElMirage. How much lighter could the car be if you were not trying to move the CG forward for stability?

            The ultimate tail would eliminate both the parachute tube and the push bar to leave a smooth sharp trailing edge. Could you get the engine exhaust over or between the rear tire(s) to avoid disturbing the laminar side panel flow? The flow field disturbance would probably be smaller and more symmetrical if the exhaust went out the top center instead of the side. Maybe as the rear body length extends it could be a set of moving air brake flaps strong enough to push directly on and contain the parachute stowage inside the body volume? This is starting to look a lot like parts of that streamliner from Montana? These air brake flaps could even have the skids on their lower surfaces and extend wider than your current maximum width to further improve roll stability. When they retracted to the closed position the skids would be near centerline and reduce complaints from others?

            Your list of benefits and changes incorporated into the 8080 vehicle is well done. Is the 200 pound increase all in safety equipment? Do the two rear tires mount on the same wheel with dual flanges, or are there actually two rear wheels as well? Does the 1 5/8 cage on 8080 have any plating over the outside? I agree that narrower track is good from a yaw moment reduction standpoint as long as the yaw stability is maintained by the CG-CP relationship to ensure that the vehicle keeps the nose pointed down track. If this condition is not part of the operation of the car a pencil rolling crash as the car tries to swap ends in accordance with the laws of nature will always result. Wide tracks are not a solution to improper weight and balance, as evidenced by the Bryant crash. What are you using for a tilt switch now? I believe this should be a car requirement as well since many times the car will be over before the driver can react and deploy chutes. Once an accident starts in these long narrow vehicles the most important thing that can be done to reduce damaging loads is keep the nose pointed down course to avoid the pencil roll and pole vault conditions and this requires a deployed chute as early as possible. Has Tim discussed the handling properties with SCTA officials so they can be comfortable that the car can get through the lights without hitting anything? This should go a long ways towards calming them down. Do you still have the small skids at the rear axle centerline like 7070? A single rear tire failure on 8080 could be very difficult to control since the remaining tire would now be offset (although less distance than a wider track would produce) and the roll resistance at the front is very low due to the narrow track. The good news is the pantograph front should not be too sensitive to the lean angle in terms of chamber steering. The down side skid will be producing drag that will yaw further into the turn radius and potentially tighten the turn, but for the long wheelbase it should be manageable.

            What led you away from the inline front wheel arrangement that was used on the NT3 788 car? It would seem to me that the smaller cross section out front would be lower aerodynamic drag than the pantograph linkage enclosure on 7070 and 8080. If the new approach evolved around the two wheeled application of 7070 it makes more sense, but for a four wheeled car application the inline arrangement should perform better. The walking beam with opposed spindles looks like good geometry development, did it work well? The rubber mounted bulkhead style suspension should work great for high frequency vibration isolation with minimal deflection.

            One of these days I am going to need a smaller, simpler land speed car than our current deal and the small displacement machines have always interested me. The design process to optimize the configuration and then building the actual hardware has been more fun than actually running the car for me. There will probably be plenty more thought and discussion go into this before any actual material or hardware is purchased.

            Let me know how things go at ElMirage this weekend.    

 

Thanks,
Tom

Who's Tom?

[NathanStewart]

---innovation is unlimited my a$$ ---

Ironically enough you're totally right Willie.  Here is the correct definition from the 2010 rule book:

5.A Special Construction Category
This category is the pinnacle of the straightaway racer’s art. It contains three main groups. In the automobile group are the unlimited Streamliners and open-wheeled Lakesters with a 4+ wheel configuration and in the motorcycle group are the Streamliner and Streamliner Sidecar classes. These classes allow both blown and unblown, gas or fuel engines. These are all-out straightaway vehicles with non-stock engine blocks allowed, (with the exception of specific Vintage engine classes). Innovation is encouraged, within the rules. Modified production bodies are forbidden.

[theazoldcrow]

   I think Willies by-line of "dpombatir"  comes into play here!

[willieworld]

nathan   you are reading the 2010 rule book---as you should---to show how fast things change  the 2009 rulebook says " innovation is unlimited"     now it says innovation is encouraged within the rules -----thats a big change in one year  the same year the 20 degree rule went into effect---  willie dpombatmir  buchta

[dw230]

Nathan, Tom Burkland.

Willie, the 20* tip rule rule was adapted from the FIM.

DW