+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 21 to 28 of 28

Thread: Integral Caliper

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Rochester NY
    Posts
    1,061
    Still working on my sourcing. When it works out I will let you know.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,690
    Rob,

    Only disadvantage of a one piece caliper/upright that I can think of is speed of disc change. Depending on the design you may have to split the caliper to change the disc, then bleed the system, clean up the mess, etc... If you mount your inboard-of-upright disc on a flange using bolts rather than studs, then this shouldn't be a problem.

    Disadvantages of steel calipers? After about 10-20 years, if you don't regularly change the brake fluid, then you will get a rusted bore and leaking seals. Ie. not a problem. Absolutely no problem if you use stainless steel. SS has a thermal expansion coefficient half way between steel and aluminium, least thermal conductivity of most metals, and better strength/fatigue properties than it is usually given credit for.

    Z

  3. #23
    Our team began using integrated upright/calipers in 1999 (for the 2000 comp) in the front, and continued that through the 2004 comp year car. For 2005 this was changed to a bolt on caliper design.

    Pros - tight packaging, less hardware, possibly lighter weight, and in our case, lower CoG by positioning the caliper at 6:00.

    Cons - difficult to machine, less interchangeability of parts, expensive, expensive, and oh yeah, expensive.
    Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
    Formula SAE '00 - '04
    Team Leader '01 - '03
    www.formularpi.com

  4. #24
    There was a team at 2005 who did their front uprights with titanium deposition, wasn't there?<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Rob Woods:
    powder metal deposition. A laser fuses metal powder into shapes. Very star trek. Basically saves on material costs because you arent cutting from a billet. Also there are savings since the powder isnt made into billets so the material costs are down form not making net shapes. Laser is expensive but the costs are going down. Basically allows you to have total design freedom. Can als switch metal types during manufacture as well. Pretty neat process. Just gotta see what the total cost is involved. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
    -David Y

    LOBOMotorsports '03-'05
    Stanford Formula for 2007

  5. #25
    yes. and they were pretty cool.
    Mike Miles
    Carnegie Mellon SAE/Carnegie Mellon Racing -- Formula SAE 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006

  6. #26
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by CMURacing - Prometheus:
    yes. and they were pretty cool. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I assume that was Carnegie Mellon? May I inquire about the cost/who performed the service for you?

    thanks,
    Adrial
    Rutgers Formula Racing 04,05, 06

  7. #27
    SAE paper #2004-01-3546
    Design and Manufacture of Titanium Formula
    SAE Uprights using Laser-Powder-Deposition
    Graham Erickson, Matt Heath, Bryan Woods,
    Daniel Dolan, Eric Henderson and James Sears
    South Dakota School of Mines and Technology
    Jarrod Hammond
    Monash University FSAE

  8. #28
    Yeah, it was SDSM&T
    James Waltman
    VRI at WWU Alumn
    FSAE ˜01 to ˜05
    http://dot.etec.wwu.edu/fsae/

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts