EVO Aerodynamics Review
Jan 30, 2014, 06:27 AM
#181
Evolved Member
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Cedarburg, WI
Posts: 963
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would lay a bet that any splitter that has ripped off on folks has bent into the wind and caused more pressure on the splitter then what it would normally get. So really all you need is a solid splitter and then you wouldn't need cables?
FWIW, it's really just a pet peev of mine. I hate the look of a bunch of cables on a race car. If you need to use cables to make it work then that's fine. I still think the standing on it test is BS. If you stood on top of a board to dispense your weight over the whole splitter, that seems like it would make more sense then it being able to hold up to the pressure of your weight on whatever size foot you have.
Can you stand on the front corner of the splitter without it bending?
FWIW, it's really just a pet peev of mine. I hate the look of a bunch of cables on a race car. If you need to use cables to make it work then that's fine. I still think the standing on it test is BS. If you stood on top of a board to dispense your weight over the whole splitter, that seems like it would make more sense then it being able to hold up to the pressure of your weight on whatever size foot you have.
Can you stand on the front corner of the splitter without it bending?
Last edited by jerdeitzel; Jan 30, 2014 at 06:51 AM.
Jan 30, 2014, 07:13 AM
#182
I would lay a bet that any splitter that has ripped off on folks has bent into the wind and caused more pressure on the splitter then what it would normally get. So really all you need is a solid splitter and then you wouldn't need cables?
FWIW, it's really just a pet peev of mine. I hate the look of a bunch of cables on a race car. If you need to use cables to make it work then that's fine. I still think the standing on it test is BS. If you stood on top of a board to dispense your weight over the whole splitter, that seems like it would make more sense then it being able to hold up to the pressure of your weight on whatever size foot you have.
Can you stand on the front corner of the splitter without it bending?
FWIW, it's really just a pet peev of mine. I hate the look of a bunch of cables on a race car. If you need to use cables to make it work then that's fine. I still think the standing on it test is BS. If you stood on top of a board to dispense your weight over the whole splitter, that seems like it would make more sense then it being able to hold up to the pressure of your weight on whatever size foot you have.
Can you stand on the front corner of the splitter without it bending?
who cares what it looks like, all that matters is the lap times.
Last edited by EVOizmm; Jan 30, 2014 at 07:19 AM.
. Just that it works!
Jan 30, 2014, 07:25 AM
#184
Jan 30, 2014, 07:30 AM
#185
I am currently in the process of making a splitter. EGBeater's thread was quite helpful:
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...evo-8-9-a.html
Here are some pictures I made for my design of the brackets. One of my goals was that it could be removed/installed in a couple minutes using r-style quick release pins.
The rear bracket would not be ideal for someone whose car is a lot closer to the ground and cannot spare that 1" of clearance. In that case, I do not have any ideas for how to make it quick to install/release.
Here are some more pictures:
The weakest points in the design I believe are the upper brackets on the crash beam and the go-kart tie rods (both aluminum). Everything else is stainless steeel.
Will this design work? The splitter should be fairly rigid (aircraft floor panel high density foam sandwiched between kevlar sheets) so I was hoping to get away with only 2 tie rods. Hopefully the outsides don't flex down too much.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...evo-8-9-a.html
Here are some pictures I made for my design of the brackets. One of my goals was that it could be removed/installed in a couple minutes using r-style quick release pins.
The rear bracket would not be ideal for someone whose car is a lot closer to the ground and cannot spare that 1" of clearance. In that case, I do not have any ideas for how to make it quick to install/release.
Here are some more pictures:
The weakest points in the design I believe are the upper brackets on the crash beam and the go-kart tie rods (both aluminum). Everything else is stainless steeel.
Will this design work? The splitter should be fairly rigid (aircraft floor panel high density foam sandwiched between kevlar sheets) so I was hoping to get away with only 2 tie rods. Hopefully the outsides don't flex down too much.
Jan 30, 2014, 07:36 AM
#187
Actually, I just thought of an idea...
If I make the rear brackets on top of the splitter and just release the front first, I could probably get to the pins on the rear bracket as long as the splitter can swing down... Then I can have my cake and eat it too.
Durrrr.... I will try that before I cut the slits in the splitter.
edit: new design
If I make the rear brackets on top of the splitter and just release the front first, I could probably get to the pins on the rear bracket as long as the splitter can swing down... Then I can have my cake and eat it too.
Durrrr.... I will try that before I cut the slits in the splitter.
edit: new design
Last edited by nollij; Jan 30, 2014 at 07:55 AM.
Jan 30, 2014, 07:39 AM
#188
Evolved Member
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Cedarburg, WI
Posts: 963
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It looks like a great design IMO and i don't think you will have anything to worry about with the end bending or causing problems.
One thing i would change is to make the splitter go back a bit more in the middle. You can then connect to the 2 cross beam bolts in the rear. It work perfect and give you a bit more flat bottom to start with when you decide to cove the whole bottom.
One thing i would change is to make the splitter go back a bit more in the middle. You can then connect to the 2 cross beam bolts in the rear. It work perfect and give you a bit more flat bottom to start with when you decide to cove the whole bottom.
Jan 30, 2014, 07:54 AM
#189
It looks like a great design IMO and i don't think you will have anything to worry about with the end bending or causing problems.
One thing i would change is to make the splitter go back a bit more in the middle. You can then connect to the 2 cross beam bolts in the rear. It work perfect and give you a bit more flat bottom to start with when you decide to cove the whole bottom.
One thing i would change is to make the splitter go back a bit more in the middle. You can then connect to the 2 cross beam bolts in the rear. It work perfect and give you a bit more flat bottom to start with when you decide to cove the whole bottom.
The important thing right now is just to get all the brackets and the splitter done and to verify it won't rip off the bottom of the car. After that I can modify it with side and bumper air dams, lowering the splitter, etc.
My other concern was if I would need to actually support the bumper shape with the splitter. With the increased high pressure on the front of the bumper and not having the undertray to help reinforce the bottom, I was wondering if I would need to add supports to the bottom of the bumper frame with the splitter. I guess I will find out.
Last edited by nollij; Jan 30, 2014 at 08:02 AM.
Jan 30, 2014, 08:13 AM
#190
I have no data to prove anything so I guess its just speculation. but I'm confident its producing some decent downforce.
Feb 1, 2014, 04:07 PM
#193
Evolved Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: East Hampton Ct.
Posts: 761
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Testing testing testing. Looks like spring rates are going way up to lower the car and I will be endurance go kart racing to get in shape! I remember going to Lime Rock Park after they repaved it super smooth. I was talking to one of the Formula Atlantic teams and asked if they had lowered the car. They said no just the opposite. The cars were generating so much more down force that they had to raise the car. I hope we can choose the rates close to whats needed so we don't waste to much time. All I can say is it will be interesting to see how we run against the Corvettes this season!
Feb 3, 2014, 09:42 AM
#194
I think the most important thing for mounting the splitter is to make sure it ties into the chassis directly. If you just have it mounted to the bumper it's just going to pull down on it and sag more than anything and not be as effective. I started out with an APR mounted to the bumper and just fought with pulling the bumper down off the car. Then I added some metal brackets that tied up to the car in 5-6 spots and it was very sturdy but a pain to take on and off. My current setup has an aluminum frame all welded together that bolts to the front frame rails and to the bottom of the crossmember (4 bolts onto the car). I used alumalite for the material and it's been working great. I did back to back sessions at the track with/without the splitter last fall and actually ran about 1.5 seconds slower without it (~2 min track). I don't have any other hard data to back that up other than the times and feel of the car. It had slightly more understeer/sloppy turn in without it. I plan on continuing with a full flat bottom but haven't made it that far yet.
Feb 3, 2014, 10:21 AM
#195
I think the most important thing for mounting the splitter is to make sure it ties into the chassis directly. If you just have it mounted to the bumper it's just going to pull down on it and sag more than anything and not be as effective. I started out with an APR mounted to the bumper and just fought with pulling the bumper down off the car. Then I added some metal brackets that tied up to the car in 5-6 spots and it was very sturdy but a pain to take on and off. My current setup has an aluminum frame all welded together that bolts to the front frame rails and to the bottom of the crossmember (4 bolts onto the car). I used alumalite for the material and it's been working great. I did back to back sessions at the track with/without the splitter last fall and actually ran about 1.5 seconds slower without it (~2 min track). I don't have any other hard data to back that up other than the times and feel of the car. It had slightly more understeer/sloppy turn in without it. I plan on continuing with a full flat bottom but haven't made it that far yet.