Carbon Brakes

[Edmonton]

What was the first F1 car to use carbon brakes?

[Kicking-back]

I believe McLaren at least tested them in 1984 with Niki Lauda at Donington.

[luke]

I also thought it was Mclaren.

[BootsOntheSide]

Am I the only one who thinks they should be banned? With the shorter braking distances the chance of overtaking reduces, and it's another aspect taken largely out of the driver's hands - their introudction reduced the number of locked wheels.

[esorniloc]

Originally posted by Kicking-back
I believe McLaren at least tested them in 1984 with Niki Lauda at Donington.

It was before 84, I remember reading ( I think Autocourse 83) that McLaren had problems with the Carbon brakes when they switched from the Cosworth to the Porsche Turbo engine.

[luke]

Exacutly, go back to steel.

[1200Datto27]

Modern ferrous brake rotors and pads will not make a difference to braking distances compared to Carbon. The reason that F1 teams like the Carbon/Carbon systems are the reduction in unsprung weight offered by them.

[Sodemo]

Surely if they restrict the size of the disks and the calipers, braking efficiency would be reduced though?

There is also much less risk of steel brakes exploding, whereas it seems every other race we hear of drivers having "brake problems" with carbon disks.

[1200Datto27]

Originally posted by The Monster
Surely if they restrict the size of the disks and the calipers, braking efficiency would be reduced though?

Thats already done, why do you think that F1 still uses 13" rims.

Originally posted by The Monster
There is also much less risk of steel brakes exploding, whereas it seems every other race we hear of drivers having "brake problems" with carbon disks.

You obviously do not race much, if you think that ferrous brakes do not fail.

[Mackmot]

Modern ferrous brakes still dont take the heat that carbon brakes can. That was the basic reason for introducing them. As the brakes get hotter the less responsive they will be. That means we will get more interesting races where sensible drivers can catch up and race in the closing stages just like they used to do.

[1200Datto27]

If the system is properly cooled, then there really is no difference to how long a rotor/pad combo will last for. The main reason that ferrous rotors overheat is that they do not have the time to cool down properly, but the same thing happens with carbon, look at Canada for an example.

And Boots, the reason that you see less locked brakes nowadays is that the tyres have gotten so much better, and the engineers know how to configure the brake systems to allow the driver to modulate and feel the brakes performance.

There is a small article floating around in one of the old threads here, with an interview with Mike Gayscoyne (IIRC) talking about the use of carbon/carbon systems, and he stated that the reason c/c is used is due to the weight and inertia savings (around 10kg per corner) only, as the performance of ferrous systems matches and in regards to things like Mu figures can beat c/c, as well as allowing the drivers better modulation and retardation charateristics.

[Glen]

Brakes can never achieve shorter braking distances than the grip of the tyres will allow - and tyre grip has increased massively in the last few years. That will change next year, most likely, with the longer-life tyres.

[Super Tourer]

I seem to remember Prost having great brake problems at one race in the early days of carbon brakes. The front discs were heating unevenly which had the effect of spinning the car around under heavy braking (IIRC).

[DougK]

The comment about reducing brake disk and caliper size - wellif its already done then it appears it needs to be done again or replace disks with steel drums - that will remove the efficancy of the braking and lead to better overtaking chances.

[Gore]

On the question of steel versus carbon brake efficiency, I remember Williams running steel in '99 and finding virtually no difference in performance. In fact, Zanardi ran with them for most of the season, preferring the feel.

Also, I'd never thought of it before, but Glen's point about the adhesion limit sounds logical to me--but then, I'm the guy who still doesn't understand the Mclaren SLK's airbrake (surely it just means the wheels will lock with less force applied to the discs? Or is that the point--to save brake wear?)...

[Morris 1100]

The first car to run carbon brakes was Brabham in 1978.

[BSchneiderFan]

Originally posted by Gore
On the question of steel versus carbon brake efficiency, I remember Williams running steel in '99 and finding virtually no difference in performance. In fact, Zanardi ran with them for most of the season, preferring the feel.

The way I remembered it, there was merely a rumour that Zanardi had tested steel brakes in an attempt to make the car more to his liking, but didn't run them in a race. I could be wrong.

[Kicking-back]

That sounds more like it, B Schneider Fan.

[Gore]

Seems that Zanardi ran with steel discs for the Austrian GP at least (see http://f1.rete.it/en/13/01267.html).

My recollection was that he raced them a few times towards the end of the season, while Ralf Schumacher stuck to carbon after trying both in testing over the course of the year. I could well be wrong, though; am working from what's left of my memory...

[Sodemo]

Dan you are correct, I distinctly remember Zanardi using steel brakes at Monza in 1999.

[AndyM]

Dan - nice to talk to you at Fulbeck

Anyway, I work in the carbon-carbon and carbon-ceramic industry, and what people have said above is pretty true - iron disc/organic pads do not suffer a inferior performance to C/C and ceramics unless pushed above the ideal opertaing window of the pads. Carbon discs generally have a much higher burst strength than iron discs due to the fibre structure.

The F1 boys use C/C purely for the weight advantage, but also the need for less cooling and hence lower drag. They are starting to look at carbon-ceramics now due to the oxidation problems with carbon over 600° (as a guide, at present 75% of brake wear on the disc during a race is due to oxidation). Carbon-ceramics have a much lower oxiaton potential due to the ceramics shielding the carbon fibres and matrix from attack. They also suffer less from frictional variations with temperature, and hence are becoming increasingly common on road cars now.

I could go on for hours, sorry...!

[Snrub]

My understanding has been that when an F1 driver stamps on the brakes he experiences a force of up to 4.5Gs. I recall reading that it happens so quickly that the human body can't really react all quickly to make fine corrections, so if they've made a mistake it's difficult to fix it once they've started to brake.

[Kojima_KE007]

IIRC, the first F1 car to have carbon brake pads was Surtees TS19 from 1976, but the first car to run them in a race was Brabham BT45 at 1976 German GP.

[RWC]

Originally posted by Glen
Brakes can never achieve shorter braking distances than the grip of the tyres will allow - and tyre grip has increased massively in the last few years. That will change next year, most likely, with the longer-life tyres.

Yes that is the only sensible solution to this 'problem'-

Combined with dramatically reduced/eliminated aero downforce
....but then a huge reduction in downforce would solve allmost everything to do with passing issues

AndyM,don't worry about going on! There is a rather large lack in concrete tech details on this forum-everything you have to say i suspect will be interesting

[Glen]

Originally posted by RWC
...
Combined with dramatically reduced/eliminated aero downforce
....but then a huge reduction in downforce would solve allmost everything to do with passing issues

How will that solve one car being quicker than the one behind it? The primary reason that a car cannot overtake in F1 is that it can't catch the one in front in the first place! Qualifying arranges them in roughly performance order, quickest at the front, and then guess what?.. the quicker car drives off. Funny that.Turbulent air and loss of grip and all that only come into the picture if you catch the guy in front to start with!

This strikes the viewer as a difference compared to the "good old days" because back then there were more mistakes and less science and hence more surprises. Cars, teams and drivers are so good now that we get much less of that.