Discussion
Apologies to the grammar Nazis...Peek is intentional.
About 30 years ago there was a lot of work done on increasing the use of plastics in engines (polyamides, PEEK,PEKE,etc) and I recall seeing one at the design museum as an undergrad, and latterly met one of the ICI chemists who'd been involved with one of the plastics used PEEK.
Given the promise, what happened. I'm surprised they never made it into Motorsport applications given the challenges appeared to be largely addressed and the claims offered big weight and performance benefits...I'm aware claims do not always align with real life.
So I'm curious to know what happened...if anyone here was involved and can they offer any insights?
About 30 years ago there was a lot of work done on increasing the use of plastics in engines (polyamides, PEEK,PEKE,etc) and I recall seeing one at the design museum as an undergrad, and latterly met one of the ICI chemists who'd been involved with one of the plastics used PEEK.
Given the promise, what happened. I'm surprised they never made it into Motorsport applications given the challenges appeared to be largely addressed and the claims offered big weight and performance benefits...I'm aware claims do not always align with real life.
So I'm curious to know what happened...if anyone here was involved and can they offer any insights?
I was wondering about this a few months ago, I'd love some real insights rather than speculation.
Given the drive for every % gain in efficiency and the total indifference to longevity it must have had some very serious durability or cost downsides not to get used by European manufacturers at the very least.
Given the drive for every % gain in efficiency and the total indifference to longevity it must have had some very serious durability or cost downsides not to get used by European manufacturers at the very least.
GeniusOfLove said:
I was wondering about this a few months ago, I'd love some real insights rather than speculation.
Given the drive for every % gain in efficiency and the total indifference to longevity it must have had some very serious durability or cost downsides not to get used by European manufacturers at the very least.
The ICI guy I spoke to at the time said that some of the wear properties were significantly ahead of those of the comparable metallic components...so I wonder if cost was a key issue. Hence pondering about Motorsport applications.Given the drive for every % gain in efficiency and the total indifference to longevity it must have had some very serious durability or cost downsides not to get used by European manufacturers at the very least.
TGCOTF-dewey said:
GeniusOfLove said:
I was wondering about this a few months ago, I'd love some real insights rather than speculation.
Given the drive for every % gain in efficiency and the total indifference to longevity it must have had some very serious durability or cost downsides not to get used by European manufacturers at the very least.
The ICI guy I spoke to at the time said that some of the wear properties were significantly ahead of those of the comparable metallic components...so I wonder if cost was a key issue. Hence pondering about Motorsport applications.Given the drive for every % gain in efficiency and the total indifference to longevity it must have had some very serious durability or cost downsides not to get used by European manufacturers at the very least.
Having regularly contracted for a company (on an ex ICI site) making PEEK over a decade ago, I believe your main stumbling block would be cost as i believe it was prohibitively expensive at the time and was only being used in aerospace after being machined by the company i was working for.
Saying that, it could be far cheaper now with modern techniques and machinery?
Saying that, it could be far cheaper now with modern techniques and machinery?
No idea, but I used to work in the oil and gas industry for a subsea christmas tree manufacturer and we did a lot of testing on this stuff in various sealing arrangements; it was often used as a back up/strengthener ring on things like chevron packing sets that were run down well bores.
Sorry, I have literally nothing to add....
Sorry, I have literally nothing to add....
Gorilla Bloke said:
Having regularly contracted for a company (on an ex ICI site) making PEEK over a decade ago, I believe your main stumbling block would be cost as i believe it was prohibitively expensive at the time and was only being used in aerospace after being machined by the company i was working for.
Saying that, it could be far cheaper now with modern techniques and machinery?
This - cost.Saying that, it could be far cheaper now with modern techniques and machinery?
A couple of years ago I was working on ROV installation in the Nuclear Decommissioning Industry.
We were working with our supplier who we’d been collaboratively developing their COTS ROV’s to be applicable and suitable to seriously harsh environments.
All was going ok until we introduced a new skid unit that fixed to the bottom of the ROV. Essentially it was a new cutting tool with a newer type hydraulic system with compensating (valves) fabricated from PTFE / Nylon.
After a few days of operation the hydraulic system sprang a leak, all the oil stuck to the machine trapping the radioactive contamination with it - the vehicle was a real headache to recover safely after multiple decontamination attempts.
There was an argument that the whole vehicle should have been scrapped to avoid costly man hours of these processes, however these are seriously expensive pieces of kit. And it still needed to be recovered to scrap. And we had to investigate to see what had happened. And learn.
The compensators had ruptured, probably because of the extreme caustic nature of the water they’d been immersed in coupled with the excessively high radiation.
You can’t get anywhere near these things to conduct a thorough investigation.
The manufacturer looked into, and came back with PEEK as the most appropriate material.
It was unbelievably expensive, I can’t remember the figure but add noughts. Lots of them.
Eventually the hydraulic type cutter was binned and a fully electric device developed and introduced.
Because of cost.
Baldchap said:
bishop finger said:
TGCOTF-dewey said:
Apologies to the grammar Nazis...Peek is intentional.
Admittedly your title piqued my interest.. therefore a quick peek was required Here is a typical use for PEEK: https://www.waukbearing.com/en/products/fluid-film...
There are also rolling element bearings and nuts/bolts made from PEEK.
It's commonly used in oil and gas applications, power generation and industrial applications where its chemical resistance, electrical insulating and high temperature properties are quite useful e.g. rotating machinery, compact and/or high temperature motor/generators, basically anywhere the benefits outweigh the cost.
There are also rolling element bearings and nuts/bolts made from PEEK.
It's commonly used in oil and gas applications, power generation and industrial applications where its chemical resistance, electrical insulating and high temperature properties are quite useful e.g. rotating machinery, compact and/or high temperature motor/generators, basically anywhere the benefits outweigh the cost.
I currently work for the former ICI division that specialises in PEEK and other PolyArylEtherKetone polymers…..
Traditionally these kind of polymers are used for injection moulded ‘plastic’ parts. With a reinforcement fibre added (typically short chopped carbon fibre) you can get a very light weight material with ‘strength’ similar to an aluminium alloy. So immediately that rules out heavily loaded structural parts that would normally be steel or titanium in a motorsport application.
Injection moulding is only really a suitable manufacture process for high volumes, due to the high investment required in tooling and process development to get the first useable part so that doesn’t really work for the prototype world of F1 engineering. Alternatively you can machine parts out of stock shapes but that means high waste of a high value raw material.
PEEK is however the ‘go to’ polymer for many motorsport companies, getting used in things like bearing cages and oil pump rotors.
In more mainstream automotive we have made PEEK gears for ancillary drives in engines, and you will see lots of PEEK gears appearing in eBike motors in the next few years.
What is potentially more interesting to the motorsport market, although they have already heavily invested in traditional thermoset based composites, is thermoplastic composites using PEEK based polymer as the resin. These have the advantage of being able to be premade as sheets and then thermoformed into the required shape without the lengthy autoclave curing of traditional composites. Numerous aerospace companies are working on aeroplane components using this technology so it is possible we may see it in F1 in the future.
Traditionally these kind of polymers are used for injection moulded ‘plastic’ parts. With a reinforcement fibre added (typically short chopped carbon fibre) you can get a very light weight material with ‘strength’ similar to an aluminium alloy. So immediately that rules out heavily loaded structural parts that would normally be steel or titanium in a motorsport application.
Injection moulding is only really a suitable manufacture process for high volumes, due to the high investment required in tooling and process development to get the first useable part so that doesn’t really work for the prototype world of F1 engineering. Alternatively you can machine parts out of stock shapes but that means high waste of a high value raw material.
PEEK is however the ‘go to’ polymer for many motorsport companies, getting used in things like bearing cages and oil pump rotors.
In more mainstream automotive we have made PEEK gears for ancillary drives in engines, and you will see lots of PEEK gears appearing in eBike motors in the next few years.
What is potentially more interesting to the motorsport market, although they have already heavily invested in traditional thermoset based composites, is thermoplastic composites using PEEK based polymer as the resin. These have the advantage of being able to be premade as sheets and then thermoformed into the required shape without the lengthy autoclave curing of traditional composites. Numerous aerospace companies are working on aeroplane components using this technology so it is possible we may see it in F1 in the future.
GT9 said:
Here is a typical use for PEEK: https://www.waukbearing.com/en/products/fluid-film...
There are also rolling element bearings and nuts/bolts made from PEEK.
It's commonly used in oil and gas applications, power generation and industrial applications where its chemical resistance, electrical insulating and high temperature properties are quite useful e.g. rotating machinery, compact and/or high temperature motor/generators, basically anywhere the benefits outweigh the cost.
But what of other plastics? Peek was only used for a small number of components IIRC. There are also rolling element bearings and nuts/bolts made from PEEK.
It's commonly used in oil and gas applications, power generation and industrial applications where its chemical resistance, electrical insulating and high temperature properties are quite useful e.g. rotating machinery, compact and/or high temperature motor/generators, basically anywhere the benefits outweigh the cost.
TGCOTF-dewey said:
But what of other plastics? Peek was only used for a small number of components IIRC.
If PEEK wouldn't work then likely neither would lower performing polymers, the only advantage they might have is cost. PA (Nylons) would be quite temperature limited and have other issues such as dimensional change due to water absorption. PAI (known as Torlon) is a competitor for PEEK in some automotive applications (typ transmission seal rings, thrust washers) but is a thermoset so has some manufacturing and recycling challenges, for a similar cost to PEEK.chrisch77 said:
TGCOTF-dewey said:
But what of other plastics? Peek was only used for a small number of components IIRC.
If PEEK wouldn't work then likely neither would lower performing polymers, the only advantage they might have is cost. PA (Nylons) would be quite temperature limited and have other issues such as dimensional change due to water absorption. PAI (known as Torlon) is a competitor for PEEK in some automotive applications (typ transmission seal rings, thrust washers) but is a thermoset so has some manufacturing and recycling challenges, for a similar cost to PEEK.Did some digging as I'm waiting for my car to be fixed at the garage.
Turns out there was an engine raced. Had, inter alia, a plastic block. 3rd in class it seems.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastic_automotive_e...
What we see a lot in this market is a desire to prove that something is technically possible, but without a sustainable business case to make a return on investment. You *could* use PEEK in a large number of applications across industries but it is only viable where there is either no alternative that will provide the required performance, OR the use of PEEK allows a cost reduction somewhere in the overall system due to a simpler manufacturing route for that component or group of components.
The other significant challenge with any polymer is the dimensional precision typically required for complex machines. Injection moulding can't give the tight tolerances expected from metal machining, so finish machining adds cost again, and any polymer will have a larger thermal expansion than metals so the tolerances will change more than a metallic component.
The other significant challenge with any polymer is the dimensional precision typically required for complex machines. Injection moulding can't give the tight tolerances expected from metal machining, so finish machining adds cost again, and any polymer will have a larger thermal expansion than metals so the tolerances will change more than a metallic component.
chrisch77 said:
What we see a lot in this market is a desire to prove that something is technically possible, but without a sustainable business case to make a return on investment. You *could* use PEEK in a large number of applications across industries but it is only viable where there is either no alternative that will provide the required performance, OR the use of PEEK allows a cost reduction somewhere in the overall system due to a simpler manufacturing route for that component or group of components.
The other significant challenge with any polymer is the dimensional precision typically required for complex machines. Injection moulding can't give the tight tolerances expected from metal machining, so finish machining adds cost again, and any polymer will have a larger thermal expansion than metals so the tolerances will change more than a metallic component.
Agreed.The other significant challenge with any polymer is the dimensional precision typically required for complex machines. Injection moulding can't give the tight tolerances expected from metal machining, so finish machining adds cost again, and any polymer will have a larger thermal expansion than metals so the tolerances will change more than a metallic component.
This is why the cost benefit analysis case applied to the project I was working on asked the question - can you come up with an alternative?.
The compensator units I mentioned earlier required a certain degree of high tolerance internal machining and waste of material.
They were proven to work and be effective over a long term
However the expense, and the learning from the previous hydraulic leak (and trapping of the contamination) which was a huge issue to overcome. Risk appetite was extremely low in addition.
Coupled with the duration of the decommissioning projected term which is decades.
An all electric solution was a more effective solution to the (both) problems.
As I’ve said this was COTS adapted equipment from the marine / oil industry. It’s all learning.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff