Graphite pads via water?

[rpcarpe]

I had no idea that the results from one District would stir up so much discussion!
Teeman, I'd like to talk before I attend the PWD Follow up meeting next Tuesday. Please e-mail me through my profile.

I'm going to try a couple of different ways to make the graphite pads inside the wheel bore. So that I understand the DQ and questioned lube processes.
I also plan to add my voice for simplifying the rules. We should 'Educate & Innovate, not Legislate'. (supertimer.com)

[gpraceman]

I also plan to add my voice for simplifying the rules. We should 'Educate & Innovate, not Legislate'. (supertimer.com)

Hopefully, simplifying the rules means the end to tear down inspections. Catch the problems at check-in. Tear downs just smack of "we think you were cheating, because you had a faster car, so we will put the car under a microscope until we prove it!" IMO, that is a witch hunt.

[rpcarpe]

Hopefully, simplifying the rules means the end to tear down inspections. Catch the problems at check-in. Tear downs just smack of "we think you were cheating, because you had a faster car, so we will put the car under a microscope until we prove it!" IMO, that is a witch hunt.

Exactly! They should ask the tough questions up front. I know lots of racing has post-race inspections, from tear down of NASCAR or short track to post race urinalysis for cyclists. Let's get away from lengthy complicated rules. Let the kids use their brains and hands to make their cars.

[doct1010]

Exactly! They should ask the tough questions up front. I know lots of racing has post-race inspections, from tear down of NASCAR or short track to post race urinalysis for cyclists. Let's get away from lengthy complicated rules. Let the kids use their brains and hands to make their cars.

rp, Glad to see you made it over here to join the discussion. Great bunch of very knowledgable builders more than willing to share experience.

I agree wholeheartedly with simplifing rules. IMO, when rules thwart creativity and innovation one must take a second look.

[FatSebastian]

Hopefully, simplifying the rules means the end to tear down inspections. Catch the problems at check-in.

Interestingly, from the rules that T-Man referenced (which are fairly well written BTW), there is no mention of tear-down inspections:

"Each car must pass inspection by the District Inspection Committee before it may compete."
"At the completion of the Speed Competition, any car may be subjected to a post-race inspection at the discretion of the Inspection Committee."

It is not obvious that the post-race inspection is any different than the pre-race inspection, or that it involves destructive testing.

Oh, there was a sign on display at the inspection table that stated clearly suspect cars would be subjected to a post race tear down. If the guys had a problem with having to take the car apart, they should not have entered the race.

I'll take T-Man's word that the posted sign clarifies the invasive nature of the post-race inspection, although it would be better to have that in the rules available before the race.

Let's get away from lengthy complicated rules.

... and lengthy complicated interpretations of said rules? In fact many of these rules seem rather standard. For example:

17. Wheel bearings, washers, bushings and wheel spacers are prohibited.

This is a very common rule and is basically the same as in the rule-in-the-box; an interpretation of caked graphite being a bushing (or perhaps more accurately, a bearing?) might pose the complication.

19. Only dry lubricant, such as Graphite, Graphite/Moly or Cub Scout Teflon Powder, may be used to lubricate the wheels. The use of liquid lubricants of any type is strictly prohibited.

This is also a very common rule and not too far from the rule-in-the-box. Again, it may be an open question whether "dried liquid" should be classified as a dry lubricant or a liquid lubricant. Silicone, for example, is available as a dry (film) lubricant, although its application sometimes involves the use of a evaporating (and therefore non-lubricating) liquid carrier?

22. Wheel bores may be polished but may not be enlarged, pocketed or grooved in any fashion. [...]
23. Axles may be de-burred and polished. They may not be altered to significantly reduce their diameter or to make grooves.

Enforcement of these rules still seem to require destructive testing.

[rpcarpe]

Here's my idea to test if Rules are simple enough:
Give a copy of the rules to an 8 yr old. Give them a legal car and an outlaw car.
If they can determine which is which, you've done well.

[*5 J's*]

Only dry lubricant, such as Graphite, Graphite/Moly or Cub Scout Teflon Powder, may be used to lubricate the wheels. The use of liquid lubricants of any type is strictly prohibited.

Is the liquid being used as a lubricant or a carrier. If it evaporates than it is not being used as a lubricant and therefore should be legal.

This is also a very common rule and not too far from the rule-in-the-box. Again, it may be an open question whether "dried liquid" should be classified as a dry lubricant or a liquid lubricant. Silicone, for example, is available as a dry (film) lubricant, although its application sometimes involves the use of a evaporating (and therefore non-lubricating) liquid carrier?

One needs to look at why the rule was created. In the case of liquid lubricants it was to keep from getting the liquid lubricant on the track. So race officials don't want a liquid that could potentially leak on the track. Now if the carrier is a liquid, but it evaporates - the lubricant isn't the liquid - the carrier WAS, but now it is gone.

I rinse my wheels in 91% ISO to remove contamination - is this using a liquid lubricant - after all is is reducing friction isn't it. I'm not sure if we are still on topic or not - but if these graphite pads were created via a process that used water in their formation - I would not say a liquid lubricant was being used. The bigger question, to me, would be -should this pad be considered a "bushing" as suggested above.

[rpcarpe]

According to the inspector/chairman, the graphite clumps/pads were intentionally formed to create a semi-permanent bushing. Apparently one parent had no idea that his method created a bushing, the other Dads admitted using water to achieve this. I'm trying it on my own as well.

I don't know what the PWD Follow-up meeting is supposed to accomplish... will post more when I know more.

[FatSebastian]

rp, Glad to see you made it over here to join the discussion.

... and here's the other discussion from the other board.

[Desmoryder]

As the Cub Dad for 2 of the cars that were disqualified, I felt compelled to post a response. This is abbreviated copy of the one sent to the District Pinewood Derby Committee. I appreciate those on this forum that seek the truth about the actual technical aspects of wheel bore prep. I know this is a bit long winded, but maybe this will shed some light on the discussion.

There is a lot of misinformation floating around concerning the events leading up the disqualification of my son’s cars at the 2010 Talakto District Derby so I felt compelled to write this letter. I feel confident that the Takakto District Pinewood Derby committee members seek the truth and facts on which to base their decisions not opinion and hearsay. I will do my best to accurately describe the event leading up to the disqualification of my sons’ cars.

It is my belief that my sons’ cars were prepared within the district rules that cover the preparation of wheel and axles.

2010 Talakto District Rules (affecting the wheels and axles):
• Wheel bearings, washers, bushings and wheel spacers are prohibited.
• Only dry lubricant, such as Graphite, Graphite/Moly or Cub Scout Teflon Powder, may be used to lubricate the wheels. The use of liquid lubricants of any type is strictly prohibited.
• Wheel bores may be polished but may not be enlarged, pocketed or grooved in any fashion. Minor wheel bore diameter increase resultant of sanding, polishing, burnishing or wheel break-in is permissible.
• Axles may be de-burred and polished. They may not be altered to significantly reduce their diameter or to make grooves.

Wheel and axle preparation methods used on the cars:
The wheels and axles were prepared using materials and methods that to the best of our knowledge followed the 2010 Talakto Pinewood Derby District rules. Each of the boys’ cars was prepared in a similar manner as follows:

• No bushings of any type were added the cars. (It should have been obvious to the race officials that no bushings were present on the car).
• The Axles were prepared using varying fine “grits” of fine sandpaper then polished with a metal polish. The axles were then cleaned using a cotton swab and isopropyl alcohol and allowed to dry. (Axle polishing is allowed in District rules)
• The Wheel Bores were polished using a fine abrasive plastic polish then rinsed with water and allowed to dry. (Wheel polishing allowed in District rules)
• Dry Powdered Graphite (Max V-Lube) was initially applied to the wheel bores using a pipe cleaner mounted and spun on a drill. Additional graphite was applied by squeezing the tube and “puffing” the graphite into the wheel bores. The technical specifications describe Max V-Lube as “a proprietary blend of high-purity natural flake graphite...” (The District Rules allow the use of graphite)
• The wheels and axles were believed to be dry when the graphite was applied
• No liquid of any type was added to the wheels or axles after application of the graphite.
• The car was subjected to multiple test runs on a wooden track with additional dry graphite being applied at numerous times by squeezing the tube and “puffing” the graphite into the wheel bores
• Also note that one wheel was slightly raised and did not touch the track thus was subjected to a minimal amount of rotation on the axle

From discussions with other derby participants, these are common legal methods used to prepare wheels and axles.

Additional information leading up to the 2010 District Race:
The boys’ competed in the 2009 District race and my son Evan’s car finished in 17th (one of the top finishing Tigers). We were pretty excited at a 17th place finish our first year out. Several weeks after the District race we received a letter stating Evan’s car qualified for the Greater Alabama Council Race. Evan was excited about being able to compete at the Council race. I knew, however, that at 17th the car would not be competitive at the council race. We obtained access to a track and conducted numerous test runs. Adjustments were made to the car's alignment during the testing. The track had no timer, but by using another car as a baseline we knew the car was faster than it started out. Note: No changes were made to the wheel lubrication other than the application of additional DRY graphite in between runs by "puffing the graphite into the wheel bores. I mention this only because I was asked how was it possible for the car to finish 2nd in the (2009) Council race after finishing 17th in the District race.

We then entered the 2009 Greater Alabama Council race. At the end of the race several of the cub families were called up front and a post race inspection was conducted on the cars by race officials. The race officials informed us that Evan’s car was legal and congratulated us on building a fast car. Note: Several other cars were disqualified for various reasons, but not Evan’s. Evan received the 2nd place trophy and was obviously elated.

Now, it's time for the 2010 District race and I am helping the committee set up for the race on the Friday night before the race. I overheard one of the Derby committee members make the statement “The top 4 cars at the (Greater Alabama) Council race used oil”. I immediately became concerned about this statement because the use of oil is illegal and my son's car finished in the top 4 at that race and oil was not used on his car. I spoke up and told him that that my son’s car was in the top 4 and it did not use oil. He said “yes it did, I said “no it didn’t, I should know I helped him build it”. The race official said “It was illegal”. I asked him that if the car was illegal, why were we told by race officials (after a post-race teardown and inspection) that the car was legal? He said “It was illegal”. I asked how was it illegal? He said “Come on, you know what you did”. I said “no I don’t”. He then said something about using oil to create "graphite pads". I was not familiar with the term “graphite pad” but I knew that no oil was used on the car and told him “we didn’t use oil”. He then said that if the cars for this year were prepared like last year, I should work on the cars and fix them before the race. I told him that the cars were prepared similar to the car from last year, but that I saw no reason to change anything on the cars because to the best of my knowledge (and based upon the results of the inspection of Evan’s car after the 2009 Council Race) the cars were legal. At no time did he indicate which of the District rule(s) if any may have been broken. When asked what rules were broken he only stated “Come on, you know what you did”.

At this point I had no confidence in what the race official was telling me because of the conflicting and incoherent statements being made because:

1. I helped my son build the car and knew for a fact that no oil was used on the car.
2. After the 2009 Council Race my son’s car was taken apart and a post race inspection was performed by race officials. We were told by the race officials that the car was legal and were then congratulated on building a fast car. (From what I remember the Council rules are similar to the District rules)

Again, I saw no reason to change anything on the cars because to the best of my knowledge they were prepared within the 2010 Talakto District Pinewood Derby rules. I thought that maybe the race official had my sons’ cars confused with someone else’s.

Upon completion of the 2010 Talakto District race my son’s cars were among several that were subjected to a post race inspection. The cars were inspected by the race official and we were told that the cars were disqualified. I asked why and which rules did we break and was told:

1. "You created a “bushing” (in the wheel)
2. "You created “Graphite Pads” (inside the wheel hub)
The only definitions for a bushing that I am familiar with are similar to the following:

Bushing:
1. Metal Sleeve - U.S. engineering, a cylindrical metal sleeve used to prevent abrasion, as a bearing, or as a guide for tool parts such as valve rods
2. Insulation - a layer of electrical insulation that allows a live conductor to pass through a grounded wall
3. Pipe adapter - an adaptor or screw-piece for connecting two different sizes of pipe

There is nothing on the cars that resemble anything close to a bushing.

I asked the race official what a graphite pad was. He then produced an illustration (not an actual photo) in a book of what I believe was a surface treated with dry powdered graphite another one treated with something else (I believe he said with graphite and oil and/or water). He said that that our wheel bores looked like the illustration of the one treated with something other than dry powdered graphite, and was thus illegal. I asked the official how do you make a graphite pad and was again told “Come on You know what you did" (he said this several times).

I told the race official that the boys’ cars used only dry powdered graphite as a lubricant. I told him that we polished the axles and polished the wheel bores and I offered to explain our preparation process. He said “I don’t want to hear it. You know what you did. You are the worst” and told us that my sons’ cars were disqualified.

Again I asked what rule did we break? The only answer I could get was that “I made a bushing” and “Come on, you know what you did” and “You are the worst”. Each time I inquired about the “graphite pads” and how do you make them, I was told “Come on, you know what you did. You are the worst”

I find the bullying “Gestapo-like” attitude of this race official very disturbing. If there was a legitimate problem with the cars, why was there a need for all the secrecy and innuendo? Why not simply state which rule that was broken in a clear concise manner? While he never said the words he basically accused me of intentionally cheating and lying.

After the race I began to do some research into the properties of graphite and to find information on these mysterious "graphite pads". I consulted with Randy Davis at Maximum-Velocity (who is the supplier of the Max V-Lube graphite) to try to get some answers. I explained the preparation methods used on our cars and the actions of the race official and he said the actions of the race official seemed “off base”. He went on to describe the properties of that Max V-Lube: A high purity dry powdered graphite that is 99.9% carbon with a medium (200 mesh/75 micron) particle size. He noted that Max V-Lube has a larger particle size than some other common graphite brands such as Tube-O-Lube which has a particle size of 44 microns. Also, Tube-O-Lube has a carbon content of approximately 95 % vs. 99.9% for the Max V-Lube. He said that tests have shown that Max V-Lube, with its high purity carbon, larger particle size, and more coarse consistency, produces faster times than Tube-O-Lube. I asked if Dry Max V-lube was capable of forming clumps without the addition of any type of oil or liquid. He said that that dry Max V-Lube could form clumps without the introduction of any liquid.

From all the research that I have done, the lubrication properties of graphite are diminished by the addition of oil, grease, or any other liquid and thus would not be desirable. (Randy also confirmed this). Based on this information I made a reasonable effort to make sure there was no water or residue left in the wheel bores after the polishing and cleaning process. There is always the possibility that some moisture or contamination remained. If so, it was definitely not intentional and was likely a very small amount. Maybe I should have examined the wheel bores under magnification or conducted some type of contamination test, but this would seem a bit excessive.

If the graphite in the wheel bores did indeed exhibit properties different than other dry graphite I would reason that it might be due to the following:

1. Max V-Lube has a different appearance than some other brands of graphite due to particle size and higher carbon content
2. Residue from the wheel polishing procedure was left inside the wheel bores and mixed with the graphite (even if this did occur, the graphite was still dry at the time of the race).

I currently have the wheels from the cars stored in a plastic bag (the wheel bores have not been touched since the race). In hindsight I wish I would have had one of the officials impound the wheels so they could be examined by an impartial 3rd party with knowledge of the properties of graphite. The wheels are available for committee members to inspect.

Based on the course of events at the 2010 District Pinewood Derby I believe that my sons’ cars (and possibly some cars from other participants) were unjustly disqualified. I think it should be the responsibility of the committee to make sure the rules more clearly define the requirements and can be clearly interpreted by the participants and judges alike. The rules should clearly define what is permitted and what is not permitted. For example if “Graphite Pads” are not permitted, then define what a “Graphite Pad” is and LIST IT IN THE RULES, do not keep it a secret! Hopefully with some changes and improvements to the rules and judging criteria, next year’s Pinewood can be a positive experience for every Cub family involved. - Frank

[rpcarpe]

I don't think anyone was overjoyed with how things turned out.
No one wants their kid disqualified, and no one wants their kid to back into First place.

[FatSebastian]

As the Cub Dad for 2 of the cars that were disqualified, I felt compelled to post a response.

Frank, thanks for the interesting post.

• The wheels and axles were believed to be dry when the graphite was applied
• No liquid of any type was added to the wheels or axles after application of the graphite.

...3 dads who were DQ'd (4 cubs total)...

all 4 cars inspected had "bushings" even if made of dry graphite, for 3 of them the admittance of water was just galvanizing the judge decision

Teeeman's posts imply that the father who had 2 cars disqualified "admitted to using water". Are you one of the dad's that "admitted to using water" at the time to race officials, or might Teeeman's earlier post contain a typographical error?

[gpraceman]

Desmoryder,

Thank you for your post. I do think that it is good to hear both sides of the story.

I do hope that things change in that district and council. It is sad that it has come to this point of confrontation and finger pointing, when it seems to me that it could have been prevented.

After hearing both sides, I think the bottom line is that in trying to make for a fair race, things have been taken too far with both the rules and how they are interpreted/enforced. IMO, and I have said this many times before, a teardown inspection is not something that should ever be considered. If it can't be caught with a reasonable check-in inspection, then the rule needs to be revised. To try to catch something after check-in is just trying to prove innocence (to some it may come across as trying to prove guilt). As our court system knows, you cannot prove innocence, only that there was not enough evidence to prove that someone was guilty. Look at any car hard enough and with a strict enough interpretation of a rule and you might easily DQ someone that was trying to follow the rules.

On a side note, I ran a race this weekend where they were using WD40 in the pits to lube some cars. I didn't say anything to them about it. When the race was over, I didn't see any oil on the track at all. We've also run many district races where liquid lubes were allowed and have not had a problem with oil on the track. IMO, the fears of using liquid lubes are quite overblown. If the car is oozing with oil when it is checked in, make the racer clean off the excess. Same should be true for graphite!!! If you can gently shake the car and a bunch of graphite falls off or it is visible all over the outside of the wheels and car body, the racer should be made to wipe off the excess.

[psycaz]

Well, let me throw some gasoline on the fire here.

Just took apart my son's car that was raced yesterday in a league. Graphite was the only lubed used on it.

Only Sporty's prep package on the wheels, I didn't even polish them after (Sporty I'll post my findings in that thread later, I am feeling horrible today) and when looking into the bores on two wheels (only two that have been taken off so far, there are cakes of graphite in the bores that do not come out with a simple tap or shake. They easily come off with a clean cotton pipe cleaner though.

Wheels were burnished with Pinewood exrteme's graphite then ran with a graphite lube (I can't say which one) then Hob-E-Lube (I didn't see the results of the other I was expecting, but am not supposed to say what it is). I did not remove the wheels before putting on the HEL. Just went over the top with it.

Look a whole lot like what was being described as a graphite bushing. Little circle things just speckeld around the bore. Would do a picture, but no way to get one. Some clumped in a tighter group, some solitary. Car doesn't have that many runs on it with this setup, maybe 14 ( 10 for Sporty and 4 for racing yesterday).

I can easily see where if the car had more runs and relubes it would be more prominent in the bore.

I can see them forming unintentionally.

Have fun with it. Glad I don't have to worry about it.

[Desmoryder]

...3 dads who were DQ'd (4 cubs total)...

all 4 cars inspected had "bushings" even if made of dry graphite, for 3 of them the admittance of water was just galvanizing the judge decision

Teeeman's posts imply that the father who had 2 cars disqualified "admitted to using water". Are you one of the dad's that "admitted to using water" at the time to race officials, or might Teeeman's earlier post contain a typographical error?

Thanks for the feedback everyone. As I mentioned in my post I definitely did not use water with graphite and I did not "admit to using water". To the best of my knowledge the wheels were dry when the graphite was applied. (I visually checked the wheel bores, but did not examine them under magnification)

The wheels did not reflect any "bushing like" qualities, something similar to what was described in psycaz's post. “Little circle things just speckeld around the bore”. I will try to post some pictures of the wheel bores. How are pictures posted on this site? - Thanks