Ferrari F2012

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter does not belong here.

Post Sat Feb 25, 2012 5:01 am

All these posts are speculation on performance not technical components, changes etc.

Anyone notice yesterdays car performed a lot better than day 3s setup? seems like they aren't planning to dial in the car yet (assumption/guessing).

But do we think that the exhaust setup from yesterday will be in the final vehicle released at Melbourne or still the original periscope type exhaust?

Once again its testing, so we can't put our money on any team just yet including the other two top runners as they may find Mercedes/Force India biting at their heels..
If someone said to me that you can have three wishes, my first would have been to get into racing, my second to be in Formula 1, my third to drive for Ferrari.

Gilles Villeneuve
Hail22
 
Joined: 8 Feb 2012

Post Sat Feb 25, 2012 9:10 pm

Great video! Great sound!!!

Crucial_Xtreme
 
Joined: 15 Oct 2011
Location: Charlotte

Post Sun Feb 26, 2012 1:30 pm

quote from AMuS print edition:

Adrian Newey: "The only reason to do it like this (pull rod front suspension) is to make it differently."
"Double points is Tyranny!"
FrukostScones
 
Joined: 25 May 2010
Location: Bonnie's Ranch

Post Sun Feb 26, 2012 2:20 pm

I'm actually a little surprised he would say something like that. He, of all people, should know that things aren't always as they seem.

Aside from the fringe aerodynamic and CoG benefits, I think there's a very real possibility that the choice of a pullrod front suspension was made to utilize the change in geometry, however subtle it might be, in an attempt to quicken the warm-up of the tires, something Ferrari hasn't been able to do for what seems like ages.
Last edited by bhall on Sun Feb 26, 2012 2:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
bhall
 
Joined: 28 Feb 2006

Post Sun Feb 26, 2012 2:26 pm

bhallg2k wrote:I'm actually a little surprised he would say something like that. He, of all people, should know that things aren't always as they seem.

Aside from the fringe aerodynamic and CoG benefits, I think there's a very real possibility that the choice of a pullrod front suspension was made to utilize the change in geometry, however subtle it might be, in an attempt to quicken the warm-up of the tires, something Ferrari hasn't been able to do for what seems like ages.



And I definitely believe they have achieved that, but perhaps at the expense of having too much heat and too little room for geometric fine tuning.
Ferraripilot
 
Joined: 28 Jan 2011
Location: Atlanta

Post Sun Feb 26, 2012 3:36 pm

It seem to me that such a suspension is much more difficult to set up because of the very low movement. The angle of the pull rod is so low, that the geometrical movements musst be very low compared to a conventional push rod at the front.
"Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose!" - Ayrton Senna

Paul Bischof
Milton Keynes, UK
MK2 2HL
http://paulsf1.wordpress.com/
PaulB
 
Joined: 17 Oct 2010
Location: Graz/Austria

Post Sun Feb 26, 2012 4:24 pm

bhallg2k wrote:I'm actually a little surprised he would say something like that. He, of all people, should know that things aren't always as they seem.

Aside from the fringe aerodynamic and CoG benefits, I think there's a very real possibility that the choice of a pullrod front suspension was made to utilize the change in geometry, however subtle it might be, in an attempt to quicken the warm-up of the tires, something Ferrari hasn't been able to do for what seems like ages.


It's really the control arm and tie rod layout that determines the kinematics of the wheel movement. Whether it is pull rod or push rod doesn't change the wheel movement.

Pull/push rod affects your forces coming from the wheel into the sprung parts and also the layout of those sprung parts. (bell cranks, linkages etc). I don't think using a pullrod affects the tyre warm up - no difference to a push rod in that respect.

I think Ferrari changed to pull-rod for aerodynamic benefits.

This whole thing just got more interesting hearing that Newey thinks front pull rods not worth the trouble.
"You can't change what happened. But you can still change what will happen.
Sebastian Vettel"
PlatinumZealot
 
Joined: 12 Jun 2008

Post Sun Feb 26, 2012 4:56 pm

You know, i think Ferrari's tub is made to accept push rod if things don't work out for them now.
For Sure!!
ringo
 
Joined: 29 Mar 2009

Post Sun Feb 26, 2012 5:05 pm

PaulB wrote:It seem to me that such a suspension is much more difficult to set up because of the very low movement. The angle of the pull rod is so low, that the geometrical movements musst be very low compared to a conventional push rod at the front.


This was either posted earlier in this thread, or somewhere in the "pullrod vs. pushrod" thread:
http://www.vivaf1.com/blog/?p=10280

Whether or not they're back to the same motion ratio of last year's pushrod is debatable w/o the actualy geometry, but it's clear that they're at least approaching the same motion ratios.

Regards,
Kurt
bettonracing
 
Joined: 12 Oct 2007

Post Sun Feb 26, 2012 5:21 pm

Crucial_Xtreme wrote:
n_anirudh wrote:

Are they trying to hide the wheel nut design??


I don't believe so, they've been visible all pre-season. I think it's just the lack of light.



Crucial its not about lack of light. i just changed the exposure level of light and the wheel nut really seems different and changed. Like they r trying something new.........
Formula One is a game.............. but not any ordinary game for me
F1.Ru
 
Joined: 30 Jan 2012

Post Sun Feb 26, 2012 6:19 pm

F1.Ru wrote:
Crucial_Xtreme wrote:
n_anirudh wrote:

Are they trying to hide the wheel nut design??


I don't believe so, they've been visible all pre-season. I think it's just the lack of light.



Crucial its not about lack of light. i just changed the exposure level of light and the wheel nut really seems different and changed. Like they r trying something new.........

Here's the launch wheel nuts
http://cdn.f1zone.net/news/wp-content/g ... 56_new.jpg

Barcelona
http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/1972/bcnnewexhaust.jpg

Different than last year but I don't believed they've changed this year.

150 Italia
http://www.autoevolution.com/images/new ... 1055_1.jpg
Crucial_Xtreme
 
Joined: 15 Oct 2011
Location: Charlotte

Post Sun Feb 26, 2012 6:19 pm

I taught that they said some time ago in an interview that they're aiming to improve on their pit stop times and are designing some new stuff because of that... wheel nuts might just be on the things... who knows..
Silverstone 2011: "Mark, maintain the gap!"
Malaysia 2013: "Multi 21 Seb, Multi 21!"
Goran2812
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Location: Croatia

Post Sun Feb 26, 2012 6:53 pm

bettonracing wrote:
PaulB wrote:It seem to me that such a suspension is much more difficult to set up because of the very low movement. The angle of the pull rod is so low, that the geometrical movements musst be very low compared to a conventional push rod at the front.


This was either posted earlier in this thread, or somewhere in the "pullrod vs. pushrod" thread:
http://www.vivaf1.com/blog/?p=10280

Whether or not they're back to the same motion ratio of last year's pushrod is debatable w/o the actualy geometry, but it's clear that they're at least approaching the same motion ratios.

Regards,
Kurt


I did a geometrical analysis. what I found is that:

The different control arm radii, and the vertical distance of the bellcrank from the control arm mounting points is what determines how much the push/pull rod displaces when the suspension moves. The Ferrari pull rods move a similar amount to the push rod using rough measurments.

In general though, for a similar vertical distance of the bell crank from the nearest control arm mounting point, the pull rod moves more for every unit displacement of the wheel. This is because the pull rod bell crank is mounted lower than the upper ball-joint, the upper a-arm has smaller radius AND the suspension moves upwards from the rest position.

For the push rod - you have to mount the bell crank much higher than the control arm mounting points to get a similar ratio to a pull-rod. that is why you see those bumps on top of the noses of the push rod cars.

One thing though. The pull-rod was at 13 degrees moving to 15 degrees. The push rod was at 41 degrees moving to 40 degrees with a bump of 20mm. Notice that you still have to contend with 2.5 times the force being transmitted through the pull rod.
"You can't change what happened. But you can still change what will happen.
Sebastian Vettel"
PlatinumZealot
 
Joined: 12 Jun 2008

Post Mon Feb 27, 2012 9:06 am

Diesel wrote:
Moanlower wrote:And as far as I know Newey is an aerodynamicist and not a technical engineer.


Wrong. He is a technical engineer, and he currently holds the chief technical officer position at Red Bull. He's worked as a designer, aerodynamicist, race engineer and technical director in various racing disciplines. Adrian Newey is 1000x more qualified than you to make observations about a pull-rod front suspension.

Also, the primary benefit of pull rod at the rear is nothing to do with mechanical grip – it's aerodynamics – it provides cleaner flow to the beam wing.
beelsebob
 
Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Location: Cupertino, California

Post Mon Feb 27, 2012 12:08 pm

beelsebob wrote:Also, the primary benefit of pull rod at the rear is nothing to do with mechanical grip – it's aerodynamics – it provides cleaner flow to the beam wing.


Your correct, beel as well as digging in the mud a bit a comment earlier your right the Fry/Byrne floor showed its face at Barca hopecully there are a few more shiny wafer thin floors ;)
If someone said to me that you can have three wishes, my first would have been to get into racing, my second to be in Formula 1, my third to drive for Ferrari.

Gilles Villeneuve
Hail22
 
Joined: 8 Feb 2012

PreviousNext

Return to F1 Car Hardware & Development

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CCBot [Bot], Ozan and 3 guests