2009 spec front wing end plates

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.

Post Thu Jan 22, 2009 12:12 am

From my understanding f1's don't have venturi tunels nowdays, just the litle extractor at the end of the flat floor...
In the case of this c60 pecarolo they extend to way before the back axel (as by the rules)...
RJC_pt
 
Joined: 18 May 2007
Location: Braga, Portugal

Post Thu Jan 22, 2009 5:19 am

For jwielage:
Here is reasonably good explanation of what the underbody venturis were all about. Today's flat-bottom rule (together with no sliding skirts), is preventing this idea, but it's to some extent still permitted in the IRL.

http://www.symscape.com/blog/secrets_of_diffusers
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"
xpensive
 
Joined: 22 Nov 2008
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Post Thu Jan 22, 2009 6:15 pm

xpensive, thanks a bunch for that link. It provided me with all the information I was looking for. =D>
“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so" - Mark Twain
jwielage
 
Joined: 1 Mar 2007
Location: New York City

Post Mon Jan 26, 2009 12:36 pm

Scotracer wrote:There are some serious misconceptions going on in this thread.

Namely, the front-wing is less susceptible to loss of efficiency when following a car than the rest of the car. Anecdotal evidence from the drivers would suggest this is happening but the OWG's wind-tunnel results tell a different story. It was realised that:

Racecar Engineering Vol18 #11 wrote:At the front of the car the front wing was found to be contributing a similar downforce component to that of the diffuser (roughly 37%. But, being less sensitive to wake than the rear end made it contribute more in wake. This is counterintuitive as we often hear of drivers suffering understeer when following another car. This is probably the net loss in downforce they are feeling, rather than specifically frontal downforce.


This shows that it's the rear of the car that is the problem, not the front. Removing the front-wing would also create incredible imbalances in the loading on the car as the front would be subjected to 0N downforce (or even negative downforce...aka lift) whilst the rear would have over 20000N of downforce - making the car near undriveable.


In an interview with Racecar Engineering Toyota's Senior General Manager Chassis Pascal Vasselon says something differently:

What are the implications of the adjustable front wing?
The adjustable front wing is another change which contributes to reducing the impact of wake on a car's performance. One of the characteristics of a car following another is to lose front downforce and end up with understeer. The new regulations have tried to minimise that but it will still exist. So the other possibility is to offer the driver an active change to the car's balance and the easiest way to achieve this is to make the front wing adjustable. This means that if a car is experiencing understeer when following another car, the driver can add some flap angle to the front wing to improve the balance. The target again is to limit the performance drop experienced when following another car closely, and to improve the chances of overtaking. But in circumstances when a driver is not following another car, he will also be able to take advantage of the adjustable wing to compensate potential balance issues in certain corners. The drivers will certainly be kept busy next year!
Pingguest
 
Joined: 28 Dec 2008

Previous

Return to Aerodynamics, chassis and tyres

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Godius, Yandex [Bot] and 1 guest