- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
Team: James Allison (TD), Pat Fry (ED), Nikolas Tombazis (CD), Stefano Domenicali (MD), Simone Resta (DCD), Corrado Lanzone (Head of production), Luca Marmorini (HE), Rory Byrne (Tech Advisor)
Drivers: Fernando Alonso (14), Kimi Raikkonen (7)
And that's the issue with these wings, the downforce changes with turning the wheel and under braking. Thus, you want drivability, to have the least change in downforce under the different conditions.bhallg2k wrote: I think I'd prefer to have peak downforce while cornering.
The issue with all of this is that when the one wheel is in the desired position of peak downforce, the other wheel is not. Also, there are different angles in which the wheel can be turned, making this change even more complex.To accomplish that, I might use something like this...
http://i.imgur.com/rJYAbSk.jpg
(Note: the bottom wing is not the same as the top one. I've included it only for better illustration. I believe it's a 2012-spec design.)
It seems likely, to me anyway, that air flow reoriented around the car while it's in yaw alters the flow pattern around the wing in general (blue arrows), which causes any strakes to become vortex generators that then energize air flow under the top elements of the wing (yellow arrows).
Because such devices require a difference in pressure on either side of the element in order to be effective, vortex generators are typically mounted diagonal to incoming air flow. This makes them somewhat draggy.
On the other hand, strakes positioned directly in line with the same incoming air flow will only be effective as vortex generators when the car is in yaw and needs as much downforce as possible in order to turn as quickly as possible. That means they won't exact a drag penalty the rest of the time. That also means the strakes can be made larger, and that there can be more of them. That certainly looks to be the case here when comparing last year's wing...
http://i.imgur.com/xR7iGc3.jpg
...to this year's wing.
The goal is to do roughly this, which isn't an easy task with narrower wings:Kiril Varbanov wrote:http://img2.auto-motor-und-sport.de/Fer ... 758266.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/HYpwYdj.jpg
An inspired engineer might even design upper wing flaps that, given their close proximity to front wheel wake, can only function efficiently with the assistance of vortex generators. That would provide yet another drag reduction.
Of course, I could just be making all this --- up.
Kiril Varbanov wrote:http://img2.auto-motor-und-sport.de/Fer ... 758266.jpg
Naturally, I disagree. (Shocking, right?)wesley123 wrote:And that's the issue with these wings, the downforce changes with turning the wheel and under braking. Thus, you want drivability, to have the least change in downforce under the different conditions.
The issue with all of this is that when the one wheel is in the desired position of peak downforce, the other wheel is not. Also, there are different angles in which the wheel can be turned, making this change even more complex.
Yes, you'd want peak downforce under cornering, but it is not possible(at least, I think it is not) to do so due to the vastly different positions of wheels as well as ride height.
Indeed, they are not. However, when front wheels are in the path it becomes a whole lot more important. Pre-2009 era it wasn't that much of a problem. The front wing was far enough off the ground to not be affected by it, and the front wheels were out of the airflow. It was rather drivable in such sense.bhallg2k wrote: varied downforce levels aren't a fresh problem for F1,
True, although I wouldn't compare it to the issue front wings have. The DRS was a simple case of an on/off state and the delays given in such a situation. It's problem did not become bigger or smaller under braking or yaw, and that is exactly where the problem of front wings lay, Their performance is based on yaw, proximity to the ground and position of the wheels, which change all the time, every turn. For the DRS and it's delay, not so much, the delay is the same everywhere. Yes, it was unpredictable, but it happened in the same sense every time.I recall that several teams initially had issues with detaching and reattaching the boundary layer from the rear wing elements during and after DRS use. The wings were prone to stalling unevenly across the span, which made performance unpredictable.
When you are doing something for the corners it also does something or the straights. The issue is kind of hard due to the different positions of the front wing. Your wing will give different performance whether your wheel is turned 10 degrees or 15 degrees. Not only that, but this then also is different between the left and right side. Also, 10 degrees and 20mm above the track will be different compared to 10 degrees and 10mm and so fort.Think about it: If a team manages to gain x-points of downforce only during yaw, the net benefit of that gain is effectively 2x-points, because the team doesn't have to carry around that additional downforce (drag) onto straights where it's not needed. And if your rivals can't replicate those gains, the benefits are enhanced even further, because you're doing something they simply cannot do. (Lookin' at you, Stefano.)
I'm not exactly sure why you disagree with me when that's the point I'm trying to get across here.wesley123 wrote:[...] and that is exactly where the problem of front wings lay, Their performance is based on yaw, proximity to the ground and position of the wheels, which change all the time, every turn.
[...]
No exhaust shielding, which is detrimental to energy recovery I think. Nice design though.f300v10 wrote:I believe this shot is of the Marussia, but it is the best one yet of the Ferrari compact turbo exhaust layout:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BiomjgTCIAEcNts.jpg
