Scarbs, do you have any values for 2009 downforce levels for Red Bull or Brawn? If it's similar to 2008 they must be 2700kg+scarbs wrote:Before every sets off on the “what looks best” solutions, lets remind ourselves what the real OWG did and what we’ve been told since.
* Reduce Aero efficiency target 50%: i.e. Less downforce for the same drag, less downforce slows the cars in medium-high speed corners, similar drag limits straight-line speed.
* Improve the cars sensitivity to wake, I.e. minimal and equal loss of downforce (front to rear)
* Reduce the disruptive wake created by the car
* Improve mechanical grip.
* Make cars less cluttered and reduce scope for cheeky interpretations of the rules.
Facts (from OWG or Tech Director quotes)
* A wider front wing with more load on its outer tip is less sensitive to wake
* A narrower taller rear wing create a less disruptive wake, create less downforce and still create plenty of drag to reduce straight-line speed.
* Diffusers are less sensitive to running in wake, they create downforce centred between the axles and if set at a low expansion ratio are not contributing to wake.
* The diffuser was set back in the 2009 rules to balance the rear downforce lost when running in wake
* Double diffusers do not contribute significantly to wake, but do add considerable downforce.
* Front wheel fairings DO contribute to wake.
* Teams have found space within the rules to create a lot of smaller aero add-ons, similar devices in the OWG study immediately found these were sensitive devices and performance in wake was improved.
* Wishbone, steering and pull rod profiles still add considerably (~5%) to downforce create as flow conditioning devices. The freedom of +/-5 degrees & 3.5-1 ratio across the entire length of each suspension member allows in creativity in designing each section to have an ideal profile.
* Downforce has crept back up (for the most successful team at least) to 2008 levels!
* KERS provides a useful tactical boost for overtaking,
* But the KERS energy limit and the wider front tyre limit its effectiveness and hence has been dropped (or never adopted) by most teams.
* Slicks has proven to provide more mechanical grip in slow corners.
* The weak rear tyre and wide front tyre, enforce an unnecessary forwards weight bais (forcing dangerous compromises for weight distribution - i.e. Nose cones so heavy two men need to carry them!)
* Wider track will add to low speed cornering, but will reduce drag improving aerodynamic downforce and straight-line speed.
* Keep Narrower top rear wing, but reduce the permissible depth (hence angle of attack), enforce minimum section thickness to add drag, wing profiles should be 2D, no twisting or different profiles in side elevation. Ban any openings in the endplate such as the slits at the top to maintain high drag levels. Lower Beam wing is subject to the same profile limitations
* Keep narrow front wing, Reduce the permissible plan area for the frotn wing and reduce the depth (hence angle of attack), Limit to two elements in a longitudinal vertical plane. Enforce similar 2d profile for outer spans, limit endplates to one closed section to reduce Brawn-Ferrari vanes. Under wing fences will also be banned under this ruling.
* Keep low diffuser, clarify the rules to ban double diffusers or any flow crossing from under the floor to above the 175mm section, ban extended (Red Bull) rear wing endplates
* Clarify the rules to ban any overlapping bodywork through out the car (the original aim of the ‘bargeboard-ban’ 2009 rules). Hence the pod wings mini bargeboards etc will be gone.
* Clarify the rules to ban extended brake ducts or fairings, a single inlet scoop will be all that’s allowed aside from the structural uprights
* Clarify the rules to ensure all suspension elements (wishbones push rods etc) are of a continuous 2d profile, to prevent the over complicated shaped currently used.
* Mandatory pocket and ballast to be designed to fit up to 40Kg in the seat\fuel tank bulkhead for performance equalisation purposes.
* Allow KERS, but non KERS cars must have 25KG ballast placed in the seat\fuel tank bulkhead to offset its absence.
* All drivers to meet minimum weight (the heaviest driver). Lighter drivers much have ballast to equalise the difference in weight fitted to seat\fuel tank bulkhead to offset the advantage.
* Maximum weight limit on nose cone\front wing assembly to prevent ballasting of the assembly.
* Reduce front tyre width or improve rear tyre construction in agreement with Bridgestone