F1Technical Overtaking Working Group

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.
Belatti
Belatti
33
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Argentina

Re: F1Technical Overtaking Working Group

Post

Tomba wrote: - No refuelling is fine by me, but I don't think it will improve overtaking, actually rather the contrary as all will be on the same load.
However, drivers/race engineers will not have to speculate with pit stop strategy to gain positions in the pits. Drivers will have to have a bigger go.

Actual strategy, race engineer:
"Wait for him to pit, make a couple of fast laps and then come inside. You will come out of pits at the front."

Future strategy, race engineer:
"Push Push Push!!! Overtake that motherf***er now!!!" :twisted:
"You need great passion, because everything you do with great pleasure, you do well." -Juan Manuel Fangio

"I have no idols. I admire work, dedication and competence." -Ayrton Senna

wrcsti
wrcsti
0
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 3:46 am

Re: F1Technical Overtaking Working Group

Post

I personally want a ban on DDD and allowing for minor extra bodywork.

wrcsti
wrcsti
0
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 3:46 am

Re: F1Technical Overtaking Working Group

Post

ced ampo wrote:GROUND EFFECT SHOULD BE ALLOWED. And also ban front wings and rear wings. That should decrease turbulence and still make cars grippy. Also put a single groove in the front tire. That should balance the car.(As a side note, they can put the stripe back in the front wheels. The green line in the tire sidewall doesn't really work if you are using aerial view.)
Ground effects were taken out for safety reasons.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2e-Zad4m ... re=related
Look at how ground effects alone flipped that car. Now imagine the same on a F1 car with incredible downforce when it flips over it will have lift. Possibly flying for a good bit and crashing onto a fence. Like this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2vGVkfd ... re=related

ESPImperium
ESPImperium
64
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 11:08 pm
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Re: F1Technical Overtaking Working Group

Post

I recon its all down to the rear diffuser and the rear wing, with a little few tweaks to the front wing that are all thats needed to the cars, looking at some more responces.

Diffiser: The reduction of the 175mm line to arround the 150mm mark would probably be best for the diffuser, using current regs for the rest of the diffuser, it could work.

Rear wing: The reduction of the radii of the wing could be the best idea. Make it a standardised radaii, reducing the ammount of "scoop" that the rear wings have to reduce downforce. But id increase the size of it, a small ammount, maybes arround 50mm each side. Also reducing the ammount of height from the top of the wing to the bottom plane by 25mm would also reduce downforce.

Front wing: Increase downforce, but not by much, maybes by about 4-7%, try and get the cars to be "braver" into a corner, but id like to make the noses sort of standardised, but do away with the high noses we currently have. Something like the BGP001 or MP4/24 nose at the lowest or the F60 or FW31 at the other extreme. Try and get the cars to "punch" thru the hole in the air a little better.

Im shure there can be something done with the Brake systems that they can be standardised, maybes make it a mandatory rule that changing the brake ballance by the driver is banned, and can only be done in the pits by removing the front wing and changing it that way. But make it a mandatory rule that 60% of the bias must be toward the front brakes, whitch would be made arround 25% larger than the rear brakes. Theese with increased use of the dustbins, but id make it that theese can only be changed from launch spec once each season, as they are a expencive piece of equiptment with simmilar development costs.

Those are the 4 areas id look into more and more.

rjsa
rjsa
51
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:01 am

Re: F1Technical Overtaking Working Group

Post

wrcsti wrote:
ced ampo wrote:GROUND EFFECT SHOULD BE ALLOWED. And also ban front wings and rear wings. That should decrease turbulence and still make cars grippy. Also put a single groove in the front tire. That should balance the car.(As a side note, they can put the stripe back in the front wheels. The green line in the tire sidewall doesn't really work if you are using aerial view.)
Ground effects were taken out for safety reasons.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2e-Zad4m ... re=related
Look at how ground effects alone flipped that car. Now imagine the same on a F1 car with incredible downforce when it flips over it will have lift. Possibly flying for a good bit and crashing onto a fence. Like this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2vGVkfd ... re=related
It's not ground effect that flips tin tops. It's their huge projected area - what a formula car lacks.

It was banned from F1 in an attempt to reduce overall downforce and to reduce cornering speeds- that's the safety measure.

But, aways a but, rubber and aero improved so much since then that cornering speeds are even highier.

I have a simple rule: convex hull, low nose, standard ground effect ducts. Wing adjusted to fix the snow plower look.

Washngo
Washngo
0
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 1:56 pm

Re: F1Technical Overtaking Working Group

Post

rjsa wrote:It was banned from F1 in an attempt to reduce overall downforce and to reduce cornering speeds- that's the safety measure.
Not really. Yes, there was an element of reducing speeds, but the main reason was because the ground effects meant the cars were inherently unstable. It depended on the car being 'stuck' to the road. If the car became 'unstuck' to the road even for a split second, for example, hitting a bump whilst cornering, the 'ground effect' could potentially disappear, sending the car out of control with the driver as passenger.

that's why it was banned.

rjsa
rjsa
51
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:01 am

Re: F1Technical Overtaking Working Group

Post

Washngo wrote:
rjsa wrote:It was banned from F1 in an attempt to reduce overall downforce and to reduce cornering speeds- that's the safety measure.
Not really. Yes, there was an element of reducing speeds, but the main reason was because the ground effects meant the cars were inherently unstable. It depended on the car being 'stuck' to the road. If the car became 'unstuck' to the road even for a split second, for example, hitting a bump whilst cornering, the 'ground effect' could potentially disappear, sending the car out of control with the driver as passenger.

that's why it was banned.
If you don't mind providing me links with such information... I'd like to learn about this.

Washngo
Washngo
0
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 1:56 pm

Re: F1Technical Overtaking Working Group

Post

rjsa wrote:
Washngo wrote:
rjsa wrote:It was banned from F1 in an attempt to reduce overall downforce and to reduce cornering speeds- that's the safety measure.
Not really. Yes, there was an element of reducing speeds, but the main reason was because the ground effects meant the cars were inherently unstable. It depended on the car being 'stuck' to the road. If the car became 'unstuck' to the road even for a split second, for example, hitting a bump whilst cornering, the 'ground effect' could potentially disappear, sending the car out of control with the driver as passenger.

that's why it was banned.
If you don't mind providing me links with such information... I'd like to learn about this.
here's a couple:
http://www.f1-grandprix.com/history4.html
and good old Wiki has a nice summary of the ground effect era:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_effect_in_cars

rjsa
rjsa
51
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:01 am

Re: F1Technical Overtaking Working Group

Post

There is no suggestion that ground effects where banned on flipping issues on either article. Only this:

Code: Select all

As Lauda commented, "The wildest imaginable things could happen behind the wheel of a ground effect car." After advancing throughout the grid, by 1981-82 all teams were using ground effects. But in an effort to bring more driver control and skill to F1, ground effects — first the skirts (along with six-wheeled and four-wheel drive cars) in 1981, and then underbody venturi tunnels in 1983 — were finally banned from Formula One.
As mentioned on the wiki article, it was successfully exploited by champ car. Which never failed to provide good racing, on ovals or street circuits.

wesley123
wesley123
198
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 4:55 pm

Re: F1Technical Overtaking Working Group

Post

Belatti wrote:
Tomba wrote: - No refuelling is fine by me, but I don't think it will improve overtaking, actually rather the contrary as all will be on the same load.
However, drivers/race engineers will not have to speculate with pit stop strategy to gain positions in the pits. Drivers will have to have a bigger go.

Actual strategy, race engineer:
"Wait for him to pit, make a couple of fast laps and then come inside. You will come out of pits at the front."

Future strategy, race engineer:
"Push Push Push!!! Overtake that motherf***er now!!!" :twisted:
True and wrong, now the less feul consuming car will have a gain, and a big one too at the start.
"Bite my shiny metal ass" - Bender

rjsa
rjsa
51
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:01 am

Re: F1Technical Overtaking Working Group

Post

OK, from Peter Wright Formula 1 Technology, page 219:
Banned technology -> Venturies and skirts
...The cars were so unpleasant to drive that for 1983, flat bottoms were mandated, setting the stage to much more pitch sensitive aerodynamic configuration ... There are advantages in enabling cars to run closer together ... Eventually, other formulae, including Formula 1, may adopt this configuration.

rjsa
rjsa
51
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:01 am

Re: F1Technical Overtaking Working Group

Post

An old convex hull concept:
Image

Washngo
Washngo
0
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 1:56 pm

Re: F1Technical Overtaking Working Group

Post

rjsa wrote:There is no suggestion that ground effects where banned on flipping issues on either article.
I never said anything about flipping? I said the cars could become easily unstable.

Read the whole article:

Despite their advances, ground effects had a problem, namely that slight miscalculations in set-up would render the ground-effect F1 car undriveable and wickedly unstable. The need to keep ground clearances extremely low led to rigidly sprung, rock-hard cars with virtually no ride height tolerance and little if any ability to handle bumps and curbs. Something really terrible, unnatural and unpredictable would happen if the airflow beneath the car was disrupted for one reason or another.



The downforce created by the ground effect was so dominant in the early '80's designed cars, that many would not even have a front wing! This meant any disruption to the vacuum created under the cars, be it from a bump, debris, damage to the skirts, mid -corner could result in the driver losing all control due to the loss of downforce. This might happen only for a split second, but when you are cornering at 150mph, a split second is all it takes. Put simply, the cars were getting incredibly quick through the corners, but also unpredictable.

rjsa
rjsa
51
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:01 am

Re: F1Technical Overtaking Working Group

Post

DOUBLED
Last edited by rjsa on Sat Jun 27, 2009 12:40 am, edited 1 time in total.

rjsa
rjsa
51
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 2:01 am

Re: F1Technical Overtaking Working Group

Post

Well, I just don't agree and will stick with Peter Wright and my memory. I follow F1 since that time and no good good source I have seen so far says venturis where banned due to snapping behaviour.

More yet, we still see those on 2009 F1 cars on the form of extractors, which are today responsible for a good 40% of overall downforce. And no one is flying around because their extractors are stalling or any other malfunction.

I say just move those venturis forward to the side pods.