View Single Post
Old 25 Jan 2011, 21:08 (Ref:2820539)   #6
Purist
Veteran
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
United States
Wichita, Kansas, USA
Posts: 5,892
Purist is going for a new world record!Purist is going for a new world record!Purist is going for a new world record!Purist is going for a new world record!Purist is going for a new world record!Purist is going for a new world record!
Now then, here is another area that I think needs some attention.

Variable-Radius Corners and Corner Sequences
This topic is perhaps not as straightforward as the first, so I will do my best to elaborate. I have noticed that many newer circuits seem to shy away from having complex sequences of corners all rather close together, like the infield at Interlagos, or just about the entire Sportscar Circuit at Sears Point (Infineon). Current designers also seem to shy away from variable-radius corners. The most notable exception to this observation is Turn 8 at Istanbul. However, even that corner isn't in the same vein as many older, variable-radius corners. What I mean by this is that Turn 8 at Istanbul has much more clearly defined apexes than you would have seen in earlier, variable-radius corners.

These changes to and omissions from current track design have major consequences. Long sequences of corners that all flow together put a premium on precision and rhythm, and magnify any errors a competitor makes, because those errors continue to cost them down the track that much further. The lack of variable-radius corners, and the type of variable-radius corners used anymore, where they are present, serve to constrict and more tightly control the racing line, which, when you're actually trying to race someone, is actually harmful, because you make any "alternative" line someone might try to use in overtaking substantially more disadvantageous.

It might seem like I show a tendency to dislike technical circuits, but the real issue behind it is what I'm describing here. Newer technical sections are usually uninteresting and ineffective.

Hungaroring is very technical for a good portion of the lap, but it does this through a number of constant-radius, clearly defined from one another, corners. Also, most of the corners are slow to medium speed even for F1 cars. It creates a follow-the-leader setup, and this is emphasized by several of these corners alternating between going left or right, which usually puts you on the wrong foot if you exit one corner and try to dive up the inside on the next. The straights are so short, and your line is so compromised, that it doesn't make much sense to attempt a serious move.

For a comparison, I have four tracks that come to mind pretty much right off that are good technical circuit overall, or at least have good technical elements, and these are a mix of new and old circuits: Jarama, Portimao, Interlagos, and Navarra.

At Interlagos, the section from the entry of Ferrardura all the way around to Juncao gives amazing scope for different lines, turn-in and braking points, and places to catch the other guys off and to get caught out yourself. The "ideal line" really depends on what you are trying to do, as well as what corner(s) you put most emphasis on. There is just enough room between the tighter corners to get a bit of a run going. It is not so much though, that the accordion effect allows the guy in front to pull too big a gap just based on the what the speed differential does to the distance between vehicles with the same time interval between them.

Portimao uses interesting combinations of corners and variable-radius coners, spaced out more than they are at the Interlagos infield, to create some of the same effects. Again, the "ideal line" is a conditional thing. Also, the higher speeds between the tight corners, coupled with the dramatic elevation changes, can put the drivers more off-balance, allowing those with better grip/handling to make opportunistic moves in the interesting places.

I can't quite put my finger on what it is about Jarama that grabs me. Part of it is probably those banked hairpins, and then there is just the distribution of quick, challenging corners around the lap that force rapid transitions from slower to faster sections as you traverse the circuit. I think I will be watching the Superleague Formula and FIA GT3 races from Jarama again here. Also, Iwould say that the esse bends at Jarama seem less obtrusive to the track flow and layout than is the case at some other technical circuits: Hungaroring or Fundidora Park for example.

I have some issues with the Navarra Circuit for other reasons, but I like the tricky, decisive moves that can be pulled off at Turn 2-3, 5-6, and 9-10 due to how these corner combinations work together. There is also just enough room to get some interesting lines coming out of Turn 13 and going through Turns 14 and 15 at the end of the lap.

One particular thing I wanted to demonstrate here, and that, if you know the tracks, you should see it, that decreasing-radius corners do NOT have to be bad for racing and overtaking. This is one thing that has bothered me with some of the posters in the F1 section here, and clearly, what they try to contend does not have to be the case at all. A number of the corners in the Interlagos infield are decreasing radius, as are two or three of the critical corners/complexes on the back side of Portimao.

It's also kind of funny, and kind of sad, that Tilke's best sequence of consecutive corners is probably one of his least liked by fans: Turns 17-25 at Valencia. It flows well, is quite fast, and provides as good an overtaking opportunity at its end as any other on the entire course.

Anyway, I think that's quite a bit to chew on for anybody, so, once again, feel free to discuss this or the first topic area, and I'll be back with another installment in the next few days here.

Last edited by Purist; 25 Jan 2011 at 21:23.
Purist is offline  
__________________
The only certainty is that nothing is certain.
Quote