Home  
Site Partners: SpotterGuides Veloce Books  
Related Sites: Your Link Here  

Go Back   TenTenths Motorsport Forum > Single Seater Racing > Formula One

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 18 May 2018, 04:45 (Ref:3823155)   #1751
Oldtony
Veteran
 
Oldtony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Australia
Gold Coast Australia
Posts: 1,722
Oldtony should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridOldtony should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridOldtony should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridOldtony should be qualifying in the top 3 on the grid
Great to see some in depth analysis.
Must admit it has changed my opinion that limiting aero was a quick fix to get more overtaking.
And it also leads me to thinking that any improvement in braking or useabl power tends to compound that problem rather than fixing it.
I think we all have to start to question whether the number of overtakes in a race is what leads to an exciting and memorable race ( or in particular a drive) is the prime factor.
Oldtony is offline  
__________________
Geting old is mandatory, acting old is optional.
Quote
Old 19 May 2018, 01:21 (Ref:3823326)   #1752
wnut
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
wnut has a real shot at the championship!wnut has a real shot at the championship!wnut has a real shot at the championship!wnut has a real shot at the championship!wnut has a real shot at the championship!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purist View Post
The accordion effect means there will inherently be spread and contraction between cars. The leader hits the gas first, chronologically, and for that little bit of time, is going noticeably faster than the trailing car, and this is exaggerated by the insane acceleration of these cars, not by the aero. (This is one phenomenon that the trump card of electric motors, instant torque, will in fact make worse as those cars become faster.)

At the other end, the simply mad braking of these cars means that, unless you're in a position to make the pass, you have to factor in the flip side: a corresponding compression of the physical gap, as the leader hits the brakes that little bit sooner.

There's only so much you can do with that dynamic, reardless of the aero.

Perhaps this illustration will make it clearer. Given the physical size of the car (the Merc is 5.7-meters/18.7-feet long), a time gap of less than 0.255 of a second is guaranteed to see contact in a 50-mph corner like Pinheirinho. And hence, a time gap of less than 0.285 of a second will see contact made in a 45-mph corner, like either Esse or Bico de Pato. Thus, even with no wings or dedicated undertray works at all, a time gap of less than 0.3 of a second is practically impossible to maintain through the tightest part of the infield at Interlagos.

What all this also means is that once you get within a certain time gap, unless you make the move quickly, you are physically forced to give time up and then try to regain it, repeatedly, in order to simply avoid a collision. Again, aero hasn't got a thing to do with the basic mechanics of that fundamental dynamic. And that constant gain and loss of time will eventually knacker your tires.

In the most extreme case, Monaco, even if you were touching the leader's gearbox at the apex of Rascasse or the Hairpin, you'd still be ~0.5 of a second, or a bit more, behind the car that your own nose is literally rubbing against.

So long as things are roughly as they are, maybe some tracks should have an extended DRS detection range. At most standard circuits, it seems like the 1.0-second gap is fine. However, maybe Singapore could use something more like 1.25-1.5 seconds, while perhaps as much as 2.0 seconds wouldn't go amiss at Monaco.
If aero doesn't affect passing then this would seem to be a strange phenomenon.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13...-50%25-in-2017

Wake turbulence means a following car does none of the advantages of the leading car operating in clean air, so to say aero has no effect is just wrong, it affects acceleration off a corner and braking distances into corners.

Braking is also affected as we saw with Ricciardo hitting the back of Verstappen following Max's double move, Ricciardo's car just did not have the aero load necessary to keep braking at the required rate and he was a passenger.

You are also assuming, that passing is purely a matter of blowing past on a straight and not taking a position in a corner as we have seen particularly Ricciardo and Verstappen do, once the front wheel is more than half the car length alongside, the lead car is forced to concede the corner. (Once the downforce goes off the front of the car with wake turbulence this is not easy!)

Last edited by wnut; 19 May 2018 at 01:27.
wnut is offline  
Quote
Old 19 May 2018, 01:53 (Ref:3823327)   #1753
EffectiveSprinkles
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 943
EffectiveSprinkles User had had their licence endorsedEffectiveSprinkles User had had their licence endorsed
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnut View Post
If aero doesn't affect passing then this would seem to be a strange phenomenon.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13...-50%25-in-2017
Not really, since all of that can be explained by the fact there was also a fall of about the same amount of pitstops. Places gained in the pitstops are counted as overtakes.
EffectiveSprinkles is offline  
Quote
Old 19 May 2018, 02:38 (Ref:3823330)   #1754
wnut
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
wnut has a real shot at the championship!wnut has a real shot at the championship!wnut has a real shot at the championship!wnut has a real shot at the championship!wnut has a real shot at the championship!
Quote:
Originally Posted by EffectiveSprinkles View Post
Not really, since all of that can be explained by the fact there was also a fall of about the same amount of pitstops. Places gained in the pitstops are counted as overtakes.
AFAIK they were pretty careful that the passes had to be on track for position, not in the pits or just blowing past out of position cars.
wnut is offline  
Quote
Old 19 May 2018, 02:49 (Ref:3823331)   #1755
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!
I won't say that aero has absolutely zero impact, but its influence has been heavily overblown, while the effects of the accordion effect have seemingly been totally overlooked and not even mentioned.

It would be much more useful to have a race-by-race breakdown between 2016 and 2017 to see where the most pronounced drops were. Also, aside from Rosberg coming back through the field, how many overtakes did the 2014 Russian GP have?

And actually, there's also this article:
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/12...taking-records

It seems like that total in the 400s, in absolute terms, isn't so out of the ordinary, but instead, those values in the 800s are the abnormal ones, even compared to the level of overtaking that took place during the second stint of Lauda's career (1982-85). (I suspect quite a few overtakes in the 1978-83 range were turbo cars blowing by naturally-aspirated cars on the straights, and then frequently being repassed when they ran their tires off. Alternatively, if the turbo cars pitted, they'd then scythe through the field yet again.)

I know there are differences, but given how close the Indy Cars can run on the superspeedways, even this year with the reduced downforce, without snapping out and around in the wake of the car in front, I'm less concerned about the impact the wake is having in F1. After all, I wouldn't expect that the Indy Cars are making any more downforce this year at Indy, at those speeds, than the F1 cars are making at just 150 mph.

There is a maximum amount of adhesion you're going to be able to get from the tires, regardless of aero load. Once you go past that, you won't be able to carry any more cornering speed. Therefore, however much more downforce than that value you happen to be making, it's just excess. Thus, you can afford to lose that margin behind another car, and still hold the road.

And yes, the article I link to mentions what they do and don't cover as an overtake.
Purist is offline  
__________________
The only certainty is that nothing is certain.
Quote
Old 19 May 2018, 04:08 (Ref:3823334)   #1756
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!
Another note on the above material is that reliability issues meant overtaking could have been more common in some respects, as theoretically class-leading cars were more likely to have to start back in the pack for any given race. In addition, the teams running those class-leading cars tended to shift more frequently prior to 2000, so there were more cars in a given race, or certainly throughout a given season, that were regarded as front runners.
Purist is offline  
__________________
The only certainty is that nothing is certain.
Quote
Old 19 May 2018, 04:29 (Ref:3823337)   #1757
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!
Wnut, the subject initially broached was about the difficulties of cars just getting close enough to have a go at an overtake, so that was what I addressed.

Now then, I think I have to point out that passing in the corner itself is very problematic on most of these newer circuits, because a number of the corners have such acute apexes; the usable line just isn't that wide. The remake of Mexico City is perhaps the most egregious example of this, but I've also seen it elsewhere.

Even outside of F1, the corners that are meant to be the primary overtaking zones, and are the primary braking zones (Turns 1, 7, and 12), at the Indianapolis roval pose the same difficulty. Basically, the trailing car has to just about get the pass done on the straight. Even if he gets around half the car in front, if he's on the outside, the driver who was leading onto the straight can just hold station, and the guy on the outside will have to yield, or get forced off the track at corner exit. Going up the inside, the trailing car will have to back out if he's still behind by much of any degree, or the leader can just put him over the curbing at the apex. If neither one yields, there will be a collision, and/or someone will end up off the racing surface.

By contrast, the opening sequence at Shanghai shows that smooth, flowing corners, even when they get down to not being terribly fast, can provide scope for some excellent racing. And in addition, the Turn 7-8 sequence shows that respectful competitors can also put on a heck of a high-speed show there.
Purist is offline  
__________________
The only certainty is that nothing is certain.
Quote
Old 19 May 2018, 13:28 (Ref:3823376)   #1758
wnut
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
wnut has a real shot at the championship!wnut has a real shot at the championship!wnut has a real shot at the championship!wnut has a real shot at the championship!wnut has a real shot at the championship!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purist View Post
Wnut, the subject initially broached was about the difficulties of cars just getting close enough to have a go at an overtake, so that was what I addressed.
I think that it was an excellent post, but I think that you are underestimating the problems caused by the wake turbulence on the trailing car's aero. We have seen a number of instances where the Mercs which could run 1.5 secs clear of the field in clear air are incapable of overtaking and working their way through the field.

Indycar have put a lot of work into massively reducing the size and complexity of their wings, streamlining the cars to reduce the wake turbulence with the rear wheel fairings and using ground effect tunnels to produce the downforce. The oval package is particularly short on wings.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Efbdxk1utSg


Quote:
Originally Posted by Purist View Post
Now then, I think I have to point out that passing in the corner itself is very problematic on most of these newer circuits, because a number of the corners have such acute apexes; the usable line just isn't that wide. The remake of Mexico City is perhaps the most egregious example of this, but I've also seen it elsewhere.

Even outside of F1, the corners that are meant to be the primary overtaking zones, and are the primary braking zones (Turns 1, 7, and 12), at the Indianapolis roval pose the same difficulty. Basically, the trailing car has to just about get the pass done on the straight. Even if he gets around half the car in front, if he's on the outside, the driver who was leading onto the straight can just hold station, and the guy on the outside will have to yield, or get forced off the track at corner exit. Going up the inside, the trailing car will have to back out if he's still behind by much of any degree, or the leader can just put him over the curbing at the apex. If neither one yields, there will be a collision, and/or someone will end up off the racing surface.

By contrast, the opening sequence at Shanghai shows that smooth, flowing corners, even when they get down to not being terribly fast, can provide scope for some excellent racing. And in addition, the Turn 7-8 sequence shows that respectful competitors can also put on a heck of a high-speed show there.
This I agree with absolutely.

Turns 7 and 8 at would be much better if they were same handed and did not allow the leading car the opportunity to cut the line of the following car twice.
wnut is offline  
Quote
Old 19 May 2018, 16:26 (Ref:3823400)   #1759
EffectiveSprinkles
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 943
EffectiveSprinkles User had had their licence endorsedEffectiveSprinkles User had had their licence endorsed
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnut View Post
Indycar have put a lot of work into massively reducing the size and complexity of their wings, streamlining the cars to reduce the wake turbulence with the rear wheel fairings and using ground effect tunnels to produce the downforce. The oval package is particularly short on wings.
All that has done is decrease the downforce but also increase drag. The cars are much slower and because of the lack of setup options make downforce in a very inefficient way now so the racing will suffer massively. Like we've seen this year already.
EffectiveSprinkles is offline  
Quote
Old 19 May 2018, 16:43 (Ref:3823402)   #1760
bjohnsonsmith
Race Official
20KPINAL
 
bjohnsonsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
United States
London, England
Posts: 23,143
bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnut View Post
I think that it was an excellent post, but I think that you are underestimating the problems caused by the wake turbulence on the trailing car's aero. We have seen a number of instances where the Mercs which could run 1.5 secs clear of the field in clear air are incapable of overtaking and working their way through the field.

Indycar have put a lot of work into massively reducing the size and complexity of their wings, streamlining the cars to reduce the wake turbulence with the rear wheel fairings and using ground effect tunnels to produce the downforce. The oval package is particularly short on wings.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Efbdxk1utSg

This I agree with absolutely.

Turns 7 and 8 at would be much better if they were same handed and did not allow the leading car the opportunity to cut the line of the following car twice.
That's a very good point about the wake turbulence. Since IndyCar introduced the aerodynamic changes to the DW-12, now the IR-18, the cars can follow each other more closely, making overtaking easier, as the majority of the downforce is now generated by the car's floor, rather than the cars surface, which produces the wake turbulence.

It's interesting to note that in F1, with the the wings and surface of the car being used to generate most of the downforce, the cars are now using more aero, noteably around the bargeboards and the front of the sidepods, as seen on this year's Ferrari, in order to improve the airflow and get every bit of surface aerodynamic advantage they can.

bjohnsonsmith is offline  
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying."
Colin Chapman.
Quote
Old 19 May 2018, 16:54 (Ref:3823404)   #1761
bjohnsonsmith
Race Official
20KPINAL
 
bjohnsonsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
United States
London, England
Posts: 23,143
bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!
Quote:
Originally Posted by EffectiveSprinkles View Post
All that has done is decrease the downforce but also increase drag. The cars are much slower and because of the lack of setup options make downforce in a very inefficient way now so the racing will suffer massively. Like we've seen this year already.
It doesn't increase the drag, it does the opposite. More doewnforce, creates more drag. The racing hasn't suffered massively at all. The only ''bad'' race this year was the IndyCar GP at IMS and since it's inception 5 years ago has never produced a good race but that is entirely another matter.
bjohnsonsmith is offline  
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying."
Colin Chapman.
Quote
Old 19 May 2018, 17:49 (Ref:3823412)   #1762
EffectiveSprinkles
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 943
EffectiveSprinkles User had had their licence endorsedEffectiveSprinkles User had had their licence endorsed
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith View Post
It doesn't increase the drag, it does the opposite.
That is not true. Read this: https://racer.com/2018/05/18/insight...uning-options/


Quote:
Looking inside the numerical differences for downforce, drag, and the aero tuning options available to teams, provides deeper answers on why speeds are slightly down and the cars are harder to drive.

Last year, and without naming the aero kit manufacturer, drivers went into qualifying with approximately 2080 pounds of downforce applied. And with that downforce, roughly 645 pounds of drag was pulled through the air.
Those figures were achieved through careful manipulation of dozens of bodywork configurations created by the manufacturers. Drivers, free to refine the intersection of speed and handling to their liking, rarely complained about an inability to tailor cars to suit their needs. At Indianapolis with the UAK18, drivers have not been as fortunate.

In an effort to reduce costs and complexity, the pretty new bodywork is surprisingly short on aero tuning pieces, and as a result, dialing downforce numbers down to last year’s qualifying figures will be tough without embracing insanity. Drag figures, in light of the rear wheel guard removal, have also gone up.
EffectiveSprinkles is offline  
Quote
Old 19 May 2018, 18:33 (Ref:3823414)   #1763
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!
I'm not surprised that removing the pods added drag. I'm sure the Lancia-Ferrari D50 would produce more drag with its pontoon tanks removed. However, that doesn't mean that the overall drag went up; I'm sure it went down, as straight-line speeds are up this year. Overall lap times haven't increased much, actually.

The downforce and drag numbers are nice, but there's a key piece missing; how fast are the cars going to attain those figures? If I had to guess, I'd think those numbers were set at a speed of either 150 or maybe 180 mph. At 200, 220, or 230 mph, those stats will be significantly higher. The equation 2,080/645 gives an L/D of 3.22:1; this year's 2,160/680 gives a value of 3.18:1. A former Swift engineer told me that a very good L/D figure for a modern open-wheel racer is about 4.0:1. (For a bit of comparison to anvanced fendered cars, the Group C sports racers on the drawing board/being tested for 1993 were working on getting into the 5.5-6.0:1 L/D range. Now, I will also note that the Group C cars tended to suffer in the L/D department when trimmed out to their Le Mans earo spec.)

It's interesting, looking at the cars at Long Beach this year, the mid-straight gap on Shoreline was pretty similar to what it has been in recent runnings. If there's potentially a notable change, it's that, if anything, the cars seemed a little more spaced out at the apex of the hairpin. Maybe the lower downforce makes it less tempting to dive into that corner, and thus, they're actually getting a better corner exit. And if the physical gap is about the same, but they're going somewhat faster on the straight, the slipstream will be at least slightly more powerful.

Last edited by Purist; 19 May 2018 at 18:51.
Purist is offline  
__________________
The only certainty is that nothing is certain.
Quote
Old 19 May 2018, 19:10 (Ref:3823416)   #1764
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!
As for my comments about passing at Shanghai, realistically, you still just have the one main shot of the leader cutting up the pursuer's line. If they're still there, they'll have the inside for Turn 8, and if they are cut off through T7, they won't be in position to even try through T8 or into T9-10. Your line will be no less cut off by the leader in the T7/8 combination at Sepang, and both those corners are right-handers. (And paved run-off or no, there should be some penalty for running a driver out of road.)

So I like T7/8 at Shanghai; I just wish T9/10 was more of a sweeper, for the flow of the section, and to improve overtaking potential into T11.
Purist is offline  
__________________
The only certainty is that nothing is certain.
Quote
Old 19 May 2018, 19:16 (Ref:3823418)   #1765
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!
On the Mercedes, yes, I know it's reported tendency to by more vulnerable to wake turbulence than the other cars; it wasn't really a dissimilar story to what was said about the Red Bull when they were stomping the competition.

The useful information though would be what specifically is the vulnerability, and more importantly, what is the apparent change in the car's behavior.

I also just have to say that I don't recall Hamilton's teammates making the same vocal complaints about the car's behavior and its reputed inability to follow, or at the very least, they certainly weren't speaking out nearly as loudly or frequently about it. (And just in general, I liked Lewis better in his 2007-09 phase, when he seemed much more genuinely grateful for the pace and abilities the car did demonstrate. Most crucial of all, back then, he didn't throw his team under the bus over the radio during the races.)

And again, this, plus BJS's comments, go back to my thought on the rulesmakers fouling things up to slow the cars down. When you take away the "easy", and most aerodynamically efficient, methods of producing downforce, this kind of thing can happen, especially with the budgets these teams have.
Purist is offline  
__________________
The only certainty is that nothing is certain.
Quote
Old 19 May 2018, 23:01 (Ref:3823464)   #1766
bjohnsonsmith
Race Official
20KPINAL
 
bjohnsonsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
United States
London, England
Posts: 23,143
bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!
Quote:
Originally Posted by EffectiveSprinkles View Post
The pods or tapered rear wheel guards as they are called in the article, virtually enclosed the rear tyre. Since they have been removed, more of the rear tyre is now exposed and that will produce more drag. As the article says: "It’s simply a byproduct of losing the rear wheel guards. "Thanks to the tapered guards behind the rear tires, aerodynamic drag was reduced as air flowed over and behind each car." The pods or tapered rear wheel guards had nothing to do with generating downforce but to do with air flow.

Otherwise, it's a fundamental aerodynamic principle that more downforce, comes at the expense of more drag because they are proportional. The greater the angle of attack of the wing, the more downforce is created but it produces more drag. As in this picture. The picture is of an airplane wing but the principle is the same but reversed with a car.



So another thing to take into consideration, in the case of slower speeds at Indy this year with the DW-12/IR-18, is that now less overall downforce is produced, the cars have a greater straight line speed, similar to an F1 car using DRS (Drag Reduction System). With greater straight line speed, the driver is now having to break earlier.

This article on F1 aerodynamics is well worth a read.

http://www.formula1-dictionary.net/a...ics_of_f1.html
bjohnsonsmith is offline  
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying."
Colin Chapman.
Quote
Old 20 May 2018, 06:02 (Ref:3823493)   #1767
EffectiveSprinkles
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 943
EffectiveSprinkles User had had their licence endorsedEffectiveSprinkles User had had their licence endorsed
I know all that, I simply was countering your idea that the new IndyCar produced less drag. Why that is is not really the point
EffectiveSprinkles is offline  
Quote
Old 20 May 2018, 08:03 (Ref:3823503)   #1768
Akrapovic
Veteran
 
Akrapovic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Scotland
Posts: 10,911
Akrapovic is the undisputed Champion of the World!Akrapovic is the undisputed Champion of the World!Akrapovic is the undisputed Champion of the World!Akrapovic is the undisputed Champion of the World!Akrapovic is the undisputed Champion of the World!Akrapovic is the undisputed Champion of the World!Akrapovic is the undisputed Champion of the World!Akrapovic is the undisputed Champion of the World!Akrapovic is the undisputed Champion of the World!Akrapovic is the undisputed Champion of the World!Akrapovic is the undisputed Champion of the World!
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith View Post
Otherwise, it's a fundamental aerodynamic principle that more downforce, comes at the expense of more drag because they are proportional. The greater the angle of attack of the wing, the more downforce is created but it produces more drag. As in this picture. The picture is of an airplane wing but the principle is the same but reversed with a car.
I've never really liked the "because they are proportional" stance because it's way more complicated than that. It's not really "proportional" if the proportions change constantly.
Akrapovic is online now  
Quote
Old 20 May 2018, 10:44 (Ref:3823525)   #1769
bjohnsonsmith
Race Official
20KPINAL
 
bjohnsonsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
United States
London, England
Posts: 23,143
bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!
Quote:
Originally Posted by EffectiveSprinkles View Post
I know all that, I simply was countering your idea that the new IndyCar produced less drag. Why that is is not really the point
My initial comment was about wake turbulence, or the relative lack of it with the IR-15 and the UAK, which has made it easier for the cars to follow each other more closely, making overtaking easier, compared to the last few years. Anyway this is going way off topic, .
bjohnsonsmith is offline  
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying."
Colin Chapman.
Quote
Old 20 May 2018, 10:57 (Ref:3823528)   #1770
Oldtony
Veteran
 
Oldtony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Australia
Gold Coast Australia
Posts: 1,722
Oldtony should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridOldtony should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridOldtony should be qualifying in the top 3 on the gridOldtony should be qualifying in the top 3 on the grid
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith View Post
My initial comment was about wake turbulence, or the relative lack of it with the IR-15 and the UAK, which has made it easier for the cars to follow each other more closely, making overtaking easier, compared to the last few years. Anyway this is going way off topic, .
May be OT but it's the most rational discusion on aero and circuit limitations on passing for a few seasons.
Leads to the thought that the more passing requirement needs to examine:
1 the nature of the circuits.
2 the drag/downforce ratio of the cars.
3 the wake turbulence left by cars
All that said I think the question remains about whether this focus on passing is necessarily the dominant factor in great racing or great drives?
Oldtony is offline  
__________________
Geting old is mandatory, acting old is optional.
Quote
Old 20 May 2018, 16:22 (Ref:3823573)   #1771
EffectiveSprinkles
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 943
EffectiveSprinkles User had had their licence endorsedEffectiveSprinkles User had had their licence endorsed
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith View Post
My initial comment was about wake turbulence, or the relative lack of it with the IR-15 and the UAK, which has made it easier for the cars to follow each other more closely, making overtaking easier, compared to the last few years. Anyway this is going way off topic, .
Yes and I don't agree with it. The removal of the rear guard pods has increased both drag and wake turbulence. There is no evidence the cars can follow more closely, in fact it seems at Indy it's going to be a lot harder. We already saw at Barber overtaking decreasing in the dry.
EffectiveSprinkles is offline  
Quote
Old 21 May 2018, 02:06 (Ref:3823677)   #1772
bjohnsonsmith
Race Official
20KPINAL
 
bjohnsonsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
United States
London, England
Posts: 23,143
bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!bjohnsonsmith is the undisputed Champion of the World!
Quote:
Originally Posted by EffectiveSprinkles View Post
Yes and I don't agree with it. The removal of the rear guard pods has increased both drag and wake turbulence. There is no evidence the cars can follow more closely, in fact it seems at Indy it's going to be a lot harder. We already saw at Barber overtaking decreasing in the dry.
You're entitled to disagree if you want but there's loads of evidence, that says otherwise. The season opener at St. Pete alone produced a rash of overtakes. IndyCar said there were a 366 on track passes to break the old race record of 323 set in 2008. This would not have been possible, if the cars weren't able to get closer, therefore making it easier to overtake.

This piece from Mario Andretti is worth reading.

https://www.autosport.com/indycar/ne...indycar-design

Anyway, not wanting to go any further off topic, this is the most up to date list regarding future GPs and particularly the 2019 F1 season, with Belgium, Germany and Japan not under contract.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_F..._planned_races
bjohnsonsmith is offline  
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying."
Colin Chapman.
Quote
Old 21 May 2018, 08:28 (Ref:3823708)   #1773
S griffin
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,325
S griffin is going for a new world record!S griffin is going for a new world record!S griffin is going for a new world record!S griffin is going for a new world record!S griffin is going for a new world record!S griffin is going for a new world record!S griffin is going for a new world record!
I agree. There's always overtaking in Indycars. Some are more exciting than others. They seem to have the right amount of aero to make great racing. Is Mario still offering his opinions?

Anyway, so GPs for next year, I would be surprised if Germany, Belgium and Japan weren't on the calendar
S griffin is offline  
__________________
He who dares wins!
He who hesitates is lost!
Quote
Old 22 May 2018, 15:06 (Ref:3823970)   #1774
chillibowl
Veteran
 
chillibowl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Canada
winnipeg, canada
Posts: 9,716
chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!chillibowl is the undisputed Champion of the World!
just a couple of questions/thoughts in no particular order...

- track redesign is an expensive prospect particularly by venues which already struggle to host...can they really be expected to pay for track changes? i feel like thats a unreasonable request.

- lots of talk about reducing aero but again asking the teams to give up on decades of research and investments in facilities (in the billions i would guess by this point) is an incredibly expensive proposition and one i would think is just as unlikely as getting venues to redesign just for F1.

- more of a layman thought, but if increasing down force is required to overcome the wake/turbulence issue then why not more mechanical grip? surely the safety issues surrounding active suspension for example have been mitigated over time.

i would add to that why not more movable aero? the cheapest solution i would think is allowing DRS to be a active the entire lap/race. benefits would be two fold. easier to overtake and more drivers would make mistakes.

- that itself may be a moot point as the cars converge towards a specific formula. an issue compounded with increasing cooperation/partnerships between the teams.

rather, wont two cars of similar design experience the same difficulties when trying to pass each other (irrespective of track design and rules)...similar straight line speed/similar corning abilities. i feel as though much of overtaking comes down to either one car having a massive advantage or one driver making an error. the advantage could be legislated against but then you just get more similarity in the cars.

as for drivers making errors...forgive this question but isnt there greater diversity/range in car and driver talent in Indy vs F1. rather the 20 drivers in F1 are (for the most part) more similar in abilities then 30 odd drivers in Indy?

please dont take that as a disparaging remark, just more a point about how homogeneous F1 is. in a way the spec Indy car series offers more variety and hence you see more overtaking?

- Merc's issues with driving through the field...kind of an F1 front runner issue. this is a car designed to lead. its not really surprising that they dont deal well when following. im not sure this is proof positive about the wake problems as much as it is about Merc's design philosophy.

not nearly as knowledgeable as i would like to be on the technical side of things so apologies in advance if these questions are missing the mark of this conversation.
chillibowl is online now  
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there
I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place
Quote
Old 22 May 2018, 16:40 (Ref:3823988)   #1775
EffectiveSprinkles
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 943
EffectiveSprinkles User had had their licence endorsedEffectiveSprinkles User had had their licence endorsed
There really isn't more overtaking in Indycar though. Just like in F1 the only overtaking is done when the two cars are on different tyre/fuel strategies. The car being overtaken has zero chance of holding the position.
EffectiveSprinkles is offline  
Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Greatest Grands Prix krt917 Motorsport History 34 1 Mar 2006 13:26
Grands Prix Peter Mallett Trackside 5 21 Jan 2005 13:13
F1 Grands Prix Marshalling...Help AndyP MyCo Marshals Forum 33 15 Feb 2004 19:09


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:31.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Original Website Copyright © 1998-2003 Craig Antil. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2004-2021 Royalridge Computing. All Rights Reserved.
Ten-Tenths Motorsport Forums Copyright © 2021-2022 Grant MacDonald. All Rights Reserved.