Renault R29

[xpensive]

While hopping between threads discussing essentially the same thing, I shamelessly believe that my own sketchy calculations on "Importance of the diffuser?", shows just how deilicate this part of the car is.

In a perfect world, to my mind anyway, is that FIA should either impose a "flat-bottom rule", as far as there is a car to measure, or make way for full-blown grund-effects with venturis, siding skirts and the whole shabang. No fans though.
kilcoo?

[NormanBates]

I would like to know how that ferrari figure is calculated... my bet is that they said something like: it's gonna take a month of full-time from everybody, and out yearly budget is XXX, so this is (XXX-oneoffexpenses)/12=20Meur; quite a silly calculation, indeed

It most likely is the cost in terms of:

- design hours for both aerodynamic & mechanical elements
- manufacturing costs of the new parts


Gearboxes do not come cheap.

And to pay the engineers

both replies are fully coherent with what I said: they are not spending more money than they would if those engineers were working on an improved suspension (it's the same people, with roughly similar manufacturing costs)

the only cost of developing a new-age diffuser is the opportunity cost: that improved suspension will have to wait for a month

but they don't spend an extra dollar, and they focus their development on an area where it is more efficient (bigger lap time improvement with same development effort)

[xpensive]

NM, perhaps you forget the cost of consultants, procurement and what-not of new parts?
Besides, I believe that a lot of the manufacturing of F1 components are outsourced anyway.

[kilcoo316]

In a perfect world, to my mind anyway, is that FIA should either impose a "flat-bottom rule", as far as there is a car to measure, or make way for full-blown grund-effects with venturis, siding skirts and the whole shabang. No fans though.
kilcoo?

I see valid arguments for both points of view. Some days I'll be in favour of one approach, other days I'll advocate the other.


While I would like to see the floor effects reduced, I don't want to see any other series able to do quicker laptimes around a (large scale) racing circuit than a formula 1 car. If that happened, F1 would quickly lose its status as the premier racing series in the world.



I see a number of possibilites:

1. Revise the existing rules to close the loopholes.
2. Supply a standard floor.
3. Define a full flat floor as you propose.
4. Open the regulations.

I would prefer option 1.

[xpensive]

Typically, I agree with you on no1, kilcoo. With a romantic faiblesse for no4 of course.

But what if we took a page from my kid's slot-racing rulebook, where the car must fit within a box of a certain size?

[Metar]

Open regulations is a nice idea, but, sadly, will only bring us worse regulations: Maximum cornering-forces or downforce-levels, then engine-power cuts when the drag gets low enough for 400km/h sprints between corners, then slowly back to regular rules.

[xpensive]

Darn it Metar, you had to rain on my parade just when I thought that I had come up with something worth reading?

OK, flat-bottom all the way & fit-in-the-box, how about that? Try get your head around that one, kilcoo?

[kilcoo316]

OK, flat-bottom all the way & fit-in-the-box, how about that? Try get your head around that one, kilcoo?

Still got moveable front/rear wings.

No doubt active suspension would be used to rake the flat floor.

[xpensive]

So, what about it? Flat bottom all the way, which should be easy enough to police, while you can do whatever wou want inaside that box, say 1800 x 3000 x 1000 mm?

Agreed, active suspension is potentially a real s-o-b aerodynamically-wise, but what if you install an FIA-approved ground-clearance monitor on each car?

[timbo]

Agreed, active suspension is potentially a real s-o-b aerodynamically-wise, but what if you install an FIA-approved ground-clearance monitor on each car?

Flat-bottom is dangerous, period. That T-shaped floor that we have now is the only really effective way to keep safety. And ground clearance monitor is fine but a potential cause of more and more controversy as teams would always try to get to the bottom of tolerances.

[xpensive]

Dangerous? Safety? Would you mind elaborate a little more before typing "period"?

[timbo]

Dangerous? Safety? Would you mind elaborate a little more before typing "period"?

Ground effect produced by flat bottom is very dependent on ride-height. Even if you monitor ground clearance you can't control things like bumps and kerbs. Also if somehow front wheels become detached from the ground it immediately creates a lot of lift.
T-shaped floor is much less prone to such effects (and of course less effective ).

[xpensive]

I beg to differ, when every racingcar had all-the-way flat-bottoms before 1977 and the advent of the Lotus 78.

The general idea with such a rule is to limit ground-effects as far as possible. Without the diffuser, ground-effects would be miniscule regardless of ride-height.

[timbo]

I beg to differ, when every racingcar had all-the-way flat-bottoms before 1977 and the advent of the Lotus 78.

But noone tried to limit ride-height for a few cm only?

The general idea with such a rule is to limit ground-effects as far as possible. Without the diffuser, ground-effects would be miniscule regardless of ride-height.

Well, I don't agree it will be miniscule and I don't agree on "regardless of ride height" thing.
Yes floor downforce would be lower, but it'd still be there (ever tried that school Bernulli law experiments with a sheet of paper - no diffuser but it sticks to the table?) and it would depend on ride-height.
Why not a T-shaped floor with standard diffuser?

[xpensive]

Ground-effect by Bernoulli obviously comes from air travelling faster under the car than above, which I believe would be rather difficult to achieve to any greater extent with a flat underside.

In the old days, you still had every reason to run as close to the ground as possible, vertical CoG being one of them.

But anyway, the point was that I failed to see that an F1-car would be safer because of the diffuser?