Why would lowering the car without instability cause higher degradation? More ground effect means less tire slip.
Imo, they are avoiding lowering the car because it caused bouncing in Bahrain.
Why would lowering the car without instability cause higher degradation? More ground effect means less tire slip.
This is less about what stopping Ferrari than what allows Red Bull to go 10mm lower than everyone else....ringo wrote: ↑26 Mar 2023, 20:00I know the theory behind ground effect. Yes the lower you go the more suction. We get that.
But let me ask. What is stopping the Ferrari from riding 10mm lower?
What happens to it when it rides in that region?
Is there instability?
You answers will help everyone get a better understanding.
If you put too much energy into the tire or are at the limit, more downforce leads to even more energy going into the tire and it heats up even more. That would then be a clear case of a suspension problem.AR3-GP wrote: ↑26 Mar 2023, 20:11Why would lowering the car without instability cause higher degradation? More ground effect means less tire slip.
Imo, they are avoiding lowering the car because it caused bouncing in Bahrain.
This problem did not exist on the launch spec SF-75. I'm not convinced that Ferrari screwed up the suspension design. As I said before, Ferrari have decades of suspension design experience.Andi76 wrote: ↑26 Mar 2023, 20:57If you put too much energy into the tire or are at the limit, more downforce leads to even more energy going into the tire and it heats up even more. That would then be a clear case of a suspension problem.
I am not saying that it is so. But it is a possibility. Especially because the requirements have changed with the Ground Effect cars. The tires are also new. And Ferrari has used virtually the same suspension geometry in recent years, something the Italian media criticized last year as well. And experience doesn't protect you from all the complexity - Benetton/Toleman had 20 years of experience in suspension design and yet in 1997 they had the problem of not getting the tires up to temperature because of problems with the suspension design...like I said - it's a possibility, I'm not saying it's so. But it is a possibility.AR3-GP wrote: ↑26 Mar 2023, 21:06This problem did not exist on the launch spec SF-75. I'm not convinced that Ferrari screwed up the suspension design. As I said before, Ferrari have decades of suspension design experience.
I think you should be able to answer this about ferrari, if you are dismissing other opinions.Andi76 wrote: ↑26 Mar 2023, 20:51This is less about what stopping Ferrari than what allows Red Bull to go 10mm lower than everyone else....ringo wrote: ↑26 Mar 2023, 20:00I know the theory behind ground effect. Yes the lower you go the more suction. We get that.
But let me ask. What is stopping the Ferrari from riding 10mm lower?
What happens to it when it rides in that region?
Is there instability?
You answers will help everyone get a better understanding.
Ferrari just took 2 RB Aeros. Italian autosport said that it is not a "magical suspension system".Andi76 wrote: ↑26 Mar 2023, 20:51This is less about what stopping Ferrari than what allows Red Bull to go 10mm lower than everyone else....ringo wrote: ↑26 Mar 2023, 20:00I know the theory behind ground effect. Yes the lower you go the more suction. We get that.
But let me ask. What is stopping the Ferrari from riding 10mm lower?
What happens to it when it rides in that region?
Is there instability?
You answers will help everyone get a better understanding.
The Formula 1 technical regulations prohibit the electronic control of the movement of kinematics and, since the FIA did not find any suitable device to control the suspensions during the checks, it is reasonable to think that there is no "cunning".
This was confirmed by the two Red Bull engineers who arrived in Maranello this winter to reinforce the aerodynamic staff directed by Diego Tondi.
Why would you be forced to raise the car?Vanja #66 wrote: ↑26 Mar 2023, 21:24If you are forced to raise the car beyond its intended operating window, there's no telling how it will react overall, as seen with W13 and post-td39 F1-75. Ferrari lacking downforce was an easy explanation for deg trouble, without even going into suspension analysis.
I was replying to AR3's f1-75 remark and lack of tyre issues before td-39. I've already responded to your question about raising SF-23 between Bahrain and Jeddah.
Sorry for not always quoting the question, sometimes I forget it when on phone...Vanja #66 wrote: ↑26 Mar 2023, 20:19I'm saying that was the biggest problem the team complained about after Bahrain. Later explanation from italian media was the car was running too low and was heating the tyres too much. The car running low was also evident from the footage during the race, so Italian media weren't wrong about that point.
There's a lot of reasons the tyres could have been heating up too much, some of which could be suspension geometry related, some of which could be setup related. Some could be downforce related (lack of it clearly), but we've seen the car in both Q sessions and Vasseur since stated a simple thing - I don't believe the second best car in qualifying is not a good car. Good cars don't lack downforce, do they?
Can we touch on that flexible floor on the F1-75 launch spec then? Maybe it was an essential component to their whole formula, and as soon as they had to worry about plank wear, it all fell apart?Vanja #66 wrote: ↑26 Mar 2023, 21:24If you are forced to raise the car beyond its intended operating window, there's no telling how it will react overall, as seen with W13 and post-td39 F1-75. Ferrari lacking downforce was an easy explanation for deg trouble, without even going into suspension analysis.
In most cases team are forced to raise the car because of plank wear. If you are referring to porpoising, it is worth mentioning that, according to media reports, the FIA has abolished the AOM metric for 2023 and you no longer have to raise the car because of porpoising.ringo wrote: ↑26 Mar 2023, 21:33Why would you be forced to raise the car?Vanja #66 wrote: ↑26 Mar 2023, 21:24If you are forced to raise the car beyond its intended operating window, there's no telling how it will react overall, as seen with W13 and post-td39 F1-75. Ferrari lacking downforce was an easy explanation for deg trouble, without even going into suspension analysis.
Andi beautify skirted around the question. So can you answer. What is happening that forces the team to raise the car?
Porpoising causes plank wear and tire degradation.Andi76 wrote: ↑27 Mar 2023, 07:28In most cases team are forced to raise the car because of plank wear. If you are referring to porpoising, it is worth mentioning that the FIA has abolished the AOM metric for 2023. You no longer have to raise the car because of porpoising.ringo wrote: ↑26 Mar 2023, 21:33Why would you be forced to raise the car?Vanja #66 wrote: ↑26 Mar 2023, 21:24If you are forced to raise the car beyond its intended operating window, there's no telling how it will react overall, as seen with W13 and post-td39 F1-75. Ferrari lacking downforce was an easy explanation for deg trouble, without even going into suspension analysis.
Andi beautify skirted around the question. So can you answer. What is happening that forces the team to raise the car?