Williams FW26 Technical Side

[hit_guy]

Since there is some talk of the new nose of the FW26 I would like to know as to whether there is the issue od Side winds(gusts) hitting the " tusks" (pardon me on not knowing the exact word, the thing that connects the wings and the nose)
Also could somebody explain how this could effect whether the car is Understeer or oversteer ? if this is a issue.
I also feel the FW26 has very little rear end work and did I see a black Box covering the diffuser in one of the pictures.
Very very unaero like.Dont like the loook of it
Concerning the FIA rules on the front wing and nose cone does any one know what exactly they are
Bye

[maxplank]

hit_guy, the black box at the diffuser is to contain a parachute . U dolt... it's purely cosmetic

[wowf1]

Yes i think you're correct, it really seems like the front wing, and 'tusks' will collapse before the actual front nose hits the wall/car etc. Slightly odd but i guess they've considered that and that the design is able to withstand the required impact. I'm also not sure how the tusks are joined to the nose cone part. My guess is that they are separate pieces, probably bonded, maybe bolted but not sure.

Another thing is that while these tusks do not represent much more leading-edge area than standard, they are not straight, ie. they don't point directly forward. So will this possibly cause a weird force being exerted sideways! and more drag! not sure how accurate my deductions are because i'm fairly sure Williams know roughly what they're doing lol. but seems like a point. Could be something to do with this vague 'stabilising' effect.

rob

[Micky]

The front wing seems to be more wavey than usual on the new car. Won't this have an unsettling effect on the car

[mirdavanfe]

please visit http://www.scarbsf1.com it will answer all you queries about the FW26 and much much more......took me a whole night to go thru it so be patient

[Steven]

well some more information about the FW26 here
I'll make an article of it as soon as I find the time (wont be very soon however), but until then, I just post things here

Made a comparison for you all:


There are some very important things that can be noted here. you can see I have aligned both cars to their wheelsbase, since that did not chance. It is however clear, that the whole chassis has moved more to the back. You can see the front overhang is less than on the FW25, while at the rear it is more. The overall width did not change because of the regulations.

Advantages may not be underestimated. Since they obviously believe they are able to use the front wing more efficiently now because of the twin keel, they were able to optimise the rear wing. You can see it is now a little more behind the rear wheel axis, which provides more downforce because of a longer force-arm.

Furthermore, the chimneys have moved up to the front a little, and so did the exhausts. The shortening of the exhausts is a good thing for the engine for sure.

Those who did not believe the rear had changed much, note that although the flip up is at the exact same place, the underside of the sidepod has been made really smaller, and there is a more or less unconventional diffuser under the rear wing. That rear wing itself is now a little longer, which should generate more downforce at the same amount of drag.

[Beostar]

nice
is it me or is the car got a lot lower than the FW25 and also a bit long at the back perhaps?
The rearwing is also a lot fatter...
Anyone care to explain?

[Steven]

it is just you

the car is not lower, and not longer at the back, it just might seem like that, with the larger airbox surface. There is a new minimum set for 2004 to allow more space for sponsors.

The rear wing got idd longer, but as I stated, this allows for better airflow control, maybe less turbulence behind the car, which benefits in decrease of drag

[NickT]

Mmmm........ Moving the bulk of the chassis backwards, does this give them a larger area for the splitter under the drivers legs? If so would this not also give them a little more downforce?

[Guest]

fw 26 inovation i don´t think so take a look in brabbham in indy 500 (1972)

[Monstrobolaxa]

yup....

[drspeed]

http://f1racing.net/news.php?ID=67202

Interesting. The former Brabham designer says it was a failure and that it creates too much drag for the increased downforce to be of any advantage.

[Beostar]

hehe as a Ferrari fan I wouldn't mind if it was a complete failure
But thats just my heart speaking

[joseff]

But Indy has always been about top speed... Given the relatively slower race pace of the FW26 against Indy Cars, I guess it's a fair tradeoff.