RacingManiac wrote:I don't know for sure, but I do know that fairing are used to control the flows in and around the wheels, which, uncontrolled, disrupts the flow that goes to the rear wing, and or other parts of the car down stream of it. Pat Symond stated that they get more downforce running the new fairing, he didn't exactly said that they got it from the new fairing, they got it with the new fairing. If it reduces the disruption to the rear wing, that would give you more downforce too....
If you think it got it from the fairing, thats your business and you are entitled to that.
In MY opinion(much like I AM Sure, which is MY opinion), the fact that much of the aero bits that are banned this year shifted their attention more to the area they can work with relative freedom, such as the brake ducting.....A lot of the bits and pieces on the car before doesn't necessarily produce downforce on their own, but working with other parts they increases the downforce of the car. And it is not a far stretch assumption in my mind that that its what he was refering to.....
I comprehend what you are saying, but I fail to understand how the outside of the front wheel would influence the much narrower rear wing. I mean, once the "air shed" gets near the sidepods, my mind assumes that the high-pressure area over the pods would actually repel the rimshield shed, since the air pressure to the outside of the sidepod would be much lower.
And maybe someone should ask Symonds a bit more directly about what he meant by "increasing downforce", because if it comes out that the rimshields themselves produce downforce at the wheel, then it would be an unsprung aerodynamic device, and that would make it in violation of the technical regs.
Maybe Scarbs can get some info on this? It would be interesting to see if this is a tech reg that all teams break, so no one protests against it. To be honest, if this is the case, I don't mind!
EDIT:
After checking the tech regs for 2009, it looks as if I am wrong about them being a violation, even if they directly add downforce at the wheel.
3.15 Aerodynamic influence :
With the exception of the cover described in Article 6.5.2 (when used in the pit lane), the driver adjustable
bodywork described in Article 3.18 and the ducts described in Article 11.4, any specific part of the car
influencing its aerodynamic performance :
- must comply with the rules relating to bodywork ;
2009 F1 Technical Regulations 14 of 67 17 March 2009
- must be rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car (rigidly secured means not having any
degree of freedom) ;
- must remain immobile in relation to the sprung part of the car.
11.4 Air ducts :
Air ducts around the front and rear brakes will be considered part of the braking system and shall not
protrude beyond :
- a plane parallel to the ground situated at a distance of 160mm above the horizontal centre line of
the wheel ;
- a plane parallel to the ground situated at a distance of 160mm below the horizontal centre line of
the wheel ;
- a vertical plane parallel to the inner face of the wheel rim and displaced from it by 120mm toward
the centre line of the car.
Furthermore, when viewed from the side the ducts must not protrude forwards beyond a radius of 330mm
from the centre of the wheel or backwards beyond a radius of 180mm from the centre of the wheel.
All measurements will be made with the wheel held in a vertical position.
So, rimshields are exempt from the unsprung, unmoving downforce generating devices.
I apologize for making such an issue about this. I did not know that they were specifically exempted.
Thanks!
is that I heard rumours that Renault asked for its use in the design process and FIA said "NO". But... again... Symonds was the designer and member of the OWG.
