Aston Martin AMR26

[Stu]

Are they compelled to run with FWAS?

#asking for a friend

[BassVirolla]

I guess that will be the trend. With the limited height of the rear wing the additional angle of attack provided by the rake will be quiet beneficial

And gets the front wing that much closer to the ground.

They can just put the front wing lower or higher no matter the “rake” though right? Rake in these cars is angle of the floor. The wings can be angled up or down or more independently. I don’t know what my point is….I guess its just semantics maybe….but definition of “rake” seems to be weird in these threads.

The front wing height is defined to Z reference plane.

Tilting such plane forward (a.k.a. rake) takes the front wing closer to the floor.

[BassVirolla]

Are they compelled to run with FWAS?

#asking for a friend

I was wondering the same thing, but I doubt not having it outweighs the drag advantage.

What pros have running without FWAS besides weight reducing?

[vorticism]

The nose structure looks like it might be celery/rhubarb shaped with a thin valance cover over top of it (covering a groove). Which could provide convenient access to the FWAS components and cooling duct.



There have been numerous cars throughout the years with overly wide or spoon-shaped noses. This could be real nose--I don't see any reason in spending resources on hiding a narrower nose.

[matt_s]

They can just put the front wing lower or higher no matter the “rake” though right? Rake in these cars is angle of the floor. The wings can be angled up or down or more independently. I don’t know what my point is….I guess its just semantics maybe….but definition of “rake” seems to be weird in these threads.

No. Because it has to still be in the legality box, which is relative to the floor. You can't then just lower the front because the front of the floor bib will hit the ground too much. You have to pivot the whole car. Front down, back up - rake.

[dren]

I guess that will be the trend. With the limited height of the rear wing the additional angle of attack provided by the rake will be quiet beneficial

And gets the front wing that much closer to the ground.

They can just put the front wing lower or higher no matter the “rake” though right? Rake in these cars is angle of the floor. The wings can be angled up or down or more independently. I don’t know what my point is….I guess its just semantics maybe….but definition of “rake” seems to be weird in these threads.

Everything is referenced/measured to the floor being horizontal to the ground. The wing can be only so low to the ground via the regulations. Tilt the car via suspension set-up and you lower the front wing and push up the rear wing.

[Lefty8]

the front wing is a placeholder. They failed the crash test on the unit they were supposed to run so this is just a stop gap to enable running in Barcelona. I suspect they will rack up some mileage on the PU today to test it as Honda indicated that they weren't 100% ready for the first test. The nose cone is typically made from higher modulus carbon fibres and uni directional to minimise the material needed to carry the loads. This is not like the chassis where the 90 or 60 matt could be used in different layers and directions to handle vibration loads , engines, drivetrain and suspension loads. The nose cone is essentially handling the crash impact loads and tensile loads from the front wing. At its mounting points, multi-direction weaves would be used but as the lay up moves away from the mounting it becomes higher modulus and uni directional, tht is why it looks different and more matte. Remember this is an unpainted car

[Macklaren]

Is that the car with the highest rake on the grid?
https://i.postimg.cc/Nf6JcqS2/Aston-rake.jpg

The McLaren for comparison

[matt_s]

Is that the car with the highest rake on the grid?
https://i.postimg.cc/Nf6JcqS2/Aston-rake.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_68JAiWcAA ... name=large

The McLaren for comparison

That's definitely the biggest _aero_ rake on the McLaren.

[Macklaren]

Is that the car with the highest rake on the grid?
https://i.postimg.cc/Nf6JcqS2/Aston-rake.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_68JAiWcAA ... name=large

The McLaren for comparison

That's definitely the biggest _aero_ rake on the McLaren.

HAHA the car may be a tractor but its def not a crane

[stewie325]

Is that the car with the highest rake on the grid?
https://i.postimg.cc/Nf6JcqS2/Aston-rake.jpg

This image makes you realise how tight the rear packaging is, compared to others.

I wonder if these regs will be a "low drag" formula.

We know the cars will start running out of electrical power on the straights, and having lower drag might buy you more time than being marginally faster in corners.

The front wing (albeit not final?) seems quite minimal.

[FNTC]

[vorticism]

Referencing the RB22, I approximately transposed its groundline and its sidepod:enginecover boundary cross-section onto this photo of the AMR26. (Thanks to the mystery photographer who provided it to FOM/F1 media, who published it.) The groundline of the AMR26 is also highlighted, with the gap to the RB22's groundline highlighted in pink. This angle doesn't quite show it, but the g-line of the AMR-26 does seem to be straight--a significant detail. The upward curvature at the front of the floor is more apparent when viewed from the side and makes the line look more curved. From front-oriented angles the straightness of it is more apparent.

[mzso]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvdymDy9-_c

He proposes that the suspension members might function as movable aerodynamic down-force producing elements. Seems outlandish.

[FNTC]

He proposes that the suspension members might function as movable aerodynamic down-force producing elements. Seems outlandish.

Technically they will move when the suspension compresses, but I don't think the aero effect will be much from that. But placing the suspension arms that high is probably aerodynamically beneficial to Newey.