What about imposing a drag limit in aero rules?

[bhall II]

edit: btw, bhall, thanks for your efforts posting all that valuable info tirelessly =D> . I know some of us (me!) can be very stubborn when trying to find solutions to the ovetaking problem, but with current technology development I can´t accept there´s no solution for the problem.

Eh, I've given this spiel so many times that it's almost second nature at this point.

In any case, what is the physical basis for your point of view here? While I don't expect you to conclusively prove anything, there's gotta be something more than just your unwillingness to accept the alternative.

I'm unwilling to accept that I can't spend my days with my face buried between Scarlett Johansson's luscious breasteses, but that doesn't mean I'm gonna wake up tomorrow with her titties on my cheeks.

Take your ride height idea: how does it work? How do you keep the diffuser from completely stalling, an outcome that increases drag? How do you keep other interdependent elements from stalling?

What is it about a fan car that's going to magically open up a second racing line?

For anyone: if the problem is aerodynamic, why don't these cars overtake one another on-track more frequently?



NP300 Navara Winton SuperSprint - Race 12, May 17, 2015

Gap between driver's and winner's average pace

Gap between driver's and winner's pace lap by lap


via v8racereview.com

[Andres125sx]

In any case, what is the physical basis for your point of view here? While I don't expect you to conclusively prove anything, there's gotta be something more than just your unwillingness to accept the alternative.

I'm unwilling to accept that I can't spend my days with my face buried between Scarlett Johansson's luscious breasteses, but that doesn't mean I'm gonna wake up tomorrow with her titties on my cheeks.

Are you really comparing your wet dreams with finding ways to reduce dirty air?

What stupid people this OWG is, trying to find a solution for something wich is comparable to your wet dreams with Scarlett....

Take your ride height idea, for example: how does it work? How do you keep the diffuser from completely stalling, an outcome that increases drag? How do you keep other, interdependent elements from stalling?

Same as they do today maybe?

Bhall, sometimes I get the impression you´re not trying to find any solution, only trying to put down anything anyone says (about this topic)

Today ride height is NOT constant, they change it from track to track as a new and smooth track is not the same as Monaco for example, with lots of bumps, so in Monaco the car must be higher. How do they keep the diffuser from completely stalling in Monaco Bhall?

And how do they do it under the rain with higher cars?

And how did Williams do it with the FW15?

Maybe they used black magic....

What is it about a fan car that's going to magically open up a second racing line?

Who said anything about a second racing line? They wouldn´t need it at all if they´re not as sensible to dirty air, and fan cars don´t need any air at all to create DF, they create it even still

If problem is dirty air as aerodynamic elements need a smooth airflow to create DF, using something wich does not need any airflow because it acts as a vacum cleaner could be a good solution. And it also would make F1 cars faster, as DF is not dependant of speed with fan cars so even slow corners would take advantage of DF created by the fan



And even if neither of this ideas could solve or even reduce the problem, I don´t think exposing ideas on a forum deserve that sort of reply, comparing my ideas with your wet dreams as if they are absurd

[bhall II]

Are you really comparing your wet dreams with finding ways to reduce dirty air?

It was a joke!

Same as they do today maybe?

What does that mean?

What has led you to believe that the aerodynamic characteristics associated with current passive suspensions are comparable to those that would be employed with the active suspension you've proposed?

Why do you think there's a similarity between an active suspension that lifts the chassis from its baseline ride height in order to reduce downforce/drag - FW15C - and one that lowers the chassis from its baseline ride height in order to increase downforce/drag - your idea?

Again, what is the physical basis for your point of view? The science. The engineering.

Who said anything about a second racing line?

Well, it's rather difficult for cars to pass through one another, yanno? Otherwise, a.) the inside line is generally quicker by a fair margin, which won't change, and b.) even current cars don't need a whole lot of help through corners that can support a viable outside line...



I'm not trying to belittle your ideas; I'm trying to understand why you have them.

[Andres125sx]

What has led you to believe that the aerodynamic characteristics associated with current passive suspensions are comparable to those that would be employed with the active suspension you've proposed?

Why do you think there's a similarity between an active suspension that lifts the chassis from its baseline ride height in order to reduce downforce/drag - FW15C - and one that lowers the chassis from its baseline ride height in order to increase downforce/drag - your idea?

So lifting the chassis from its baseline ride height in order to reduce DF is ok if it´s on the FW15, but doing the same to reduce DF today (and let a margin to increase DF moving down the chassis when in a slipstream) is absurd?

What is the physical basis for your point of view? The science. The engineering.

Who said anything about a second racing line?

Well, it's rather difficult for cars to pass through one another, yanno? Otherwise, a.) the inside line is generally quicker by a fair margin, which won't change

That´s not the problem, never was. Problem is they can´t be close enough before the straight (through corners) to take advantage of the slipstream and overtake before the braking point, or in the braking point.

If they could chase each other in the corners that would be a huge step forward, no need for a second racing line

b.) even current cars don't need a whole lot of help through corners that can support a viable outside line...

https://giant.gfycat.com/SomberShabbyAf ... heagle.gif

Disagree, they need, as seen in that gif, different tires with MUCH better grip. To me that´s a whole lot of help through corners, and even so it only happens on slow corners where aero doesn´t work

[Andres125sx]

And merry christmas btw!

[bhall II]

So lifting the chassis from its baseline ride height in order to reduce DF is ok if it´s on the FW15, but doing the same to reduce DF today (and let a margin to increase DF moving down the chassis when in a slipstream) is absurd?

What is the physical basis for your point of view? The science. The engineering.

There's a distinct difference between a system that's designed to provide maximum downforce in its baseline configuration and one that's ostensibly designed to only periodically provide maximum downforce.

I've asked you three times to explain the basis of your idea, and you've dodged the question at every turn. So, I see no reason to continue here.

Happy holidays.

[Andres125sx]

I've asked you three times to explain the basis of your idea

And I did reply, since that was used by williams to improve or decrease DF/drag when needed, any reason the very same cannot be done today?

It´s you who dodged the question, my proposal is based on previous F1 solutions wich worked so great it was immediately banned because of the dominance it created, so I don´t see the reason you keep asking about the basis of the idea

[bhall II]

It´s you who dodged the question, my proposal is based on previous F1 solutions wich worked so great it was immediately banned because of the dominance it created, so I don´t see the reason you keep asking about the basis of the idea

Clearly.

A diffuser optimized to efficiently produce downforce in a baseline configuration, i.e. within the conditions it will experience most of the time, will stall if taken out of that configuration.

In the case of the FW15C, in which the raised chassis caused a stall that reduced both downforce and drag, such an outcome was desirable. In the case of your proposal, in which the lowered chassis would cause a stall that reduces downforce and increases drag, the outcome is decidedly not.

This is why I was pressing you for details.

On a different note: it's not too early for eggnog, is it?

[sgth0mas]

What a supreme display of the Dunning Kruger effect. Theres no way to put this other than "you simply dont know what you dont know". If youve never ran CFD or even hand calcs for fluid flow, then your purely spouting off guesses as to the best solution.

Why does this fan car idea keep coming up. You want to allow cars to follow closer....then propose a solution that scatters debris at any xar behind it. The fan car was proven dangerous and prone to failure by the Chapparal 2J. It is a poor solution to the problem of close racing. A very poor solution. The last time this discussion was had, PZs reference to ground breaking engineering was another failure in the form of Nissans Le Mans.

There may be a point with undercar aero, so focus on something that may actually work like that. But it seems to continue putting F1 on the same path as indy.

[Andres125sx]

A diffuser optimized to efficiently produce downforce in a baseline configuration, i.e. within the conditions it will experience most of the time, will stall if taken out of that configuration.

I guess there must be some margin, I don´t see F1 cars stalling and loosing 40% of its DF when they need some more ride height in Monaco, or when it rains.

The idea is not moving the car up or down 10cm, just some milimeters. Take the optimal/minimal ride height for each track, and that position can only be used when within 1 second of the car in front. If not the car must be some milimeters higher, the minimum necessary to loose same DF (more or less) than a car on dirty air.

Even if not perfect it would equal things a bit so we´d see a lot more overtakings

[bhall II]

I guess

Exactly.

[Andres125sx]

And you know obviously

But not to the point you can explain it further, despite teams change ride height every gp

[bhall II]

They also have to adjust rear-end aero.

Bahrain...


Spain...


Monaco...


Do you know what happens to a car when you lower its ride height? It becomes more sensitive to variation.

Two cars: one with 55mm rear ride height and one with 35mm. A 5mm deflection for the 55mm car is a change of 9%; a 5mm deflection for the 35mm car is a change of 14%.

Designer's dilemma: do you design a diffuser to operate at peak efficiency at a ride height in which it will experience the vast majority of the time, or do you design a diffuser to operate at peak efficiency at a ride height it will experience only when the car is within a given distance to the car ahead of it? If you design for the former, your driver will likely be at the helm of a pitch-sensitive nightmare whenever he's trailing in another car's wake, a situation that's not easy even under ideal conditions. If you design for the latter, he'll likely never even get that close, because his car will have a diffuser that doesn't work very well most of the time.

[Andres125sx]

So teams have one different floor/difuser for each ride height?

Or those are the usual aero updates throughout the season?

[bhall II]

So teams have one different floor/difuser for each ride height?

Or those are the usual aero updates throughout the season?

You should be looking at the monkey seats (or lack thereof). The downforce they generate in their own right is negligible, but the upwash they produce increases the efficiency of the diffuser and helps keep air flow attached to the rear wing. The design varies according to circuit requirements.

Here's the one Mercedes used at Spa...