F1 - Vasseur: "Leclerc's dancing rear wing is not usable"
So I guess you know how they can aggressively keep the weight down with composite parts, without actually having any issues and nail the saftey factor exactly, to the 3rd decimal? I'm sure you'll also be able to explain how is single pylon miles better than two pylons?gordonthegun wrote: ↑03 Mar 2023, 18:25This wing was already in testing and broke, now, after a week, you put it again on the car and it swings like a bell and you can't use it for the race.
That wing was very important because it gave a little more downforce and now you can't test with that setup.
A top team can't do that.
Worth noting that Ferrari is the only top team (really? ) to still have two pylons for the rear wing.
It's not me to have to know all these things. I don't work at Ferrari.Vanja #66 wrote: ↑03 Mar 2023, 18:54So I guess you know how they can aggressively keep the weight down with composite parts, without actually having any issues and nail the saftey factor exactly, to the 3rd decimal? I'm sure you'll also be able to explain how is single pylon miles better than two pylons?gordonthegun wrote: ↑03 Mar 2023, 18:25This wing was already in testing and broke, now, after a week, you put it again on the car and it swings like a bell and you can't use it for the race.
That wing was very important because it gave a little more downforce and now you can't test with that setup.
A top team can't do that.
Worth noting that Ferrari is the only top team (really? ) to still have two pylons for the rear wing.
The headline is "Leclerc's dancing rear wing is not usable".
I’m guessing single pylon is better deflectable on higher speeds. A single pylon rear wing with slightly more downforce might be a good choice obviously.gordonthegun wrote: ↑03 Mar 2023, 19:27It's not me to have to know all these things. I don't work at Ferrari.Vanja #66 wrote: ↑03 Mar 2023, 18:54So I guess you know how they can aggressively keep the weight down with composite parts, without actually having any issues and nail the saftey factor exactly, to the 3rd decimal? I'm sure you'll also be able to explain how is single pylon miles better than two pylons?gordonthegun wrote: ↑03 Mar 2023, 18:25This wing was already in testing and broke, now, after a week, you put it again on the car and it swings like a bell and you can't use it for the race.
That wing was very important because it gave a little more downforce and now you can't test with that setup.
A top team can't do that.
Worth noting that Ferrari is the only top team (really? ) to still have two pylons for the rear wing.
If single pylon is not better than double why to (try to) use it like Mercedes, Red Bull?
Anyway, no one else had such serious problems pursuing the correct weight saving.
That's enough because we're close to get off topic.
Unlike the double pylon wing spec where the pylons are attached to the mainplane and can thus carry load and stabilize the wing, the single pylon does not appear to attach to the mainplane. It looks as if all the single pylon does is support the DRS mechanism. I guess it's possible the pylon does connect to the mainplane via the 'beak' of the swan neck, out of view from the camera but that seems unlikely. All the load would thus have to pass down the endplates and through the beam wings, which currently are not up to the task. I do find it surprising Ferrari didn't do some form of lateral load test on the wing during design that would have shown it lacked the required rigidity.Sevach wrote: ↑03 Mar 2023, 19:59The headline is "Leclerc's dancing rear wing is not usable".
Inside the article Vasseur, "It's a piece we couldn't test last week, we tried this morning but, as we saw, it wasn't a succesful test, in the end we can't use this wing, even if we want too".
He also makes passing comments on Aston's form and the changes in the strategy team (downplays them).
Looking at this photo it seems also that the support wrapping the exhaust pipe is not so aerodynamically favorable.Vanja #66 wrote: ↑03 Mar 2023, 20:52Since you don't know the details, trust me that this is a very complex topic for composite parts and tiny differences in design and manufacture can lead to this kind of behaviour. It's not a big issue, especially in 23-race season. I think two pylons are better for what it's worth, but Ferrari is trying something different and they will make it work quickly.gordonthegun wrote: ↑03 Mar 2023, 19:27It's not me to have to know all these things. I don't work at Ferrari.
If single pylon is not better than double why to (try to) use it like Mercedes, Red Bull?
Anyway, no one else had such serious problems pursuing the correct weight saving.
That's enough because we're close to get off topic.
Remember RB18 DRS trouble in Spain and a few following races? If everything is going according to plan, you are not pushing hard enough.
ing. wrote: ↑03 Mar 2023, 22:55ing. wrote: ↑03 Mar 2023, 22:52Toroidal airfoil shape with flow-through annulus—likely used as jet-pump to draw air from rear facing cooling exit—is pretty much standard. Some “beefiness” is needed for adequate stiffness of the support at its base.gordonthegun wrote: ↑03 Mar 2023, 22:22
Looking at this photo it seems also that the support wrapping the exhaust pipe is not so aerodynamically favorable.
It creates a block in the airflow:
https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/C ... 980991.jpg
I just noticed now, Ferrari have these camera targets on the rear wing (which are separate from the FIA ones).gordonthegun wrote: ↑03 Mar 2023, 22:22Looking at this photo it seems also that the support wrapping the exhaust pipe is not so aerodynamically favorable.Vanja #66 wrote: ↑03 Mar 2023, 20:52Since you don't know the details, trust me that this is a very complex topic for composite parts and tiny differences in design and manufacture can lead to this kind of behaviour. It's not a big issue, especially in 23-race season. I think two pylons are better for what it's worth, but Ferrari is trying something different and they will make it work quickly.gordonthegun wrote: ↑03 Mar 2023, 19:27It's not me to have to know all these things. I don't work at Ferrari.
If single pylon is not better than double why to (try to) use it like Mercedes, Red Bull?
Anyway, no one else had such serious problems pursuing the correct weight saving.
That's enough because we're close to get off topic.
Remember RB18 DRS trouble in Spain and a few following races? If everything is going according to plan, you are not pushing hard enough.
It creates a block in the airflow:
https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/C ... 980991.jpg
Good observation. I suppose better targets are a necessity when the rear wing moves like it’s been in a crash.AR3-GP wrote: ↑03 Mar 2023, 23:22
I just noticed now, Ferrari have these camera targets on the rear wing (which are separate from the FIA ones).
https://i.postimg.cc/qqfGQL5f/image.png
A crash test for reference:
https://i.postimg.cc/yNg95R97/image.png
This type of sighting is much better than the plain white sightings that the FIA requires (and makes me question the quality of the FIA's monitoring processes...)