planetf1.com

It is currently Tue Sep 30, 2014 7:54 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 8:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 7:50 pm
Posts: 133
so what do you all think i don't see it as a game changer but may keep them in q2 now hrt is gone
sems all the big guns will moan or copy it



http://www.gptoday.com/full_story/view/ ... y_of_2013/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 9:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 2:50 am
Posts: 606
GODISMYCOPILOT wrote:
so what do you all think i don't see it as a game changer but may keep them in q2 now hrt is gone
sems all the big guns will moan or copy it



http://www.gptoday.com/full_story/view/ ... y_of_2013/



Won't see test 2 and if it is allowed they'll all have versions come Melbourne.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 10:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 10:39 am
Posts: 1309
Not at the moment. We'll wait after T3 in Catalunya.

I have proven to be wrong, but I'm right more often than not unfortunately it seems these days.

Caterham will score 8 points this year (a random guess, but we'll see).

_________________
"We can not drive slower, just to make the races more exciting." Alain Prost


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 10:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 1:43 pm
Posts: 3204
Here's the piece of kit that is considered "controversial" by some. It is a vane (probably metal) that sits across the exhaust "tunnel".
Image

Now we get to the regulations:
Quote:
The design may fall foul of article 5.8.4 of the 2013 Technical regulations which state that.

Once the exhaust tailpipes, the bodywork required by Article 3.8.4 and any apertures permitted by Article 3.8.5 have been fully defined there must be no bodywork lying within a right circular truncated cone which :

a) Shares a common axis with that of the last 100mm of the tailpipe.

b) Has a forward diameter equal to that of each exhaust exit.

c) Starts at the exit of the tailpipe and extends rearwards as far as the rear wheel centre line.

d) Has a half-cone angle of 3° such that the cone has its larger diameter at the rear wheel centre line.

Furthermore, there must be a view from above, the side, or any intermediate angle perpendicular to the car centre line, from which the truncated cone is not obscured by any bodywork lying more than 50mm forward of the rear wheel centre line.

No formal protest can be lodged yet as in testing the full regulations do not apply. More follows


So we get to the first question, is it legal? Does it fall within the area defined by the regulations?
Image

That alone is a very close call.

The second question is whether Caterham intend to use it when Melbourne rolls around? Who knows, right now they can run it in testing, and without a doubt Charlie Whiting and his staff have informed the team on their opinion on it's legality.

My personal opinion is that Caterham are using it only to direct the exhaust flow to a specific area to learn where the exhaust should go, then once they have determined the path they want the exhaust to flow, will design and construct bodywork to match their testing results. This is a much cheaper and easier method to do than build different versions of body work to find out where they want the exhaust to flow.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 10:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 7:50 pm
Posts: 133
fair point its a wonder why they let it out just now if they hat waited to Melbourne they may have got 2 races out of it then told its illegal

would have been nice to see what hapens if they had done it that way , as its only seems to be red bull that do that


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 10:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:07 pm
Posts: 5528
Blinky McSquinty wrote:

The second question is whether Caterham intend to use it when Melbourne rolls around? Who knows, right now they can run it in testing, and without a doubt Charlie Whiting and his staff have informed the team on their opinion on it's legality.


All communication between FIA and team is available to other teams. If they asked for calrification, teams would know everything about its legality. And FIA until FP1 can't do anything with it as long as the car meets safety standards. Teams cannot protest it before FP1 either.

_________________
..


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 06, 2013 11:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 6:16 pm
Posts: 77
It was mentioned on Teds notebook earlier as Lotus were calling it in to question BUT he also mentioned some stuff about one team introducing double drs, had people round and never caught it properly then the dog sat on the remote so I couldn't rewind.

Surely any form of ddrs is banned this season? Anyone know what he was referring to?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2013 12:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 1:41 pm
Posts: 219
crankcase wrote:
It was mentioned on Teds notebook earlier as Lotus were calling it in to question BUT he also mentioned some stuff about one team introducing double drs, had people round and never caught it properly then the dog sat on the remote so I couldn't rewind.

Surely any form of ddrs is banned this season? Anyone know what he was referring to?


Think he said Lotus had DDRS with them to test tommorow?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2013 12:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 8:28 am
Posts: 320
Malkiiin wrote:
crankcase wrote:
It was mentioned on Teds notebook earlier as Lotus were calling it in to question BUT he also mentioned some stuff about one team introducing double drs, had people round and never caught it properly then the dog sat on the remote so I couldn't rewind.

Surely any form of ddrs is banned this season? Anyone know what he was referring to?


Think he said Lotus had DDRS with them to test tommorow?

I think, iirc, that Lotus' DDRS system is passive, so that circumvents the rules a little.
I think.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2013 8:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 12:48 pm
Posts: 1361
Lentulus wrote:
Malkiiin wrote:
crankcase wrote:
It was mentioned on Teds notebook earlier as Lotus were calling it in to question BUT he also mentioned some stuff about one team introducing double drs, had people round and never caught it properly then the dog sat on the remote so I couldn't rewind.

Surely any form of ddrs is banned this season? Anyone know what he was referring to?


Think he said Lotus had DDRS with them to test tommorow?

I think, iirc, that Lotus' DDRS system is passive, so that circumvents the rules a little.
I think.

Iirc that's right. But back the the exhaust do the cars have to comply with rules during testing ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2013 12:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 1:43 pm
Posts: 3204
A2jdl wrote:
do the cars have to comply with rules during testing ?


No, notwithstanding safety


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2013 1:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2011 9:59 pm
Posts: 198
Leave them alone they will be slow anyway


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2013 1:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2010 3:18 am
Posts: 289
Location: USA
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
Here's the piece of kit that is considered "controversial" by some. It is a vane (probably metal) that sits across the exhaust "tunnel".
My personal opinion is that Caterham are using it only to direct the exhaust flow to a specific area to learn where the exhaust should go, then once they have determined the path they want the exhaust to flow, will design and construct bodywork to match their testing results. This is a much cheaper and easier method to do than build different versions of body work to find out where they want the exhaust to flow.

That sounds plausible enough. It's what I would do.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition - 2013 Edition
Best Finish: 1st place, Austin 2013
Career: 4 podiums, 1 wins
Current 2014 Championship standing: Mired in the midfield as usual... 47th


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 07, 2013 1:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:07 pm
Posts: 5528
Quote:
BBC F1 technical analyst Gary Anderson in Jerez

"There has been a bit of a discussion about the exhaust exit on the Caterham and whether it complies with the regulations. The rules say the exhaust exit has to point upwards at 10 degrees and in towards the centre of the car at between 0-10 degrees. But the teams want the gases down in the area where the floor meets the rear wheels to improve aerodynamics. So all the cars have channels beyond the exhaust exit that use something called the Coanda effect to attach the gases to a bodywork surface that slopes downwards in that direction. The issue with the Caterham is that it has a small turning vane - aerodynamically shaped piece of bodywork - in that channel to try to enhance the effect. But it is an area where the rules have all sorts of restrictions that basically ban turning vanes. It's a grey area because there is an exhaust exit there but the rules still say you can't have aerodynamic devices there. We'll have to see how that pans out. But I'm not even sure it will be a benefit. That's because you want the exhaust flow to have as much energy in it as possible to have the greatest effect at the floor. Putting that turning vane in might help its direction in simulations but it will reduce its energy."

_________________
..


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: cosmo, Flash2k11, Google Adsense [Bot], Guia, Laura23, owenmahamilton, Pest44, pokerman, Sappher and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group