planetf1.com

It is currently Sat Oct 25, 2014 11:35 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 7:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2012 8:27 am
Posts: 38
Same thing as Lotus i suppose...

James Allen-
Quote:
The Ferrari is using a DRS booster system using a Fluidic Switch, which channels air flow above a certain speed to increase the drag reduction system. It’s a difficult thing to get working right on a race track, but could be a useful gain if they nail it. Most of the top teams will probably evolve one as the year goes on.

http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2013/02/analysing-a-few-pointers-and-trends-from-first-f1-test-of-2013/

Can u guys point out few more sites which provide new technical developments like this.......better still discuss it here .


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 8:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:11 pm
Posts: 3029
http://www.racecar-engineering.com
http://www.scarbsf1.com

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 9:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2012 8:27 am
Posts: 38
thank u ashley313 .


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 10:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 6:58 pm
Posts: 2968
So do we assume Lotus will have one first? Possibly some advantage early in the season if other teams are only just developing this.

_________________
XVII To a swift recovery.

VI LXXVII XIV X
Image
gif from reddit


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 1:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 1:41 pm
Posts: 235
Third day of testing - Ted reported that Lotus had brought there "DDRS" to testing. So it's all possible they may have an advantage! Be nice to see them reach the top place on the podium more often!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 1:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 6:52 pm
Posts: 67
It'll probably go the way of the suspension brake thingy that Lotus developed last year.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 1:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 11:16 am
Posts: 1006
I'd be more interested to know what grounds Ferrari have broken on the downforce side. Some reports from testing suggest Red Bull have 10% more downforce than the next best car. That's ominous to say the least.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 2:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:07 pm
Posts: 5642
AngusWolfe wrote:
So do we assume Lotus will have one first? Possibly some advantage early in the season if other teams are only just developing this.

Lotus already tested it during Fridays sessions last season. Probably they have been working at this longer than any other team.

_________________
..


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 2:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 1:41 pm
Posts: 235
callMEcrazy wrote:
I'd be more interested to know what grounds Ferrari have broken on the downforce side. Some reports from testing suggest Red Bull have 10% more downforce than the next best car. That's ominous to say the least.


Is there a source regarding the Red Bull statement?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 2:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:11 pm
Posts: 3029
Gary Anderson is the source of the 10% quote IIRC.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 3:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2012 8:27 am
Posts: 38
On the plus side ,Redbull are the second slowest team through the speedtrap.....can lead to more interesting races even if they are on pole.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 3:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:11 pm
Posts: 3029
They have always been near the bottom of the trap list.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 3:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 9:41 am
Posts: 1678
callMEcrazy wrote:
I'd be more interested to know what grounds Ferrari have broken on the downforce side. Some reports from testing suggest Red Bull have 10% more downforce than the next best car. That's ominous to say the least.

Thats not true

The differences between the top teams would be 1-2% or less


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 3:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2012 11:18 am
Posts: 679
infi24r wrote:
callMEcrazy wrote:
I'd be more interested to know what grounds Ferrari have broken on the downforce side. Some reports from testing suggest Red Bull have 10% more downforce than the next best car. That's ominous to say the least.

Thats not true

The differences between the top teams would be 1-2% or less


I think it's more than just 1 or 2%.

The RB7 was practically the only chassis in the field that was able to go full throttle in certain slow and twisty turns. 1 or 2 % simply doesn't account for such a speed gain at such a slow speed turn. Speed gain meaning only a hand full of MPH extra at the apex but that's a lot in F1. There were reports showing the extra down force in percentage for the added speed would be in the double digits if not very close to it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 4:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:11 pm
Posts: 3029
The level of downforce on the cars is not static - I'm sure there were times during the test that the RB9 was running in max downforce trim and the others were in slippery mode. I also don't think GA really meant the actual numbers were 10% higher, but more a colloquial "it looks 10% more planted than the rest" type thing. Does it matter? The cars will keep changing. RBR is bringing all new rear bodywork for Barca pt. 2 as well.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 5:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 11:16 am
Posts: 1006
Malkiiin wrote:
callMEcrazy wrote:
I'd be more interested to know what grounds Ferrari have broken on the downforce side. Some reports from testing suggest Red Bull have 10% more downforce than the next best car. That's ominous to say the least.


Is there a source regarding the Red Bull statement?


nop. it came up in the text commentary in Autosport during testing that some trackside expert (don't remember the name, maybe Gary Anderson ?? dunno) reported it. of course I didn't take it literally but to me it meant that the difference in downforce is big enough to be visible.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 6:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 1:43 pm
Posts: 3382
Brawn has stated in an interview that Mercedes is also working on their own version. But it is incredibly tricky to figure out and tune, and it may eat up too much valuable resources.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 8:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 9:23 am
Posts: 278
ashley313 wrote:
http://www.racecar-engineering.com
http://www.scarbsf1.com


Ouhhh Come ON dude! - As if I'm already not obsessed enough! - You just had to share them didn't you?

Just kidding, thanks. I have a ton of studying to do, instead I'm reading F1 articles and Analysis. :( :( :( :(

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 4:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2009 7:49 am
Posts: 2069
Location: Australia
I find this passive DDRS concept interesting. IIRC Lotus and Mercedes have struggled with it because it has to automatically go on and off (so to speak) at a speed that is faster than the fastest corner. From what I've read it just doesn't seem worthwhile to invest all the resources to get it working, but seeing as a number of teams are pursuing it I can only conclude that it has the potential to be worthwhile. I wonder how many teams will try it in testing but then drop it for the race season.

I'm also quite surprised that the FIA hasn't banned it on safety grounds because surely a stalled rear wing going through corners is a recipe for disaster.

_________________
Twitter @Jo_Soucek


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 9:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 10:33 pm
Posts: 922
I have to disagree kal. I think that there are so few avenues of development left under these regs that a working passive DRS would be a worthwhile avenue of development.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 11, 2013 9:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 4898
TheThirdTenor wrote:
I have to disagree kal. I think that there are so few avenues of development left under these regs that a working passive DRS would be a worthwhile avenue of development.


Honestly if they're severely restricting the use of DRS during practices (including qualifications) because of "safety reasons", it would be likely to also ban passive DDRS.

Now for the real reason of restricting DRS during practices... :)


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: Classic, FinsFan, Google Adsense [Bot], James14, Mr-E 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