Instead of detaching airflow to decrease down-force in a certain area, would it not be a better idea to for the car to generate 'side-force' as a car goes round the corner, or would the air pressure on the leading side of the car be too extreme to try to balance out on the outer low pressure side?
That's what my main idea is, not messing with the downforce, but using direct aero force to help turn the car, and if possible modulate that with the fluid switch concept.
I think it would add some instability around the yaw axis, but that's exactly how they make fighter aircraft more maneuverable (except the instability is in pitch, I think, so they can turn more aggressively in a bank). Basically the plane wants to rotate, so you have to work to hold it straight but when you do want to turn the plane does that better because it's what it naturally wants to do.I'm not suggesting that level of instability, but if there is sideforce coming and going without direct control then it's going to buffet the car a bit -- if they use a fluidic switch to modulate it.
Alternatively, it might be useful just as steady force to one side, and then I don't think it would destabilize the car -- just make it naturally pull in the direction of the circuit.
It might not need to be a LOT of force, just enough to help reduce tire wear and, of course, help the car take key corners faster
. It might actually slow it down in some corners, so they'd have to plan it so it helps through longer corners. They do this already, trading off downforce vs. straight-line speed, so it would be just another element to plan.
M.Nader -DODZ- wrote:
No i wouldn't say so, up to this point scientifically it is not yet known which is introduced first side force or slip (slip causes side turning force, or turning force causes slip). so both are in direct relation to each other and even if aero is rotating the car the car is still attached to the ground through the wheels so for it to turn, slip angle MUST be introduced and in value it wouldn't think it would differ to turning the car by steering since slip angle by definitions is the difference between where the wheels are pointing and where the car is actually going (and remember that you can't have side/Lateral force without slip angle).
Just having a friendly discussion, but if I were the Green Goblin, flew alongside Grosjean and physically pushed the front of his car away from Alonso, and he turned the wheels to face along the same arc I'm turning him on, then how is there slip angle? The tires are aimed in line with the tarmac that's passing underneath them, exerting no side-force.
Whether or not we're going to call it "slip angle", at that point the tires are not experiencing as much degradation as they would if they were doing the work of turning the car. It's the other force -- be it Goblin or aero -- that's doing the work, hence saving at least one of the tires.
Total Turning Force = Tire Turning Force + Aero Turning Force.
So if we're adding an aero component to the force that's turning us through a corner, then we need less force from the tire.
Tire Turning Force = Shear Force on the Tire Compound
It seems like since we'd need less tire turning force, there would be less shearing force on the tire compound, and therefore it would not be "worked" as much and should last longer.
If that's wrong, what have I missed?