Get the damm chassis right

[SportscarBruce]

The conventional wisdom which says "take off the wings and let'em race, fixing everything", a view which none other that Roger Penske latched onto during his talk with Despain last week, is not valid.

There are two banes that arise in the grip department when cars run in close proximity; disruption of airflow over the front wing and disturbances in chassis df, both in force and location of maximum pressure (somewhat similiar to pitch sensitivity in effect). A related issue is the interaction of big, soft tires and sharp front wing endplates and fences.

Get away from band-aid solutions, F1's current configuration should be studied as to what NOT to do. Shortened rear wing width, pedestal-mounted huge front wings, and diffusers (for cripes sake diffusers!) made the racing worse. I couldn't believe my eyes when this year's F1 season began.

Focus attention towards smoothing and directing airflow DOWN towards the rear, move the wings back to the canard-type location of mid-90's superspeedway wings, mandate a flat bottom with radiused sidepods, and place the sidepod exits directly to the rear. Get rid of overdependence on chassis downforce. Enable the wings to work as well or better when trailing another car, and fatten up the rubber to make up for a lower aero df percentage.

Then the cars can RACE, TOUCH, PASS, and the drivers can DRIVE once again.
mokin:

[Chamoo]

We still need to provide the cars with some sort of downforce. We can't give them absolute minimum downforce and expect to keep safety at the levels they are at now.

I don't like your idea of a flat bottom, I think we need to produce some downforce from the bottom of the car instead of the wings. I think the design you'll see, the radical design Brian Barnhart has spoken about, will include very little downforce from the wings, which is a positive in my opinion. However, some downforce will be gained from under the car.

I'm not totally sure what to expect from the car though, it could be a bit scary at first until we adjust to it.

[Pat Wiatrowski]

We still need to provide the cars with some sort of downforce. We can't give them absolute minimum downforce and expect to keep safety at the levels they are at now.

I don't like your idea of a flat bottom, I think we need to produce some downforce from the bottom of the car instead of the wings. I think the design you'll see, the radical design Brian Barnhart has spoken about, will include very little downforce from the wings, which is a positive in my opinion. However, some downforce will be gained from under the car.

I'm not totally sure what to expect from the car though, it could be a bit scary at first until we adjust to it.

Sounds like a DP-01 to me!

[Chris R]

I am thinking the DP-01 would have been the "right step" between the current car and what will be the next car - but really the next car needs to be "better" than the DP-01 - not that the DP-01 is a bad car - just won't be the right one in 2012....

[Bob Riebe]

We still need to provide the cars with some sort of downforce. We can't give them absolute minimum downforce and expect to keep safety at the levels they are at now.

I don't like your idea of a flat bottom, I think we need to produce some downforce from the bottom of the car instead of the wings. I think the design you'll see, the radical design Brian Barnhart has spoken about, will include very little downforce from the wings, which is a positive in my opinion. However, some downforce will be gained from under the car.

I'm not totally sure what to expect from the car though, it could be a bit scary at first until we adjust to it.

With little, or no (remove the wings) aero down force, they WILL NOT be as fast as they are now even with nine hundred horse power.

[Hoop-98]

With little, or no (remove the wings) aero down force, they WILL NOT be as fast as they are now even with nine hundred horse power.

No DF = 180 MPH turn speeds at Indy. The DP01 was simply the result of lifting the rules that had been introduced since the late 90's to slow the cars down. No magic tricks. Still over 1/2 it's downforce from the wings.



We are limited to about ~1.7 G with the tires.

rh

[anthonyvop]

The conventional wisdom which says "take off the wings and let'em race, fixing everything", a view which none other that Roger Penske latched onto during his talk with Despain last week, is not valid.

There are two banes that arise in the grip department when cars run in close proximity; disruption of airflow over the front wing and disturbances in chassis df, both in force and location of maximum pressure (somewhat similiar to pitch sensitivity in effect). A related issue is the interaction of big, soft tires and sharp front wing endplates and fences.

Get away from band-aid solutions, F1's current configuration should be studied as to what NOT to do. Shortened rear wing width, pedestal-mounted huge front wings, and diffusers (for cripes sake diffusers!) made the racing worse. I couldn't believe my eyes when this year's F1 season began.

Focus attention towards smoothing and directing airflow DOWN towards the rear, move the wings back to the canard-type location of mid-90's superspeedway wings, mandate a flat bottom with radiused sidepods, and place the sidepod exits directly to the rear. Get rid of overdependence on chassis downforce. Enable the wings to work as well or better when trailing another car, and fatten up the rubber to make up for a lower aero df percentage.

Then the cars can RACE, TOUCH, PASS, and the drivers can DRIVE once again.
mokin:

You can always just cut off the roof and remove the fenders of a Grand-Am Daytona Prototype.

[SportscarBruce]

I'm glad to see some ideas being tossed about, even if they don't echo my thoughts on the matter. I guess the best place to nail down the proper specs is through scale model wind tunnel testing.

One thing I'll like to ad is this; allow the driver the capability of trimming the front wing through a mechanical or electrical device. This will give him or her the
ability to compensate for front-end push while executing a pass.

[beachbum]

You can always just cut off the roof and remove the fenders of a Grand-Am Daytona Prototype.

I don't know about that. The tube frame is pretty ugly, and everyone knows the car has to "look right" or it can't be a race car.

[Chamoo]

I'm glad to see some ideas being tossed about, even if they don't echo my thoughts on the matter. I guess the best place to nail down the proper specs is through scale model wind tunnel testing.

One thing I'll like to ad is this; allow the driver the capability of trimming the front wing through a mechanical or electrical device. This will give him or her the
ability to compensate for front-end push while executing a pass.

I don't know about allowing the drivers to adjust the front wing. I don't like it, and F1 drivers have said it doesn't help, and it could become dangerous.

I just don't like the idea in general as it seems like a bit of a gimmick.

And according to Barnhart, he seems like he already has 2 options in mind. I think alot of testing has already been done, not all of it, but alot. They just need to decide which direction they want to go now.