Ferrari F2012

[Lycoming]

Without DDRS, you very briefly (until the wing closes and flow reattaches) applying excessive pressure to the rear wheels. Usually, that causes lockups, but not at high speeds and not in that short transient period when brake pressure is probably still building. During this transient period, the car transitions from oversteer to understeer, but generally, the car is undergoing pure longitudinal acceleration. This second point would not be true if you are trail braking at the very start of the braking period, but I can't think of any places where this would be true. Oversteer/understeer results from some sort of net moment on the car, but where would that arise during braking? obviously the wheels are not at exactly 0 slip angle, but how does the transient period affect slip angle to create a moment?

Considering this, what effect is there on handling? stability is generally defined as a system with outputs or states growing without bounds; where does this occur?

I would agree that the benefits under braking are minute or, more likely, unnoticeable.

[Huntresa]

There is also one thing everyone who thinks that other teams will develop DDRS is forgetting, Ross Brawn has said himself the systems value isnt big but it was a cheap system to integrate into the car for a gain of 0.2sec in Qual, but the word is integrate. Mercs system is integrated from start from the ground up and they still only manage 0.2sec gain, i doubt anyone else would be able to integrate this system as neatly as merc has done and therefor would not gain as much.

[alogoc]

ok, i admit i was wrong about braking whit DDRS,it doesnt help braking after all!



@ScarbsF1 Does DDRS helps cars stability under braking?

Craig Scarborough ‏@ScarbsF1
@alogoc No, because the driver closes DRS before he brakes

[zyphro]

There is also one thing everyone who thinks that other teams will develop DDRS is forgetting, Ross Brawn has said himself the systems value isnt big but it was a cheap system to integrate into the car for a gain of 0.2sec in Qual, but the word is integrate. Mercs system is integrated from start from the ground up and they still only manage 0.2sec gain, i doubt anyone else would be able to integrate this system as neatly as merc has done and therefor would not gain as much.

Finally, you're talking some sense .

[italian]

According to Autosprint, in Montreal Ferrari will try the original exhaust solution: http://translate.google.it/translate?sl ... 22&act=url If the translation isn't clear enough, tell me, I'm Italian.

[Teechnical]

Problem with that exhaust is that the sidepods would have to be designed to accommodate it, possibly creating drag.
Unless ofcourse the engineers have found another way.

[Crucial_Xtreme]

Problem with that exhaust is that the sidepods would have to be designed to accommodate it, possibly creating drag.
Unless ofcourse the engineers have found another way.

I agree many of us believed the original exhaust/sidepods induced too much drag and that may be a correct assumption but it may be false as well. Fry said they understand the exhaust much better now so I'm inclined to believe if they reintroduce the Acer Ducts, be it old style or a new iteration, they feel confident in using it. They may also only test it in free practice & not in Qulai/Race.
The article says the Acer Duct solution provides the most downforce but also a small loss of power. It will be interesting to see if Ferrari revert to getting the exhaust to the floor but introduce new sidepods. I expected to see a McLaren/Sauber type solution.

[alogoc]

i think it will not look like in Jerez,same direction of blowing but more towards front of the car to stop tires from overheating and whit the coanda ramp of somekind!

[Chuckjr]

I've read a few times on this forum that just a few mm of exhaust movement can be the difference between an exhaust solution working extremely well and an exhaust solution being total crap. 

The iteration of exhaust that is revealed in Canada may not be able to be distinguished from Jerez day one. I don't think anyone can know what it will look like till it's seen, but I think it's safe to say....if Ferrari have found a unique esoteric exhaust  solution that works well, they may have the field covered for the year as these things don't seem to be easy to copy like Macca did last year with red bull EBD--just slap on a titanium hand built EBD and you get an automatic 1.5 seconds better pace just like that...good news is, if it does not work for Ferrari, they clearly have a car that can stay in touch with the field till the final solution is realized. 

[FakeAlonso]

[alogoc]

what does it say?

[FakeAlonso]

what does it say?

Mostly about the importance of tires for this year championship.

Ferrari was cautious in Monaco they just covered the guys in front even though there was the possibility to stay out more and try to get p1. Stuff we all know.

[Crucial_Xtreme]

With all the talk of holes/slots in the floor I figured I'd post a good picture of the F2012's slots. Very very small slot that you can't slide a piece of paper through..


via Racecar Engineering

[shelly]

I think that we could see also a new shape in these floor cutouts in canada, optimised to work with the exhausts' original shape. That would be maybe the mythical byrne floor, which was supposed to be visually striking.
I think the reuqest for fia clarification against the rbr slots was instrumental in getting a fia statement on what's legal and what is not, and finally show this (maybe controversial) item.

Of course the byrne floor could have either never existed or been on the car without being spotted since the first race; but the slot area is key in managing flow interaction with the rear wheel and I find it odd that the original exhaust comes back after this rule clarification (even if there are different valid reasons, like timing of the race after the mugello tests etc etc)

[Crucial_Xtreme]

I think that we could see also a new shape in these floor cutouts in canada, optimised to work with the exhausts' original shape. That would be maybe the mythical byrne floor, which was supposed to be visually striking.
I think the reuqest for fia clarification against the rbr slots was instrumental in getting a fia statement on what's legal and what is not, and finally show this (maybe controversial) item.

Of course the byrne floor could have either never existed or been on the car without being spotted since the first race; but the slot area is key in managing flow interaction with the rear wheel and I find it odd that the original exhaust comes back after this rule clarification (even if there are different valid reasons, like timing of the race after the mugello tests etc etc)

They tested a floor similar to the floor introduced in Spain with the RB inspired notch on the trailing edge of the diffuser & similar holes ahead of the rear tyre in preseason. But the floor was only used for one day and then it vanished. So you could be onto something Shelly. Will be interesting to see exactly what configuration gets tested in Montreal.