Renault R29

[Spencifer_Murphy]

I think this relates quite strongly to the Gordon Murray penned Brabham Fan Car from 1978.

The cars were so utterly dominant in their first race that were banned by the FIA, even though they were deemed legal, so the results stood from the first race.

Could the FIA just turn around and say "No" the diffuser rule interpretation, even if it was legal?

If this was the case, it would be interesting to see if BRAWN could also replicate Brabham in another way: going back to a single deck "legal" diffuser and still taking 2 race wins with a hindered car.

I don't think the FIA can just say "No its not legal" in the same way they did the Fan Car. The fan car used a huge engine cooling fan to suck the car to the ground. Suction or low pressure is an aerodynamic effect, thus the fan car was deemed to have used a moveable aerodynamic device, hence it was banned.

In this circumstance they haven't designed a part which has a secondary role designed purely to circumvent the rules. They've simply interpreted the diffuser rules more effectively.

[Giblet]

That makes sense.

[Miguel]

Good morning to everybody,

In this circumstance they haven't designed a part which has a secondary role designed purely to circumvent the rules. They've simply interpreted the diffuser rules more effectively.

Just a quick reply. I think that the appeal is not based on the dimensions of the rear diffuser, which is legal because the crash-test exceptions make it so. From what I've heard is that the appeal is based on the floor rules. We had here some discussion regarding the McLaren cut floor a while ago, and someone mentioned that the floor had to be flat on the underside and that it should cover the whole car when viewed from above. Thus, if I didn't have hallucinations that day, the appeal states that the floor of the "double-decker cars" doesn't cover the whole car (since you have to feed the upper deck somehow).

[Metar]

I don't think the FIA can just say "No its not legal" in the same way they did the Fan Car. The fan car used a huge engine cooling fan to suck the car to the ground. Suction or low pressure is an aerodynamic effect, thus the fan car was deemed to have used a moveable aerodynamic device, hence it was banned.

In this circumstance they haven't designed a part which has a secondary role designed purely to circumvent the rules. They've simply interpreted the diffuser rules more effectively.

Couldn't you argue that, at least in a way, the teams did do that? They've designed a crash-structure with a "side-effect" of serving as an extra diffuser. They've interpreted the crash-structure regulations to provide the secondary role of a diffuser.

[xpensive]

I find that a vey relevant anology Metar, when Brabham's argument at the time was precisely that, a side-effect.

[ISLAMATRON]

Actually, they have 'tested the concept of it' in their windtunnel, they haven't been developing it for a month. They have probably given one guy the job to design something similar to Toyota's diffuser (as that one was earlier out in the winter than the Brawn) and just see what it would give in the windtunnel. Apparently it showed an extra 14% downforce just by sticking it on.

As for your second question, Pat Symonds already said after Melbourne - along with Alonso - that they cannot just glue it onto the car. Additional downforce at the rear will have to be compensated with front wing or splitter development, which may take another week - assuming they put that up high priority.

Symonds also said however that they might be able to run the new device at China if it's approved to be legal...

If they stuck one on and it gave an instant 14% downforce without much drag they would most definatly put it on the race car. Even if they had to lower the angle of attack of the rear wing to lower its downforce(to keep proper balance) as long as the overall downforce to drag ratio improved they would use it.

It is thusfar mostly a "legality" issue with them... watch, as soon as it is deemed "legal" you will see duct taped on "new" diffusers popping up all over the grid... because they are really not that hard to make work.

I bought a diffuser off ebay for my car, put it on with zip ties an felt an instant improvement in handling and no change in my straight-line 0-100mph speed. Then I flat bottomed the rest of the car with thin aluminum and got even more grip out of the car... ground effects downforce is a pretty simple thing to add onto cars.

[DM0407]

[...
I bought a diffuser off ebay for my car, put it on with zip ties an felt an instant improvement in handling and no change in my straight-line 0-100mph speed. Then I flat bottomed the rest of the car with thin aluminum and got even more grip out of the car... ground effects downforce is a pretty simple thing to add onto cars.

If you don't mind me asking, What does an Islamatron drive?

[ISLAMATRON]

[...
I bought a diffuser off ebay for my car, put it on with zip ties an felt an instant improvement in handling and no change in my straight-line 0-100mph speed. Then I flat bottomed the rest of the car with thin aluminum and got even more grip out of the car... ground effects downforce is a pretty simple thing to add onto cars.

If you don't mind me asking, What does an Islamatron drive?

the race car is an FC3S Rx-7

the daily driver is an SUV for hauling parts, unless i'm not, then its a CBR 600 for high gas milage.

[joseff]

...the diffuser issues opens up a development path that was not previously open.

The ramifications could be the whole rear half of the car which obviously has a huge amount of cost implications in a not fantastic economic time.

I bought a diffuser off ebay for my car, put it on with zip ties an felt an instant improvement in handling and no change in my straight-line 0-100mph speed. Then I flat bottomed the rest of the car with thin aluminum and got even more grip out of the car... ground effects downforce is a pretty simple thing to add onto cars.

=D>

[ISLAMATRON]

laugh if you want but I got at least .03 in lateral g's out of the diffuser alone on the 50m radius skidpad

[Metar]

But this is F1, where you already have a diffuser attached.

[ISLAMATRON]

But this is F1, where you already have a diffuser attached.

and they all want the effect of a bigger one

[Metar]

Yes, but it's not a roadcar where you can pull the bumper off and install an off-the-shelf solution. The diffusers are at the rear - every part of the car affects the air reaching that section. It's around a suspension (especially RBR's), a gearbox, rear wing - they're all tightly packaged. To find the extra space for the double section, you'll need to redesign your gearbox, spend time in the tunnel refining the new aerodynamics, design new sidepods that suit the design and that leave enough space open for cooling (remember, taller diffuser means existing rear cooling-exits might be blocked), and refine the diffuser to extract maximum downforce.

[ISLAMATRON]

Yes, but it's not a roadcar where you can pull the bumper off and install an off-the-shelf solution. The diffusers are at the rear - every part of the car affects the air reaching that section. It's around a suspension (especially RBR's), a gearbox, rear wing - they're all tightly packaged. To find the extra space for the double section, you'll need to redesign your gearbox, spend time in the tunnel refining the new aerodynamics, design new sidepods that suit the design and that leave enough space open for cooling (remember, taller diffuser means existing rear cooling-exits might be blocked), and refine the diffuser to extract maximum downforce.

absolutely... I agree on all accounts, but just imagine if they were suddenly allowed to extend the current diffuser farther out the back and higher, they would all do it the next day and figure out the rest as they go because it would be instant downforce at a low drag penalty.

[Spencifer_Murphy]

I don't think the FIA can just say "No its not legal" in the same way they did the Fan Car. The fan car used a huge engine cooling fan to suck the car to the ground. Suction or low pressure is an aerodynamic effect, thus the fan car was deemed to have used a moveable aerodynamic device, hence it was banned.

In this circumstance they haven't designed a part which has a secondary role designed purely to circumvent the rules. They've simply interpreted the diffuser rules more effectively.

Couldn't you argue that, at least in a way, the teams did do that? They've designed a crash-structure with a "side-effect" of serving as an extra diffuser. They've interpreted the crash-structure regulations to provide the secondary role of a diffuser.

True, I guess they could argue that. I really don't know. The thing is with the diffuser thing is that although the crash structure has been deigned to have a certain side effect, it is attached to the diffuser (or vise-versa) in a way that is totally within the technical rules (in terms of dimensions etc.).

On the otherhand, one could argue that the Fan car's fan was attached in a way that was totally within the rules (technicalt speaking) lol. I guess its all down to how one chooses to view it.