Adjustable Rear Wing (DRS)

[Mandrake]

As could be seen from the video at the time, the FW was balacing left and right when he came out of Button's wake making him loose control. Taking the probable same FW behaviour, combined with the probably engaged ARW, how would this then turn out this year ? A full side-on slide ?

The loss of control did not come from a change in downforce balance but a number of unfortunate effects. Wet track, car close to rev limit, aggressive change of direction by Vettel etc.

Open rear wing + sticking your nose out of the slipstream doesn't make the car spin around!

[i70q7m7ghw]

As could be seen from the video at the time, the FW was balacing left and right when he came out of Button's wake making him loose control. Taking the probable same FW behaviour, combined with the probably engaged ARW, how would this then turn out this year ? A full side-on slide ?

The loss of control did not come from a change in downforce balance but a number of unfortunate effects. Wet track, car close to rev limit, aggressive change of direction by Vettel etc.

Open rear wing + sticking your nose out of the slipstream doesn't make the car spin around!

Your correct, but shamikaze still has a valid point. The cars are going to have alot less DF on the straights, so sudden moves out of the slipstream might not be possible this year. Atleast, not with closing the rearwing...

[horse]

All the teams running f-ducts last year didn't have too many problems manoeuvring their cars for overtakes while it was operating on the straights. Therefore, I see no reason why manoeuvring with the ARW will be any more difficult.

[i70q7m7ghw]

All the teams running f-ducts last year didn't have too many problems manoeuvring their cars for overtakes while it was operating on the straights. Therefore, I see no reason why manoeuvring with the ARW will be any more difficult.

They are going to be more effective at shedding DF no?

[horse]

I think very similar principles apply. By changing the angle of attack of the flap you re-vector the negative lift of the flap into the horizontal plane and decouple it from the main wing.

So the main wing will be contributing less down-force without the action of the flap, but the flap itself will most likely still be generating some down-force when it is open, with much reduced drag. The f-duct will have completely taken away the effect of the flap when it was being "stalled".

[Giblet]

Merged some topics (I think) into the DRS thread from the RB7 thread.

Getting the hang of the control panel, bear with me a I am sure to have a hiccup or two.

[ringo]

I think very similar principles apply. By changing the angle of attack of the flap you re-vector the negative lift of the flap into the horizontal plane and decouple it from the main wing.

So the main wing will be contributing less down-force without the action of the flap, but the flap itself will most likely still be generating some down-force when it is open, with much reduced drag. The f-duct will have completely taken away the effect of the flap when it was being "stalled".

Well down force is downward, so there will be a substantial reduction of force on the wheels. Much more than the F duct.

The flap itself will have much less lift, because of the reduced angle of attack. it's not necessarily re vectoring. The magnitude is reduced. An f duct doesn't go as far as changing the characteristics of the whole wing. This is why teams have said how much more powerful the ARW is than the f duct and even KERS.

This flap angle will also affect the lift potential of the main element as well.
So the flap wont work in isolation like the f duct. It will drop the efficiency of the main element.

[horse]

The car will be at max velocity when the wing is activated and the flow about the open flap will be attached and lifting (down in the direction of down force).

The point is, I really don't think they will struggle to manoeuvre the car on the straights with it open, although the driver will have to feel for the change of balance.

[marekk]

The car will be at max velocity when the wing is activated and the flow about the open flap will be attached and lifting (down in the direction of down force).

The point is, I really don't think they will struggle to manoeuvre the car on the straights with it open, although the driver will have to feel for the change of balance.

I see no problems during manouvres on the straight either, but then suddenly the car is at max speed with flap open in 50m braking zone, hitting brakes as hard as possible, but without this shedded downforce for few tenths. And at this speed 1 tenth is 10m. So you have to brake earlier then your competitor - i doubt this DRS will give us more overtaking. But i'm almost sure we will see some spectacular out of track activities

[MeowMix]

I dont think so... The rules state that the system will be deactivated as soon as the driver hits the brakes. If you have seen the wing operating, they pretty much snap shut immediately, therefore giving practically max downforce from the second the brake is pressed.

I got to play with a 50% model of a teams rear wing.... Its quite clever. The engineers are quite adamant that it wont change much in terms of braking distance. What I however am thinking, is that with the reduced downforce to the rear, the car will be relatively over-steery and there will be a sharp transition from over-steer to under-steer as soon as the flap snaps shut. If the drivers start turning before braking (high speed corner after a relatively short straight) it could get quite interesting... but then again I guess that type of straight will not be the one on which the flap will be allowed to be used.

First post

[marekk]

I dont think so... The rules state that the system will be deactivated as soon as the driver hits the brakes. If you have seen the wing operating, they pretty much snap shut immediately, therefore giving practically max downforce from the second the brake is pressed.

RedBull's interpretation of word "immediately" seems to be a little relativistic.
For me it looks like > 50m from start of shutdown to flap closed.
Interestingly, it seems to go quicker the other way.

[MeowMix]

RedBull's interpretation of word "immediately" seems to be a little relativistic.
For me it looks like > 50m from start of shutdown to flap closed.
Interestingly, it seems to go quicker the other way.

Thats very interesting. Could that be the qualifying setup though? I find it hard to believe that teams will operate the wing in such a way that it end up hindering their drivers when it comes to breaking, then again, stranger things have happened

[csponton]

http://spontoncristiano.wordpress.com/2 ... re-mobile/
I sorpassi in Formula 1 con l’introduzione dell’ala posteriore mobile non saranno cosi facili come qualcuno ha ipotizzato e prende sempre più forza l’analisi di Fernando Alonso che ha espresso perplessità sul fatto che tale dispositivo possa aiutare e soprattutto facilitare i sorpassi. Da un’analisi fatta, risulta, infatti, che il pilota che intende sorpassare deve trovarsi ad una distanza massima di 12 metri da quello che lo precede perché azionando il dispositivo di regolazione dell’ala posteriore possa effettuare il sorpasso. Da notare che la FIA ha imposto che il dispositivo si possa utilizzare solo in un rettifilo stabilito a priori e per una lunghezza massima di 600 m e il pilota che segue deve avere un distacco inferiore al secondo rispetto a quello davanti. Verrà, infatti, disegnata una riga sull’asfalto nel rettilineo in cui si può usare per indicare al pilota quanto può azionarlo.

La tabella indica la velocità del pilota dietro rispetto a quello davanti dal punto di azionamento del MRW (mobile rear wing) fino al punto di staccata. La differenza di velocità di punta nel punto di staccata tra le due vettura è di circa 11 km/h. Tale velocità si aveva anche l’anno scorso tra le macchine che usavano l’F-Duct e quelle che non lo usavano. Eppure non è che i sorpassi fossero cosi facili.

[volarchico]

(IMAGES) RedBull's interpretation of word "immediately" seems to be a little relativistic.
For me it looks like > 50m from start of shutdown to flap closed.
Interestingly, it seems to go quicker the other way.

Did you show each frame? If so...4 frames at a standard 30 frames/sec = 0.13 seconds. Even at 300 km/hr, that's only 11 m. Since the image sequence seems to show a much further distance, I'm guessing you didn't show every frame. Can you count the frames and report back?

[marekk]

(IMAGES) RedBull's interpretation of word "immediately" seems to be a little relativistic.
For me it looks like > 50m from start of shutdown to flap closed.
Interestingly, it seems to go quicker the other way.

Did you show each frame? If so...4 frames at a standard 30 frames/sec = 0.13 seconds. Even at 300 km/hr, that's only 11 m. Since the image sequence seems to show a much further distance, I'm guessing you didn't show every frame. Can you count the frames and report back?

Sorry, it's from youtube - i don't think it's near 30fps (likely 10-15). It's a stream, so fps can vary during playback. I've used VLC player and famous RedBull's hd on-board's from Barcelona test.
Those are 4 consecutive "frames".