Ferrari F2012

[Hail22]

All these posts are speculation on performance not technical components, changes etc.

Anyone notice yesterdays car performed a lot better than day 3s setup? seems like they aren't planning to dial in the car yet (assumption/guessing).

But do we think that the exhaust setup from yesterday will be in the final vehicle released at Melbourne or still the original periscope type exhaust?

Once again its testing, so we can't put our money on any team just yet including the other two top runners as they may find Mercedes/Force India biting at their heels..

[Crucial_Xtreme]

Great video! Great sound!!!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8KHJAr1vI0[/youtube]

[FrukostScones]

quote from AMuS print edition:

Adrian Newey: "The only reason to do it like this (pull rod front suspension) is to make it differently."

[bhall]

I'm actually a little surprised he would say something like that. He, of all people, should know that things aren't always as they seem.

Aside from the fringe aerodynamic and CoG benefits, I think there's a very real possibility that the choice of a pullrod front suspension was made to utilize the change in geometry, however subtle it might be, in an attempt to quicken the warm-up of the tires, something Ferrari hasn't been able to do for what seems like ages.

[Ferraripilot]

I'm actually a little surprised he would say something like that. He, of all people, should know that things aren't always as they seem.

Aside from the fringe aerodynamic and CoG benefits, I think there's a very real possibility that the choice of a pullrod front suspension was made to utilize the change in geometry, however subtle it might be, in an attempt to quicken the warm-up of the tires, something Ferrari hasn't been able to do for what seems like ages.

And I definitely believe they have achieved that, but perhaps at the expense of having too much heat and too little room for geometric fine tuning.

[PaulB]

It seem to me that such a suspension is much more difficult to set up because of the very low movement. The angle of the pull rod is so low, that the geometrical movements musst be very low compared to a conventional push rod at the front.

[PlatinumZealot]

I'm actually a little surprised he would say something like that. He, of all people, should know that things aren't always as they seem.

Aside from the fringe aerodynamic and CoG benefits, I think there's a very real possibility that the choice of a pullrod front suspension was made to utilize the change in geometry, however subtle it might be, in an attempt to quicken the warm-up of the tires, something Ferrari hasn't been able to do for what seems like ages.

It's really the control arm and tie rod layout that determines the kinematics of the wheel movement. Whether it is pull rod or push rod doesn't change the wheel movement.

Pull/push rod affects your forces coming from the wheel into the sprung parts and also the layout of those sprung parts. (bell cranks, linkages etc). I don't think using a pullrod affects the tyre warm up - no difference to a push rod in that respect.

I think Ferrari changed to pull-rod for aerodynamic benefits.

This whole thing just got more interesting hearing that Newey thinks front pull rods not worth the trouble.

[ringo]

You know, i think Ferrari's tub is made to accept push rod if things don't work out for them now.

[bettonracing]

It seem to me that such a suspension is much more difficult to set up because of the very low movement. The angle of the pull rod is so low, that the geometrical movements musst be very low compared to a conventional push rod at the front.

This was either posted earlier in this thread, or somewhere in the "pullrod vs. pushrod" thread:
http://www.vivaf1.com/blog/?p=10280

Whether or not they're back to the same motion ratio of last year's pushrod is debatable w/o the actualy geometry, but it's clear that they're at least approaching the same motion ratios.

Regards,
Kurt

[F1.Ru]

Are they trying to hide the wheel nut design??

I don't believe so, they've been visible all pre-season. I think it's just the lack of light.

Crucial its not about lack of light. i just changed the exposure level of light and the wheel nut really seems different and changed. Like they r trying something new.........

[Crucial_Xtreme]

Are they trying to hide the wheel nut design??

I don't believe so, they've been visible all pre-season. I think it's just the lack of light.

Crucial its not about lack of light. i just changed the exposure level of light and the wheel nut really seems different and changed. Like they r trying something new.........

Here's the launch wheel nuts
http://cdn.f1zone.net/news/wp-content/g ... 56_new.jpg

Barcelona
http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/1972/bcnnewexhaust.jpg

Different than last year but I don't believed they've changed this year.

150 Italia
http://www.autoevolution.com/images/new ... 1055_1.jpg

[Goran2812]

I taught that they said some time ago in an interview that they're aiming to improve on their pit stop times and are designing some new stuff because of that... wheel nuts might just be on the things... who knows..

[PlatinumZealot]

It seem to me that such a suspension is much more difficult to set up because of the very low movement. The angle of the pull rod is so low, that the geometrical movements musst be very low compared to a conventional push rod at the front.

This was either posted earlier in this thread, or somewhere in the "pullrod vs. pushrod" thread:
http://www.vivaf1.com/blog/?p=10280

Whether or not they're back to the same motion ratio of last year's pushrod is debatable w/o the actualy geometry, but it's clear that they're at least approaching the same motion ratios.

Regards,
Kurt

I did a geometrical analysis. what I found is that:

The different control arm radii, and the vertical distance of the bellcrank from the control arm mounting points is what determines how much the push/pull rod displaces when the suspension moves. The Ferrari pull rods move a similar amount to the push rod using rough measurments.

In general though, for a similar vertical distance of the bell crank from the nearest control arm mounting point, the pull rod moves more for every unit displacement of the wheel. This is because the pull rod bell crank is mounted lower than the upper ball-joint, the upper a-arm has smaller radius AND the suspension moves upwards from the rest position.

For the push rod - you have to mount the bell crank much higher than the control arm mounting points to get a similar ratio to a pull-rod. that is why you see those bumps on top of the noses of the push rod cars.

One thing though. The pull-rod was at 13 degrees moving to 15 degrees. The push rod was at 41 degrees moving to 40 degrees with a bump of 20mm. Notice that you still have to contend with 2.5 times the force being transmitted through the pull rod.

[beelsebob]

And as far as I know Newey is an aerodynamicist and not a technical engineer.

Wrong. He is a technical engineer, and he currently holds the chief technical officer position at Red Bull. He's worked as a designer, aerodynamicist, race engineer and technical director in various racing disciplines. Adrian Newey is 1000x more qualified than you to make observations about a pull-rod front suspension.

Also, the primary benefit of pull rod at the rear is nothing to do with mechanical grip – it's aerodynamics – it provides cleaner flow to the beam wing.

[Hail22]

Also, the primary benefit of pull rod at the rear is nothing to do with mechanical grip – it's aerodynamics – it provides cleaner flow to the beam wing.

Your correct, beel as well as digging in the mud a bit a comment earlier your right the Fry/Byrne floor showed its face at Barca hopecully there are a few more shiny wafer thin floors