Ferrari F2012

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter do not belong here.
Owen.C93
Owen.C93
177
Joined: 24 Jul 2010, 17:52

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

If Ferrari were winning we would be hearing about how all the other teams have crap designers and that Pull-rod front suspension was an inspired design that separates Ferrari from everyone else.

Same reason that undercut sidepods were superior when Brawn were winning, or when no undercut but short sidepods were the best design in F1 when RB were winning. I'd hate to see McLaren be poor this year because we'd never hear the end of how a low nose is a stupid design.
Motorsport Graduate in search of team experience ;)

bhall
bhall
244
Joined: 28 Feb 2006, 21:26

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

Lycoming wrote:I think there is merit to the theory that they have compromised suspension to try and mitigate these effects. Running stiff suspension would combat pitch sensitivity, but it wrecks tyres and could cause the contact patch to slide around.

Mechanically, softer springs will help maintain better contact patch, but aerodynamic and other considerations always necessitate the running of suspension that is probably stiffer than ideal, at least from the tyres point of view. Perhaps Ferrari have been forced to move even further from that ideal.

And it does make sense that there would be "band-aids" like this on the car, they've known its issues for long enough to try and patch it up, but not fix it properly.
It only took three tries to get someone to read my ramblings. Cheers, Lycoming.

The rear being too stiff - on purpose so the car won't bottom out - would also explain why the car gets worse as it gets lighter. The weight of the fuel acts like a damper to keep the rear end from bouncing around. So, when the fuel load decreases instability increases.

Crucial_Xtreme
Crucial_Xtreme
404
Joined: 16 Oct 2011, 00:13
Location: Charlotte

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

Lycoming wrote:
And as for that translation... Im not sure I understand. It sounds like hes saying that they require chassis modifications to get more downforce? does that mean the chassis lacks stiffness, or that the chassis itself does not generate adequate downforce? The former is plausible given the addition of that rod to the gearcase for additional stiffness...
He's just saying the car lacks downforce, and maybe they'll need to modify the chassis to try and generate more. He doesn't really get into specifics. Of course to be fair it's just his opinion, albeit educated so he could be right or wrong.
Obviously if they require a new crash test for a new chassis, we'll hear about it rather quickly.

Jersey Tom
Jersey Tom
166
Joined: 29 May 2006, 20:49
Location: Huntersville, NC

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

Don't think I agree with Gary Anderson's comments on a number of points. Nor do I even know what he's getting on about.

Lateral forces and the tire footprints "moving around" ? The pushrod having anything to do with caster de-wedging with steer? What?
Grip is a four letter word. All opinions are my own and not those of current or previous employers.

Crucial_Xtreme
Crucial_Xtreme
404
Joined: 16 Oct 2011, 00:13
Location: Charlotte

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

Jersey Tom wrote:Don't think I agree with Gary Anderson's comments on a number of points. Nor do I even know what he's getting on about.

Lateral forces and the tire footprints "moving around" ? The pushrod having anything to do with caster de-wedging with steer? What?
Neither do I. Sometimes he says some things that don't make sense. Have you seen the two articles below on the F2012 pull rod suspension? Also I posted part of an article Scarbs did, but it's on AutoSport. Just wondering if you agree with the analysis. Thing is the site looks to be down right now. Will post links anyway, it should be back up shortly. BTW headed through Huntersville on my way to NorthLake Mall. :D

First article:
http://www.vivaf1.com/blog/?p=10173





Second article:
http://www.vivaf1.com/blog/?p=10280

munudeges
munudeges
-14
Joined: 10 Jun 2011, 17:08

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

Jersey Tom wrote:Lateral forces and the tire footprints "moving around" ? The pushrod having anything to do with caster de-wedging with steer? What?
Where are you getting that from, whatever it is?

Crucial_Xtreme
Crucial_Xtreme
404
Joined: 16 Oct 2011, 00:13
Location: Charlotte

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

munudeges wrote:
Jersey Tom wrote:Lateral forces and the tire footprints "moving around" ? The pushrod having anything to do with caster de-wedging with steer? What?
Where are you getting that from, whatever it is?
This article on the BBC from Gary Anderson--> http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/17506004

alogoc
alogoc
-10
Joined: 13 Feb 2012, 23:54

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

THE F2012!
THE CAR THAN WON 2012 WORLD F1 CHAMPIONSHIP WHIT A TILTED ENGINE!

Goran2812
Goran2812
27
Joined: 28 Mar 2010, 22:58
Location: Germany, BW

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

the technical side of that article just doesn't make any sense... o.O
Visit my photo page! -> http://www.gorankphoto.com/formula1

User avatar
Tim.Wright
330
Joined: 13 Feb 2009, 06:29

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

Jersey Tom wrote:Don't think I agree with Gary Anderson's comments on a number of points. Nor do I even know what he's getting on about.

Lateral forces and the tire footprints "moving around" ? The pushrod having anything to do with caster de-wedging with steer? What?
de-wedging! new favourite word!
Not the engineer at Force India

xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

Gary Anderson in BBC:

"It backs up my theory that there is a problem with the front end of the Ferrari, that it cannot cope with lateral forces in corners because the front-tyre contact patch is moving around."

Not that I hold much admiration for the man, but I think he's basically saying the same thing as I tried to convey a few pages back, that the F2012 pull-rod geometry induces xcessive loads on all of the suspension's components, wishbones, joints and rockers alike, something which causes load-dependent deflections and as a result camber changes.
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"

bhall
bhall
244
Joined: 28 Feb 2006, 21:26

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

Or it's all too stiff.









"That's what she said."

allstaruk08
allstaruk08
2
Joined: 21 Jan 2009, 20:47

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

from the Malaysian GP 2012: Gary Anderson’s technical review
"Ferrari have been struggling with a lack of front-end grip in fast corners and this wing is an attempt to find more consistent front downforce and prevent the wing from 'stalling' as much."

what does he mean by "stalling" i thought they were just lacking downforce at the front? is the wing stalling at high speeds in corners? :?

Lycoming
Lycoming
106
Joined: 25 Aug 2011, 22:58

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

Stalling has nothing to do with airspeed, so I don't know what thats about, at least not from that little excerpt.

Is the car really lacking front end grip in the fast corners though? Unfortunately I did not get to watch malaysia... In australia, their issue was low speed traction. Though they seemed to be understeering at times. Melbourne would not show true high speed performance anyways... damnit I really missed out.

in any case:
xpensive wrote:Gary Anderson in BBC:

"It backs up my theory that there is a problem with the front end of the Ferrari, that it cannot cope with lateral forces in corners because the front-tyre contact patch is moving around."

Not that I hold much admiration for the man, but I think he's basically saying the same thing as I tried to convey a few pages back, that the F2012 pull-rod geometry induces xcessive loads on all of the suspension's components, wishbones, joints and rockers alike, something which causes load-dependent deflections and as a result camber changes.
Yes, pullrod increases loads on structures. This is well known. However, this should not be a problem. If their engineers know what they are doing, (and I'm going to assume that at least on that level they do) they could easily have compensated for it in the design of the wishbones. You can end up with the same stiffness and the same deflection measured at the uprights, at the expense of slightly heavier upper wishbones.

it makes more sense for it to be a setup problem than a structural design problem, because its a pretty basic stuff. Also "load-dependent deflection" is a bit of an odd thing to say because all deflections are the result of load and generally vary with load, though how they react to load as it increases can change, particularly outside of the linear range.

xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

Lycoming wrote: ...
If their engineers know what they are doing, (and I'm going to assume that at least on that level they do) they could easily have compensated for it in the design of the wishbones. You can end up with the same stiffness and the same deflection measured at the uprights, at the expense of slightly heavier upper wishbones.
...
You'd be surprised, even engineers makes mistakes at times, in particular those working on a new mousetrap.
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"