Team: Pat Fry (TD), Nikolas Tombazis (CD), Stefano Domenicali (MD)
Drivers: Fernando Alonso (5), Felipe Massa (6)
+1...i think that everyone is just speculating on something that in my opinion has nothing wrong...timbo wrote:Nor would I think the wishbones can be enough obstruction to steal any topspeed.Crucial_Xtreme wrote:The vortices near the wishbones and the rod aren't like the ones they've got in the wind-tunnel.
Not sure how they claim to know this, nor would you think Ferrari would make such an oversight.
It is not impossible but, in my opinion, extremely unlikely expecially when you have in that car much more evident sources of dragshelly wrote:The autosprint rumor could be right or wrong, but it is coherent.
If the wt showed the engineers a certain vortex behaviour, they have built the car accordingly, and they could have discovered on track that the pattern is not the same on the 100% size car.
It is not impossible that this happened.
Yes, it's possible, but remember, it's Autosprint, yesterday its director on twitter said Ferrari were running a floor-facing exhaust, and in a matter of seconds here we discovered that it was simply not true.shelly wrote:The autosprint rumor could be right or wrong, but it is coherent.
If the wt showed the engineers a certain vortex behaviour, they have built the car accordingly, and they could have discovered on track that the pattern is not the same on the 100% size car.
It is not impossible that this happened.
I think you're right Shelly, it's possible. But honestly I simply rubbished it in my own mind because that publication has been on about the front suspension since Australia and have different reasons each time. I just think people have been looking for the F2012's problems, and it's easy to blame the one part that is different from the rest of the grid, true or not.shelly wrote:The autosprint rumor could be right or wrong, but it is coherent.
If the wt showed the engineers a certain vortex behaviour, they have built the car accordingly, and they could have discovered on track that the pattern is not the same on the 100% size car.
It is not impossible that this happened.
it does make sense..to me at least...one thing i said quite a while back is that when the front wing bends downwards...it needs a force pushing it...so part of the force that would make downforce is now actually 'wasted' as it keeps pushing the wing down...bhallg2k wrote:Work with me here.
Red Bull's flexible front wings have long been said to provide more downforce when flexed because it puts the wings closer to the ground. This has never made sense to me, but I've kept my views to myself, because I don't always know what the hell I'm talking about, and it seemed silly to challenge the consensus view.
At any rate, the reason why it's never made sense is because I don't understand why teams would want to tack on additional downforce on straights where the wing is flexed the most, because, as we all know, downforce equals drag. A straight is the very last place on a circuit where one would want to add drag.
With that in mind, could the flexible wings actually be a way reduce drag rather than a way to create more downforce?
Everyone knows that tires are among the biggest contributors to drag on an F1 car, if not the biggest contributor of all. Because of this, teams have gone to great lengths to divert air flow around the front tires. Brawn ushered in outwash end plates on the front wings for this very reason. However, outwash end plates subtract from the total surface area of the wing itself, which means it can't make as much downforce.
Red Bull, as far as I know, never adopted outwash end plates. Instead, their wings flexed.
Imagine a clam shell and how it opens. If you get the wings to flex at speed, the end plates open just like that. This action would be very valuable if it means the new angle can divert flow around the tires.
Note how all of those wings feature an increasing number of (Jane, you ignorant) slots as one looks from the front of the wing to the rearmost corner of the flap. I think those (dirty, dirty) slots are what allow the wings to flex. They do so by reducing the wings rigidity in those areas. The arrangement of those (loose) slots also suggest that not only do the end plates open like a clam shell, their outward angle is also increased, which directs even more air around the tires. These effects would even seem to be amplified as speed, and thus force on the flexible portion of the wings, is increased.
It's a perfect solution. More speed = less drag.
Conversely, the leading edge of the wing remains robust so that it can shoulder the forces applied to the end plates during FIA scrutineering. You can even see how the the cascade wing supports spread those forces out along a greater portion of the wing.
Does any of this make sense, or do I need to get my doctor to up the dosage?
EDIT: This would also explain Ferrari's troubles with errant vortices. The pull rod suspension creates a wider track width when compressed. The front wings probably didn't flex enough to allow for an angle necessary to get around the new width.
looks like this is the older (launch ?) configuration: longer acer ducts, no turning vane, no "tongue" out of the exhaustionForza wrote:Mugello - Day2 F2012 exhaust configuration (via AMUS)
Below is a image of one of the turning vanes on the floor. We're not exactly sure what's coming tomorrow. I suspect if they have a new floor ready we may see it tomorrow, although in Spain is more likely.p910iFrank wrote:I am new of the forum.
I noticed that the floor in yesterday configuration had some
wings to divert gas.
Is it the floor configuration for the big upgrade that
is coming tomorrow?
I don't think that Ferrari spent two month for changing the
Exhaust system direction
Never mind. Scarbs wrote of this at least as far back as January.bhallg2k wrote:[Everything I said earlier]
