Ferrari F2012

[superdread]

That's not the case. The car started the season with the angled engine installation but was not designed to have a Double Diffuser. Ferrari only added a double diffuser several races into the season after their protests over Brawn/Williams/Toyota didn't bear any fruit. The angled engine was part of the original design and was intended to maximse the volume of the single diffusor. It also made it difficult to introduce a double diffuser as the engine and acilliary layout made it difficult to squeeze the extra diffusor deck in which is why their's was not too effective.

But the single deck diffusers had the same limitations as now? So there would be no need to tilt the engine.

I'm no suggesting they are tilting the engine as a mod for this year. In fact, it seems unlikely as they'd need to do a new chassis unless they were happy they could make a spacer that wouldn't affect stiffness/installation integrity too much.

That's not what I meant. If there is no use in tilting the engine now, why would there be in 2009, for a car not using DDD?

[F1.Ru]

For the sake of changing the topic........... anyone have any information on the infamous Rory Byrne floor, what happened with it or whats wrong with it............

Having just heard about it and my (granted, half-hearted) research only yielded in something concerning heating, unspecific loopholes and that it's shiny, what is the deal with it?

Heating it would not have a very great effect on aero (water is max 370K, with 290+K normal not much thermal expansion of the air). Although saving radiator cross section by such means would be at least interesting (you have to consider that the ground is 310K and the upside of the floor is shone upon by the sun, hampering efficiency).

Are teams allowed to run a pressurized water cycle, to raise boiling temperature?

In the Pr-season sepc. thread we r discussing various method of performance upgradation, where "Rory Byrne Floor" is supposed to be helping the heat transfer of rad cooling and also linked with a means of storing KERS energy (or perhaps act like a flywheel or battary). It is also speculated to be beneficial in terms of higher mass flow transfer by creating a sort of small low pressure zone...... and staff like this. Though i m not very knowledgeable about this sort of things but some of them made me intrigue with their overall corresponding benefit. Hope i made myself clear enough.......

[Nando]

All right then. With rake there are no real limitations (problem is getting the diffuser to work).

Ok thanks.

[superdread]

In the Pr-season sepc. thread we r discussing various method of performance upgradation, where "Rory Byrne Floor" is supposed to be helping the heat transfer of rad cooling and also linked with a means of storing KERS energy (or perhaps act like a flywheel or battary). It is also speculated to be beneficial in terms of higher mass flow transfer by creating a sort of small low pressure zone...... and staff like this. Though i m not very knowledgeable about this sort of things but some of them made me intrigue with their overall corresponding benefit. Hope i made myself clear enough.......

What would be truly great are materials that have exotic thermal expansion behaviour (e.g. helix-fibers in a viscous resin => very high thermal expansion of the fibers (I don't know if such technologies exist but am pretty sure they could)). While heating (exhaust or cooling water) they could expand the diffuser, or make the floor bow down in certain areas (when coupled with a layer of non-expanding CFCs) and break bodywork rules only when the car is running hot (i.e. whenever a FIA official can't measure the car).

That would be highly experimental though, and banned within seconds.

[Pierce89]

That's not the case. The car started the season with the angled engine installation but was not designed to have a Double Diffuser. Ferrari only added a double diffuser several races into the season after their protests over Brawn/Williams/Toyota didn't bear any fruit. The angled engine was part of the original design and was intended to maximse the volume of the single diffusor. It also made it difficult to introduce a double diffuser as the engine and acilliary layout made it difficult to squeeze the extra diffusor deck in which is why their's was not too effective.

2010 is when they tilted the engine. I assure you it was the F10, not the F60. BTW it was for more room in their DDD.

http://www.formula1.com/news/technical/2010/0/719.html

[Gilles 27]

According to Autosprint, McLaren will once again copy Ferrari .
The initially ridiculed front, pull-rod suspension, solution, will be installed apparently on the Mclaren in 2013 too.

[FLuidd]

According to Autosprint, McLaren will once again copy Ferrari .
The initially ridiculed front, pull-rod suspension, solution, will be installed apparently on the Mclaren in 2013 too.

Rumors will always impress idiots.

[aral]

According to Autosprint, McLaren will once again copy Ferrari .
The initially ridiculed front, pull-rod suspension, solution, will be installed apparently on the Mclaren in 2013 too.

I hope that another Ferrari manual has not gone missing!

[scuderiaF2012]

According to Autosprint, McLaren will once again copy Ferrari .
The initially ridiculed front, pull-rod suspension, solution, will be installed apparently on the Mclaren in 2013 too.

I hope that another Ferrari manual has not gone missing!

LOL...that is not funny
but for ONCE, at least someone wants to copy us, instead of US doing the copying...

i hope we'll be back on top come Spa and Monza...although i just read that Lotus are planning to win both of them...LOL

...i hope they're just full of you know what...they were on the podium last race and now they think they can WIN...i think it was just the circuit characteristics as well as the really HOT track due to hot weather...
i personally think lotus will struggle come Spa due to normally cooler temps that are there...

[fynrd1]

Is it allowed by the rules to bypass the hydraulicsystem for the DRS? By adding an extra actuator? I think i got an excellent and very controversial idea..

[beelsebob]

Is it allowed by the rules to bypass the hydraulicsystem for the DRS? By adding an extra actuator? I think i got an excellent and very controversial idea..

No, the aero parts may only be moved by the FIA provided actuator and that may only be controlled by the FIA provided McLaren ECU.

[fynrd1]

Is it allowed by the rules to bypass the hydraulicsystem for the DRS? By adding an extra actuator? I think i got an excellent and very controversial idea..

No, the aero parts may only be moved by the FIA provided actuator and that may only be controlled by the FIA provided McLaren ECU.

And it's then only allowed to control one aerodynamic body? In this case the DRS flap? What about the fluid switches/valves that lotus uses? Are these allowed to use more of them? And usable without DRS activation, so its kinda an passive f-duct system?

[beelsebob]

Is it allowed by the rules to bypass the hydraulicsystem for the DRS? By adding an extra actuator? I think i got an excellent and very controversial idea..

No, the aero parts may only be moved by the FIA provided actuator and that may only be controlled by the FIA provided McLaren ECU.

And it's then only allowed to control one aerodynamic body? In this case the DRS flap? What about the fluid switches/valves that lotus uses? Are these allowed to use more of them? And usable without DRS activation, so its kinda an passive f-duct system?

Yes, it must "comprise only one component that must be symmetrically arranged about the car centre line with a minimum width of 708mm."

[fynrd1]

I tweeted Ferrari that I have an idea, I hope they will be interested

[fynrd1]

Yes, it must "comprise only one component that must be symmetrically arranged about the car centre line with a minimum width of 708mm."

Thank you very much sir