Are you sure the actuator is a spec piece. It wasn't last year, as I remember Ferrari switched between electrical acuation and a Moog hydro piece.beelsebob wrote: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 wrote: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..
if you can use such material then i thought it would be great but alas FIA mandate some material and govern which types of material you can use for your car and also sometimes limit the use of some material at different area of the car. Such as use of Titanium is restricted in some area of the car caz they can give u extra strength without putting a lot of weight, which in turns help weight distribution of the car.superdread wrote: 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.
Yes they do, but this is the FIA, a worldwide authority in using foresight to make simple and loophole-free rules. They just regulate the ingredients of a material and not its structure, so some sort of micro-structured material would not be regulated (they couldn't enforce such a ban effectively).F1.Ru wrote: if you can use such material then i thought it would be great but alas FIA mandate some material and govern which types of material you can use for your car and also sometimes limit the use of some material at different area of the car. Such as use of Titanium is restricted in some area of the car caz they can give u extra strength without putting a lot of weight, which in turns help weight distribution of the car.
So no use of such exotic thermal expansion material are permitted by the FIA......
superdread wrote: 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).
I think they are supplied by the ACO/FIA.PhillipM wrote:superdread wrote: 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).
I always thought something similar would be ideal to make your intake restrictor out of for Le Mans and WRC....
The text accompanying the vanes does convey, that Massa's is the new one, and the small vanes of Alonso look rather manky.Hail22 wrote:Spotted this on Formulatechandart
To me the nose vane update for Hungary could be a pre cursor for a slightly larger upgrade for SPA?
Tested in Mugello but never raced....interesting...notice on the beam wing a similar air vent/scoop to what Lotus has been Testing?
I'm referring to the upper semi oval above the crash structure, you can clearly size a tiny gap...What I'm trying to say is that small slit/cut could be an aiding tool to break up the rear drag?superdread wrote:The text accompanying the vanes does convey, that Massa's is the new one, and the small vanes of Alonso look rather manky.Hail22 wrote:Spotted this on Formulatechandart
To me the nose vane update for Hungary could be a pre cursor for a slightly larger upgrade for SPA?
Tested in Mugello but never raced....interesting...notice on the beam wing a similar air vent/scoop to what Lotus has been Testing?
That middle section has nothing to do with what Lotus is using, the thing beneath it is the rear crash structure not a duct.
Ah no, you're right – it's not a spec part, no idea why I thought it was.Pierce89 wrote:Are you sure the actuator is a spec piece. It wasn't last year, as I remember Ferrari switched between electrical acuation and a Moog hydro piece.beelsebob wrote: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 wrote: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..
What is "breaking up drag"?Hail22 wrote:I'm referring to the upper semi oval above the crash structure, you can clearly size a tiny gap...What I'm trying to say is that small slit/cut could be an aiding tool to break up the rear drag?
As luck would have it, I just recently learned about this.Chuckjr wrote:What is the purpose of the different "v" shaped cut outs (sometimes one of them, sometimes two of them, why not three?) on the top edge of the rear wing?
Secondly, do they correspond or have anything to do with what's going on with the front wing? Are there patterns between the two?
How do you physically 'split' the upwash from the wing?bhallg2k wrote:They do so by "splitting" the upwash from the wing so that its interaction with oncoming flow is minimized....
What i thought that bhallg2k literally means is that the cutout reduces the pressure in that zone and thus counteract with the vortex generated by the trailing edge of the RW and thus split upwash into two different flow 1. high pressured and energized and 2. one is relatively less pressurized and week. by doing so u can reduce the drag induce by trailing edgeof RW and boost ur top speed. but those cutout is also served other purposed like directing and sucking airflow out of certain velocity at different parts of RW.............. hope i made myself clear enough...hardingfv32 wrote:How do you physically 'split' the upwash from the wing?bhallg2k wrote:They do so by "splitting" the upwash from the wing so that its interaction with oncoming flow is minimized....
Brian