Williams FW35 Renault

[N12ck]

Your idea is reingesting exhaust gases into an enclosed piece of bodywork in this case a pipe which is ileegal

legality slot makes it legal, without the fia clarification on williams exhaust, but it may be possible this is what the intention may have been

yes now it is illegal, as williams exhaust has been declared illegal, but if it wasnt declared illegal this may have been up their sleeves

[turbof1]

Tiny chance it still might be legal. Williams didn't remove it after the FIA told how they felt about it, so Williams must be rather confident that they can win this one. Of course all hopes and dreams will be shattered once Charley Whiting puts the hammer on it, but as until now he has not done that.

[N12ck]

this could be what they are planning IMO,

[wesley123]

Even if it is legal we are going to hear this "spirit of the rules" crap eventually with this.

[turbof1]

Deeming it legal will set the door VERY wide open for more extreme solutions, Teams can turn it into a ramp with a fully enclosed tunnel, save for the slot. It will still not be anywhere near the 2011 solution, due quick loss of heat and energy out of the flow, but it can get several points of DF on the rear. It does not look too difficult to integrate into the existing concepts, so the other teams might be more into copying it then filing complaints.

IMO, it should be deemed legal. Against the spirit of the rules: yes. BUT the FIA shoot itself in the foot by allowing coanda and downwash methods for reingesting exhaust flow.

[Sevach]

Barely anyone has bought new stuff to the tests. They mostly do that in the last test.

Apart from that, I cannot remember a 3 plane cascade being test/ran last year, so it is actually new for the wintertests

While many teams do that, they don't launch their new wings than decline to use it.
Mercedes brought their new FW, and the old one is history now.
And this FW they are testing now was tested last year but i don't think it was raced.

http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... &start=660
quick look at the FW34 thread.

[wesley123]

Ah yes I see it.

But note that with every different FW they put on, they also have a different nose. They either have it without a panel, with a panel at maximum nose height, or a panel that goes above the maximum nose height. I believe they are rather testing nose solutions than fw solutions.

[Sevach]

Could be... each nose has a different FW model, but right now that just makes more uncertain of why they are doing that.

Maybe we are gonna see the new FW attached to the Jerez nose.

[zoro_f1]

click this article: [Williams FW35 clever brake duct innovation legal].

[PhillipM]

Deeming it legal will set the door VERY wide open for more extreme solutions.

Whereas deeming it illegal opens up the door about all these cooling gills and floor slots they've said were fine for years...
As for 'against the spirit of the rules' - well, so are coanda and downwash exhausts.....

[Sevach]

Whereas deeming it illegal opens up the door about all these cooling gills and floor slots they've said were fine for years...
As for 'against the spirit of the rules' - well, so are coanda and downwash exhausts.....

I also find that weird, the coanda channel is clearly against the spirit of the rules (which says exhausts should be pointing up), but you place a little fin in said channel and that's crossing the line?

[turbof1]

I think the FIA is more concerned about what will happen if they allow the fin.

Back at 2012 they actually might not have known what was going with the exhausts. Remember, teams don't have to clarify their intend; they only need to have their cars approved. The FIA probably did that without knowing what the effects of the different exhaust solutions really were, or heavily underestimating them. By my knowledge the FIA has no data on those solutions, no simulator or wind tunnel to test their influence. They have to judge these solutions by the naked eye.

[Cuky]

I also find that weird, the coanda channel is clearly against the spirit of the rules (which says exhausts should be pointing up), but you place a little fin in said channel and that's crossing the line?

But tip of exhaust pipe (or more precisely, according to rules, last 100mm of it) do indeed point upwards for no less than 10° to the reference plane. Only coanda effect of bodywork under it and force of airflow over it do push it downwards.

[Sevach]

But tip of exhaust pipe (or more precisely, according to rules, last 100mm of it) do indeed point upwards for no less than 10° to the reference plane. Only coanda effect of bodywork under it and force of airflow over it do push it downwards.

I get that, but the Williams/Caterham fins on the coanda chamber are also below the specified exhaust cone (where no body work is allowed), therefore legal according to the letter of the law.

It seems weird that the rules specify a cone going up from the exhaust and they are pissed at people putting bodywork below said cone, it's like admitting your rules don't work in the first place.

The coanda is against the "spirit" of the rules, but ok according to the letter=FIA allows it.
The chamber fin is against the spirit of the rules, but ok according to the letter=FIA says this is prohibited.

[AnthonyG]

Is there anything known as to how the wheel nut design influences pitstops? (I imagine they should be a bit slower)