Williams FW35 Renault

[Sevach]

It's trickier and more complicated sure, but that also means more fine tuning possibilities.

To change a Mclaren bulge you need to pretty much redesign the entire sidepod.

[Vasconia]

Williams is one of the teams that didn't show their cards, i hope their hand is a good one.

Agreed. They were clearly on a programme that didn't involve low fuel runs. I too hope they have been keeping their powder dry and will be in Q3 in Melbourne.

If they can further optimise the new ramps and the side pods for the opener that would be an awesome effort...

Its quite logic, the car was launched later and they have been forced to change the exhaust design, they need more time to understand the car and the developments/changes, so I dont know what to expect. In the first days I was quite hopeful because the car was capable of reaching a good pace easily but I dont know how bad can this change in the exhaust be for the cars perfomance.

[boyracer94]

Its quite logic, the car was launched later and they have been forced to change the exhaust design, they need more time to understand the car and the developments/changes, so I dont know what to expect. In the first days I was quite hopeful because the car was capable of reaching a good pace easily but I dont know how bad can this change in the exhaust be for the cars perfomance.

The original exhaust design was never intended to be raced. I agree that it will most likely take them a while to understand the ramp/tunnel solution, and get the best out of it.

[Coefficient]

I think the early spec FW35 was a smokescreen and Coughlan always intended to switch to the ramp/tunnel affair. I bet they will have had some information from Renault to say that the ramp/tunnel works better with their engine than the Mclaren style pods and that silly little turning vein was just to help them assess exactly where they needed the plume to go so they could rapid prototype an exhaust exit that would be correct for the ramp/tunnel set up from the off. Hence the IR camera etc.

[raymondu999]

Or, as some other suggested - thr vane was a "feeler" - if the FIA let it go, they could extend it to something more radical, like a tunnel (with a slit in it) to the floor. The ramped sidepod was the fallback design.

[boyracer94]

I think the early spec FW35 was a smokescreen and Coughlan always intended to switch to the ramp/tunnel affair. I bet they will have had some information from Renault to say that the ramp/tunnel works better with their engine than the Mclaren style pods and that silly little turning vein was just to help them assess exactly where they needed the plume to go so they could rapid prototype an exhaust exit that would be correct for the ramp/tunnel set up from the off. Hence the IR camera etc.

This is correct from what I've heard.

[Sevach]

More or less the same rake angle of the Redbull

Hi-res versions

http://motorsport.nextgen-auto.com/gall ... us/002.jpg

http://motorsport.nextgen-auto.com/gall ... us/011.jpg

[infy]

I don't think it is a coincidence that the Reno powered cars exclusively share the same exhaust setup.

I just hopes that its not an advantage other teams cant replicate due to a regulation freeze (which generally benefits who ever was ahead at the time of the freeze).

[turbof1]

I think the early spec FW35 was a smokescreen and Coughlan always intended to switch to the ramp/tunnel affair. I bet they will have had some information from Renault to say that the ramp/tunnel works better with their engine than the Mclaren style pods and that silly little turning vein was just to help them assess exactly where they needed the plume to go so they could rapid prototype an exhaust exit that would be correct for the ramp/tunnel set up from the off. Hence the IR camera etc.

I pretty much doubt the vane was a smokescreen, the semi-coanda exhaust the same. Remember, we are not talking about mere toys. Both the ramp and the exhaust bulge are very costly to develop and to produce. If you want a smokescreen, slap on last years exhaust solution. Much more logical would be that they evaluated both options to check which one is the better, or first use the semi-coanda one to gather comparable data. The slit vane was a tryout, and could have been used on the ramp too.

[Coefficient]

I think the early spec FW35 was a smokescreen and Coughlan always intended to switch to the ramp/tunnel affair. I bet they will have had some information from Renault to say that the ramp/tunnel works better with their engine than the Mclaren style pods and that silly little turning vein was just to help them assess exactly where they needed the plume to go so they could rapid prototype an exhaust exit that would be correct for the ramp/tunnel set up from the off. Hence the IR camera etc.

I pretty much doubt the vane was a smokescreen, the semi-coanda exhaust the same. Remember, we are not talking about mere toys. Both the ramp and the exhaust bulge are very costly to develop and to produce. If you want a smokescreen, slap on last years exhaust solution. Much more logical would be that they evaluated both options to check which one is the better, or first use the semi-coanda one to gather comparable data. The slit vane was a tryout, and could have been used on the ramp too.

Maybe you're right. I just think the semi coanda test with the vein gave them the data they needed to get the tunnel option working from the off. Something RB failed to achieve last year starting with their conventional exhaust in early pre season testing.

[turbof1]

No red bull started off the wrong foot. They had developed a completely different solution which got banned before testing began. They lacked time to develop their new solution. If they enough time they would had a good solution when testing started. IMO the vane was a test for a much bigger solution. If that got allowed they effectively could turn it into a tunnel all the way down to the floor. Bulge or ramp, this would always had a big benefit.

[Coefficient]

No red bull started off the wrong foot. They had developed a completely different solution which got banned before testing began. They lacked time to develop their new solution. If they enough time they would had a good solution when testing started. IMO the vane was a test for a much bigger solution. If that got allowed they effectively could turn it into a tunnel all the way down to the floor. Bulge or ramp, this would always had a big benefit.

Yes I know all that, but that doesn't alter the possibility that the early test spec could have given Williams the data they needed to make sure the ramp/tunnel would work straight away and had RB done the same last year their tunnel may have come on song earlier too.

Also, Williams would have known that the semi coanda and vein was sailing very close to the wind and stood no chance of being permitted by the FIA long ago because of the technical amendment issued to the teams last year regarding exhaust solutions and the re ingestion of gases. This is why I believe it could have been intended to distract onlookers from other aspects of the car rather than be intended as a genuine solution.

After all, it certainly got the other teams having a moan didn't it and Williams were utterly unphased in removing their 50 pence worth of carbon fibre.

[Neno]

Well Williams trough whole first Barcelona test run, illegal exaust with piece of carbon. They compared datas from last year semi coanda exaust with illegal semi coanda exaust to see how much difference this two systems have. They also produced tunnel-ramp exaust to see difference between first test exaust, and finded more rear downforce with tunnel-ramp.
It was magnificent job done by Williams.

Similar thing did Lotus, but they decided immediatly go with tunnel ramp and at the end of second test they weld peace of metal on exaust exist to see how much difference there is between legal and illegal tunnel-ramp solution and downforce points.


Test are to test different solutions of setup, bodywork, exaust, tires, to find where they can extract more performances trough season, it's not Q3 like they think in Mercedes.

[sirexilon]

I don't think it is a coincidence that the Reno powered cars exclusively share the same exhaust setup.

I just hopes that its not an advantage other teams cant replicate due to a regulation freeze (which generally benefits who ever was ahead at the time of the freeze).

I think the freeze this time didn't favor Renault, nor did the others. Just Renault engines work different in the exhaust portion than the others. And that was the freeze brought up. They could do things the others couldn't do with the blown exhausts, at least couldn't without spending money and a lot of it in re-design. Which is all against this economic times we live in.

The Ramp for Renault is because they can do what the others can with he exhaust, so they utilize it in a different way. It balances in the end, but getting the tunnels right took RB some time last year.

[Nando]

http://motorsport.nextgen-auto.com/gall ... medium.jpg

http://motorsport.nextgen-auto.com/gall ... medium.jpg

More or less the same rake angle of the Redbull

Hi-res versions

http://motorsport.nextgen-auto.com/gall ... us/002.jpg

http://motorsport.nextgen-auto.com/gall ... us/011.jpg

Note the steering angle, Vettel is putting way more loading in his car at the time of the picture taken.

Here´s a better one,