2014 too slow? (or not, as the case may be)

[Artur Craft]

It would change regarding CoM because of the way I was thinking(a very stupid one)

I totally disregarded the ground normal contact which makes the flipping occurs at the outer wheels and not around the CoM, when it happens.

If you have a flying object( let's keep the shape and size of an F1 car) and suppose you had a lateral force far some distance from CoM plane. Because there is no normal force from the ground, the object would flip around it's CoM

In that scenario, the vertical loads would never counter the flipping moment coming from the sideways force(wherever it's source on the air lol).

This is what I had in mind, I just totally disregarded the ground as if it didn't exist. I know, it was incredibly stupid of me

In this scenario which I had in mind(flipping around CoM and disregarding the floor), there would be no counter moment and the object would spin around it's CoM

The equation Fs*h = Fd*w/2 would not apply as there would be no Fd*w/2 component

Let's suppose you would have a weight distribution such that at 1/4 of the body's width, you would have the CoM of half the body.

so there would be a rolling moment around the CoM(due to vertical forces) of magnitude Fd*w/4 on one side, and equally Fd*w/4 on the other side countering it.

So the moments due to vertical forces would cancel each other out and have no influence at all in a flip around the whole body's CoM

But I understand your post regarding the actual car situation. In the limit case, the inner wheels have no contact with the ground and thus no normal force to push it upwards and enter the force equation. The resultant normal force, acting on the center of pressure of the contact patch, on the outer wheels does not contribute to the flipping around it, obviously.

So, as you said, on the limit case of inner wheels losing contact with the ground, only the total vertical load acting on the body and the lateral force will influence on the resultant moment regarding a flip around the the outer wheels

[Tim.Wright]

Be careful assuming that the inside wheels are unloaded at the limit. There is no reason this has to be true for any car. The tyres of an F1 car probably run out of grip long before you reach 100% load transfer due to the low CG and high downforce.

[Stradivarius]

Be careful assuming that the inside wheels are unloaded at the limit. There is no reason this has to be true for any car. The tyres of an F1 car probably run out of grip long before you reach 100% load transfer due to the low CG and high downforce.

That is the point I have been trying to make all the time. The inside wheels being unloaded is the flip condition, which we know is not fullfilled today. The discussion was really about whether this could happen as a result of increased downforce, which we finally agreed is not the case. The friction coefficient of the tyres would have to be more than round 3 (depending on the actual height of the center of mass) for this to be possible, so the limit that actually governs the speed, is the that of the grip.

[Blackout]

Nico Rosberg 2013 ---- Felipe Massa 2014
Rundenzeit
1:32.330 min ---- 1:33.258 min
Sektor 1
29.416 s ---- 29.464 s
Sektor 2
39.847 s ---- 40.476 s
Sektor 3
22.987 s ---- 23.318 s
Speed Kurve 5
237,2 km/h ---- 248,8 km/h
Speed Kurve 11/12
262,3 km/h ---- 266,6 km/h
Speed Zielstrich (finish line)
290,1 km/h ---- 291,8 km/h
Top-Speed
312,0 km/h ---- 331,2 km/h



http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 65140.html

[Just_a_fan]

Be careful assuming that the inside wheels are unloaded at the limit. There is no reason this has to be true for any car. The tyres of an F1 car probably run out of grip long before you reach 100% load transfer due to the low CG and high downforce.

I think the term "unloaded" is unhelpful - it's one of those terms that has come from TV commentators I think. The inner tyre is likely to be less loaded than the outer one during turn in under brakes but it still carrying load. It's just that the driver is trying to get both front tyres at the limit in order to maximise braking and turning at the some time. There might be only a couple of % difference in load across the axle but it would be enough to lock one and not the other if the driver was maximising (or at least trying to with a system that doesn't allow across-axle modulation) the available grip.

[hollus]

That's interesting. According to that, the Massa in 2014 has a better performance in the long straights before corners 1 and 4, clear to see in the sector 1 time, and obviously higher top speed. But also higher speeds at any points measured in corners. The engine also has a higher or equal maximum power output which should result in higher acceleration from medium speeds.
Where is he losing time? One option is braking from lower downforce, but the cornering speeds would speak against it. Badly tuned brake by wire? Another is starting to accelerate much later, as they are insecure with the more torquey engines, but these are elite drivers we talk about as to lose a whole second in that.
I fear the higher cornering speeds cannot be right. They are supposed to have less downforce and harder tires (although this lap was in 2014 supersofts). Where do those speeds come from? It just doesn't add up...

[Miguel]

Blackout, do you happen to know if those turn speeds are apex speeds or inbetween corners? In the first case, I'd struggle to understand how a car that has a considerably higher top speed, isn't short on power *and* has a higher apex speed is almost 1s slower in S2. Much less efficient braking due to drag? Sandbagging?

Back to 91 cars, I'd take with a pinch of salt the comparison with qualy laps. They had qualy engines back then, plus most likely qualy tyres as well. Add a qualy setup, where you'll sacrifice top speed for laptime. Additionally, Suzuka was different: 130R was still a real turn and the Casio chicane has suffered enough modifications that I wouldn't trust it to be the same. As a consequence, it's extremely likely today cars run a lower drag setup, compromising sector 1. That's even if I conceded the accuracy of the speedo seen in the TV.

Finally, and as good as today's tyres may be (Pirelli and good tyres in the same sentence?), we shouldn't forget the 2007 Bridgestones were ~2s slower than the 2006 tyre war versions. And the 2011 Pirellis were also considerably slower (and more fragile!!!) than the 2010 Bridgestones.

Malaysia is perhaps the best comparison for modern F1, because it's so aero dependant and has been unchanged since 1999. But because nothing's perfect, it's very prone to rain, which ruins some comparisons.

[Blackout]

AMuS simply says Rosberg ''accelerated'' in 2013 with 237.2 km/h in turn 5 while Massa managed 248.8 km/h there. Then they say ''at the exist of curve 11 the Merc reached 262.3 km/h while Massa reached 266.6 km/h.''

I think you answered the question Hollus:

Badly tuned brake by wire? Another is starting to accelerate much later, as they are insecure with the more torquey engines

Plus 50 kilos heavier 2014 cars should be a bit less easy to brake + the coanda/downwash blown diffusers which, according to Merc brought one second per lap.
And the long straight lines help the new cars recover much ground.
So I think 2014 cars loose a bit of ground in the braking zones but exit the slow corners significally slower.
In S1 there is 2 big braking points and 2 slow corners + two rather big straight lines ---> F1 2014 > F1 2013
In S2 there is 2 big braking points + one or two slow exits + a medium straignt line ---> F1 2014 << F1 2013
In S3 there is 2 big braking zones and 2 medium straight lines ---> F1 2014 < F1 2013

[hollus]

I think you are right. The measure points are not really in the corners. Then it all fits, and I'd say, as expected. Cool.

[Artur Craft]

Back to 91 cars, I'd take with a pinch of salt the comparison with qualy laps. They had qualy engines back then, plus most likely qualy tyres as well. Add a qualy setup, where you'll sacrifice top speed for laptime. Additionally, Suzuka was different: 130R was still a real turn and the Casio chicane has suffered enough modifications that I wouldn't trust it to be the same. As a consequence, it's extremely likely today cars run a lower drag setup, compromising sector 1. That's even if I conceded the accuracy of the speedo seen in the TV.

Finally, and as good as today's tyres may be (Pirelli and good tyres in the same sentence?), we shouldn't forget the 2007 Bridgestones were ~2s slower than the 2006 tyre war versions. And the 2011 Pirellis were also considerably slower (and more fragile!!!) than the 2010 Bridgestones.

With all the respect, your post misses the whole point of the 91 discussion. Laptime was never considered so no need to bring in the fact of possible qualy engines and tyres and that 130 was different back them. But even if laptimes were brought in, it would work even more in favour of the 91 cars as the track is faster now due to the modifications on 130R. But the changes in this iconic corner is not enough to justify a significant change in drag/downforce values. The track still remains highly demanding on downforce levels due to the many high speed corners.

The speed you see on Senna's car were coming directly from Honda's telemetry to FujiTV. What I wanted to demonstrate with it, was that in the hairpin, where downforce is virtually insignificant, contemporary tyres allow the nowadays cars to corner faster than the 91 car, thus showing that they are faster despite the 91 tyres being qualifying ones and wider.

But I also showed that on the Esses, where downforce is very important, Senna is able to match Vettel's speed and be faster
than Alonso's Ferrari. If the 91 tyres are slower, then that must be due to 91 cars having bigger downforce. That's the whole thing I intended to show with this.

But I liked your post because you are aware that Bridgestone 2010 tyres, despite being harder, were faster than the 2011 much softer Pirellis. And it's also true that 2007 tyres were around 2s slower than 2006 tyre war

The AMUS cornering speed numbers are useless. As stated by you guys, it's obvious that if the 2014 cars accelerates faster, due to more torque(roughly speaking), have higher top speeds and their laptimes are slower than 2013, despite better cooler temperatures than the 33ºC Rosberg faced on his pole, it automatically follows that their cornering speeds MUST be lower.

And that is in total agreement with the fact that they have slightly slower tyres and 15% less downforce.

Rosberg speeds can be taken from his pole lap onboard. However, Massa's speeds(during cornering or on straight line) cannot be accessed through Ferrari's telemetry, as is the case with the telemetry FOM shows on tv, the only way AMUS can measure those are with speed radar guns

With this method, they will read different speeds than that shown in a telemetry from the car

Bottom line is, specially the cornering speeds are not representing the reality of it. I'm sure we'll see lower cornering speeds.

[ESPImperium]

Personally, im glad the cars have gone back to slippery beasts and are fast in a straight line and also with the aero decently quick in the corners. I think this will be the best of all worlds as the cars have became really draggy and slow in a straight line in recent years with V-Max dropping as much as 15% in my opinion. I want my F1 cars to be fast and slippery in a straight line and also very quick in the corners, however id have gone about the aero regs in a slightly different way for this years cars.

* Floors to have more flex texts that are harsher with the T-Tray extending 150mm further forward.
* Front wings to be brought in to 1750mm
* Rear wings to be extended to 1600mm
* Standardised exhaust
* Flat area from A-A line to B-B line in drawing 5 of the tech regs

However, id have allowed active ride back again in a regulated form allowing the car to be adjusted by the driver 5 times in a race distance in order to give the sport a balance between the mechanical guys, aero guys and engine guys so you may see cars that are not the best succeed over a superior aero car or engine car. We need the sport to have a better balance between Aero/Power Trains/Mechanical guys as this way i think the teams that don't have a Newey could look to develop their mechanical side to beat his cars that way.

[Miguel]

With all the respect, your post misses the whole point of the 91 discussion. Laptime was never considered so no need to bring in the fact of possible qualy engines and tyres and that 130 was different back them. But even if laptimes were brought in, it would work even more in favour of the 91 cars as the track is faster now due to the modifications on 130R. But the changes in this iconic corner is not enough to justify a significant change in drag/downforce values. The track still remains highly demanding on downforce levels due to the many high speed corners.

The speed you see on Senna's car were coming directly from Honda's telemetry to FujiTV. What I wanted to demonstrate with it, was that in the hairpin, where downforce is virtually insignificant, contemporary tyres allow the nowadays cars to corner faster than the 91 car, thus showing that they are faster despite the 91 tyres being qualifying ones and wider.

But I also showed that on the Esses, where downforce is very important, Senna is able to match Vettel's speed and be faster
than Alonso's Ferrari. If the 91 tyres are slower, then that must be due to 91 cars having bigger downforce. That's the whole thing I intended to show with this.

FIrst of all, where do speeds come from? You said they came from telemetry in the past. And today? How accurate are those numbers? This is a genuine question, irrespective of the rest of the topic.

My whole point is that every single change between the 91 and 2012 regulations favor the 91 cars being faster in S1. I'm not considering the fact that, in terms of total laptime, current cars qualify at least 4s faster. I do agree that, if the speed at the hairpins is faster now, but equal in high-speed corners, the 1991 car generates more downforce at high speed.

Anyway, and sidestepping the issue a bit, was there any rule change at the end of 1991? I'm not aware of any. I've taken a look at the qualy times of Suzuka in wikipedia and Berger's pole time would only be beaten in 2001 (!!!). Even the almighty 92 and 93 williams qualified at least 2s slower than Berger that day.

[Artur Craft]

FIrst of all, where do speeds come from? You said they came from telemetry in the past. And today? How accurate are those numbers? This is a genuine question, irrespective of the rest of the topic.

Anyway, and sidestepping the issue a bit, was there any rule change at the end of 1991? I'm not aware of any. I've taken a look at the qualy times of Suzuka in wikipedia and Berger's pole time would only be beaten in 2001 (!!!). Even the almighty 92 and 93 williams qualified at least 2s slower than Berger that day.

The telemetry numbers we see on the screens today must come directly from the car's telemetry. FOM must have access to it because the speeds matches perfectly with the speed displayed in the steering wheel of the car(when the lights allow to be seen ). Also, I doubt FOM would install a new accelerometer in each car just to get the accelerations to be able to put on the screen, when the "G-force" is displayed. That also must be coming from the car's telemetry. As I said, the speed must come from it given it'd perfect accuracy with the info on the steering wheel.

About the Berger pole. I already wondered that too myself. Strangely, those qualifying times would only be matched in 2001 as you said. The year 1991 was the last with qualifying tyres, but I think the laptimes were lowered in 1992 for many tracks, I don't know why it took so long to beat that Berger's pole.

Just as a good example, Monaco where I think qualifying tyres would make more difference, Mansell managed to low the 91 pole by 0,8s in the 1992 season.

[FW17]

Major change I think was the rear tyre width (not completely sure of it was 91 or 92 end). Through most of the disadvantage was negated by the reduced drag, I guess the some of the lack of grip was pronounced at circuits like suzuka with never ending list of high and medium speed corners.

[JimClarkFan]

The engines seem great, what are the feelings on fuel restrictions, could we see people racing round at a canter?