Williams FW36 Mercedes

[wesley123]

Could anyone elaborate on Smedley's comment after Austria:

"We have a very efficient car with a lower drag level than our competitors, and here if you look at the circuit efficiency in terms of the sensitivity for drag and sensitivity for lift, it's quite an efficient circuit, so it suits us."

If they have an efficient car, wouldn't it be better to utilise it by running that little bit more downforce (even by higher flap angle or similar) to have relatively more df with the same drag as competition, or, in simple terms, do they prefer less speed in cormers and better top speed?

Also, by 'efficient circuit' does he mean it hasn't got that many corners and a few long straingts so running decent but not too high df with lower drag than competition favours their car?

It isn't a simple continuous line of where you can bolt on downforce and have a similar amount of drag added. If they start to add more downforce(which is kind of hard to do) They most likely start to add much more drag, and probably end up with a much less efficient, and unbalanced, car.

[PhillipM]

As other have said, if your high downforce versions/packages are far more draggy, you no longer have an efficient car. It's no good just bolting on a shedload of downforce if you can't meet the efficiency targets you need.

[wesley123]

To add a little more; until this year drag hasn't been much of an issue. There is power to overcome the drag.

Now, this power is still there, however, this is limited by a certain amount of fuel. and to overcome the drag, you need power, and that burns fuel. Thus, you consume more fuel(don't quote me on how much) with a more draggy car.

So for this year, it makes sense to go for a less draggy car and be less limited by the fuel allocation.

[Glyn]

To add a little more; until this year drag hasn't been much of an issue. There is power to overcome the drag.

Now, this power is still there, however, this is limited by a certain amount of fuel. and to overcome the drag, you need power, and that burns fuel. Thus, you consume more fuel(don't quote me on how much) with a more draggy car.

So for this year, it makes sense to go for a less draggy car and be less limited by the fuel allocation.

I would like to know what the relationship is between "downforce" and "weight". Is a less draggy car also lighter?

[trinidefender]

To add a little more; until this year drag hasn't been much of an issue. There is power to overcome the drag.

Now, this power is still there, however, this is limited by a certain amount of fuel. and to overcome the drag, you need power, and that burns fuel. Thus, you consume more fuel(don't quote me on how much) with a more draggy car.

So for this year, it makes sense to go for a less draggy car and be less limited by the fuel allocation.

I would like to know what the relationship is between "downforce" and "weight". Is a less draggy car also lighter?

No relationship really, weight is a force downwards as a result of gravitational forces of the mass of the car.

Downforce is also a force downward but is a result of the aerodynamics of the car.

What you can tie into weight though is momentum. Momentum is a product of mass and velocity and is worked out as kg times m/s. The lower the momentum of the car by reduced mass or reduced velocity the less energy it takes for the car to change direction or accelerate/decelerate. Downforce is generally tied into velocity and is always downwards forcing the car into the ground. Low weight with high downforce (as in an F1 car) means the force downwards is great increasing grip without the associated large momentum countering that.

[PlatinumZealot]

Williams mean they have similar down-force with not as much drag as other teams.

[seinfeld]

Williams FW36 - trick intercooler packaging

http://www.formula1.com/wi/full/ta_arti ... e_1197.jpg

Williams produced a shock in Austria as they proved to be the most competitive team after Mercedes, carrying the fight to the championship leaders throughout the weekend. One of the secrets behind their pace also came to light over the Spielberg weekend - an innovative intercooler installation previously thought to be unique to the Silver Arrows (Click here for more). It was revealed earlier this season that Mercedes' decision to place the turbo and compressor at opposite ends of their power unit (Click here for more) has made cooling far more straightforward, and it's now emerged that the Mercedes-powered Williams squad have - like their engine suppliers - used this fact to cleverly locate their intercooler immediately behind the cockpit (red arrow). This allows them to run smaller, more aerodynamic sidepods, with incredibly neatly packaged radiators - a design arguably second only to Mercedes' own in terms of efficiency. Rivals using Ferrari and Renault power have not been able to integrate this layout since their power units group the turbo and compressor together at the rear of the engine (Click here for more), but expect it to become a trend on all teams' 2015 cars.

see the source also:

http://www.formula1.com/news/technical/ ... /1197.html

Also noticed when Botas got in the car minutes before the race. the team then had Bottas lean forward. a funnel was inserted behind his headrest and scoops and scoops of dry ice were dropped down, and pushed down by another mechanic with wire.
I would say this is the front of the intercooler or battery pack to keep it even cooler. dry ice would last 2 hours EASY and would drop inlet temps, or pre intercooler temps by minimum 15 degrees!

[LookBackTime]

British GP 2014

[.poz]

I would like to know what the relationship is between "downforce" and "weight". Is a less draggy car also lighter?

No relationship really, weight is a force downwards as a result of gravitational forces of the mass of the car.

in a broad sense yes.. you need less fuel with a low drag car

[LookBackTime]

One sponsor is back: Thomson Reuters

[LookBackTime]

Miss him ?

[LookBackTime]

[LookBackTime]

[LookBackTime]

[stefan_]

Great Britain 2014 - Thursday (03.07.2014)