active aero - would it cure 'running in wake'?

[tuj]

I personally am all for the idea of active aero (albeit driver-controlled). I'm wondering if anyone knows how adjusting the AoA on the wings would help/hinder a car running in dirty air? Would a significant change to the AoA or perhaps to specific elements of the front wing help the trailing car recover it's downforce? Or is the wake problem too great?

[SiLo]

I don't think it's too great, I just think the problems with safety that it would present is the real issue here.

[tuj]

surely the DRS is just as 'unsafe'?

[turbof1]

This what I posted on Matt Somers' blog:

Concerning the show: I always felt DRS was adressing the right problem with the right concept but with the wrong solution. The car wake decreasing downforce of the following car is something that really needs to be adressed, however trying to loosely compensate that by decreasing drag on the straights never made sense, since at that very same point there is no real issue.

The Front Wing Flap adjuster was an idea in the right direction, but underestimated how serious the car wake really is. I don't think that bringing it back will help since front wings just become more and more sensitive year after year. Moreover, it does not help that the one in front can do the same, despite not being in someone else's wake.

My idea is to take the DRS concept, reverse it to adding downforce instead of reduction drag (DIS: Downforce Increasing System), apply it in the corners (detection point at the speed trap and activation point in the braking zone?) and deactivate it on the straights. That would solve the issue directly. It will take more detection and activation points, but the tech is already there for that. The driver should still make the conscious choice to activate it since he needs to be aware the extra downforce is applied. That would effectively solve the issue in a very direct way.

Leaves the question: where to apply the extra downforce and how? As I explained, the front wing is a poor choice. I was thinking about the power of ground effect; why not put collapsable&retractable rubber skirts at the edges of the floor? it would seal the floor's edges, increasing ground effect and increase downforce right at the center of the car.

I think this would satisfy a lot of purists, since they as said the issue is directly tackled instead of loosely compensated. It would also very much benefit wheel to wheel action, since even if the chasing car has more cornering speed, overtaking in corners is very challenging (and a delight to watch when it happens!) and while the chasing car would exit the corners much closer to the car in front, he will not blast-by that easily anymore, having only the slip stream to crawl closer. - See more at: http://somersf1.blogspot.be/2015/04/str ... BXWBe.dpuf

Basically as long as you activate the extra aero before the corner, safety shouldn't be much of a concern. It gets dangerous when you activate it mid corner.

[Tom.Ace49]

Sounds like a really good idea!

[ESPImperium]

I am with Matt Somers to a point. I do believe that the front wings should be a lot more simpler, id limit the amount of elements that can have, id limit them to 4 elements, no Red Bull 8 or 9 elements. As for the wing adjust, id follow the same rules as 2009, but with a tweak, allow the Front Flap Adjust to adjust 2 elements by up to 2 degrees twice per lap. So in essence you can increase the flap up once and down once. You can then increase it to close the gap, but also decrease it to manage your tyres as well. It should be a driver tool to manage the car.

As for DRS, it should be a attack/defend tool, but used strategically in the race. I have always been an advocate that the drivers need to be limited in time to the amount of use they can get from it. DRS zones can stay for safety, but the one second behind thing can go as it is useless. Ive always said 300 seconds, as thats 20 laps you can use it, if its 15 seconds a lap you use it. It should be used to attack and defend as well.

Those are the two areas id be looking at, active aero should be just on the wings, no where else.

Give the cars more downforce yes, like a increase on the diffuser height with a standardised central section like the front wing, same with a re introduction of the beam wing, but with a standard central section. That should sort the rear issues out, as for the front, make the front wings slightly wider, id say 500mm each side and it would be ideal. The cascades would be limited as well, id make it illegal for them to join on to the end plates. Also increase the nose height, not by much, again 500mm would be enough. That should sort most issues out, however the bulkhead should be again decreased in height by 300mm on both top side and 400mm on the floor side.

Thats enough aero change, the cars would then have more than enough downforce to make them at least 2 seconds faster, all that would be needed is a increase in mechanical grip, a reduction in weight and one or two areas to make the cars another 3 seconds a lap quicker for 2017.

[natehall]

I am with Matt Somers to a point. I do believe that the front wings should be a lot more simpler, id limit the amount of elements that can have, id limit them to 4 elements, no Red Bull 8 or 9 elements. As for the wing adjust, id follow the same rules as 2009, but with a tweak, allow the Front Flap Adjust to adjust 2 elements by up to 2 degrees twice per lap. So in essence you can increase the flap up once and down once. You can then increase it to close the gap, but also decrease it to manage your tyres as well. It should be a driver tool to manage the car.

As for DRS, it should be a attack/defend tool, but used strategically in the race. I have always been an advocate that the drivers need to be limited in time to the amount of use they can get from it. DRS zones can stay for safety, but the one second behind thing can go as it is useless. Ive always said 300 seconds, as thats 20 laps you can use it, if its 15 seconds a lap you use it. It should be used to attack and defend as well.

Those are the two areas id be looking at, active aero should be just on the wings, no where else.

Give the cars more downforce yes, like a increase on the diffuser height with a standardised central section like the front wing, same with a re introduction of the beam wing, but with a standard central section. That should sort the rear issues out, as for the front, make the front wings slightly wider, id say 500mm each side and it would be ideal. The cascades would be limited as well, id make it illegal for them to join on to the end plates. Also increase the nose height, not by much, again 500mm would be enough. That should sort most issues out, however the bulkhead should be again decreased in height by 300mm on both top side and 400mm on the floor side.

Thats enough aero change, the cars would then have more than enough downforce to make them at least 2 seconds faster, all that would be needed is a increase in mechanical grip, a reduction in weight and one or two areas to make the cars another 3 seconds a lap quicker for 2017.

Im not usually one to be nitpicky, but your looking to increase the dimensions of the car the following:

width of the front wing 500mm either side, or 1000mm/100cm/1m total
increasing the nose height by 500mm/50cm/.5M
reducing the bulkhead hight by 300mm/30cm/.3m..

All this on a car 1800mm/180cm/1.8m wide by 950mm/95cm/.95m tall..

Have you got your dimensions wrong?

[ESPImperium]

I am with Matt Somers to a point. I do believe that the front wings should be a lot more simpler, id limit the amount of elements that can have, id limit them to 4 elements, no Red Bull 8 or 9 elements. As for the wing adjust, id follow the same rules as 2009, but with a tweak, allow the Front Flap Adjust to adjust 2 elements by up to 2 degrees twice per lap. So in essence you can increase the flap up once and down once. You can then increase it to close the gap, but also decrease it to manage your tyres as well. It should be a driver tool to manage the car.

As for DRS, it should be a attack/defend tool, but used strategically in the race. I have always been an advocate that the drivers need to be limited in time to the amount of use they can get from it. DRS zones can stay for safety, but the one second behind thing can go as it is useless. Ive always said 300 seconds, as thats 20 laps you can use it, if its 15 seconds a lap you use it. It should be used to attack and defend as well.

Those are the two areas id be looking at, active aero should be just on the wings, no where else.

Give the cars more downforce yes, like a increase on the diffuser height with a standardised central section like the front wing, same with a re introduction of the beam wing, but with a standard central section. That should sort the rear issues out, as for the front, make the front wings slightly wider, id say 500mm each side and it would be ideal. The cascades would be limited as well, id make it illegal for them to join on to the end plates. Also increase the nose height, not by much, again 500mm would be enough. That should sort most issues out, however the bulkhead should be again decreased in height by 300mm on both top side and 400mm on the floor side.

Thats enough aero change, the cars would then have more than enough downforce to make them at least 2 seconds faster, all that would be needed is a increase in mechanical grip, a reduction in weight and one or two areas to make the cars another 3 seconds a lap quicker for 2017.

Im not usually one to be nitpicky, but your looking to increase the dimensions of the car the following:

width of the front wing 500mm either side, or 1000mm/100cm/1m total
increasing the nose height by 500mm/50cm/.5M
reducing the bulkhead hight by 300mm/30cm/.3m..

All this on a car 1800mm/180cm/1.8m wide by 950mm/95cm/.95m tall..

Have you got your dimensions wrong?

Got my dimensions wrong, looking at many things that have dimensions at the moment. Should be a tenth of what i have quoted.

Should be:

width of the front wing 50mm either side
increasing the nose height by 50mm
reducing the bulkhead hight by 30mm

[bhall II]

Would a significant change to the AoA or perhaps to specific elements of the front wing help the trailing car recover it's downforce? Or is the wake problem too great?

The problem isn't necessarily too great, but there's still no way to solve it permanently without standardizing all aero. Otherwise, development will inevitably result in solutions that progressively trend toward greater sensitivity to disturbances, because the law of diminishing returns causes designers to become increasingly reliant upon complex interactions that are relatively easy to interrupt.

Mercedes, for one, seems to have already reached a critical stage in development in which the effects of "dirty air" have perhaps begun to outweigh the ability of engineers to add downforce... https://twitter.com/f1/status/597373773143252992 From an aerodynamic standpoint, the most you can really do is reset the regulations every once in a while to restart that process. Even the adoption of active aero or a move toward enhanced ground effect, which is largely immune to "dirty air," would only provide temporary relief, because neither change would alter the relative performance differentials that separate the teams.

in other words, such changes wouldn't make matters better or worse; they'd just make matters different.

[natehall]

Im not usually one to be nitpicky, but your looking to increase the dimensions of the car the following:

width of the front wing 500mm either side, or 1000mm/100cm/1m total
increasing the nose height by 500mm/50cm/.5M
reducing the bulkhead hight by 300mm/30cm/.3m..

All this on a car 1800mm/180cm/1.8m wide by 950mm/95cm/.95m tall..

Have you got your dimensions wrong?

Got my dimensions wrong, looking at many things that have dimensions at the moment. Should be a tenth of what i have quoted.

Should be:

width of the front wing 50mm either side
increasing the nose height by 50mm
reducing the bulkhead hight by 30mm[/quote]

Thought that was the case, but wasnt sure if id missed something as a non-engineering person and love learning from this forum

[McMrocks]

From an aerodynamic standpoint, the most you can really do is reset the regulations every once in a while to restart that process.

This part of your post is great. I was thinking about the same for a while. F1 cars get developed unbelivably fast. If you compare 2009 cars to the current... very different.

Of course i can't prove it but i think that all the small winglets, that were developed over the years and work in the wind tunnel, don't work in dirty air.

F1 needs new aerodynamic rules every (lets say) 5 years to cure the problem of the cars becoming too advanced

[turbof1]

The issue is: resetting neither delivers infinitely the same results. There's a saying around in F1: "You can't unlearn what is learned". The biggest example would be when the FIA banned Exhaust Blown Diffusers. Teams then started using coanda effect to get the benefits partially back. In 2014 the teams then used the coanda effect on the Y100 winglets.

Where I'm going with this, is that will continue try to apply with is learned, even if you keep resetting things. Eventually resetting the whole ordeal will not have an effect anymore.

[ChrisF1]

Well the tightness of the rules will dictate the infinite or finite solutions. I would much rather see a sq cm of front wing that you could run, encouraging teams to vary a little bit so we don't see identical designs straight off. Sure, teams will copy and move towards what they consider most efficient, but we still have alternative wings at the moment.

[FW17]

If they are thinking of adding more down force for a chasing car then;

1) allow double deck diffusers

2) slot is normally closed but open when the driver is within range.

[turbof1]

That's not a good idea. The car would become very understeery due the imbalance between the front wing running in dirty air and the diffuser gaining downforce above the normal balance. It's better to create the extra downforce at the front, which is difficult because that part is hit the hardest by the car wake, or at the center. As bhall mentioned, ground effect is affected the least by the dirty air, so imo the extra downforce should come from the floor.