Ground Effect - Bring It Back

[bhall II]

The whole car is already in ground effect, and moving to venturi tunnels would just change the nature of the problem. Short of complete aerodynamic standardization, there's no aerodynamic solution to overtaking.

As an aero package is developed, efficiency becomes increasingly reliant upon complex interactions that are more and more sensitive to turbulence. This is true of any concept you can imagine, and it means cars in advanced stages of development will tend to be more sensitive to "dirty air." It's why Hamilton had great difficulty following Vettel at this year's Spanish GP...



(It's also why IndyCar's problems with "dirty air" are practically non-existent when compared to F1.)

Overtaking is about performance differentiation, and trailing cars will always have worse aerodynamic efficiency. Think of it this way: running is another car's wake is like temporarily reverting to an older-spec car. Even fan cars would be susceptible to the problem, because the better designs would inevitably feature aero advantages that exist outside the influence of the fans, which means the better cars would still be more sensitive to turbulence.

As a problem without a solution, I think it's best to just accept it and move on to something else.

[Andres125sx]

Dirty air what makes overtaking too difficult so racing is pretty boring maybe on 80% of the races.

This exact same dirty air existed in the 70s, 80s, and 90s as well(don't forget the 00s!), they overtook perfectly fine and created the races that people always cling back to in arguments of how awful racing today is.

Except in those decades downforce was lower so dirty air was not such a big problem because grip was not so dependant on downforce.

00s it already was the modern era with too much problems to overtake.

In the 80s they ran with huge barn door wings, I'm certain that those would create much more dirty air than cars do now.

Even if true, the effect of dirty air will be completely different as in the 80s car grip didn´t depend so much on downforce as they do today

And that´s assuming it´s true, but I have serious doubts about it. Just compare front wings, those 80´s wings are on a different planet, just frontal area is so different drag and turbulence probably can´t be compared

The vast majority of F1s history is through one team dominating all. If that's a problem, then how come so many people watch it these days? If that truly was a problem then F1 would never have taken off.

Fair enough, that´s true

No. Tim is right on this. You are just promoting a massive change just because a few people don't like something.

Few people no, few millions. Not even with all those new countries wich now host a GP that never had before (Singapour, Arabic Emirates, China, Rusia, USA...) audience have increased. Actually audiences are decreasing, what means there are some millions in countries with F1 tradition who are no longer following F1, more than those who now watch F1 because they have a GP in their country.

If you want to ignore millions of fans quiting from F1, ok, you´re not alone, join Bernie´s group

[Andres125sx]

Personally I see wings as an antiquated technology, they are an inneficient way to create downforce

Exactly my thoughts, wings are a good way to create downforce, but IMHO aerodynamics have evolved enough to get rid of them and all the dirty air they produce and still get enough downforce to be the fastest cars out there.

You just have to think about how many things are banned to stop teams from designing a car with too much downforce... too much to count from memory. With a complete rethinking of aero rules wings could be removed while keeping current downforce levels

[Andres125sx]

The whole car is already in ground effect, and moving to venturi tunnels would just change the nature of the problem. Short of complete aerodynamic standardization, there's no aerodynamic solution to overtaking.

As an aero package is developed, efficiency becomes increasingly reliant upon complex interactions that are more and more sensitive to turbulence. This is true of any concept you can imagine, and it means cars in advanced stages of development will tend to be more sensitive to "dirty air." It's why Hamilton had great difficulty following Vettel at this year's Spanish GP...

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2015/05/13/2 ... ranscript/

(It's also why IndyCar's problems with "dirty air" are practically non-existent when compared to F1.)

Overtaking is about performance differentiation, and trailing cars will always have worse aerodynamic efficiency. Think of it this way: running is another car's wake is like temporarily reverting to an older-spec car. Even fan cars would be susceptible to the problem, because the better designs would inevitably feature aero advantages that exist outside the influence of the fans, which means the better cars would still be more sensitive to turbulence.

As a problem without a solution, I think it's best to just accept it and move on to something else.

I can´t disagree with you obviously, but after reading this it looks like efficient aerodynamics with low drag (wich causes few turbulence) would be the same as high drag solutions, no difference, when it´s not.

There will always be some dirty air and the car running into it will always have some problems, but those problems can be maximized with high drag solutions (current situation), or minimized with low drag solutions (switching to GE based cars)

Difference is overtaking will be difficult so to overtake the car behind need to be noticeably faster, or it will be simply imposible even if it´s much faster, as you´ve just proved with that radio comunication.

Some problems is better than too much problems

[piast9]

Wait a minute. Weren't a 1000 Hp engines the target of the F1? I think you can have either immensly powerfull cars with less downforce or not so powerful with DF aided by the ground effect. You can't have both or the cornering speed will rise again until a tragedy happens.

If you have a ground effect then you have more downforce. To balance it out you will have to introduce limitation on the wing sizes or complexity. But I am sure that the teams will claw back the downforce from wings back even if the rules will limit them. Ground force seems cool but there are many things that are connected with it.

[mrluke]

How long do you think F1 would survive if we said that the cars are already as fast as they can ever be allowed to go. Even in 20 years laptimes will be no faster than they are now.

Its not going to sell tickets is it.

[bhall II]

The whole car is already in ground effect, and moving to venturi tunnels would just change the nature of the problem.

I can´t disagree with you obviously, but after reading this it looks like efficient aerodynamics with low drag (wich causes few turbulence) would be the same as high drag solutions, no difference, when it´s not.

Again, the cars are already in ground effect. Think of the front wing as a diffuser, and it makes more sense...



So, given this...

The front wing idea didn’t work from an overtaking perspective; it wasn’t very obvious because Pirelli tyre degradation and DRS contributed to a significant increase in overtaking anyway post 2011.

...venturi tunnels would just make the problem look different.

Personally, I'd like to see tracks somehow modified to accommodate a second viable racing line. That would make a bigger difference than anything else, because the solution would last a lot longer than modifying cars that continuously evolve toward greater sensitivity as a matter of course.

[SectorOne]

Inherent performance differentials in cars will only spread out, and if you reverse the field you will get some fake overtakes until the order has been restored and after that no more overtakes. It´s not rocket science...or brain surgery.

So how do you get the needed performance differential to cause an overtake with cars that are of extremely similar performance?
Slipstreaming.

And how do you get slipstreaming?
Staying close to the guy in front.

And do you stay close to the guy in front?
Solve the dirty air problem.

[Andres125sx]

The whole car is already in ground effect, and moving to venturi tunnels would just change the nature of the problem.

I can´t disagree with you obviously, but after reading this it looks like efficient aerodynamics with low drag (wich causes few turbulence) would be the same as high drag solutions, no difference, when it´s not.

Again, the cars are already in ground effect. Think of the front wing as a diffuser, and it makes more sense...

Yes but with high cambered wings too, and this sort of wings produce a lot of drag and turbulence at high speed, much more than any diffuser.

That´s the reason no plane use this sort of high cambered wings for the speed F1 cars go, they´re used for ULM and slow planes wich do not reach 200km/h because they generate the highest lift of any other airfoil with the drawback of drag, but since their flying speed is low, drag is not that important. But on F1 they´re used even for speeds well over 300km/h because they don´t care about drag that much since they have tyres in contact with asphalt that can overcome this drag easily.

But this has a drawback, turbulence or dirty air, wich causes the problems we know. Teams don´t care about what´s happening behind their cars, but FIA should as this is a big problem for the show.

What I mean is aero rules could be reformulated to achieve more efficient aerodynamics so they do not affect the car behind that much, even when ground effect would also be affected by a close car in front, but not to the same degree.

Personally, I'd like to see tracks somehow modified to accommodate a second viable racing line. That would make a bigger difference than anything else, because the solution would last a lot longer than modifying cars that continuously evolve toward greater sensitivity as a matter of course.

Agree

I posted it here on F1T some time ago, it´s an idea wich came to my mind because I love mx and they use it there, banked corners. If the normal line keep level, but you provide a little banking in the outside of the corner, there would be more than one line, the usual and the outer one taking advantage of the little banking, so drivers will have more than one line to choose and overtaking will be easier.

A bit crazy, but I´m sure it´d work

[bhall II]

What I mean is aero rules could be reformulated to achieve more efficient aerodynamics so they do not affect the car behind that much, even when ground effect would also be affected by a close car in front, but not to the same degree.

What I mean is that I seriously doubt it's possible. Any turbulence that can adversely impact an inverted wing in ground effect can and will do the same to a venturi tunnel, because both devices operate on the basis of the same principle. You'd just be moving the problem from the front of the car to the middle of the car.



Also consider this: the rear wing was made smaller last season, and the beam wing was eliminated. According to conventional "wisdom," the resultant downforce reduction and lower wake structure should assist overtaking.



And yet...

I think this is a problem without an aerodynamic solution.

A bit crazy, but I´m sure it´d work

I don't think it's the least bit crazy. In fact, I'm pretty sure that modifying the tracks is the only viable solution. It's unorthodox, which makes it's all but impossible to implement. But, it's a helluva lot more sensible to alter a few corners at each track one time than it is to continually make adjustments to the cars.

[Pingguest]

There is an aerodynamic solution available, but its implementation requires political willingness: get rid of downforce.

[Tim.Wright]

If you are happy with F1 lapping circa 20 sec slower then that would be one possible solution.

[chuckdanny]

This overtaking problem especially in barcelona is ridiculous. It is the reason why they implemented a low speed part before the straight. But they implemented it in a stupid way, the last bit before the straight is a high speed corner that's why they can't follow closely. A f1 car accelerate pretty fast, they should know, so already 260 at corner exit.
https://motoren.wordpress.com/2012/05/1 ... celona-gp/

Bring the slow part closer the the 90 deg right hander and there will be overtaking opportunity. Even make the chicane leading directly to the straight by completly rotating and extending right the slow bit.
THat's ridiculous !! a 90 deg with only one racing line at full acceleration and everyone wonder how come they can't overtake ?
You can get out of slip stream when in the straight part dirty air prevent rear wheel traction at the beginning, in a 90 deg cornering with one only optimal line you can't... obviously.
Dirty air prevent overtaking by preventing cars from following in corners leading to the straight. But dirty air allow also a better slip streaming effect, so the solution is desperatly simple (in the case of a hamilton mercedes following a ferrari, more so with a w06 with a very good traction in slow corners).
Aerodynamic is less a factor in slow corners, do we need to explain them why? There are a bunch of stupid people in this business and we know why.

[mertol]

So make them drive in dirty air most of the time so the aero designers have to take it into account - make the qualifying just 20 minutes with all cars on track at the same time.

[Facts Only]

So make them drive in dirty air most of the time so the aero designers have to take it into account - make the qualifying just 20 minutes with all cars on track at the same time.

NO! It took around 20 years to get a decent format for qualifying! Its about the only thing people dont moan constantly about.