Ground Effect - Bring It Back

[SectorOne]

In a spec-series, overtaking works because the prime performance differentiator is an imperfect biological entity

No that would be the slipstream. The number 1 cause for overtakes in lower formulas.

Two guys, same equipment, same speed, no dirty air, corner coming up, guy behind can actually stay with him through the corners (because he´s just as fast) and then gets rewarded with a slip stream effect that simply shoots him in front of the other guy.

Performance differential yes, no doubt. But temporary which is the key word.

Edit: the second performance differentiator i would say is not the piece of flesh doing the steering but actually the open setup of the cars.

[zeph]

Bhall you are doing a great job of erasing any respect others had for you!

*slow claps*

OT, but why? He sticks to his guns, but he remains civil and puts forth a coherent argument. I may or may not necessarily agree with him, but I don't find his posts objectionable.

OK, enough OT. Back to GE.

[Andres125sx]

Basically because I don´t want to trade one GE solution for another GE solution, but a wing based solution for a GE based solution.

Anycase GE is just an idea, the target is to reduce dirty air problem and you´ve stated yourself there are solutions wich would reduce the problem. Let´s talk about that instead of explaining why this or that solution will never work. I think nobody is defending a particular solution, we only want to discuss about how to reduce the problem as much as posible

The 2009 rule change already shifted performance from wings to ground effect. As it stands, the rear wing is basically the only aerodynamic device on the car that doesn't work like a venturi tunnel. Moreover, its efficacy has been diminished so much over the last few years that it's currently little more than a way to facilitate DRS.

How was that?

IIRC they still used two high cambered wings, one in front and one behind...

Even when the front wing is designed to work as a venturi tunnel as much as possible, that does not mean it works as a venturi tunnel. It´s a wing, with a top side (contrary to a venturi tunnel) what causes drag, high pressure zones, and more turbulence as when the air pass throught the wing it´s mixed one high pressure zone (top side) with another low pressure zone (bottom side).

And sorry but I can´t believe the rear wing efficiency is as low as it only work to facilitate DRS

Not sure about the reason, but IMHO you look like obsessed trying to convice people that current cars use ground effects more than wings, like if wings are there only to aid GE.

[hollus]

You have to give Bhall the point that few "wings" have tall vertical fences along the underside...

[Andres125sx]

Sorry hollus, but I don´t get what you mean

[djos]

Bhall you are doing a great job of erasing any respect others had for you!

*slow claps*

OT, but why? He sticks to his guns, but he remains civil and puts forth a coherent argument. I may or may not necessarily agree with him, but I don't find his posts objectionable.

OK, enough OT. Back to GE.

From where I'm sitting he's stuck to his guns in fairly contradictory way. I'm not saying he's being rude (blunt is fine with me).

[wesley123]

To bring a bit to the conversation on dirty air, doesn't this dirty air also affect the car creating this wake itself? See it as a motorway, if there's a slowdown further ahead on the road you'll start noticing that further back as well.

Teams spend lots of money to perfect the airflow all around the car, to improve front wing extraction, manage wheel wake etc. etc., but there is one thing they can't manage that much; The airflow behind their own car. I'm certain this affects airflow further ahead. Thus, in the same way as the car behind them, it affects themselves as well.

It is one of those things in physics that you'd rather not want to exist, because it's pretty dangerous on airplanes. But sadly, as they are a law of physics, they can't be changed, merely reduced, but in effect, you'll reduce the downforce of the cars as well, as this dirty air is an effect of the downforce they produce.

and on that aspect I agree with bhall, it's a problem that can't be solved, merely changed.

[djos]

To true, there is no magic bullet but imo there is enuf evidence to demonstrate that full ground effects tunnels combined with much much smaller wings, that exist mainly for aero balance trim, would allow the cars to race closer together with *less impact* caused by dirty air.

It won't level up the field, but it will allow teams, that are roughly on par with each other, to more effectively do battle up and down the field ... Imo.

[wesley123]

I'm not sure, the problem would still exist, and I'm certain it would bring other problems with them as well.

The floor is very sensitive, it requires a certain height from the ground to optimally work, change that, and downforce is lost. And I'm certain that the wake of the other car will bring huge issues when it gets under the floor. While i agree, in theory with less dirty air the car behind would be less affected, in reality the problem also exists of where that dirty air goes.

I'm certain teams will find problems to solve that, but in effect it all starts from the beginning again.

[djos]

I'm not sure, the problem would still exist, and I'm certain it would bring other problems with them as well.

The floor is very sensitive, it requires a certain height from the ground to optimally work, change that, and downforce is lost. And I'm certain that the wake of the other car will bring huge issues when it gets under the floor. While i agree, in theory with less dirty air the car behind would be less affected, in reality the problem also exists of where that dirty air goes.

I'm certain teams will find problems to solve that, but in effect it all starts from the beginning again.

I guess I should have added that my preference is for active suspension to make a return at the same time.

This would solve most of the variability issues full Ge would suffer from on really bumpy street circuits etc.

Active suspension would likely be a lot cheaper for the team's than the current damper and springs arrangement.

[Tim.Wright]

Active suspension would likely be a lot cheaper for the team's than the current damper and springs arrangement.

Not a chance in hell.

Not only will the hardware be more expensive but R&D behind the tuning will be massively expensive for the first year or so as the teams try to be the first to converge to the optimum control strategy.

[djos]

Last time I checked the team's spend millions of dollars every year on new shocks, j-dampers etc and the components all get replaced multiple times per race weekend.

Surely if the fia mandated a system like Williams ran at the peak of the active era (configuration, not components), then the bulk of the costs would be in tuning the software and not the hardware?

Ps micro hydraulics is something the team's already have more than enuf experience designing and operating.

[Tim.Wright]

I think millions is quite an exaggeration. And they certainly don't replace all the parts multiple times each weekend. I think you are just making stuff up now...

I like the idea of active suspension, but you're dreaming if you think you can develop an active system cheaper than the current passive systems.

[FW17]

Active suspension with a standard control unit will not be bad

Maybe the standard control unit can define the functions and the number of processes per second

[bhall II]

No that would be the slipstream. The number 1 cause for overtakes in lower formulas.

My point was more about the big picture. Spec-series cars don't have a locked-in performance advantage, which is untrue of cars in a developmental series. That means overtaking in a developmental series is always going to be more difficult, regardless of any and all elements that form the basis of performance differentiation, simply because advantages gained through technological development are vastly more consistent than even the very best drivers.

Combined with a qualifying format that arranges the structurally fast cars ahead of the structurally slow cars, you don't exactly have an ideal recipe for wheel-to-wheel racing, yanno?

The takeaway of that is this: unless the fundamental nature of F1 is altered, it will never consistently produce idyllic on-track battles. As such, I think it's best to manage expectations accordingly.

IMHO you look like obsessed trying to convice people that current cars use ground effects more than wings, like if wings are there only to aid GE.

Simply put, an inverted airfoil in ground effect creates downforce as a result of vortices that form along the end plates at the wing's point of peak suction. The low pressure literally sucks the wing to the ground.



On the other hand, an airfoil in freestream creates a pitching moment that rotates the wing, producing a downwash that causes lift.



To be continued...