Track wetness indicators

[Andres125sx]

Aquaplaning is more manageable than driving with inadequate visibility. Just don't accelerate when the grip is starting to fall away.

Only problem is that only works when water is constant all around the track, wich is a 100% unreal scenario.

Aquaplanning does not occur when drivers don´t stop accelerating when the grip is falling away, they´re not stupid. Aquaplanning occurs when they have good grip, but sudenly they find a small river crossing the track, or simply a deeper water puddle, and tires can´t evacuate enough water so they loose contact with the asphalt.

[Andres125sx]

If the deflector points two streams of water infront of another can in the braking zone... That's aquaplaning. Then a big shunt.

You will take water off the road to place it back there again. You see what is wrong?

No I don´t. Tires are not designed to dry up the track, but to take enough water into their grooving so the tire can keep contact with the asphalt. Once that is done, I see no problem if that water returns to the track. The ideal scenario would be if they can also take it out of the track, but that´s not their function.

I don´t think any deflector will be worse than the spray current F1 cars produce sincerely.

[Andres125sx]

Because cars overtake from the side, a sudden stream of water in front of another car would be like a driver brakes into a puddle. So the direction you direct the stream, doing it behind is not a bad idea. It has to be evaluated. But i rememeber putting the difflector idea already in a thread. And it was argued.

The other thing is the tyres displace at ground level and because of the velocity of the car the angle of the spray is low, so the deflector has to be very low. In the video below these LMP1 cars already had "blockers" or mudgaurd looking objects behind the rear wheels but the spray still rooster tails similar to F1.

https://youtu.be/-b-wu3cVjeI

IMHO that spray is not similar to the spray F1 cars produce. Actually I think that´s not even close, visibility looks very very good compared to F1

[mzso]

Because cars overtake from the side, a sudden stream of water in front of another car would be like a driver brakes into a puddle. So the direction you direct the stream, doing it behind is not a bad idea. It has to be evaluated. But i rememeber putting the difflector idea already in a thread. And it was argued.

The other thing is the tyres displace at ground level and because of the velocity of the car the angle of the spray is low, so the deflector has to be very low. In the video below these LMP1 cars already had "blockers" or mudgaurd looking objects behind the rear wheels but the spray still rooster tails similar to F1.

That video doesn't support your arguments. It shows that the visibility is pretty great with closed tires, lots better than in F1 and there's no extra slippage for the attacker.

[PlatinumZealot]

Because cars overtake from the side, a sudden stream of water in front of another car would be like a driver brakes into a puddle. So the direction you direct the stream, doing it behind is not a bad idea. It has to be evaluated. But i rememeber putting the difflector idea already in a thread. And it was argued.

The other thing is the tyres displace at ground level and because of the velocity of the car the angle of the spray is low, so the deflector has to be very low. In the video below these LMP1 cars already had "blockers" or mudgaurd looking objects behind the rear wheels but the spray still rooster tails similar to F1.

https://youtu.be/-b-wu3cVjeI

IMHO that spray is not similar to the spray F1 cars produce. Actually I think that´s not even close, visibility looks very very good compared to F1

Look at the pattern. And compare photos.

The day light is good and the water is less but the pattern is similar.

I can do an overlay. Or you can look at the angle of spray as it leaves the ground behind the tyre

[Hoffman900]

I forgot about this video:


You can also see why open wheel is a big part of why there is so much spray. This isn't a hard experiment to do with a bicycle as well

[PlatinumZealot]

Looking at that video, the bulk of the spray emerges from the contact patch, and shoots at a narrow angle downward/ Does the fender go down to 2 inches above the ground where the spray is? Not in today's race cars. To reduce lift and drag the back of most of today's race car fenders are absent.

Pirrelli's take on the wet tyre spray situation:

https://www.racefans.net/2021/09/08/lit ... 022-isola/

“The question clearly is about what happened in Spa and the reason for not running because of the visibility,” Isola says. “On the tyre side, I believe that there is very little we can do to avoid the spray in the air.

“We can design a different tyre, able to disperse less water, but then the problem becomes safety because clearly it’s a tyre that is not able to manage aquaplaning as the current tyre is doing.

“There are probably other solutions considering different tarmac, considering an inclination of the track to remove standing water, or other solutions to the car. But on tyre side, if we want to disperse this amount of water, it’s impossible not to have the spray in the air. And if you have spray in the air, the visibility becomes worse and worse.”

[Hoffman900]

Looking at that video, the bulk of the spray emerges from the contact patch, and shoots at a narrow angle downward/ Does the fender go down to 2 inches above the ground where the spray is? Not in today's race cars. To reduce lift and drag the back of most of today's race car fenders are absent.

Pirrelli's take on the wet tyre spray situation:

https://www.racefans.net/2021/09/08/lit ... 022-isola/

“The question clearly is about what happened in Spa and the reason for not running because of the visibility,” Isola says. “On the tyre side, I believe that there is very little we can do to avoid the spray in the air.

“We can design a different tyre, able to disperse less water, but then the problem becomes safety because clearly it’s a tyre that is not able to manage aquaplaning as the current tyre is doing.

“There are probably other solutions considering different tarmac, considering an inclination of the track to remove standing water, or other solutions to the car. But on tyre side, if we want to disperse this amount of water, it’s impossible not to have the spray in the air. And if you have spray in the air, the visibility becomes worse and worse.”

Of course the bulk does, but there is A LOT that is carried to the top of the wheel. F1 aero now is way more about exploding the air around the open wheels and getting it out. That water ends up airborne, and with a closed fender design, it wouldn't.

The video you posted earlier didn't support your point either.

[PlatinumZealot]

Agree to disagree.

Have to find a very wet race to compare. But the pattern of the spray leaving the tyre is what I want to emphasise.

[Hoffman900]

[PlatinumZealot]

Very similar.. Becaue the angle of the spray leaving the contact patch is very shallow, also the wake of the car pulls it inward.

[Andres125sx]

OMG platinum, even after Hoffman pics wich shows how that pattern you were talking about is completely different, you still continue repeating the contrary to the evidence??

[PlatinumZealot]

OMG platinum, even after Hoffman pics wich shows how that pattern you were talking about is completely different, you still continue repeating the contrary to the evidence??

I posted those same photos Hoffman posted a couple pages earlier to explain why changing tyres won't work because of the pattern. this was comfirmed by mario Isola of Pirelli.

My stance is that sports car/ protoype fenders will not change much at racing speeds because the angle the spray leaves the contact patch is shallow as eveidenced by my photo.

I can do an overlay to match it up.

Let me hear your explanation in some way that can be visuallized Because I am not really clear what you want to say.

We discussed these elements: About the floor sucking the front spray under, the cut outs behind the fenders, the vehicle wake briniging in the spray from the rear tyres. If you have similar speed, similar rain, and downforce my hypothesis is that the same old rooster tail the result. Slower cars i think you will see less. But the context is for F1 and exrtreme wet conditions.



You say this is not even close to F1. So you have to explain. Because I find that hard to say.

[PlatinumZealot]

Remember I have nothing against deflectors. But we can't have short memories. In this thread you can see how my deflector idea is developed by input from other posters. So been there already.

viewtopic.php?t=26691

I actually wanted to explore the wetness indicators on the track in this post, but it went off-topic because people tend to oppose my Ideas for the sake of it. The wetness indicator is so that drivers can lower their speed below the hydroplaning speed of the tyre. Then someone rightly pointed out that visibility was why the race was red-flagged. But I think the wetness indicator still has some merits. Drivers get indications of wind-speed, tyre temperatures, so I think the wetness of the track is fair game.

[Andres125sx]

OMG platinum, even after Hoffman pics wich shows how that pattern you were talking about is completely different, you still continue repeating the contrary to the evidence??

I posted those same photos Hoffman posted a couple pages earlier to explain why changing tyres won't work because of the pattern. this was comfirmed by mario Isola of Pirelli.

No, far from that


Do you really see same pattern in these two pics?

Anycase it´s a matter of logic, if the spray the wheels generate makes contact with a fender, mudguard or whatever piece close to the wheel, it partially will get collected into bigger drops of water wich will fall to the track again instead of remaining in the air as spray. Obviously the problem is not completely solved, but it´s surely reduced