Ferrari Rear Wheel Lip

[zac510]

Well said, reca.

[RH1300S]

Well said, reca.

Hear, hear........very good post Reca, clears some other stuff up too

[Saribro]

As for pictures:




Same car, same driver. Obviously :)

[manchild]

So ? Too big is too big, period. All the versions of brake ducts used by Ferrari are inside the dimensions mandated by rules. I really don’t see the relevance of the example.

I know this is a word game but if that CF element is duct that helps cooling than using no duct at all prooves that it has nothing to do with breaking system but with aerodynamics.

It was removed to prevent overheating of brakes which means that it isn't device helping in cooling of brakes but oposite. It is pure aero device with "brake system" label on it with as much logic as if mass damper had "movable aero" label on it.

I still didn't heard explanation why was it allowed to Ferrari to make alterations or brake system in Japanese GP. I'd except explanation bhallg2k gave for Chinese GP but what weather conditions change occured during race in Japan?

[bhall]

See, here's my thing. It was only a conjecture from a forum member that the wheel elements were removed due to brake overheating. Everyone seems to have latched onto that as fact. The truth is, we don't know why they were removed.

Also, Ferrari was much, much slower during the race (without the wheel elements) than they were in qualifying (with them). I'm talking 2-3 seconds.

I can promise you that if those rings made that much of a difference in lap times due to improved aerodynamics, every team would be running with them. No one would pass up the opportunity to gain that much time.

The most logical explanation is that they simply weren't needed for the race. The rings were introduced when the summer temperatures started going up, and as the temperatures have fallen, as in China and Japan, they've started running without them.

There is an argument to be made about whether or not it was legal to remove the rings once the car had been qualified. But the FIA regulations do allow teams to make changes to the car for safety reasons. Since brakes are probably the most important safety feature of the car, it makes sense that doing anything possible to make them operate perfectly would be allowed. We have to remember that F1 brakes simply don't work well if they are kept too cool.

I'm not trying to be an apologist here, but not everything is nefarious.

[DaveKillens]

If the wheel fairings were deemed allowable and legal by the FIA, then we have to live with it. Personally, I don't believe for a second that they assist rear brake airflow, but instead clean up the aero around the rear wheel and reduce drag.
With or without changed wheel duct fairings, the cars would have carried more top end speed in qualifying than the race. In qualifying the tires have more grip, the drivers are accelerating out of the corners (especially the spoon) sooner, so it's logical that they have more speed. As well the engineers turn up the RPM limit in qualifying, and during the race lower the RPM.
Top RPM limit can be set, and it has a direct relationship with engine longevity. Maybe that was a factor in Schumacher's engine blowup. Alonso was matchimg him on pace, maybe in a panic the engineers had raised the RPM limit to ensure Alonso could not close the gap.
What Reca said about the reason for using different hole sizes is very logical. That smaller hole increases the difficulty in attaching the wheel to the car. During qualifying you have that time without great penalty. But in a race, have the following sets have larger holes to make it easier, and more reliable for the mechanics to get that wheel nut on properly.

[ginsu]

Movable bodywork in that area is legal no matter what its function is, hence the fairing would be legal even if its effect was exclusively to reduce aerodynamic drag (and IMHO, if I understand correctly how Ferrari rear brake ducts work, it’s not), no need to convince FIA that it has no aero influence, it obviously has, but it’s allowed to.

I would love to see the evidence that this part actually improves the cooling of the brakes.



For one, why would you use it only on the rear brakes if it helps cooling so much? Obviously the front brakes could use alot more cooling than the rear would need.

Secondly, it obstructs any airflow from coming in or out of the wheel rim. Because the intake duct is on the inside of the wheel, wouldn't you want it to exhaust through the wheel rim? If this is the case, then the lip is preventing proper airflow through the wheel.

Let's not forget that the wheel is supposed to be constructed of a single material and the regulations explicity say this, so somehow Ferrari continue to get rules overlooked simply because they've argued that it's part of the braking system. Obviously, somebody is not scrutinizing the ferrari very well. They certainly could if they wanted to.

[bhall]

That's basically my point, Dave.

Ferrari was definitely slower during the race than they were during qualifying, and the dropoff was more than the usual difference. I think what happened is that the track moved away from Bridgestone overnight, as the qualifying track temperature was some 20+ degrees (F) warmer than during the race. Conversely, I think the change really benefitted Michelin. Alonso said he was "very surprised" by his pace.

Ferrari had to have known this after a few laps. And if those rings were all about improving aerodynamics, and thus speed, they would've continued to use them instead of taking them off to try and claw back some of what they lost. They have professional mechanics who can deal with a smaller diameter hole to change tires. We're not talking about Renault's pit crew here.

I mean, I wouldn't put it past Ferrari to lie about the rings' purpose. But I still believe that if they did anything to improve aerodynamics that every team would have them. Everything else has been copied.

And to ginsu: The front brake ducts have largely unobstructed inlets, making cooling easier. And a smaller diameter outlet for the rear brakes speeds up the extraction of hot gasses, again making cooling easier.

[mini696]

Just because these make the brakes hotter doesnt make any differance to their legallity.

[joseff]

All I can find is:

12.3 Wheel material :
All wheels must be made from an homogeneous metallic material.

Funny... I remember reading about wheel fairings, propeller-shape wheels etc being forbidden. Are they finally allowed this year?

[mini696]

All I can find is:

12.3 Wheel material :
All wheels must be made from an homogeneous metallic material.

Funny... I remember reading about wheel fairings, propeller-shape wheels etc being forbidden. Are they finally allowed this year?

It has been discussed ad-nausium (sic) the covers are legal because they are within a "aero box" allowed for brake ducts. Clarification was given for these. They are NOT part of the wheel.

[Fan Solo]

See, here's my thing. It was only a conjecture from a forum member that the wheel elements were removed due to brake overheating. Everyone seems to have latched onto that as fact. The truth is, we don't know why they were removed.

Also, Ferrari was much, much slower during the race (without the wheel elements) than they were in qualifying (with them). I'm talking 2-3 seconds.

I can promise you that if those rings made that much of a difference in lap times due to improved aerodynamics, every team would be running with them. No one would pass up the opportunity to gain that much time.

The most logical explanation is that they simply weren't needed for the race. The rings were introduced when the summer temperatures started going up, and as the temperatures have fallen, as in China and Japan, they've started running without them.

There is an argument to be made about whether or not it was legal to remove the rings once the car had been qualified. But the FIA regulations do allow teams to make changes to the car for safety reasons. Since brakes are probably the most important safety feature of the car, it makes sense that doing anything possible to make them operate perfectly would be allowed. We have to remember that F1 brakes simply don't work well if they are kept too cool.

I'm not trying to be an apologist here, but not everything is nefarious.

Conjecture indeed as the wink described.

IMHO the discs are blatantly there to help aero efficiency with a influence also on getting more heat into the tyre , from what I have noticed in hot conditions the Bridgestones perform better, so why not get them as hot as you can in the race? Is this why a couple of other Bridgestone runners have tried them? Whatever they do its a botch job & they look ridiculous, take them off and play 'fia'r.

FS

[zac510]

It's a bit like OJ SImpson.. lots of evidence against it but no definitive proof to convict.

Anyway analogy would be to suggest that a team who has too much front wing on the car cannot change it because that would change aerodynamic function. Of course there is far too much 'red rage' inside some forum posters!

One also needs to understand how ducts operate properly. To simplify it, the exit of a duct only needs to be as large as the inlet. The exit of the wheel there is absolutely no larger than the inlet and the small diameter of it may enhance the exit speed of the air, increasing efficiency of the duct. That there is an aerodynamic benefit too is a coincidence but not one that an engineer wouldn't want

Has anybody considered that Ferrari may have been slower in the race due to concerns about the engine longevity too? They would have known well before Schueys pitstop that the engine was on the way out and would not have watned to risk Massa's engine either.

[pRo]

That there is an aerodynamic benefit too is a coincidence but not one that an engineer wouldn't want

So you're saying it's ok if it's a brake cooler AND an aerodynamis device? I don't think things work like that.

I can't argue whether it helps brake cooling or not, but I'm sure it helps aerodynamics -> it should be banned.

Has anybody considered that Ferrari may have been slower in the race due to concerns about the engine longevity too? They would have known well before Schueys pitstop that the engine was on the way out and would not have watned to risk Massa's engine either.

I don't have access to laptimes right now, but from what I recall, Ferrari was quite fast on the race as well. Not compared to Alonso, but to the rest of the cars. Ignoring the light Toyotas in the early race.

I bet they were going as fast as they could. Massa surely saved his engine after the blowup though, but so did Alonso and few others. At least Raikkonen said the team told him to back off from Button and just save the engine. Alonso said he lowered the revs the moment he saw Schumi's out and didn't Massa (or someone from Ferrari) say the same?

[zac510]

So you're saying it's ok if it's a brake cooler AND an aerodynamis device? I don't think things work like that.

Yes, because it is providing its primary function as a brake cooler. And I think things do work like that!

How do you respond to the fact that teams are allowed to change the front wing in order to gain different aerodynamic benefits?