MW - HK brakeing distance

[ISLAMATRON]

The Lotus is also heavier, and with a much higher CG, but that is probably minimal compared to the DF difference.

The Lotus will be a max 10kg heavier.

Actually, if I remember correctly they arent running any ballast as they are overweight, no carbon suspension was one example why. Plus the cosworth is quite a bit more thirsty than the renault.

I cant put number on it but I woulod think that the fuel difference alone would be at least 10kg

[mep]

I don't think a steel suspension is much heavier than a carbon one. I even like to see them using one made from steel.

[forty-two]

I don't think a steel suspension is much heavier than a carbon one. I even like to see them using one made from steel.

Actually +1

To be running steel suspension, and still holding their own (albeit toward the back of the pack) is IMO somewhat impressive.

[marcush.]

I don't think a steel suspension is much heavier than a carbon one. I even like to see them using one made from steel.

I`d rather think the big advantage is aero?
it is amazing how small things add up...both in aero and weight.It is F1 so you can´t afford to give away anything.
But of course we have to realise ne piece of the cake is car and car potential the other is the team able to exploit what they have and only the tird and smallest slice is what the driver can do with the other two bits....
Obviously di Grassi ,Senna and chandhok are in the same league ,and Glock,Trulli and kovalainen in another-be it due to experience or talent they carry an advantage and we can say it is less than .5 s per lap
As we don´t see anything significant from HRT in terms of car upgrades we can conclude:Virgin has failed to produce significant upgrades , as the gap is constant
hrt just learning to exploit what they have ,whereas Virgin has already introduced significant new parts.
Lotus seem to have a conservative car ,but they have shown ability to exploit what they have ,plus their updates have worked...and this helps them beat the other newbies.

[mep]

by marcush
I`d rather think the big advantage is aero?

Are you talking about the aero of the whole car or about the suspension aero now?

Regarding braking distance of course the car aero is the important factor, no need to question this.
Btw. I watched the coverage last night and this 80m braking distance some users brought up here is totally impossible. You can see that HK brakes somewhere around the 100meter sign. MW needs to brake on a similar position maybe 1 or 2 meters later but for sure not 80meters. MW had a much bigger top speed possibly created by some slip stream and was running just 1 meter behind HK. Even if HK had not braked at all this could have caused a crash.


Regarding suspension areo vs steel suspension:
I think the problem with steel suspension is to make them aero shaped.
Normally you would use a simple steel tube but this doesn’t have the airfoil shape.
A air foiled steel tube is hard to manufacture and could be quite heavy.
Anyways I checked for some pictures now and their suspension is aero shaped.
By the way who came up with the idea that they are steel made?
On the pictures they look very much like carbon.
Maybe they have something like a hybrid design. A structural steel tube in the center surrounded with carbon to get the airfoil profile.
Could be a quite nice design. I can’t tell on the first glance which one is better.
At least it seems to be quite strong because Kovalainens was still able to drive his car back to pits and his suspension didn't looked like it had a big damage.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[marcush.]

real full carbon wishbones , ,it looks like these are steelones with carbonfibre shrouds glued to them ...
there are of course aero shaped cromo tubes available but these are not really what designers are liiking for as they have quite some aspect ratio ..for a long time elliptic tubes were what teams used and of course fabricated, shaped designs .
I´m not quite sure who was first with cfr wishbones -Barnard most likely,with his blade type inner mounting points made of ti instead of balljoints??

I was speaking of the possibility to shape the wishbones more to suit aero needs .
Read somewhere about the aero advantages on bicycles by exploiting aero shaping of frame an wheel components..wich was quite amazing.

[FW17]

Mark was the one who claimed that HK braked 80m before

[mep]

Can you really tell just from the pics if they are full carbon or steel carbon hybrid ones?
This pushrod looks a bit like steel one but for the wishbones I can't see a difference to McLaren ones.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

I was speaking of the possibility to shape the wishbones more to suit aero needs .

hm, I cant see any difficulties when you cover the steel tube with carbon anyways.
The carbon cover can have whatever shape you like.

I see some trouble with the mounting points.
How they make them when they have steel wishbones?
Still flexing blades or go back to ball joints?
Flexing blades made from steel might be not as good as carbon ones because the steel might get deformed plastically with lower bending angles.
Ball joint are possibly much heavier and need more space.

So maybe it’s just the pushrod made from steel. It's just a straight rod anyways.

Read somewhere about the aero advantages on bicycles by exploiting aero shaping of frame an wheel components..wich was quite amazing.

Yes a friend of me builds carbon wheels for racing bikes.

[mep]

Mark was the one who claimed that HK braked 80m before

Mark Webber?
Thats a bad excuse from the onboard video you can see that HK braked somewhere around the 100 meter sign and I don't belive MW is able to brake at 20 meters. [-X
Well possibly 90% of the Fans might belive him.

I just found this video of the GP2 race from the same weekend:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzjHY-JMNDw[/youtube]
Quite a coincidence to have two similar crashes on the same weekend.

[ringo]

We also have to take into consideration human reaction time. Mark saw Heiki's car brake, but it took some time for his brain to process that and send that to his left foot. Moving at 190mph, that is a lot of distance covered within the time taken to reacte to Heiki visually slowing down.
Let's say webber's processing and action time is 0.5s, that's a distance of 42.5m beofore he touches the brake at the moment Heiki slows, if he's moving at 190mph.

Also marc was fixating on slip streaming, and may have not taken notice of the lotus requiring a greater braking distance. Normally he would prepare to brake at a certain point with the reaction time subliminally compensated if following another car. However this time he was not mentally prepared and his reaction was not based on preparation, but the visual stimulus of Heiki slowing.
Because of this, Marc could have felt Heiki braked 80m too early, all because it may have took him 42.5m to react; instead of canning that reaction time into his preparation to break earlier to compensate for it.

[marcush.]

We also have to take into consideration human reaction time. Mark saw Heiki's car brake, but it took some time for his brain to process that and send that to his left foot. Moving at 190mph, that is a lot of distance covered within the time taken to reacte to Heiki visually slowing down.
Let's say webber's processing and action time is 0.5s, that's a distance of 42.5m beofore he touches the brake at the moment Heiki slows, if he's moving at 190mph.

Also marc was fixating on slip streaming, and may have not taken notice of the lotus requiring a greater braking distance. Normally he would prepare to brake at a certain point with the reaction time subliminally compensated if following another car. However this time he was not mentally prepared and his reaction was not based on preparation, but the visual stimulus of Heiki slowing.
Because of this, Marc could have felt Heiki braked 80m too early, all because it may have took him 42.5m to react; instead of canning that reaction time into his preparation to break earlier to compensate for it.

how long does it take to build up full brake force when hitting the brake? Is it possible to actually react to a visual input if you follow a car at 170mph at a distance of less tha a car length?
Seems impossible and was the trigger of the accident in my view.For Webber it was a braketest by Kovalainen and in reality it was a big misjudgement on Webbers side.

[cornermarker]

Mark was the one who claimed that HK braked 80m before

Mark Webber?
Thats a bad excuse from the onboard video you can see that HK braked somewhere around the 100 meter sign and I don't belive MW is able to brake at 20 meters. [-X
Well possibly 90% of the Fans might belive him.

I just found this video of the GP2 race from the same weekend:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzjHY-JMNDw[/youtube]
Quite a coincidence to have two similar crashes on the same weekend.

Very similar to the gp accident. A slower car, off the racing line get's hit by a faster car. In the gp2 incident, I'd put all of the blame on driver error, the following driver. None on the leading driver, none on brakes.

I could see MW thinking that he was break checked. There was a slower car, off the racing line, needing to brake early because he had pulled off the racing line to let a much faster car by.

Heikki was in a slow car with a really compromised racing line (he had stayed off the racing line to let a much faster car by) + a tight corner coming up next = Early braking.

Unbeknownst to him, that faster car that refused to go ahead and pass him? It was still tucked in behind his gearbox.

Again, nothing to do with braking ability.

50% Webber- Should not have been tucked in behind a much slower car's gearbox all over the track entering a turn
50% Heikki driver error (should have stayed off the racing line once he chose to let Webber by.)
0% Brakes

Racing incident. Let's move on.