Ferrari F2012

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter do not belong here.
Forza Ferrari
Forza Ferrari
0
Joined: 10 Jan 2012, 15:51

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

muelte wrote:
FORZA FERRARI wrote:Felipe will be using chassis n°294 instead of n°293 for the malaysian GP.

I thought it was strange the nando got to use n°295 and felipe "only" n°293... it was quite blatant that there was something wrong with n°293..

Anyway, it just shows that when a new piece is available, nando has the priority over it :|
Oh, come on! Chassis are all exactly the same, number means nothing, only production order. Massa is going to use the 'spare' chassis 294 just to check if there was something wrong with his.

I'm afraid this forum (great, the best technical reference avaiable) is starting to go down the hill with the level of some posts & discussions... Massa conspirancy theories here is bad news.
Are you kidding ?? all the chassis are the same?? BS sometimes it can happen that a chassis has structural problems,it's quite comon in F1... just ask webber ;)

muelte
muelte
14
Joined: 03 Feb 2011, 10:34

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

Of course manufacturing problems can happen (but nowhere near "common") but clearly your point was that Alonso was getting preferential treatment because he is using a newer and better chassis. Fact is that tub is homologated and are all the same, you can't make a "this is for our driver number one" chassis.

And it is not proven yet that there was someting 'blatantly' wrong with Massa's chassis. In fact, probably the chassis is OK, it is Massa who is crap since long ago (now I apologise for going low myself) and they are giving him an excuse.

Forza Ferrari
Forza Ferrari
0
Joined: 10 Jan 2012, 15:51

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

muelte wrote:Of course manufacturing problems can happen (but nowhere near "common") but clearly your point was that Alonso was getting preferential treatment because he is using a newer and better chassis. Fact is that tub is homologated and are all the same, you can't make a "this is for our driver number one" chassis.

And it is not proven yet that there was someting 'blatantly' wrong with Massa's chassis. In fact, probably the chassis is OK, it is Massa who is crap since long ago (now I apologise for going low myself) and they are giving him an excuse.
For sure Massa is nowhere near alonso level, but Ferrari is not trying to find excuses for Massa. There might have been something wrong with the chassis, otherwise they would not change it after only 1 gp.

And it's blatant that alonso is driver n°1, so preferential treatment is given to him. But i'm not blaming the team for this, since he deserves it.

User avatar
Afterburner
1
Joined: 23 Feb 2009, 16:24

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

Crucial_Xtreme wrote: Please show me any quote from the team that said they would be fighting for the pole. You can't find one because it was not said. By anyone in the team. You are referring to a story from spanish publication MARCA. And they took Fernando's words out of context. Fernando wasn't saying for weeks that the team would have to grit it's teeth in the first races, then suddenly change to we can fight for pole.

As for the rest, I agree they're not familiar with the new suspensions and it will take them a bit to find the sweet spot, same as it took other teams. The sidepods on the F2012 are basically the same as last year, just smaller. The car isn't overheating so I don't really see how new cooling is hurting them.
Their main problems are lack of downforce & the lack of knowledge on properly setting up the pull rod suspensions.
Can't find the quote but i read somewhere someone from technical staff saying that "hopefully we can fight for pole".

As for the sidepods i disagree with you, the concept isn't ideal, putting the exaust on the u-pod channel (disrupting airflow ?) doesn't makes sense, at all, and just proves my point.

If they change this car too much they'll need testing time, they don't have, to fine tune it the best way, at the same time the other teams are developing their cars and finding half a second until may.

bhall
bhall
244
Joined: 28 Feb 2006, 21:26

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

Crucial_Xtreme wrote:Right, but comparing aerodynamics & suspensions are completely different. With the latter being less difficult. The team has never said anything about problems with their 7 post rig, but they have had wind tunnel & CFD issues.
On the surface, that's probably true. But, when you look at the facts surrounding this car and listen to or read statements made about its design, you learn that every bit of it was conceived with aerodynamics playing the single most important role, even with regard to the wholly new front suspension. Because it's all obviously compromised due to faulty research results, I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say that the effects of those faults might turn up in unlikely places.

I'm reminded of the integration drift of inertial navigation systems when I think of this car and the many ways in which one or two serious errors, even those in "lesser" systems, can foul up everything else along the way.

Put another way: If compromises are made to D, E and F because it's believed that those decisions will improve the effects of A, B and C to enhance the car's overall performance, those compromises become nothing but detrimental if A, B and C don't work.

xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

bhallg2k wrote:
Crucial_Xtreme wrote:Right, but comparing aerodynamics & suspensions are completely different. With the latter being less difficult. The team has never said anything about problems with their 7 post rig, but they have had wind tunnel & CFD issues.
On the surface, that's probably true.
...
As a die-hard mechanical engineer I beg to differ of course, my xperience is that stiffness, clearance and friction can play tricks with the best of conceived theories and simulations in the world of reality.

And just because you are not aware of any problems, it doesn't mean you don't have them.
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"

Raptor22
Raptor22
26
Joined: 07 Apr 2009, 22:48

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

usually a by product of the bury my head in the sand and make sure I don't look at the problem therefore I don't have it syndrome.

Nando had a better GP than Massa simply because he was getting more consistency out of the tyres. He has been working the set up of the car to steer it more off the rear axle to get the back end of the car to work at least. Massa can't handle the car at the moment because his prefered stiffer front end makes the rear too loose.

The car is aweful, but Nando can get a little more from it than Massa that's all.

These high downforce cars have exceptionally narrow set up windows. You really need a very good base to get set up frexibility and its clear the Ferrari chassis is made of cheese

Gerhard Berger
Gerhard Berger
-1
Joined: 20 Sep 2010, 11:17

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

joseluisf1 said that Pat fry has 2 teams working on the 2 different exhaust solutions (original solution of blowing the fins on the brake ducts, and the adapted solution of blowing the beam wing, though they are also considering a Mclaren/Sauber style solution).

munudeges
munudeges
-14
Joined: 10 Jun 2011, 17:08

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

I don't think you can change suspension geometry just as Ferrari have done without being sure you're going to get some large, and I mean large, advantage out of it. I'm sure that Rob Marshall at Red Bull will admit that he probably wasn't keen on implementing a rear pull-rod from a mechanical point of view, but the aerodynamic gain given the regulations was just too large.

Yes, there will probably be some aerodynamic gain to what Ferrari are doing but I think they've simply gone too far trying to gain any theoretical CFD or windtunnel benefit they can. In addition, the front end of the car is far more critical from a handling and set up point of view and with a push-rod there are simply far, far more things you can do to help yourself. In addition, there is the current height of the nose which is just an ill-fit with the geometry they have.

They've been brave I'll give them that but I simply can't see anything other than a B spec of this car, probably at Barcelona, with a front push-rod suspension.

Crucial_Xtreme
Crucial_Xtreme
404
Joined: 16 Oct 2011, 00:13
Location: Charlotte

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

munudeges wrote: They've been brave I'll give them that but I simply can't see anything other than a B spec of this car, probably at Barcelona, with a front push-rod suspension.
Other than a crystal ball, what evidence do you & Xpensive have the the front suspension is a problem. So much so that the team will have to crash test a new chassis to change to push rod front?
I submit that you have none. Only an opinion based off of nothing really other than what you perceive to be a problem.

User avatar
Afterburner
1
Joined: 23 Feb 2009, 16:24

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

Crucial_Xtreme wrote:
munudeges wrote: They've been brave I'll give them that but I simply can't see anything other than a B spec of this car, probably at Barcelona, with a front push-rod suspension.
Other than a crystal ball, what evidence do you & Xpensive have the the front suspension is a problem. So much so that the team will have to crash test a new chassis to change to push rod front?
I submit that you have none. Only an opinion based off of nothing really other than what you perceive to be a problem.
They have the same crystal ball you have to deny they are wrong. Besides, saying that front pull rod needs to be changed and Ferrari keeps it doesn't means we are wrong, they could keep it even knowing it's wrong but can't afford to change it for some reason.

User avatar
Redragon
19
Joined: 24 May 2011, 12:23

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

Afterburner wrote:
Crucial_Xtreme wrote:
munudeges wrote: They've been brave I'll give them that but I simply can't see anything other than a B spec of this car, probably at Barcelona, with a front push-rod suspension.
Other than a crystal ball, what evidence do you & Xpensive have the the front suspension is a problem. So much so that the team will have to crash test a new chassis to change to push rod front?
I submit that you have none. Only an opinion based off of nothing really other than what you perceive to be a problem.
They have the same crystal ball you have to deny they are wrong. Besides, saying that front pull rod needs to be changed and Ferrari keeps it doesn't means we are wrong, they could keep it even knowing it's wrong but can't afford to change it for some reason.
Maybe you are right, the time would say. At the moment the team haven't report any problems with front suspension and even Scrabs thought the geometry they designed were really similar to push-rod and couldn't see would be a problem, so I don't think they are focusing on that area at all, but it is my opinion, not denying.

Also, has been an urgency meeting on Italy involved Fry and Dominacelli, THe Boss not happy at all. Spanish press said The boss is pressing to acelarate this B-spec to come sooner than Spain and the development it is focus on sidepods and rear end

Crucial_Xtreme
Crucial_Xtreme
404
Joined: 16 Oct 2011, 00:13
Location: Charlotte

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

Afterburner wrote:
They have the same crystal ball you have to deny they are wrong. Besides, saying that front pull rod needs to be changed and Ferrari keeps it doesn't means we are wrong, they could keep it even knowing it's wrong but can't afford to change it for some reason.
No, I'm going off the interview where Stefano Domenicali was specifically asked if they were going to change the chassis and he said no. That's about as solid as you get. Not some speculation about how you think the suspension is working. And to say they just don't know that it's bad and needs to be changed is preposterous. For someone who has no access to the telemetry to say it's wrong with no physical evidence, but claim the team who has qualified engineers & mechanics, doesn't know is funny. Maybe some of you should go work for Ferrari or other teams.

Edit: Pat Fry has been asked about the front pull rod and whether or not it's causing problems. He said no it isn't. <-- another part of my "crystal ball"

xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

xpensive wrote:
banibhusan wrote: ...
We have to believe what the whole team is saying. And if all are saying that the front pull rod is not causing any problem, then that should be true. The inherent issue for the Ferrari in the past few years has been the lack of downforce and it's the same this year also, which they have already admitted.
...
My quarter of a century worth of xperience with engineers has taught me that as a general rule, they find it easier to be critical to their own design when they have something or someone to share the blame with, like a demented draftsman or a faulty calibrated windtunnel, than admitting that an innovative design they have so proudly championed, like a novel mousetrap or a funny looking front suspension, is crap.
What I'm trying to say with the above, is that it takes courage to admit that your celebrated novelty turned out to be a dog,
it's so much easier to "agree" that some of your aerodynamic measurements or xhaust assumptions were proven wrong.
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"

munudeges
munudeges
-14
Joined: 10 Jun 2011, 17:08

Re: Ferrari F2012

Post

Well, the "They know what they're doing" line isn't conducive to further discussion to be honest. Of course they're going to say they're not going to change the chassis and of course they're not going to say if it's causing problems. It's much easier to come up with an excuse later where something 'unexpected' comes up meaning they have to change. They'll probably blame the wind tunnel again. Not that Ferrari are muppets, but I think they've chased some aerodynamic ideal rather than looking long and hard at the practicalities.

The height of the nose section is the first thing that makes this idea seem very odd. The angle of those pull-rods is a big cause for concern and with them being shallow you're talking about quite a bit of extra lateral force on them I would have thought. From a handling point of view being able to move the push-rod mounting backwards or forwards to transfer load is one major thing that just isn't open to Ferrari.

Whether we all like it or not, those limitations are there.