Idea to limit DF

[Pierce89]

How could they do that with a plank wear test, though?

Sorry, do what specifically?

Drone along at a speed limited by friction on the plank

[Lycoming]

He meant that top speeds were limited because if they ran any faster the downforce would drive the plank into the road and wear it down too hard.

I think.

[bill shoe]

He meant that top speeds were limited because if they ran any faster the downforce would drive the plank into the road and wear it down too hard.

I think.

Yea, that's it. Mosley-limited (can we call it that?) top speed is the speed where downforce almost pushes your plank onto the track. The engine could drive the car faster, but you can't afford to wear the plank by dragging it, so you leave a micron between the track and plank. In theory.

[Just_a_fan]

Sadly lots of people don't seem to understand that an F1 car gets its lap times not from being fast in a straight line but by fast in the slow bits - the apex of the corner. It's better to be slow on the straight if it means that every apex is 10s of km/h faster. That and braking performance (linked to downforce again).

So in a scheme where plank wear defines whether you've been carrying "too much" downforce, you'd just set your car up to run at the highest speed that gives you the plank wear required on the straights based on your downforce levels. In the corners you'd be able to make use of that lovely downforce to whiz around very quickly. The guys who think "mustn't run more than XkN downforce to preserve the plank at 300km/h at the end of the straight" would be slow in the corners and quick on the straights. And they would lose. Every time.

[Moxie]

You're kind missing the inability for f1 cars to put on a proper race. The car behind is always automatically disadvantaged. That seems dumb to me.

Absolutely! And with DRS the driver ahead is disadvantaged. I wouldn't mind so much if the cars were shaped like bricks if it means that there is a proper race to watch. Perhaps a more appropriate shape though would be to greatly limit the size of the diffuser, and limit the size and shape of front and rear wings, so that they may be used more for balancing downforce without throwing off quite so much dirty air.

[Pierce89]

Sadly lots of people don't seem to understand that an F1 car gets its lap times not from being fast in a straight line but by fast in the slow bits - the apex of the corner. It's better to be slow on the straight if it means that every apex is 10s of km/h faster. That and braking performance (linked to downforce again).

So in a scheme where plank wear defines whether you've been carrying "too much" downforce, you'd just set your car up to run at the highest speed that gives you the plank wear required on the straights based on your downforce levels. In the corners you'd be able to make use of that lovely downforce to whiz around very quickly. The guys who think "mustn't run more than XkN downforce to preserve the plank at 300km/h at the end of the straight" would be slow in the corners and quick on the straights. And they would lose. Every time.

I absolutely get what you're saying but teams run to the limit of plank wear now. So, softer springs would reduce the downforce they can run.

[Blanchimont]

For me the easier way to limit downforce is the way that FIA is currently going.

Simply define boxes, where the front and rear wings and the diffusor can be placed. This limits the area and the maximum angle of attack of the devices and therefore the maximum downforce. In addition the technical regulations limit the rear wing to be made of only two profiles, the same could be done with the front wing. Other possibilities could be to increase the height difference between the reference plane and the step plane.

Whenever the downforce and the cornering speeds are to high to be considered safe, simply adjust the box dimensions and you're fine.