Ferrari F2012

[bhall]

You can still tune the exhaust for improved engine performance within very narrow RPM ranges through the use of Helmholtz Resonance chambers.

[Crucial_Xtreme]

You can still tune the exhaust for improved engine performance within very narrow RPM ranges through the use of Helmholtz Resonance chambers.

Agreed, but the team haven't used the resonance chambers with the original exhaust configuration/Acer Ducts. The collection chamber only made an appearance when the team switched the exhaust so I'm not so sure we'll see it in Canada if in fact the team try a solution similar to the original.

[Gerhard Berger]

You can still tune the exhaust for improved engine performance within very narrow RPM ranges through the use of Helmholtz Resonance chambers.

Agreed, but the team haven't used the resonance chambers with the original exhaust configuration/Acer Ducts. The collection chamber only made an appearance when the team switched the exhaust so I'm not so sure we'll see it in Canada if in fact the team try a solution similar to the original.

I would have thought that the exhaust chamber would be more beneficial with the original solution (acer ducts) since they were, at least attempting, to blow aerodynamically sensitive parts of the car. The new solution seems quite aero neutral.

[bhall]

If Scarbs was correct in his initial view that the chambers serve to stabilize the otherwise abrupt transition from throttle to off-throttle effects, the devices will help no matter what exhaust layout Ferrari chooses. Stability is stability is stability.

The same is also true if the chambers are being used traditionally to tune engine output characteristics within a certain RPM range.

[hardingfv32]

Would someone explain how: 'the chambers serve to stabilize the otherwise abrupt transition from throttle to off-throttle effects'?

Is it being implied that the one time release of the volume of exhaust in the branch is aerodynamically relevant? That is a pretty small amount of air flow. This seems far fetched.

Brian

[Crucial_Xtreme]

Would someone explain how: 'the chambers serve to stabilize the otherwise abrupt transition from throttle to off-throttle effects'?

Is it being implied that the one time release of the volume of exhaust in the branch is aerodynamically relevant? That is a pretty small amount of air flow. This seems far fetched.

Brian

The chamber acts as a pressure accumulator when the exhaust is blowing. Then when the driver is off the throttle the pressure built up in the chamber is release, which smoothes the blown diffuser effect between full and part\closed throttle. This system works on the backpressure created within the exhaust

http://scarbsf1.wordpress.com/category/ferrari-f150/

[marcush.]

A Helmholtz resonator is ,as far as i understand a means of killing unwanted frequencies in a system ...frequencies that may reduce power or even break parts ..
I´d think the volume accumulated in the tube cannot be of any significance to support flow ?

[bhall]

If it's for stability instead of tuning, I don't think it's meant to sustain flow. It's likely just to add a step or two between full exhaust and no exhaust. The F2012 has had balance issues since it was born, so the idea isn't implausible.

I think Massa's comments after Monaco were very telling. He thinks he's made a breakthrough with the car's setup as a direct result of using Monaco-specific settings, which, amongst others, are a higher ride height and softer springs. The team virtually erased the car's rake during winter testing, because the exhaust didn't consistently seal the diffuser as planned. The subsequent stiffening of the rear suspension has been adversely affecting the car's traction ever since. It makes sense then that moves to soften the suspension for Monaco would reveal more of the car's intended performance.

Massa also stated that this lesson can be translated to other tracks. If so, that could indicate that Ferrari is very close to getting the F2012's balance sorted out.

[bonjon1979]

If it's for stability instead of tuning, I don't think it's meant to sustain flow. It's likely just to add a step or two between full exhaust and no exhaust. The F2012 has had balance issues since it was born, so the idea isn't implausible.

I think Massa's comments after Monaco were very telling. He thinks he's made a breakthrough with the car's setup as a direct result of using Monaco-specific settings, which, amongst others, are a higher ride height and softer springs. The team virtually erased the car's rake during winter testing, because the exhaust didn't consistently seal the diffuser as planned. The subsequent stiffening of the rear suspension has been adversely affecting the car's traction ever since. It makes sense then that moves to soften the suspension for Monaco would reveal more of the car's intended performance.

Massa also stated that this lesson can be translated to other tracks. If so, that could indicate that Ferrari is very close to getting the F2012's balance sorted out.

I saw that from Massa, it's interesting but I think harder to translate to other tracks. The problem with the Ferrari seems to be traction under high lateral load something you don't really get at Monaco. I suspect that they can't run a higher rake at a high speed track due to what you mention about the need to stiffen the rear suspension. The thing is though, I feel pretty confident that Ferrari only need that magic bullet to unlock the qualifying speed in the car so they can set the car up as they intended at the beginning of the season. The problem is that, once they've done that they'll realise that the car is no faster in the race as they (along with everyone else) has to drive to the speed of the tyres. Can't help to be at the front of the grid though and I fully expect 'nando to win the WDC from here if Ferrari can get the car on the front row in Montreal.

[bhall]

Unfortunately, we don't know exactly what kind of setup discovery Massa/Smedley found at Monaco. All we can do is make broad speculations based upon known characteristics of the circuit. But, based on its nature as a tight, twisty course and Ferrari's struggles with low-speed traction - aside from top speed, Ferrari's high-speed performance is in order - it's not out of the realm of possibility that Ferrari has indeed found something that will help them increase rake on the car. If so, that should bring added downforce from the diffuser and improved traction from a softer rear setup that would no longer have to be stiffened to prevent bottoming out.

Those things also fall in line with the speculation that the team is going to give the original Acer ducts another go.

[Chuckjr]

On that note, and while waiting endlessly for Crucial to post some Canada F2012 new exhaust iterations, it would be nice to see a rake shot from Monaco compaired to the first couple races...

[bhall]

There appears to be a difference, but that could just be appearance and nothing more.

Australia

(Click to enlarge)

Monaco

(Click to enlarge)

[bonjon1979]

Unfortunately, we don't know exactly what kind of setup discovery Massa/Smedley found at Monaco. All we can do is make broad speculations based upon known characteristics of the circuit. But, based on its nature as a tight, twisty course and Ferrari's struggles with low-speed traction - aside from top speed, Ferrari's high-speed performance is in order - it's not out of the realm of possibility that Ferrari has indeed found something that will help them increase rake on the car. If so, that should bring added downforce from the diffuser and improved traction from a softer rear setup that would no longer have to be stiffened to prevent bottoming out.

Those things also fall in line with the speculation that the team is going to give the original Acer ducts another go.

I agree that it's broad speculation however I would question your ascertion about low speed traction. i thought that they weren't that bad in this regard and it was stability in high lateral load that was causing the problems, making the car hard to drive and wearing tyres. This is what fry says about it:

http://thef1times.com/news/display/06071

[Teechnical]

If the new (or old:p ) exhaust doesn't work for them, and lets say it'll not give a good balance etc., and they find this out by Friday, will they have to race with the same configuration? Or do teams always have a backup plan.
Because i'm pretty sure Mugello to Montreal is a good 6 hours flight.

[bhall]

I agree that it's broad speculation however I would question your ascertion about low speed traction. i thought that they weren't that bad in this regard and it was stability in high lateral load that was causing the problems, making the car hard to drive and wearing tyres.

Then, it’s well known that we don’t yet have enough aerodynamic downforce and we are lacking in traction at the exit to slow corners, which could be the biggest problem.

Well, no wonder the team's been struggling; they're not even on the same page!

Seriously, though, I think the author of the F1 Times piece somehow just deduced medium-speed traction issues based on Fry's answers. The team's been pretty explicit about their low-speed woes since Day 1. I think the results bear that out, too, because the F2012 has been strongest in situations where a softer than usual setup is optimal, e.g., rain in Malaysia and Monaco's normal nasty self.

That said, the F2012 does have tire wear issues, but I think they're just symptomatic of the main problems.