- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
Car thread from a moderator?Richard wrote:Curious that it failed so early for Button while Alonso completed a lot more mileage yesterday. I thought Alonso had the same design as Button on day 1.
Hahaha oh that is quite funny, I remember that post years ago.dren wrote:That doesn't make sense. Why would a well packaged car be more draggy?ringo wrote:The car looks like it will be quick in high speed turns, but i get the feeling that the car is so well packaged that it might be very draggy, similar to the old redbulls. Not a bad formula to work with, but tracks like Monza may be their weakness.
Have you located ellipses all over the car, too?
How tightly packaged a car is, is not a very good indicator of drag levels. A gentle tightening of the rear end will generally produce less drag than a read end that tightens up quickly at a sharp angle. Of course those doesn't take into accout things like how the airflow moves between the rear bodywork and the rear tyres but all the same if you want to reduce drag then you reduce the pressure gradients. How do you reduce the pressure gradients? You make the bodywork have a gentler curve on it as it travels back. Of course this introduces the problems of now you have more surface area. It is all a trade off and not something you can generally determine by looking at.lkocev wrote:Hahaha oh that is quite funny, I remember that post years ago.dren wrote:That doesn't make sense. Why would a well packaged car be more draggy?ringo wrote:The car looks like it will be quick in high speed turns, but i get the feeling that the car is so well packaged that it might be very draggy, similar to the old redbulls. Not a bad formula to work with, but tracks like Monza may be their weakness.
Have you located ellipses all over the car, too?
Seriously Ringo, I don't know how you equate good packaging with being 'draggy'. The car itself appears to be packaged very neat, tidy and narrow through its sidepods and coke-bottle area, in designing the car that way I can only assume it is for the purpose of exploiting the effectiveness of the floor further. The floor of a formula one car is generally accepted as one of the more efficient means of generating downforce, if not the most efficient.
It remains to be seen if this is the correct packaging compromise, remember the perfect package doesn't exist, only the most suitable compromise. The package may be well suited to some circuits, but less suited to others, no one really knows at this stage. Remember there is likely to be some form of performance penalty taken as a result of having those heat exchangers above the intake plenum of the engine, both mechanical and aerodynamic, you can't expect that an increase in the cross-section and volume of bodywork/components upstream of the rear wing not to have a performance impact on it. Would this suit Monza or not? again it is yet to be seen, but keep in mind Monza is not really about low downforce, its about getting drag low enough, it just so happens that usually means trimming the wings down in order to do so.
The car appears quick to me, they seem to be able to go out and post respectable times even carrying all the technical issues they are having. A well balanced car, which the 30 appears to be according to Button and Alonso, will generally be a well balanced car on any circuit. So if the 30 emerges as the 4th or 3rd quickest car this season, you can reasonably expect that would be the case across the calendar.
I'm tempted to type something to make you look stupid, but i wont.dren wrote:That doesn't make sense. Why would a well packaged car be more draggy?ringo wrote:The car looks like it will be quick in high speed turns, but i get the feeling that the car is so well packaged that it might be very draggy, similar to the old redbulls. Not a bad formula to work with, but tracks like Monza may be their weakness.
Have you located ellipses all over the car, too?
I'm not suggesting that being tightly packaged through the rear either reduces nor increases drag, but I do think we can expect that the reason the team has taken this design route is for the purpose of exploiting the effectiveness of the floor. Last seasons Williams I would agree appears to be one of the lower drag cars, if not the lowest, but we still don't know how much downforce it generates relative to that drag. The same with the 30, we don't know how much drag it creates, or how much downforce it creates, but we can assume that if their floor is more effective relative to other teams, then in order to achieve a given downforce, they would have the option to design wings that create less drag, much in the same way that Red Bull did through the 2013 season.trinidefender wrote:How tightly packaged a car is, is not a very good indicator of drag levels. A gentle tightening of the rear end will generally produce less drag than a read end that tightens up quickly at a sharp angle. Of course those doesn't take into accout things like how the airflow moves between the rear bodywork and the rear tyres but all the same if you want to reduce drag then you reduce the pressure gradients. How do you reduce the pressure gradients? You make the bodywork have a gentler curve on it as it travels back. Of course this introduces the problems of now you have more surface area. It is all a trade off and not something you can generally determine by looking at.
Take Williams last year, they are generally accepted as far and away the lowest drag car. Yet they weren't even near to the most tightly packaged. Food for thought.
vor genMesteño wrote:https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-cZXC0CIAAKpsu.jpg
What?crbassassin wrote:vor genMesteño wrote:https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-cZXC0CIAAKpsu.jpg
