Williams FW35 Renault

[Owen.C93]

Anyone else notice the front brake ducts tilt significantly downwards under braking from the new on board camera shot?

I noticed most of the cars doing it. I think it's just the torsional between upper and lower wishbones doing that.

Why is williams so optimistic about the new exhaust position the 2014 exhaust positions are not even similar to their current solution. The 2014 will exist under the rear wing, so there is no correlation between the two solutions.

But other teams are gaining large chunks of time with their exhausts and Williams aren't. When you remove these effects for 2014 obviously all the teams will lose time, but likely Williams less than others.

I dont think Williams will gain. Remember the Mercs changing back from coanda and also being faster. The coanda effect is hard to master. Also Austin is not a good example of Williams pace i think a lot teams struggling with tyre temps etc. Also Williams 2012 solution is still adding downforce, in 2014 the exhaust will create no downforce at all. So they are still gaining from the gasses. But their pace looks solid.

Merc had problems a year ago but go it sorted for this year, and look where they are. They are gaining, but I don't think they are gaining as much as the top teams are and the fact they are the only team to switch back suggests their coanda exhausts is worth less to them than anyone else. Remove exhausts from a Williams and they lose 5 tenths, remove it from a RB and it could be 1s.

[briant1]

Anyone else notice the front brake ducts tilt significantly downwards under braking from the new on board camera shot?

I noticed most of the cars doing it. I think it's just the torsional between upper and lower wishbones doing that.

Having the brake ducts tilt downwards will give extra front-downforce (which is very helpful under breaking). So the teams would certainly try to exploit this within the limits set by the regulations (no moving aero parts; but there's no test for this under breaking).

[trinidefender]

Anyone else notice the front brake ducts tilt significantly downwards under braking from the new on board camera shot?

I noticed most of the cars doing it. I think it's just the torsional between upper and lower wishbones doing that.

Having the brake ducts tilt downwards will give extra front-downforce (which is very helpful under breaking). So the teams would certainly try to exploit this within the limits set by the regulations (no moving aero parts; but there's no test for this under breaking).

Do the front brake ducts really generate any downforce? Looking at their design it all seems about trying the get the cleanest airflow past the front wheels as possible. If I am wrong please correct me and tell me which part actually creates the downforce.

Secondly generally for stable braking you want the center of pressure for downforce to be behind the center of gravity of the car. Moving the center of pressure forward reduces the stability of the car under braking making the car harder to control.

[Yurasyk]

Do the front brake ducts really generate any downforce?

I guess they actually can act as vortice generators or be assistants of a front wing in this issue.

[briant1]

Having the brake ducts tilt downwards will give extra front-downforce (which is very helpful under breaking). So the teams would certainly try to exploit this within the limits set by the regulations (no moving aero parts; but there's no test for this under breaking).

Do the front brake ducts really generate any downforce? Looking at their design it all seems about trying the get the cleanest airflow past the front wheels as possible. If I am wrong please correct me and tell me which part actually creates the downforce.

Secondly generally for stable braking you want the center of pressure for downforce to be behind the center of gravity of the car. Moving the center of pressure forward reduces the stability of the car under braking making the car harder to control.

You're right, a big part of the job of the front brake duct is to condition the flow and get it nicely around/above the sidepods. In doing so, they do tend to move some air upwards, which does create downfore (not a massive amount, but quite handy since directly at the hub). Look at this picture, some air is moved updards (downforce):



I think you're also right with the comment about aero balance and stability but supposing that the centre of downforce under braking is back far enough, having a little more front downforce would help (ceteris paribus). Whether Williams are in such situation I don't know, thats far too complex to say from the outside (at least for me^^).

[raymondu999]

The centre of pressure should be somewhere near the front under braking. That's why trail braking even exists - because there's a big weight and grip shift forwards. Not only is the car's mass moving forwards, the front wing is closer to the ground and the rear is also further from the ground, all helping front grip to the detriment of rear grip. The amount of grip generated by those winglets on the front wheel hubs is insignificant. They're there to act as flow conditioners for the rear of the car, not to generate downforce in and of themselves (though they do generate some, inevitably)

[trinidefender]

The centre of pressure should be somewhere near the front under braking. That's why trail braking even exists - because there's a big weight and grip shift forwards. Not only is the car's mass moving forwards, the front wing is closer to the ground and the rear is also further from the ground, all helping front grip to the detriment of rear grip. The amount of grip generated by those winglets on the front wheel hubs is insignificant. They're there to act as flow conditioners for the rear of the car, not to generate downforce in and of themselves (though they do generate some, inevitably)

Not saying this is how or how they are not designed but doing this would make the car very unstable on turn-in. Maybe it is enough for most driver to manage I am not sure. With the brake bias of F1 cars being much closer to neutral than road cars and if the center of pressure is very far forwards that means under hard braking it would make the back end either lose most of its grip or completely lock up he rear and want to oversteer. I doubt that the drivers who like under steer would like this kind of setup. Also having a car that is unstable in braking makes it very hard to place in a corner.

Here is a hypothetical scenario. I'm sure you will agree that while braking the center of mass transfer forward will almost always be more than the center of pressure shift forward under hard braking. This will create a situation where the center of pressure is behind the center of mass allowing stable braking. Trail braking involves gradually easing off the brake pressure until the apex. As you ease off of the brakes the deceleration will decrease moving the center of mass further back toward the center of pressure. This may be enough to allow the center of pressure to move forward of the center of mass pushing the front of the car onto the track cutting under steer.

To me this would be the ideal situation

[Tim.Wright]

The centre of pressure should be somewhere near the front under braking. That's why trail braking even exists - because there's a big weight and grip shift forwards. Not only is the car's mass moving forwards, the front wing is closer to the ground and the rear is also further from the ground, all helping front grip to the detriment of rear grip. The amount of grip generated by those winglets on the front wheel hubs is insignificant. They're there to act as flow conditioners for the rear of the car, not to generate downforce in and of themselves (though they do generate some, inevitably)

Not saying this is how or how they are not designed but doing this would make the car very unstable on turn-in. Maybe it is enough for most driver to manage I am not sure. With the brake bias of F1 cars being much closer to neutral than road cars and if the center of pressure is very far forwards that means under hard braking it would make the back end either lose most of its grip or completely lock up he rear and want to oversteer. I doubt that the drivers who like under steer would like this kind of setup. Also having a car that is unstable in braking makes it very hard to place in a corner.

Here is a hypothetical scenario. I'm sure you will agree that while braking the center of mass transfer forward will almost always be more than the center of pressure shift forward under hard braking. This will create a situation where the center of pressure is behind the center of mass allowing stable braking. Trail braking involves gradually easing off the brake pressure until the apex. As you ease off of the brakes the deceleration will decrease moving the center of mass further back toward the center of pressure. This may be enough to allow the center of pressure to move forward of the center of mass pushing the front of the car onto the track cutting under steer.

To me this would be the ideal situation

The centre of mass doesn't move mate...

[trinidefender]

The centre of pressure should be somewhere near the front under braking. That's why trail braking even exists - because there's a big weight and grip shift forwards. Not only is the car's mass moving forwards, the front wing is closer to the ground and the rear is also further from the ground, all helping front grip to the detriment of rear grip. The amount of grip generated by those winglets on the front wheel hubs is insignificant. They're there to act as flow conditioners for the rear of the car, not to generate downforce in and of themselves (though they do generate some, inevitably)

Not saying this is how or how they are not designed but doing this would make the car very unstable on turn-in. Maybe it is enough for most driver to manage I am not sure. With the brake bias of F1 cars being much closer to neutral than road cars and if the center of pressure is very far forwards that means under hard braking it would make the back end either lose most of its grip or completely lock up he rear and want to oversteer. I doubt that the drivers who like under steer would like this kind of setup. Also having a car that is unstable in braking makes it very hard to place in a corner.

Here is a hypothetical scenario. I'm sure you will agree that while braking the center of mass transfer forward will almost always be more than the center of pressure shift forward under hard braking. This will create a situation where the center of pressure is behind the center of mass allowing stable braking. Trail braking involves gradually easing off the brake pressure until the apex. As you ease off of the brakes the deceleration will decrease moving the center of mass further back toward the center of pressure. This may be enough to allow the center of pressure to move forward of the center of mass pushing the front of the car onto the track cutting under steer.

To me this would be the ideal situation

The centre of mass doesn't move mate...

Sorry I apologise, was quite tired while writing that. Any time I said centre of mass change it really should have been weight transfer. Reading this over I feel stupid because mass is not a force therefore does not change as the car accelerates, decelerates or turns, thanks for pointing it out

[emmepi27]

New strakes here

[stefan_]

Brazil 2013 - Wednesday (20.11.2013)





via Dickie Stanford




via AMuS

[Seamus]

New.. stepped nose or optical illusion?! Can't see it clear from my phone.. :-B

[Kai]

New.. stepped nose or optical illusion?! Can't see it clear from my phone.. :-B

Just an illusion.

[stefan_]

Brazil 2013 - Thursday (21.11.2013)




via Dickie Stanford

[Seamus]