Research Questions

[kalyangoparaju]

Hey guys,

I am a graduate student pursuing Aerospace Engineering with specialization in Aerodynamics and CFD. My Masters thesis will be on aspects related to race car aerodynamics.

In this regard, I would like to know from any one if there are any big problems which don't have a permanent solution as yet in the world of formula-1 . According to my Advisor, it's fun to do research on problems which are unsolved rather than just some optimization and doing simulations after simulations.

With DRS, the trailing driver has a really strong edge and seems to be the winner almost all the time. I was actually wondering if something could be done where the leading driver can also benefit and overtaking is not really that easy. I know it sounds really crude and that's the reason I am here to take all your inputs.

Hope you guys can help me out

[Jeffsvilleusa]

For what it's worth (I have very little technical knowledge), it seems to me the problem in F1 these days is how to generate downforce in 'dirty air' (in the wake of another car). All parts are designed for clean airflow, so one car following another loses a lot of grip and therefore is much more difficult complete a pass. This is the reason we have DRS, KERS and the short-lifespan tires. Of course you are already probably aware of this.

To me, the problem of F1 today is how to generate downforce when in both clean air and in disrupted airflow. I'm not sure, but I think ground effects is the answer, but maybe there is another way! But for all I know, this proposition may be against the laws of physics!

DRS, KERS etc. are meant to equalize the playing field, but is there another way?

Just a thought.

[Fil]

Yep. F1's longest-standing issue has been the negative effect of the leading car's aerodynamic wake. The unresolved issue being how to reduce the wake, or how to minimise the front-end sensitivity of the following car.


If you want to go down this path, a wealth of ideas and arguments have been all but exhausted on F1T:
Aerodynamic study of the CDG concept
"How can F1 increase overtaking" - A Level Physics Report
Divergent Governance: A Solution to the Overtaking Problem
Technical Regulations for 2009-2015
The Overtaking News Topic
Future Aero Regulations: ideas
Is the recipe for PASSING realy that difficult?
Diffuser vs. Rear Wing
CDG wing concept
ban the wings?
Underbody Tunnels
F1Technical Overtaking Working Group

[Jeffsvilleusa]

Hehe, while my soapbox is still warm...

In considering the current aerodynamic paradox of F1 which seems to have been analyzed to death on this forum, I figured I would toss my hat in the ring- kalyangoparaju I hope you will not mind me using your thread as a forum for these thoughts, but I will try to ultimately tie it into your question.

The Problem
The current design of F1 cars are very difficult to overtake on the track because they are highly sensitive to disturbances in the oncoming airflow, particularly when they are following another car on the track, to such an extent that the following car losses grip and is essentially handicapped in the prospect of overtaking.

Current solution
DRS, KERS, short-lifespan tires, 'Overtaking Working Group' implementing global reduction in downforce.

Proposed alternate solutions
Thanks Fil for posting all those links, I read quite a few of them, not all, and post summaries of what I read there following: (Apologies to those whose ideas may be misrepresented)
-Race on much wider race tracks that incorporate banked curves (Possibilities to pass without being in the disturbed airflow)
-Mandate extra-hard tires (Cars are on a 'knife-edge' where mistakes are easier and skill is magnified)
-Disallow front wings (Reduce dependancy on aero and therefore the penalty of the wake)
-Allow greater design freedom (Current Formula is inefficient)
-Reduce overall downforce (Same logic as 'disallow front wings')
-Reintroduce ground effects (Possibly generates downforce regardless of wake)
-Mandate mid-mounted wings only (Reduces penalty of wake)
-Reintroduce manual gear shifters/clutch (increase difficulty to drive cars, therefore making drivers difference in skill more obvious)
-Change nothing (drivers are able to pass if they try hard enough)

Soapbox
In my opinion, any solution that involves regressing in terms of technology or mandating inferior equipment is against the spirit of innovation and competition, and thus may not be considered. Likewise, any solution that involves the arbitrary banning of any particular element is against the spirit of innovation and competition and is also forbidden, unless such an element is a clear safety hazard. F1 is about the cutting edge of technology, not the dull edge.

My assessment is that this current chassis design which suffers from the aerodynamic phenomenon of losing grip in another car's wake will always carry this penalty, it is a weakness in design. This chassis design has plenty of strengths also, it is just part of it's characteristics. The problem is that this chassis design is mandated to all teams. In my (admittedly purist, perhaps impossible) view, any design that is mandated is against the spirit of innovation, with the exception of safety measures, characteristics that define the type of racing (open wheels) and perhaps cost-saving measures. If we allow teams the freedom, I'm sure there are many ways to make an efficient car when it comes to balancing aero-dependency with aero-sensitivity.

How can we expect designers to 'think outside the box' when regulations define a very strict box within which all design must take place? Only loop-hole exploitation remains. We are making lawyers of our designers! I understand Colin Chapman had a similar sentiment when his twin chassis car was outlawed. The main drawback to this approach is that racing will likely become much more dangerous.

That said, to apply this concept to your research question, how about designing an alternative chassis design to the current model which will complement the other? Perhaps a design that won't suffer in the wake, but may carry other penalties. A yin for all this yang we have been experiencing!

[bhall]

The current design of F1 cars are very difficult to overtake on the track because they are highly sensitive to disturbances in the oncoming airflow, particularly when they are following another car on the track, to such an extent that the following car losses grip and is essentially handicapped in the prospect of overtaking.

I no longer think that's necessarily true. As I've said in another thread, we're in year 3 of an aerodynamic formula specifically designed for overtaking; yet, nothing really changed until the introduction of rapidly degrading tires which, themselves, introduced the potential for cars to be at vastly different levels of performance. That is the key to overtaking and why, after years and years of ever tighter regulations making performance (and reliability) relatively identical, overtaking is now so prolific. DRS merely makes the overtaking gratuitous, rather like F1 porn.

Ciro started a thread meant to highlight great drives from great drivers in the past. His first installment talked about Graham Hill in the 1965 Monaco Grand Prix, where, while leading in the early stages of the race, he went off track and lost a solid minute of time while getting out of his car to push it back on track. In that full minute of time, he only fell from first to fifth. Where would a driver be now if he lost a minute of time, especially in the early stages of the race? And could he possibly turn around and win the race like Hill did?

The field is simply bunched together with today's regulations. Save for the introduction of gimmicks, overtaking on a grand prix circuit is always going to be difficult, if not impossible, under such circumstances. Blaming the problem on aerodynamics - which, by the way, is at least 90% of how F1 achieves F1 performance - is too easy.