Intelligent ِDRS

[type056]

After watching Canadian GP i though that DRS should be inactive just before follower car overtake front car.
The idea prevent artificial overtaking maneuver that occurs before braking point.
The purpose of idea want two cars reach the braking point at same time,in oder word there is no spatial distance between two at braking point.
The idea achieve this purpose by inactivate DRS of follower car at one specific speed (it depend on front car speed,distance between front car and braking point and distance between two cars).
For example we have two car with constant speed which front car speed is 65 m/s (meter per second) and follower car speed with active DRS is 70 m/s that after this speed DRS should be inactivate and distance
between front car and braking point is 195 m (meter) and distance between two cars is 15 m.
So distance between follower car and braking point is 195+15=210 m.
Front car reach the braking point in 3 second and complete all 195 m (65*3=195) and follower car complete all its distance in 3 second too (70*3=210).
So two cars reach the braking point at same time.
My example was too simple but i think Charlie have all data to write a proper computer program to find that DRS inactivate speed simply.

[Shrieker]

I concur. In fact I have a similar suggestion. Your's is much more complex but I'm all in.

DRS should only bring the chasing driver level with his opponent. It should close when the overtaker is side by side with his rival (that, or the rival should also be able to open his DRS when someone with DRS open is alongside). From thereon, it's up to the drivers to sort it out. With the technology available it's entirely possible and plausible.

[godlameroso]

Would it be practical to have a car that changes some of it's shape to be more or less aerodynamically loaded depending on it's speed, and what's being asked of it in terms of steering, braking, etc?

I'm not talking about flaps like on the Huayra, but more along the lines of having surfaces that pitch and yaw, as well as expand and contract like the wings of an F14 when at higher speeds.

[Gridlock]

Someone will be along to correct/flame me in a moment, but IIRC the original recommendations of the overtaking working group were that a system was required that shed drag if you were within 1 second of the car in front - not in a zone, but everywhere, live. Technology, specifically timing loops, was the sticking point. So we get this weak sauce.

[wesley123]

Someone will be along to correct/flame me in a moment, but IIRC the original recommendations of the overtaking working group were that a system was required that shed drag if you were within 1 second of the car in front - not in a zone, but everywhere, live. Technology, specifically timing loops, was the sticking point. So we get this weak sauce.

Okay and in what way that would be less weak? Now they drive past in a specific zone on the track, without the zone they would jsut do that anywhere

[Gridlock]

Okay and in what way that would be less weak? Now they drive past in a specific zone on the track, without the zone they would jsut do that anywhere

The idea was to allow chasing cars to get within one second of the car in front, i.e. to counter the lost aero from being in the wake. Whether the original recommendation was the movable main plane we have now or not I don't know*. Of course, and this is what answers your question, as soon as the following car moves ahead it then loses DRS and the victim becomes the hunter.

The main result of the OWG was the 09 aero changes, i.e. narrow rear wing and larger front. DRS was the cherry on top, and in interview someone (I seem to recall it was Rory Byrne but I'm probably wrong) said that they wanted it everywhere but the timing issues were insurmountable.

Further reading;

http://www.fia.com/en-GB/automotive/iss ... le-1a.aspx

*Edit: Duhh, the 09 'DRS' equivalent would be the movable front wing, which makes more sense in the context of getting close to the guy in front.

[Belatti]

Oh I see now! So fans do not want artificial overtaking, but artificial parity.

[JayeOFarrell]

At the moment a lead car can open its DRS if it is within 1 second of a car about to be lapped because it is to complicated to work out which car gets the DRS and what can doesn't during lapping according to Martin Brundel. I believe that is an unfair advantage because the lead car already has a speed advantage however my point is that if they can't even write a competent enough system to figure that out how would they ever have a system that can make those calculations during the over taking move?

I completely agree with the original statement but realistically how feasible is it?

[Shrieker]

Oh I see now! So fans do not want artificial overtaking, but artificial parity.

I don't see how this would be artificial parity. If a following car didn't have to suffer from dirty air in corners, then the most it could do is to put a front wheel alongside coming out to the straight TOPS. Currently, DRS offers much more than that. The most it should do is to bring you to the tail of the car in front or alongside. From thereon, you shouldn't have any advantage. Asking this isn't asking for artificial parity, it is almost exactly what would happen if the cars didn't have to suffer from dirty air at all.

[Matt Somers]

All that is really being asked for here is a return to the slipstream effect. The air following another car with the current regs will always be a problem for the trailing car so DRS should eliminate most of that. The problem is the teams are now refining the way their aero works in order to get an even larger leap when DRS is in use. I see both sides of the argument and think there is no real winner but there definitely should be no room for parity within F1.

[krisfx]

I posted in another thread that maybe a two stage solution might work?

I'm sure there are people who could make this more plausible but here goes.

The trailing car gets full DRS and the defending car gets either some (don't know how this would work) or some form of slot gap what opens on the main plane of the wing, shedding off a bit of drag but not as much as the attacking car.

As I said, I'm sure someone could probably come up with something better, which would sound more realistic.

[raymondu999]

If your intended outcome is for the difference between half-DRS and full-DRS activation to be less (ie giving the guy behind less of an advantage) then why not just half the amount the guy behind can open it? Give the teams something like a 30mm gap rather than the 50mm allowed or something.

[krisfx]

Yeah that was the intended outcome,

I don't think it's that simple though is it?

But yeah that's the general thought process, that way the guy defending has some sort of chance to keep alongside the attacking car, rather than being a sitting duck

[Slife]

A bit off-topic, but why is that Indy cars can use slipstreams to a greater extent and F1 cars cannot ?

[mx_tifoso]

It's due to the different downforce requirements for each series. F1 needs downforce for braking and cornering, and due to the wakes that they create via the diffusers and rear wings, they interrupt the airflow for the following car. The interrupted airflow, aka dirty air, affects the following cars ability to create downforce.

Hence the reason why we only see F1 cars slip streaming on the straights, where DF isn't a priority. This explains the Indy car scenario.