How much downforce will the CDG wing generate?

acer · Post 13 Mar 2006, 03:51

I would like to ask how much downforce will the CDG wing generate? If anyone has a imformation about it post to here

Monstrobolaxa · Post 13 Mar 2006, 10:18

The provisional 2008 regulations limit the total car downforce at any time on the track to 12000 N (twelve thousand Newtons). So no car at any time can have more then this...! So you just need to distribute the total downforce to the aero devices and you'll find out more or less how much will be a reasonable number.

To me...using the difuser/underbody will be even more importante in 2008, cause it's an area that doesn't create too much drag...and creates a lot of downforce. So the CDG wing will probably not be used to create a lot of downforce.

acer · Post 13 Mar 2006, 12:01

Probaly to make overtaking easier according to the FIA

kilcoo316 · Post 13 Mar 2006, 18:35

I'd love to see the FIA try to prove the downforce is limited to 12,000 N!!!

Totally, completely, irretreivably unworkable!

dumrick · Post 13 Mar 2006, 19:18

kilcoo316 wrote:I'd love to see the FIA try to prove the downforce is limited to 12,000 N!!!

Totally, completely, irretreivably unworkable!

Not at all. All it would take was a crash test: load the cars with 12000N, with all wings in full, send them top speed in a track that starts angling sideways and, when the track gets upside down, the ones that don't fall are illegal!!!!

dumrick · Post 13 Mar 2006, 19:25

Monstrobolaxa wrote:To me...using the difuser/underbody will be even more importante in 2008, cause it's an area that doesn't create too much drag...and creates a lot of downforce. So the CDG wing will probably not be used to create a lot of downforce.

Well, my personal theory is that the top of the sidepods and the engine cover will no longer be streamlined as today (that is the trend, because it maximizes rear wing efficiency) but, with CDG they will get bulky and sloped upwards to increase diffuser efficiency (the diffuser will no longer have the lower wing element to interact with) and contribute themselves to downforce.
This way, the central area of the flow around the car will be disturbed anyway and the goals of the new wing will not be achieved by the FIA!!!!

Scuderia_Russ · Post 13 Mar 2006, 19:42

Gary Anderson seems to think it's a flawed design because it leaves the supposed overtakers airbox in a low pressure state that will reduce the ram effect so much that you had might as well stick with turbulent rear wings in the first place. He also said "It looks like something a first year student would come up with."

Tom · Post 13 Mar 2006, 19:53

Surely this is a dangerouse step because a car in the low pressure zone on a straight will be faster because the low pressure does not create as much drag, however this would surely have a dramatic effect on downforce during cornering, making it near impossible to get a good run at a car on the straight anyway.

Scuderia_Russ · Post 13 Mar 2006, 19:56

Not much different to now then Tom, today cars lose downforce when cornering if following too close to a competitor today so things might not change too much in that respect.

Tom · Post 13 Mar 2006, 23:18

But the idea of the CDG is that there is less pressure still, reducing downforce even more than already is

King of Spades · Post 14 Mar 2006, 16:01

dumrick wrote:
kilcoo316 wrote:I'd love to see the FIA try to prove the downforce is limited to 12,000 N!!!

Totally, completely, irretreivably unworkable!
Not at all. All it would take was a crash test: load the cars with 12000N, with all wings in full, send them top speed in a track that starts angling sideways and, when the track gets upside down, the ones that don't fall are illegal!!!!

Except that the fuel is gravity-fed into the engine, so you wouldn't be able to drive it upside-down.

kilcoo316 · Post 14 Mar 2006, 20:03

King of Spades wrote: Except that the fuel is gravity-fed into the engine, so you wouldn't be able to drive it upside-down.

No, its pumped in at a very high pressure - remember the BAR fuel pump "container tank" fiasco last year...

Admittedly, the location of the pump inlet within the fuel tank may need to be revised

Monstrobolaxa · Post 14 Mar 2006, 21:13

kilcoo316 wrote:
King of Spades wrote: Except that the fuel is gravity-fed into the engine, so you wouldn't be able to drive it upside-down.
No, its pumped in at a very high pressure - remember the BAR fuel pump "container tank" fiasco last year...

Admittedly, the location of the pump inlet within the fuel tank may need to be revised

But the fuel pick-up pumps are located at the bottom of the fuel tank.....so yes the fuel is gravity-fed...to the pumps!

acer · Post 16 Mar 2006, 08:00

King of Spades wrote:

Except that the fuel is gravity-fed into the engine, so you wouldn't be able to drive it upside-down.

Maybe you can if you install 1 high power magnet on the tyre and another one the road when it repel's you will stick to the wall

King of Spades · Post 16 Mar 2006, 19:47

Good solution, Acer.

Maglev is sexy.