Official 2021 Azerbaijan Grand Prix Thread ***SPOILERS***
Discussion
This is similar to Bar / Barg in pressure, we are all experiencing 1 Bar or one atmosphere of pressure but a pressure gauge would show 0 Barg as it measures pressure relative to atmospheric.
If I bought a tyre pressure gauge and it read 1 Bar atmospheric I’d be sending it back as mis-calibrated.
We are experiencing 1x the force of gravity right now but if I installed a data logger into a racing car and it had a ‘Z’-axis which measured +1g stationary I would be a bit perplexed as to why it was set up that way as G is an acceleration expressed as a multiple of the force of gravity and what I’m interested in is the G-force the car is developing and not the G-force the car is developing plus 1G in case I forget gravity exists. While 1G positive on the ‘Z’-axis may be accurate as an absolute, what I would want to instrument would be relative to that.
If I bought a tyre pressure gauge and it read 1 Bar atmospheric I’d be sending it back as mis-calibrated.
We are experiencing 1x the force of gravity right now but if I installed a data logger into a racing car and it had a ‘Z’-axis which measured +1g stationary I would be a bit perplexed as to why it was set up that way as G is an acceleration expressed as a multiple of the force of gravity and what I’m interested in is the G-force the car is developing and not the G-force the car is developing plus 1G in case I forget gravity exists. While 1G positive on the ‘Z’-axis may be accurate as an absolute, what I would want to instrument would be relative to that.
TheDeuce said:
Well right now, unless you're being surprisingly athletic, you're experiencing 1g. God knows what your theoretical F1 car is doing at 200mph to evade earth gravity.
Why are you ignoring what jsf writes?Not in the context of a race car. G in that context is left/right accelerate/decelerate, not vertically. It's not about downforce added to earth's gravity (which, by the way, is a myth. The earth sucks). At a constant speed, the G in terms of left/right or accelerate/decelerate is zero
stemll said:
TheDeuce said:
Well right now, unless you're being surprisingly athletic, you're experiencing 1g. God knows what your theoretical F1 car is doing at 200mph to evade earth gravity.
Why are you ignoring what jsf writes?Not in the context of a race car. G in that context is left/right accelerate/decelerate, not vertically. It's not about downforce added to earth's gravity (which, by the way, is a myth. The earth sucks). At a constant speed, the G in terms of left/right or accelerate/decelerate is zero
stemll said:
TheDeuce said:
Well right now, unless you're being surprisingly athletic, you're experiencing 1g. God knows what your theoretical F1 car is doing at 200mph to evade earth gravity.
Why are you ignoring what jsf writes?Not in the context of a race car. G in that context is left/right accelerate/decelerate, not vertically. It's not about downforce added to earth's gravity (which, by the way, is a myth. The earth sucks). At a constant speed, the G in terms of left/right or accelerate/decelerate is zero
At constant speed in a straight line a car is subjected to zero longitudinal or latitudinal g force.
I started this with the 6 tonne bombshell and it’s been interesting g to watch it unfold.
I’m going to throw in side winds and a cambered track to point out that just because an F1 car is travelling at a constant speed in a straight line doesn’t meant it’s experiencing 0G in the x and y axes.
I’m going to throw in side winds and a cambered track to point out that just because an F1 car is travelling at a constant speed in a straight line doesn’t meant it’s experiencing 0G in the x and y axes.
talksthetorque said:
I started this with the 6 tonne bombshell and it’s been interesting g to watch it unfold.
I’m going to throw in side winds and a cambered track to point out that just because an F1 car is travelling at a constant speed in a straight line doesn’t meant it’s experiencing 0G in the x and y axes.
If its experiencing any external force change (wind or change in surface profile or even Mu of the track surface) its not in a steady state or constant condition. I’m going to throw in side winds and a cambered track to point out that just because an F1 car is travelling at a constant speed in a straight line doesn’t meant it’s experiencing 0G in the x and y axes.
Edited by anonymous-user on Saturday 12th June 20:15
jsf said:
talksthetorque said:
I started this with the 6 tonne bombshell and it’s been interesting g to watch it unfold.
I’m going to throw in side winds and a cambered track to point out that just because an F1 car is travelling at a constant speed in a straight line doesn’t meant it’s experiencing 0G in the x and y axes.
If its experiencing any external force its not in a steady state or constant condition. I’m going to throw in side winds and a cambered track to point out that just because an F1 car is travelling at a constant speed in a straight line doesn’t meant it’s experiencing 0G in the x and y axes.
The only thing that matters is longitudinal and latteral rate of change (expressed as G) and yaw.
Sandpit Steve said:
TheDeuce said:
So...
Who's looking forward to the French GP this coming weekend?
After 36 exciting races in a row, since we were last in France, we should get an overdue reminder of what a dull as ditchwater race feels like to watch...Who's looking forward to the French GP this coming weekend?
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff