F1 racing: Romain Grosjean's comments about aero
Discussion
I noticed this comment from Romain Grosjean on the differences between driving in F1 and GP2:
So, should the F1 Overtaking Working Group have produced specifications for not only reducing downforce from the wings and appendanges, but also increasing allowances for ground effect? Should F1 go the way of the Champ Cars' 2007 Panoz DP01 and generate more than half of their downforce using ground effect? Have advances in computational power and understanding of aerodynamics offset the dangers of ground effect anomalies?
Romain Grosjean said:
Well, to be honest I was quite surprised how difficult it is to follow a car in Formula One. I don’t know from where it came but for sure I was behind Luca Badoer for quite a long time in the first stint and I couldn’t get closer than 0.8s because you lose most of the downforce and the car goes much faster and this makes your life quite hard when you follow another car. I think there’s a different spirit of building the car. In GP2 all the cars are the same and the ground effect is quite big compared to the aero and in Formula One we are using more aerodynamic downforce than ground effect, so in the end it makes the race much harder to fight and to get close to another car.
So following a car from behind is still very problematic. Anywhere closer than eight-tenth of a second, and you lose most of the downforce and the car accelerates. He also notes that GP2 cars produce more proportional downforce from ground effect than F1 cars.So, should the F1 Overtaking Working Group have produced specifications for not only reducing downforce from the wings and appendanges, but also increasing allowances for ground effect? Should F1 go the way of the Champ Cars' 2007 Panoz DP01 and generate more than half of their downforce using ground effect? Have advances in computational power and understanding of aerodynamics offset the dangers of ground effect anomalies?
FunkyNige said:
Weren't they a bit closer at the start of the season? Then with all the new diffusers they went back to last season's gap.
Not sure that's quite true..First race in Aus, Fastest/Slowest/diff qually times: 1:24.855 / 1:26.964 / 2.109
Last race in Spain, Fastest/Slowest/diff qually times: 1:38.182 / 1:39.925 / 1.743
(I am ignoring Luca Badoer's time)
Scuffers said:
FunkyNige said:
Weren't they a bit closer at the start of the season? Then with all the new diffusers they went back to last season's gap.
Not sure that's quite true..First race in Aus, Fastest/Slowest/diff qually times: 1:24.855 / 1:26.964 / 2.109
Last race in Spain, Fastest/Slowest/diff qually times: 1:38.182 / 1:39.925 / 1.743
(I am ignoring Luca Badoer's time)
custardtart said:
Scuffers said:
FunkyNige said:
Weren't they a bit closer at the start of the season? Then with all the new diffusers they went back to last season's gap.
Not sure that's quite true..First race in Aus, Fastest/Slowest/diff qually times: 1:24.855 / 1:26.964 / 2.109
Last race in Spain, Fastest/Slowest/diff qually times: 1:38.182 / 1:39.925 / 1.743
(I am ignoring Luca Badoer's time)
Eric Mc said:
It's a perennial problem in F1 and I cannot see any solution - barring the abolition of ALL forms of downforce - which will never happen.
but GP2 still has (relatively) high levels of downforce and they can still follow closely - as Grosjean says the use of Ground Effect there helps downforce without causing following problems. Personally I'm thinking his comments support much of my own comments from here:http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Scuffers said:
I agree that loosing the plank rules etc would do this, just have to remember why the plank was introduced in the first place.
They introduced it to stop the teams running the cars too low to the track and bottoming out (see Senna accident). I really am not convinced the plank has any detrimental effect on the aerodynamics. You could still have a plank and a skirt/tunnel aerodynamic design like GP2 has.
zac510 said:
Scuffers said:
I agree that loosing the plank rules etc would do this, just have to remember why the plank was introduced in the first place.
They introduced it to stop the teams running the cars too low to the track and bottoming out (see Senna accident). I really am not convinced the plank has any detrimental effect on the aerodynamics. You could still have a plank and a skirt/tunnel aerodynamic design like GP2 has.
KaraK said:
Eric Mc said:
It's a perennial problem in F1 and I cannot see any solution - barring the abolition of ALL forms of downforce - which will never happen.
but GP2 still has (relatively) high levels of downforce and they can still follow closely - as Grosjean says the use of Ground Effect there helps downforce without causing following problems. Personally I'm thinking his comments support much of my own comments from here:http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
In order to overtake you must -
run closely
be able to pop out of the slipstream without losing control of the car
outbreak
maintain sufficient traction and grip through the corner to complete the overtaking manoeuver
Downforce coupled with highly efficient brakes mitigates against these factors in virtually ALL formes of winged formulae - not just F1.
I honestly don't see much in the way of a solution to this. No matter what downforce related restrictions are introduced by the rule makers, the designers will find some way of clawing the downforce back. They are very clever chaps.
I really think "something" should be done about this. I thought the diffuser thing was to solve this issue?
How many times have you seen a driver catch another driver at half or a second a lap and you think, he'll be up his chuff in a few laps, this should be interesting/exciting, a few laps later he's caught up and then spends the rest of the race (or to the next pit stop) about a second behind him, makes things rather disappointing.
I don't know enough about aerodynamics and the current rules to know what the solution is, but I'm those that do can think of something.
How many times have you seen a driver catch another driver at half or a second a lap and you think, he'll be up his chuff in a few laps, this should be interesting/exciting, a few laps later he's caught up and then spends the rest of the race (or to the next pit stop) about a second behind him, makes things rather disappointing.
I don't know enough about aerodynamics and the current rules to know what the solution is, but I'm those that do can think of something.
Eric Mc said:
Runing closely is one thing. Attempting to overtake is another.
In order to overtake you must -
run closely
be able to pop out of the slipstream without losing control of the car
outbreak
maintain sufficient traction and grip through the corner to complete the overtaking manoeuver
Downforce coupled with highly efficient brakes mitigates against these factors in virtually ALL formes of winged formulae - not just F1.
I honestly don't see much in the way of a solution to this. No matter what downforce related restrictions are introduced by the rule makers, the designers will find some way of clawing the downforce back. They are very clever chaps.
All very interesting but... GP2 is a winged formulae and it all works very well. If it works for that and it has worked in F1 in the past then it can work again in F1.In order to overtake you must -
run closely
be able to pop out of the slipstream without losing control of the car
outbreak
maintain sufficient traction and grip through the corner to complete the overtaking manoeuver
Downforce coupled with highly efficient brakes mitigates against these factors in virtually ALL formes of winged formulae - not just F1.
I honestly don't see much in the way of a solution to this. No matter what downforce related restrictions are introduced by the rule makers, the designers will find some way of clawing the downforce back. They are very clever chaps.
It really is that simple. Yes the rules, with planks and banning on this that or the other in F1 currently negates alot of that but, change the rules and overtaking will return.
Eric Mc said:
Downforce coupled with highly efficient brakes mitigates against these factors in virtually ALL formes of winged formulae - not just F1.
Can't agree. As pointed out during the press conference, racing is still close in GP2, and I'll add WSBR, F3, and IndyCars as well (not to mention the old Champ Cars). All of them, particular Indy and Champs, involve(d) cars with very high downforce, yet there is plenty of overtaking.With the right design and restrictions, I think F1 racing can be closer, but there is just too much reliance on wing-generated downforce, and not enough on mechanical grip and ground effect.
Dracoro said:
I really think "something" should be done about this. I thought the diffuser thing was to solve this issue?
Not really the diffusers. The rear wings were cut down in size and aero appendages were removed to:1. Reduce the overall amount of aero downforce.
2. Reduce the cars' sensitivity to turbulence (ie. "dirty air").
You've also got driver-adjustable front wings to compensate for the loss of downforce when following a car closely.
The problem is that for a clean pass, a driver needs to be able to follow a rival very closely around a turn, and then slipstream past them down the next straight. But drivers can't follow a car too close when going around a corner due to abrupt loss of downforce (therefore much less traction), so their ability to slipstream past is very limited unless the driver in front makes a mistake or the performance difference between two cars are big enough for a following car to catch up despite the distance gap. All that limits good overtaking opportunities to straights which follow slow corners (slow enough to minimise the aero effect), cars with KERS, or by outbraking for turn. The first is hard to find, the second is discriminatory to certain cars, and the last is very difficult due to short braking zones.
The key is to allow cars to follow each other closer without suffering huge decreases in downforce, or instability when moving out from a car's wake. Ground effect can help, since it is not over-dependent on wings pushing the air up above the rear of the car. Ground effect cars don't create as violent a hole through the air as cars which rely predominantly on wings for downforce.
Edited by Jungles on Friday 28th August 10:30
Eric, your standards are slipping!Jungles said:
Eric Mc said:
Downforce coupled with highly efficient brakes mitigates against these factors in virtually ALL formes of winged formulae - not just F1.
Can't agree. As pointed out during the press conference, racing is still close in GP2, and I'll add WSBR, F3, and IndyCars as well (not to mention the old Champ Cars). All of them, particular Indy and Champs, involve(d) cars with very high downforce, yet there is plenty of overtaking.With the right design and restrictions, I think F1 racing can be closer, but there is just too much reliance on wing-generated downforce, and not enough on mechanical grip and ground effect.
The aero in GP2 was upgraded a couple of years ago, the team all remarked that the cars responded to changes better instead of just running the rear at max angle and leaving it there for the season. Over taking was reduced.
Over taking in F1 isn't helped by this stupid rpm limit. You either set the car to be as fast as possible and then when getting a slip stream the car hits the limiter, or you allow a couple of hundred rpm for this, but reduce the straight line speed making the car more likely to be overtaken.
Evangelion said:
My solution:
2 - entire car flat-bottomed
Bad idea... Flat bottomed car's are somewhat pitch sensitive2 - entire car flat-bottomed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0rzFdux3kY
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff