[F87source]

Originally Posted by Artemis

Although it serves a totally different purpose, but that idea sprung to mind from operating the air brake handle on gliders (operated with your left hand): it's purely mechanical, interfering with airflow to reduce speed + you can modulate 'how much brake' you give (from a bit resistance to full resistance).

Of course in F1 the purpose is to maintain high speed, but to avoid the car from porpoising. Hence, the idea of dynamically modulating the airflow under the car, either by restricting airflow gateways/channels or by dynamically channeling airflow (either more to the back or more to the sides in the fastest sections of the track, operated by an actuator, as switching railway tracks with a handle).

Or what about a diffuser that can be modulated (dynamical: different angle position settings with the touch of a button).

Attachment 2895903

Yeah it would be a cool idea to be able to manipulate the air flow, but it would be really hard to make the aero devices manipulate air flow in such a way to stop porpoising but not lose downforce. Because you can use it to stall the floor so it doesn't bounce on the straights by sacrificing downforce. But it will not work in the high speed corners because you will lose downforce by stalling air flow or bleeding off air. Maybe there is a design out there that could some how reshape the floor to prevent it from stalling when it is under max load and is really close to the ground idk.


But imo active ride height would be the best solution, and it would make these cars tremendously fast and stable. Too bad the FIA is for some reason anti innovation, maybe cost? idk.

[M5Rick]

Sainz holding up Chas slightly in the pit with the 'stacking' can happen,Sainz was second after all and Chas was held up momentarily letting his feelings flow with some expletives and easy to blame Ferrari for another b@ls up but there was not a lot they could do under those circumstances in the tight confines of that track where you can't swing a cat.
.

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by Artemis

What about focusing more onto handling the source(s) ?

For example, what about dynamically handling the air flow processed beneath the car: is it allowed under the rules to use electronically operated gate valves for the 'gateways' channeling air flow under the car (gate valves partially restricting, possibly even intermittently, air flow at (very) high speed, reducing sufficient downforce to avoid contact with the track surface) ? Electronically operated: just like DRS is operated by the driver simply pushing a button.

Electronically operated valves or flowchanging devices are not allowed. (active aero; except for DRS (which is limited to a certain size and place)

I hinted in the "First 2022 Regulations F1 car revealed" topic that maybe a flap that bends might be used to control the buildup of underpressure that causes porpoising.
Like a reed valve. This could be made as part of the floor; incorporating a piece of carbon in the floor that bends through underpressure, opening an equalizing hole. I wonder if this would count as an 'aperture', as it is closed when stationairy. (from what I've read and understood from the rules, apertures are not allowed in the floor other than to cool things)

https://www.zpost.com/forums/showpos...&postcount=754

But the regulations are quite complex to understand fully....

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by F87source

But imo active ride height would be the best solution, and it would make these cars tremendously fast and stable. Too bad the FIA is for some reason anti innovation, maybe cost? idk.

safety.
Active ride heigth was banned in ~1995. (no active suspension parts)
The FIA doesn't want the cars to get too fast.

[F87source]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

safety.
Active ride heigth was banned in ~1995. (no active suspension parts)
The FIA doesn't want the cars to get too fast.

Ground effects wasn't deemed safe back then but technology improved enough where skirts aren't required and now can be implemented safely. So active ride could be made safe, and it'll benefit driver comfort and solve a big issue with modern day ground effects. It'll also help close the gap between the 2022 cars and the cars if the past, iirc the 2017 cars were over a second a lap quicker than the 2022 cars in qualifying at Barcelona.

Edit- it would also really help with low speed performance, something these cars struggle with alot .

[Artemis]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

Electronically operated valves or flowchanging devices are not allowed. (active aero; except for DRS (which is limited to a certain size and place)

I hinted in the "First 2022 Regulations F1 car revealed" topic that maybe a flap that bends might be used to control the buildup of underpressure that causes porpoising.
Like a reed valve. This could be made as part of the floor; incorporating a piece of carbon in the floor that bends through underpressure, opening an equalizing hole. I wonder if this would count as an 'aperture', as it is closed when stationairy. (from what I've read and understood from the rules, apertures are not allowed in the floor other than to cool things)

https://www.zpost.com/forums/showpos...&postcount=754

But the regulations are quite complex to understand fully....

Then maybe the use of floor board materials that are even more flexible. Flexing to a critical point due to airflow dynamics that it either restricts/covers an airflow gateway/channel or accesses/widens differently patterned ones channeling part of the airflow to the sides.

Or a less complex solution of gateways/channels in different materials: those heading to the back structurally molded in a very stiff compound (virtually no flexibility, as is the case now) while those gateways/channels heading sideways in a very flexible, expendable compound (for example flexible fins integrated in a channel). This way, those channeling sideways will flex/widen/expand at high(er) speed, unlike the sturdy ones channeling airflow to the back. A marginal alleviation of the back could already make a big difference.

Brief, dynamically generating a different ground effect at high speed (that's when the porpoising effect happens). No electronics involved. Just using the laws of phyics at play on stiff and flexible materials.

This may all sound crazy, but teams got to think out of the box to come up with smart solutions to remedy porpoising. It could get them an advantage over the competition.

Remember: porpoising is inspired by dolphins bouncing around. But dolphins can also simply stay under water. All it takes is dynamically operating their tail, fins and force differently during the high speed movement.

https://academic.oup.com/icb/article/42/5/1071/659889

[///M Power-Belgium]

Originally Posted by M5Rick

Sainz holding up Chas slightly in the pit with the 'stacking' can happen,Sainz was second after all and Chas was held up momentarily letting his feelings flow with some expletives and easy to blame Ferrari for another b@ls up but there was not a lot they could do under those circumstances in the tight confines of that track where you can't swing a cat.

Red Bull's brain behind the outstanding race and pitstop strategy is :

"Hannah Schmitz"

[Killed by Death]

Good summary of how Ferrari managed once again to be Ferrari..

[TheBingoBalls]

Originally Posted by Killed by Death

Good summary of how Ferrari managed once again to be Ferrari..

This is so frustrating. Would LEC be guaranteed a win if Ferrari didn't double stack? Who knows but the win was lost when they did. And the fact that LEC fell behind and finished behind SAI was just the bitch slap just because. Ferrari doing Ferrari things I guess.

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by F87source

Ground effects wasn't deemed safe back then but technology improved enough where skirts aren't required and now can be implemented safely. So active ride could be made safe, and it'll benefit driver comfort and solve a big issue with modern day ground effects. It'll also help close the gap between the 2022 cars and the cars if the past, iirc the 2017 cars were over a second a lap quicker than the 2022 cars in qualifying at Barcelona.

Edit- it would also really help with low speed performance, something these cars struggle with alot .

Active ride control would make the cars much much faster, especially in corners where most accidents happen. FIA doesn't want that.
I don't think you understand the FIA mindset.
An accident at higher speed has more risc of injury than an accident at lower speed.
Why do you think suspensions were made more basic this year? (and like I wrote, it was already planned for earlier implementation, but at some point postponed a year)
And active suspension control are considered drivers aids. Another thing that the FIA don't want.
You're starting a discussion already held in 1993

[///M Power-Belgium]

[F87source]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

Active ride control would make the cars much much faster, especially in corners where most accidents happen. FIA doesn't want that.
I don't think you understand the FIA mindset.
An accident at higher speed has more risc of injury than an accident at lower speed.
Why do you think suspensions were made more basic this year? (and like I wrote, it was already planned for earlier implementation, but at some point postponed a year)
And active suspension control are considered drivers aids. Another thing that the FIA don't want.
You're starting a discussion already held in 1993

You're not wrong they want it to be safer, but if you want better racing you gotta fix the low speed side of things too, cars can't keep getting heavier and less advanced. Because that is a formula for being slower.

If they want it to be safer they could limit adaptive ride height to benefit aero at low speed and just switch to anti porpoising for high speed, it'll save drivers from concussions from all the bouncing.

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by F87source

Because that is a formula for being slower.

You still don't understand the FIA's mindset.
It's not their goal to make the cars faster.
It's about making racing exciting while keeping the speeds down.
This year it's more exciting than last year. So they're on the right path

Trust me, they're not gonna introduce active ride height control.
Or ANY other active suspension tech. They've banned that almost 30(!) years ago.

And Brawn said it himself in the video I posted: It's for the teams to solve and handle. The FIA has a very clear view on that.

[///M Power-Belgium]

Originally Posted by Killed by Death

Good summary of how Ferrari managed once again to be Ferrari..

Killed by Death

[Killed by Death]

Originally Posted by TheBingoBalls

This is so frustrating. Would LEC be guaranteed a win if Ferrari didn't double stack? Who knows but the win was lost when they did. And the fact that LEC fell behind and finished behind SAI was just the bitch slap just because. Ferrari doing Ferrari things I guess.

Redbull playing chess while Ferrari playing checkers

[FrankMstein]

While on delay...

[F87source]

Originally Posted by GuidoK

You still don't understand the FIA's mindset.
It's not their goal to make the cars faster.
It's about making racing exciting while keeping the speeds down.
This year it's more exciting than last year. So they're on the right path

Trust me, they're not gonna introduce active ride height control.
Or ANY other active suspension tech. They've banned that almost 30(!) years ago.

And Brawn said it himself in the video I posted: It's for the teams to solve and handle. The FIA has a very clear view on that.

I know they're not going to introduce active ride but I would like them to do so. And yes I saw brawn say there will be no active ride control and porpoising was the teams problem.

If they wanted to make racing even better then low speed needs to be addressed because that's where these cars are struggling.

[TheBingoBalls]

Originally Posted by Killed by Death

Redbull playing chess while Ferrari playing checkers

Checkers? More like Connect 4.

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by F87source

If they wanted to make racing even better then low speed needs to be addressed because that's where these cars are struggling.

There are probably just as many opinions about that as there are persons

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by ///M Power-Belgium

Red Bull's brain behind the outstanding race and pitstop strategy is :

"Hannah Schmitz"

Kudos to Hannah!

[F87source]

Originally Posted by ///M Power-Belgium

Red Bull's brain behind the outstanding race and pitstop strategy is :

"Hannah Schmitz"

It was more like ferrari screwing up their strategy so bad that redbull inherited the win...

Literally ferrari ordered a double stack at the start of the lap while the gap between charles and carlos was 3ish seconds, by the end of the lap the gap evaporated to almost nothing so they screwed over charles and he had to wait for carlos.

So pretty much ferrari screwed up so hard redbull benefitted, redbull didn't have some master class strategy that put them in the lead they just inherited it.

[M5Rick]

How it all came together for Checo.