F1 front suspension geometry

[JerryH]

Can anyone enlighten me as to the goal of the latest F1 front suspension geometry?

I'm referring to the instant link center being outside the car......a-arms running down from chassis to wheel.......wider apart at the chassis than at the wheel....etc.

Now I know that considering forced based roll center theory, geometric roll centers MAY not be as importrant as we once thought......(at least in a very stiffly sprung car), but camber gain on roll, and minimizing tire side scrub are still worth pursueing, right?

I have run lots of combinations like I see on F1 (and the new Firman FB) through my mitchell program, and I can't find a way to avoid excessive tire scrub and positive camber change.

Structurally I can see an advantage (with a very high nose)......and maybe an aero benefit (allows a higher nose without the lower a-arm pickup point getting in the way of airflow uner the nose). F1 doesn't have much wheel travel, so in that case I guess it doesn't really matter......but can a lower level formula car benefit in some way (we do have SOME suspension movement) ?

Perhaps I'm missing something.......maybe tire scrub in some direction is a benefit......

Hoping Steve Lathrop, Richard Pare, Jay Novak, and anyone else with experience and expertise will chim in here. This is a serious attempt at a serious answer.....but humorous comments are welcome!

Jerry Hodges

[lmpdesigner]

The answer is simple: everything on an F1 car is compromised for aerodynamics. The front suspension is designed to have minimal impact on front wing aero and on flow under and around the body.

Most of the suspension travel on an F1 car comes from the tire sidewall.

Biggest issue isn't roll centers or camber control, it is tire contact patch load variation (power spectral density average), and transmissibility from tire to chassis. And almost all of this is controlled by dampers of various types and things-such as inertia dampers, etc.

Conclusion-don't take what F1 does as the "gospel" for car design. Everything is compromised for aero, engine and tire load.

[lmpdesigner]

Lower level formula cars have issues that F1 cars don't;

1.) We don't have aero like they do.

2.) We need mechanical grip for our cars to work.

3.) our tires are designed like an F1 tire

4.)"Us" drivers are wankers compared to an F1 driver. What they can do --we can't.

Maybe on a higher downforce car-Atlantic or C/D sports racer it may be worth a look but we give up so much mechanical grip that the net change would probably be worse of-or at best a wash. but maybe i am wrong!

[Brands]

Going back to the aero thing, when I was at Williams we would try all sorts suspension set ups in the wind tunnel, with some really wacky shapes. It was pretty much up to the mechanical guys to make it work if the aero was good! Odly enough the best aero results I ever saw on a wishbone test were small diameter round tube. This was only a baseline run with these wishbones designed to take SLA (rapid prototype parts) cladding. You would not believe the iterations we went through and would often end up with each individual wishbone leg at a different angle, nose up or nose down. Bloody boring testing though!

[R. Pare]

Yes, the geometry is heavily driven by underside aero concerns - the impact of turbulence from the wishbones to the flow of air at the leading edges of the sidepods has to be minimized in order for the rest of the bottom of the car to work properly. Most likely, if the designers could figure out a way to get the arm up above the tire centerline, you'd see that on a car in a heartbeat!

[JerryH]

Thanks guys......that was my thinking, but wanted someone with more knowledge and experience to confirm it.

Lots of lower forumla (and sports racers) manufacturers copy the "big boys", and I have always had a problem witht that......but I guess it sells cars......to those who have the money and just want the "latest" thing.

Anyone else?

Jerry Hodges

[JerryH]

Funny you should mention round tube drag......I have some experience with that.....and in some turbulent flow situations, a round tube has less drag than aero tubing.....depends on the direction of the local flow/eddies.....the aero tube may present a larger cross section to the local flow direction.


Jerry

[DB4 Tim]

Very good thread...

[Jnovak]

Very interesting questions & subject Jerry. I have been researching this for about 6 months with lots of simulations & kinematic models.

However, I think that there is some potential to using this type of geometry if the appropriate tires & other factors are taken into account.



A few comments:

1. No doubt that this effort is driven by aerodynamics.
2. When using this type of geometry the suspension system is not as "robust" as your non-aero style geometry. In that I mean that the functional adjustment window in much smaller.
3. Tires are obviously VERY important to allow the functional use of this type of geometry, radials are necessary IMHO.
4. To do it right you MUST have tire data & tune the geometry to the tires.
5. My simulations indicate that the car "generally has" a significantly reduced response time. This means it turns in faster & has a quicker yaw response time.
6. There is the potential of less rolling resistance.
7. There are additional things that may be of benefit but I need more time to work on it.

I am designing a front suspension package for a car that will be built this year that will experiment with this concept. I will be able to do both types of geometry on the same chassis with fairly minor changes. I will try it later this year & may post some info.

It is an extremely interesting subject & hopefully I will learn something new.

Thanks ... Jay Novak
NovaRace

[mwalker]

very interesting thread, and most way over my head :-) a question, though, for those with the skills: i've noticed the noses of F1 cars have a small, oval-shaped hole, indentation, something, and i was wondering what the purpose of this is? anyone have a thought?

thx

marc

[nulrich]

very interesting thread, and most way over my head :-) a question, though, for those with the skills: i've noticed the noses of F1 cars have a small, oval-shaped hole, indentation, something, and i was wondering what the purpose of this is? anyone have a thought?

It's an opening for cooling air, usually for the driver, but sometimes for electronics. It's a high pressure area, and a stagnation point, so the aerodynamic impact is negligible.

Nathan

[mwalker]

thanks

[George Main]

very interesting thread, and most way over my head :-) a question, though, for those with the skills: i've noticed the noses of F1 cars have a small, oval-shaped hole, indentation, something, and i was wondering what the purpose of this is? anyone have a thought?

thx

marc

When the Reynard 92H atlantic car appeared in america with the "move" from stressed skin tubs to carbon, an interesting phenom happened, at high speed, such as the Pheonix oval, the driver's helmet kept getting pushed upward and literally choking the driver with the chin strap. We accidently had an air pressure tap tube for the pitot tube dislocate and fall into the drivers compartment and suddenly noticed the pressures inside and determined the cause for the driver's helmet getting pushed up.
To fix the "problem" we put a small inlet hole in the nose to allow air into the driver compartment.

Electronics on it's own, would not internally produce enough heat to need a air duct to it, though enviroment heat such as locations in the side pods or engine compartment would need some kind of cooling. This isn't true of the nose area, though.

IMHO the duct isn't for that. More likely to get some air movement to the driver as the air gets pulled out of the driver compartment at speed.

[nulrich]

Electronics on it's own, would not internally produce enough heat to need a air duct to it, though enviroment heat such as locations in the side pods or engine compartment would need some kind of cooling. This isn't true of the nose area, though.

IMHO the duct isn't for that. More likely to get some air movement to the driver as the air gets pulled out of the driver compartment at speed.

You are certainly welcome to guess at its purpose. And electronics would never need to be cooled, what a silly idea! I'm sure Red Bull just added fins to the side of their sensor pod for looks .

Nathan

[George Main]

You are certainly welcome to guess at its purpose. And electronics would never need to be cooled, what a silly idea! I'm sure Red Bull just added fins to the side of their sensor pod for looks .

Nathan

Nathan,
IMHO, Uh, Nathan, the reason for the FINS, (which they aren't) is because they are a lens for the Optical sensor to "look" at the tire contact patch. That pod contains Optical Sensors, some have presumed incorrectly, ride height lasers. They are located in the nose box
I never said that electronics didn't need to cooled, though the reason for cooling isn't because of Internally CREATED heat, which it would have to be, if the electronics were located in the nose area. There simply isn't enough resident heat in the nose box to heat up electronics. Now if your talking the side pod, behind the radiator, lot's of high EXternal heat (especially when the car stops), not only from the radiator but migrating from the engine bay as well.

If a sensor (except one connected to and designed to take the heat...brake pressure as example.. or in a hot environment) is getting that hot (it's time to throw it away)...time to look for a short in the wiring, or if an ECU was causing so much heat internally that it needs to be cooled, then the design of it is too poor to be on a race car. The processor mounting surface would melt and dislodge...

Most ECU's, data loggers, control boxs don't even use current processors like an Intel or AMD latest processor, mainly because they don't need the processing power to do their job. The Mclaren ECU has a 40watt power supply and is ribbed on the casing. IMHO, this is because of EXTERNAL heat generation and the environment it needs to live in, not something generating heat from within.

As a point of reference, in 2000 Trans raced the Dallas Oval (on the road course) the outside ambient temp was 115 F, inside the driver's area, I registered 175F on a "ribbed" Commander II box (CDS) outside surface. Though all the Commander's survived the weekend (95% of the 30 car field had CDS) and continued to live the rest of the season, it was not without concern for the loggers and damage internally that could have occured, but didn't.

Not one unit failed due to heat, yet you could have baked cookies inside there

The air inside most Carbon tubs is literally stationary unless the suspension pieces intrude or there are holes were air can enter. Otherwise as in the case of the 92h, the stationary air is sucked out by the air flow over the body....

[nulrich]

George:

A couple quick points.

Adding fins increases heat transfer rate, so fins would INCREASE the temperature of the electronics if they were somehow cooler than the surrounding environment. But electronics always generate some heat, so in steady state they simply can't be cooler than ambient (unless they incorporate a heat pipe or a Peltier cooler to dump their heat somewhere else). In fact, your CDS unit heat sink at 175 F was still considerably hotter than the surrounding air because it was transferring heat OUT of the unit. You should have added a hole in the nose to cool it .

Seriously, I know for a fact that at least two F1 teams use the nose inlet partially to cool electronics. You might be surprised at how powerful some of the processors are in the various black boxes on a modern F1 car, by the way, since programming is often C code generated from a SIMULINK model, which isn't computationally efficient. And many odd things ended up in the nose in 2009 in an effort to move the CG forward (one reason Brawn's low nose was a net advantage last year).

The laser ride height sensor on the Red Bull is located in that pod, along with other sensors (hence the name "sensor pod"). The accuracy of most sensors is affected by temperature, and temperature compensation is never perfect, which is why they added cooling fins to the side. I'm not sure who told you they were a "lens."

Nathan

[Mike B]

Nathan,
IMHO, Uh, Nathan, the reason for the FINS, (which they aren't) is because they are a lens for the Optical sensor to "look" at the tire contact patch.

How can you optically "see" the tire contact patch?

[George Main]

George:

A couple quick points.

Adding fins increases heat transfer rate, so fins would INCREASE the temperature of the electronics if they were somehow cooler than the surrounding environment. But electronics always generate some heat, so in steady state they simply can't be cooler than ambient (unless they incorporate a heat pipe or a Peltier cooler to dump their heat somewhere else). In fact, your CDS unit heat sink at 175 F was still considerably hotter than the surrounding air because it was transferring heat OUT of the unit. You should have added a hole in the nose to cool it .

Seriously, I know for a fact that at least two F1 teams use the nose inlet partially to cool electronics. You might be surprised at how powerful some of the processors are in the various black boxes on a modern F1 car, by the way, since programming is often C code generated from a SIMULINK model, which isn't computationally efficient. And many odd things ended up in the nose in 2009 in an effort to move the CG forward (one reason Brawn's low nose was a net advantage last year).

The laser ride height sensor on the Red Bull is located in that pod, along with other sensors (hence the name "sensor pod"). The accuracy of most sensors is affected by temperature, and temperature compensation is never perfect, which is why they added cooling fins to the side. I'm not sure who told you they were a "lens."

Nathan

"Adding fins increases heat transfer rate, so fins would INCREASE the temperature of the electronics"
So if you blow air on the fins, would it not transfer cooler temps to the body of the box? After all, it is the box that sits in radiating heat, especially in a side pod.

I will agree that "some" electronics on an F1 car get hot internally and create their own heat though they would be ignition or actuator/controller related boxes. Though doubtful they would put them in the nose box, just not enough room or realistic for a quick removal. Along with the size they have to be and the proxmity to the engine/trans compartment which their intent would be for.

I can't think of a sensor that would get so hot that it would need cooling, not even a laser. It's normally vibration that kills them, I've never seen one that got hot on it's own or died from heat exposure.

Unfortunately, I was unable to locate a picture to show you that clearly shows that the small pod on the Red Bull car is not a laser ride height, as there's no opening on the bottom of it to shoot a beam through it. (the picture was the Red Bull car on a hoist and a shot showing the whole bottom of the car) Also in the same pic is a slot where the nose connects to the tub, that is used to "shoot" the laser through for ride height. The diminsions for the Datron Laser that most F1 teams used is twice as big in length and won't fit inside the pod. A third picture of the car confirms the position of the Datron ride height sensor located inside the foot box inbetween the master cylinders at the front bulkhead inside where the nose fits on.
Maybe this one from the Mclaren will suffice, notice the "lens" on the side. This is a Datron optical sensor. The diminisons of which are 130mm X30mm x 66.
http://i44.tinypic.com/23hk192.jpg

Second picture of same car minus the "pod", zoom it up to the point where the nose connects to the bulkhead, you'll see a slot where the bottom of the lasers (dual beams) shoot through the bottom of the car... exactly the same on the Red Bull with the pod still connected on it
http://i44.tinypic.com/168wux4.jpg

I'll see if I can find the pictures again so you can see for yourself....

[DB4 Tim]

This so sooooo good.

[George Main]

How can you optically "see" the tire contact patch?

The optical sensor measures (in this case) the lateral ground movement speed, at the tire contact patch location. Helps in judging tire deflection (slip angle) and grip level of that tire in the corners, to put it simply.

[nulrich]

"Adding fins increases heat transfer rate, so fins would INCREASE the temperature of the electronics"
So if you blow air on the fins, would it not transfer cooler temps to the body of the box? After all, it is the box that sits in radiating heat, especially in a side pod.

Well, you have to include the rest of my statement: "Adding fins increases heat transfer rate, so fins would INCREASE the temperature of the electronics if they were somehow cooler than the surrounding environment." I was being a little facetious, sorry.

Fins will cool the electronics if the fins are hotter than the air surrounding the fins, whether the air is "blowing" or still. Moving air will make the fins much more effective. My point was that, in steady state, the electronics will always run hotter than the environment around them, since they generate heat. How much hotter depends on the effectiveness of the heat sink.

I will agree that "some" electronics on an F1 car get hot internally and create their own heat though they would be ignition or actuator/controller related boxes. Though doubtful they would put them in the nose box, just not enough room or realistic for a quick removal. Along with the size they have to be and the proxmity to the engine/trans compartment which their intent would be for.

ALL electronics generate heat, even sensors. How much depends on the specific device, and how hot a given box runs depends on the how much heat is generated and how effectively it is transferred out.

You really can't think of any electronic devices in the nose that generate substantial heat? Or any "actuator/controller related boxes" that would be located in the nose? I can think of several boxes that are sometimes located in that area that have fairly big power devices inside (including flap actuator controllers). Looks pretty busy on the Ferrari, for example!

Unfortunately, I was unable to locate a picture to show you that clearly shows that the small pod on the Red Bull car is not a laser ride height, as there's no opening on the bottom of it to shoot a beam through it. (the picture was the Red Bull car on a hoist and a shot showing the whole bottom of the car) Also in the same pic is a slot where the nose connects to the tub, that is used to "shoot" the laser through for ride height. The diminsions for the Datron Laser that most F1 teams used is twice as big in length and won't fit inside the pod. A third picture of the car confirms the position of the Datron ride height sensor located inside the foot box inbetween the master cylinders at the front bulkhead inside where the nose fits on.

I'm told Red Bull doesn't use the Datron sensor. I just looked through the 600+ high res photos I have of the 2009 Red Bull and couldn't find any sign of a laser ride height sensor inside the nose. I'd be interested to see any evidence you have to the contrary, as it would surprise a number of people .

Here's a photo of the front bulkhead, don't see any sign of a laser ride height sensor.

Nathan

[Brands]

We used a nose duct at Williams from time to time to cool electrickery, and at one point to cool the dampers, although this was never raced. I don't remember what they where experimenting with but we certainly ran a pressure tapped duct in the nose.

Going through the old grey matter I think the damper cooling duct was for the 'active' car the test team ran to validate the wind tunnel. It was nearly 10 years ago now so I'm sure I can spill the beans a little! The active ride car was developed to hold the car at ride heights we used in the tunnel to help validate what we were seeing in half scale. We weren't chasing a problem, it was just part of the development but I only remember us running this car for one, maybe two seasons. We used to get Formula Ford and F3 drivers to do the 'boring' straight line tests. There was good coralation between model and full size - which is good!

[Fatoldman7]

IF there's one thing I get out of this discussion, and that is even the big dogs still use zip ties to hold stuff on there cars. I won't feel so guilty the next time I break out the tub-o-ties.

[George Main]

Well, you have to include the rest of my statement: "Adding fins increases heat transfer rate, so fins would INCREASE the temperature of the electronics if they were somehow cooler than the surrounding environment." I was being a little facetious, sorry.

Fins will cool the electronics if the fins are hotter than the air surrounding the fins, whether the air is "blowing" or still. Moving air will make the fins much more effective. My point was that, in steady state, the electronics will always run hotter than the environment around them, since they generate heat. How much hotter depends on the effectiveness of the heat sink.

ALL electronics generate heat, even sensors. How much depends on the specific device, and how hot a given box runs depends on the how much heat is generated and how effectively it is transferred out.

You really can't think of any electronic devices in the nose that generate substantial heat? Or any "actuator/controller related boxes" that would be located in the nose? I can think of several boxes that are sometimes located in that area that have fairly big power devices inside (including flap actuator controllers). Looks pretty busy on the Ferrari, for example!

I'm told Red Bull doesn't use the Datron sensor. I just looked through the 600+ high res photos I have of the 2009 Red Bull and couldn't find any sign of a laser ride height sensor inside the nose. I'd be interested to see any evidence you have to the contrary, as it would surprise a number of people .

Here's a photo of the front bulkhead, don't see any sign of a laser ride height sensor.

Nathan

Seen quite a few shots of cars in garage, that have removed parts from the bulkhead and that includes the ride height sensor (expensive piece to damage). Jack point bracket to hoist the car with a hydraulic jack? Alignment attachment?
Though your right about electronics in the nose on the Brawn and now I see with your picture electronics in the Ferrari nose. Note the quick connect connector mounted on the bulkhead of the Ferrari. Looks like a 25 pin or so, connector)
Though there doesn't appear to be one on the Red Bull car.

Got any pictures of the nose cone from the back? the slot for pointing the sensor to the ground is on that piece, on the Red Bull car, if I remember correctly it was sometime around Monaco last year or before.

Just a thought, maybe it's the controller for the electric power steering? I believe most are using electric power steering and the box for that can get quite warm.

Hopefully my dementia will subside and I'll remember where I saw those pictures.

Geo

[George Main]

IF there's one thing I get out of this discussion, and that is even the big dogs still use zip ties to hold stuff on there cars. I won't feel so guilty the next time I break out the tub-o-ties.

Boy, I miss the old duct tape that they don't make anymore, nothing ever fell off the car using that stuff. Couldn't ever remove it either, LOL....

[DB4 Tim]

Nathan...where do you get such great shots of the technical items...I I have gone to the site and cannot find the ones you do...very good they are.

Here's a photo of the front bulkhead, don't see any sign of a laser ride height sensor.

Nathan

[George Main]

A reason for the quick connect connector on the Ferrari and the Brawn? Both cars have the winglets that contain a camera in the winglet, maybe what the connector is for.....

[rickb99]

IF there's one thing I get out of this discussion, and that is even the big dogs still use zip ties to hold stuff on there cars. I won't feel so guilty the next time I break out the tub-o-ties.

Yes but, those are Formula One tie-wraps. They cost $1,000 a dozen.

[Ananth K]

The optical sensor measures (in this case) the lateral ground movement speed, at the tire contact patch location. Helps in judging tire deflection (slip angle) and grip level of that tire in the corners, to put it simply.

It is impossible to measure tire slip angles in this manner. Reliably, anyway.

[Christopera]

I'm proud to say the wiring on my FC is installed in a more organized manner than the Ferrari there. Zip ties however are also my main tool for attachment.

[Christopera]

Also a question.

For those in the know, what is the best way to reduce the pressure taht exists within the driver compartment? Keep in mind that I ask this within the context of an open top, open wheeled car. So within in the design constraints of a current open wheeled car like F1 or even FC. Decrease the size of the driver compartment opening? Or is this high pressure area more likely a result of the drivers hemlet as well as other closely related (spatially) variegated vertical areas?

[Jnovak]

It is not that there is a high pressure in the drivers compartment but a low pressure just outside the compartment. The inside of the passenger compartment is typically fairly dead air & thus is close to atmospheric pressure & has a higher relative pressure to the high speed air flowing over the cockpit & the drivers helmet, This pressure differential is what is pulling the drivers head out of the cockpit.

Thanks ... Jay Novak
NovaRace

[R. Pare]

You can decrease the lift generated right above the cockpit by ducting air into the cockpit from somewhere else - a duct up front to "cool the shocks" works quite well.

Running in the rain is a whole 'nother issue...........

[nulrich]

You can shape the surfaces surrounding the cockpit, especially the windscreen lip and roll hoop fairing area, in such a way as to reduce the lift generated on the driver's helmet. Requires CFD, time in the wind tunnel, or lots of track testing to get right. Hard to accomplish without negatively impacting the overall aero performance of the car, of course. Look at a current F3 or F1 car for some ideas, although they often still have to fuss with it for each individual driver.

Or you can do what Van Diemen did, and exhaust one of the sidepods into the driver's compartment...although I think it was accidental .

Nathan

[George Main]

It is impossible to measure tire slip angles in this manner. Reliably, anyway.

The optical sensor is looking specifically at lateral slipage by measuring lateral ground speed velocities of the ground just inboard of the tire patch. The increasing velocity of the lateral speed (as the tire acquires a slip angle) while cornering are measured.
As the tire contorts it has a velocity associated with it, it will progressively accelerate (laterally) until full slip is reached. A sudden increase in velocity after the "full" slip angle is reached, indicates a loss of grip and these readings are compared and used in conjunction with laser ride height, suspension sensors, pushrod load cells and tire pressure readings.
These are fed into a simulation (Adams, as one example) model that contain a tire model based on "in house" tire measurements from a "tire contact patch" machine, that measures what slip angle the tire is capable of. Tire spring rate, pneumatic trail, squash, etc. are also measured. Tire pressure changes are also noted due to tire compression.
The only gray areas in the analysis are pavement changes, differences in compound/construction (of the same tire), wear, etc. After a large enough database is built, the gray areas become lessened.
Though it is the closest yet, to measuring a (real time) contact patch and slip angle, IMHO.

[Ananth K]

George,

I have never heard of tire slip angles being measured directly, usefully anyway. Body sideslip angle, now that's fairly easy to measure if you have a gyro and a lateral speed sensor, or even an accelerometer.

I realize how the data could be borderline useful in an MBS simulation (I do this for a living) however what I don't understand is how you'd reliably measure slip angle.

Slip angle as you know is the difference between true heading and theoretical heading of the tire. Even if you could somehow measure true heading of each individual tire, the theoretical heading would constantly change based on weight transfer, chassis compliances, road undulation etc. I just dont see how you can get any useful data specially on an uncontrolled surface like a race track.

[George Main]

George,

I have never heard of tire slip angles being measured directly, usefully anyway. Body sideslip angle, now that's fairly easy to measure if you have a gyro and a lateral speed sensor, or even an accelerometer.

I realize how the data could be borderline useful in an MBS simulation (I do this for a living) however what I don't understand is how you'd reliably measure slip angle.

Slip angle as you know is the difference between true heading and theoretical heading of the tire. Even if you could somehow measure true heading of each individual tire, the theoretical heading would constantly change based on weight transfer, chassis compliances, road undulation etc. I just dont see how you can get any useful data specially on an uncontrolled surface like a race track.

I also have never heard of "live" tire slip angles measured directly. Though tire machines that measure a rolling tire on a wheel under controlled vertical/lateral (and combinations of them) loads and creating a slip angle that can be measured. Spring rate (through different pressure ranges) rate of the tire, pneumatic trail, max slip (through different pressures, lat-vertical-long g load ranges). The numbers and info of the tire can create a sim model that can contain enough information that when the tire is running and measured from the assorted sensors, the slip angle can be calculated "fairly" accurately.

As example, the height of the road to the wheel (tire squash) from laser ride height, the acceleration/deacceleration of the side wall as it contorts into/out of slip (any contortion with lateral G present considered as slip), read with the optical sensor. Loads through pushrod load cells. Highly accurate (and $$) GPS, Front and rear (between the axles) for reading the heading of that end of the car. Accelerometers front/rear (between the axles) for G readings on that end.
The usual cast of characters, steering, throttle, brake press., speed. Probably missing a few of them,
As you stated there are many things "surrounding" a tire's performance, some from within, right down to chemical property of the rubber that's changing at a perticular time
and the outside influences that we either can control or can't.
I 'm not aware of anyone that has gained an absolute number for every given 100th of second in time, though with the many sensors focused on the tire, the majority of even a single corner (of a track) can be realized.

Such is the life of dealing with rubber-
A few years back I got into a conversation with tire compound engineer. What a world these guys live in and interesting how rubber compound mixing is so delicate and has many things that can change the intended result. Some for the good and some for the bad. I came away from that conversation with a totally different view and information on tires than any "regular" tire engineer would ever let go of.
You can bake two cakes exactly the same way, same batch, same temp and end up with two different consistancies and even taste different. Such is the art of making tires.

How the tire companies make tires and get it right as often as they do, is truly amazing.
And how tire slip measurement (from a moving car) and still is not an absolute science in this day and age is also just as amazing.

It's also like coming up with an absolute number for understeer...until we can measure a drivers mental ability and powers or his past experiences, there isn't one...

My best advice is don't look for an absolute, look for a comparitive number. The majority of the strength of data acquisition is there anyways... and we're speaking about rubber..

The guy that invents a singular tire slip sensor is going to make millions, until then the mental beatings (though getting less) are going to continue.. IMHO

[Christopera]

You can shape the surfaces surrounding the cockpit, especially the windscreen lip and roll hoop fairing area, in such a way as to reduce the lift generated on the driver's helmet. Requires CFD, time in the wind tunnel, or lots of track testing to get right. Hard to accomplish without negatively impacting the overall aero performance of the car, of course. Look at a current F3 or F1 car for some ideas, although they often still have to fuss with it for each individual driver.

Or you can do what Van Diemen did, and exhaust one of the sidepods into the driver's compartment...although I think it was accidental .

Nathan

Hahaha. The Van Diemen side pod inners are a mess.

[Christopera]

I see that the majority of the new cars incorporate vortex generators on the bottoms of the front wing endplates.

Pretty good examples can be seen here: http://www.mondial-karting.com/autom...s/f1saison.htm

What's the theory behind this? Seal the wing to the track? Or some type of interaction with the front and front tires?