Deltawing for LeMans in 2012
#101
Posted 13 March 2012 - 13:59
Advertisement
#102
Posted 13 March 2012 - 14:03
#103
Posted 13 March 2012 - 14:06
Yeah some parts of Le Mans are like that, but that's a problem for all cars.
The line is lightest on the right groove where 80% of the weight and friction takes place, darker on the left groove where less happens and quite dark in the middle - take the colour differences as traction grip levels obviously the darkest being the slipperiest and right where the Deltawings front wheels will traverse.
#104
Posted 13 March 2012 - 14:13
#105
Posted 13 March 2012 - 14:15
The line is lightest on the right groove where 80% of the weight and friction takes place, darker on the left groove where less happens and quite dark in the middle - take the colour differences as traction grip levels obviously the darkest being the slipperiest and right where the Deltawings front wheels will traverse.
It's hard to tell if this will be significant though..
I'm not sure how to word it, but it seems to me the Deltawing will always have at least one front wheel on what is the optimal part of the groove. (it's funny enough this car already managed to split 'the groove' into different parts though)
#106
Posted 13 March 2012 - 14:20
The Truck Tracks©
So the Deltawing won't be straddling the grooves any more than a normal car would.
Of course it will be, at that apex right there the Deltawings front wheels will be smack in the middle on one years worth of car's and truck's dripping oil as well as unused/unworn (rougher) surface.
#107
Posted 13 March 2012 - 14:52
#108
Posted 13 March 2012 - 15:02
Of course it will be, at that apex right there the Deltawings front wheels will be smack in the middle on one years worth of car's and truck's dripping oil as well as unused/unworn (rougher) surface.
On the other hand the car shouldn't need much lateral grip up front to steer, the front wheels are more like the rudder on a boat turned backwards, more a trimming mechanism than a conventional highly loaded steering axle.
#109
Posted 13 March 2012 - 18:20
On the other hand the car shouldn't need much lateral grip up front to steer, the front wheels are more like the rudder on a boat turned backwards, more a trimming mechanism than a conventional highly loaded steering axle.
If so your not using the available grip good enough.. -> wearing the rears faster than a balanced car.
#110
Posted 13 March 2012 - 18:31
#111
Posted 13 March 2012 - 21:20
Of course it will be, at that apex right there the Deltawings front wheels will be smack in the middle on one years worth of car's and truck's dripping oil as well as unused/unworn (rougher) surface.
As silly as this sounds, could the car be setup (using 4 wheel steering) so that the front of the car would hug the apex during everyone corner.
To do so might require the front wheels to steer in the opposite direction of movement with the rear wheels going the majority of the steering.
#112
Posted 13 March 2012 - 21:49
2)Various series have demonstrated that rule changes are not enough
3)they have done something reasonably significant that hasn't been tried before with 'open wheeler's
I'd guess that dollar for dollar a conventional car could be faster round a given circuit, that is not the point.
#113
Posted 13 March 2012 - 23:37
Even if it does drive reasonably under normal conditions how will it react when it becomes unstable and gets out of shape, especially through a quick corner? How do you 'correct' it?
#114
Posted 13 March 2012 - 23:45
Wil
#115
Posted 14 March 2012 - 05:57
The rear will be carrying much more weight than the front. There is probably twice as much rubber on the road at the rear so they would need to wear at twice the rate anyway.If so your not using the available grip good enough.. -> wearing the rears faster than a balanced car.
#116
Posted 14 March 2012 - 08:40
Despite liking the 'out of the box' thinking, I can't see it being anything less than a massive flop.
Are you talking from a commercial POV or a car dynamics POV? First will be a huge publicity (albeit momentary) success and will be quickly forgotten ala P34 Tyrell 6 wheeler so I guess you're correct but that latter is untrue and the car will perform to all it's parameters and will be successful primarily because it is unregulated running against regulated cars - regardless of how bad it may be on equal ground, the 'half weight' advantage (475 Vs 900kgs) is a huge one.
Even if it does drive reasonably under normal conditions how will it react when it becomes unstable and gets out of shape, especially through a quick corner? How do you 'correct' it?
Correction is the same as any normal vehicle, it might suffer from some snap oversteer occasionally but will snap back into place equally as fast because of it's very low polar moment and a triangular footprint vehicle's ability to change yaw rapidly.
By the way, as I mentioned earlier about 3 wheelers handling opposite to what most people think, did anyone see the Morgan 3 wheeler on Top Gear and it's horrible understeer ...
#117
Posted 14 March 2012 - 08:41
It's an interesting exercise, certainly.
I'm now looking forward to its debut race. The proof of the pudding, and all that.
#118
Posted 14 March 2012 - 12:38
Edited by saudoso, 14 March 2012 - 12:39.
#119
Posted 14 March 2012 - 12:58
Cheap, where did that 52" come from?
52"??
Did you mean the 52 seconds for the lap time?
Advertisement
#120
Posted 14 March 2012 - 13:30
Edited by saudoso, 14 March 2012 - 13:30.
#121
Posted 14 March 2012 - 16:36
One interesting thing to also get from that video is that the car apparently has no "paddles", Marino is changing gears using a sequential shifter.
#122
Posted 14 March 2012 - 16:46
Yep, isn't ' for minutes and " for seconds?
Sorry Mate, yes it is - I was seeing 52 inches!
the car apparently has no "paddles", Marino is changing gears using a sequential shifter.
Well it seams you should not use a seamless box when you can use a non-seamless box that seams to be closer to seamless than a seamless seams to be - or so it seams we have been told seamlessly.
Edited by cheapracer, 14 March 2012 - 16:57.
#123
Posted 14 March 2012 - 19:15
Well it seams you should not use a seamless box when you can use a non-seamless box that seams to be closer to seamless than a seamless seams to be - or so it seams we have been told seamlessly.
If only this quote was attributed to Irish poet Seamus Heaney, it would have been perfect.
#124
Posted 14 March 2012 - 19:20
#125
Posted 14 March 2012 - 19:45
Sorry Mate, yes it is - I was seeing 52 inches!
That's allright. Me don't consider the inches that much...
Now where those other times come from? From what I figured they ran the track #24 (west loop only) and I can just find times for the two loops (#1, #13, #18) and those are around 2 minutes.
#126
Posted 14 March 2012 - 22:29
Well it seams you should not use a seamless box when you can use a non-seamless box that seams to be closer to seamless than a seamless seams to be - or so it seams we have been told seamlessly.
It seams I wasn't clear, because I don't really care about the seamlessness of the box, but with the fact that seamingly the DeltaWing driver will need to take his right hand off the wheel to change gears. So, my observation was more about paddles and sticks than it was about the boxes they operate.
Now where those other times come from? From what I figured they ran the track #24 (west loop only) and I can just find times for the two loops (#1, #13, #18) and those are around 2 minutes.
I guess from here:
Edited by Hun200kmh, 14 March 2012 - 22:29.
#127
Posted 14 March 2012 - 22:47
#128
Posted 15 March 2012 - 11:17
#129
Posted 15 March 2012 - 11:33
#130
Posted 15 March 2012 - 12:32
#131
Posted 15 March 2012 - 12:55
Thanks, because when I watched the video, my first thought was that a good F. Ford would get through the corners a lot faster than that.My friend says he can get his Titan Formula Ford around in the low 63's. It is an old FF in years, but very well prepared. He said a 62 in his FF car should be doable. Maybe that will help out a little on lap times also. Oh and yes that is on the west loop only
#133
Posted 15 March 2012 - 14:04
I guess so. I'm wondering if Cheapy's time for Road Atlanta also are.
That was going to be my next question, because I thought he was comparing to C6 GT2 times.
#134
Posted 15 March 2012 - 16:26
#135
Posted 16 March 2012 - 12:49
#136
Posted 16 March 2012 - 13:46
If you take a look at the Racecar interview with Ben Bowlby here:Has anyone thought to ask what kind of differential and differential control this thing uses?
http://gb.zinio.com/...7...ev=sub&p=44
he describes a form of torque vectoring diff.
But, I don't see how this works as a torque vectoring diff. It's more a speed vectoring diff. Any difference in torque at the rear axle would have to come via the rear tyre slip ratios, only loosely coupled to the speed difference. And not responsive or accurate enough in my opinion to allow the driver control effect Bowlby describes.
This is in contrast to recent torque vectoring diffs described by Mistubishi, Honda & BMW which shunt torque independent of speed.
Of course, Bowlby may have been misquoted or the description otherwise mangled by Racecar.
Another 'active' torque vectoring diff design recently described by Oxford Brookes University has the same issue.
Regards, Ian
#137
Posted 17 March 2012 - 11:55
If you take a look at the Racecar interview with Ben Bowlby here:
http://gb.zinio.com/...7...ev=sub&p=44
he describes a form of torque vectoring diff.
But, I don't see how this works as a torque vectoring diff. It's more a speed vectoring diff. Any difference in torque at the rear axle would have to come via the rear tyre slip ratios, only loosely coupled to the speed difference. And not responsive or accurate enough in my opinion to allow the driver control effect Bowlby describes.
This is in contrast to recent torque vectoring diffs described by Mistubishi, Honda & BMW which shunt torque independent of speed.
Of course, Bowlby may have been misquoted or the description otherwise mangled by Racecar.
Another 'active' torque vectoring diff design recently described by Oxford Brookes University has the same issue.
Regards, Ian
The electric motor input at the differential is essential to the cornering capability of this vehicle.
I mentioned my ideas for the concept on another thread applied to a tadpole layout.
My system does not need a differential however.
My ESERU allows such control without one.
#138
Posted 17 March 2012 - 14:14
I guess so. I'm wondering if Cheapy's time for Road Atlanta also are.
Of course, wouldn't be consistency otherwise.
#139
Posted 20 March 2012 - 22:31
Pffft, aren't the Irish getting enough freebies this week?
No. They were trashed by England at Twickenham.
Advertisement
#140
Posted 23 March 2012 - 14:03
Biggest challenge will be to get car in 24h reliability mode...79 days to go, and many new features to be ironed out. Test driver Comas comments on Buttonwillow test.
#141
Posted 23 March 2012 - 14:16
#142
Posted 23 March 2012 - 14:53
So someone who knows what's going on with the DW thinks it's steering a little too much?
3 wheelers can change yaw rate much faster as I mentioned in post #117, that's not a secret about 3 wheelers..
#143
Posted 23 March 2012 - 14:58
#144
Posted 23 March 2012 - 14:59
#145
Posted 23 March 2012 - 15:13
3 wheelers can change yaw rate much faster as I mentioned in post #117, that's not a secret about 3 wheelers..
Given same polar moments etc. what would make the difference?
( Not counting 'Morgansteer' & Clarkson)
Edited by hogits2, 23 March 2012 - 15:20.
#146
Posted 23 March 2012 - 15:31
#147
Posted 23 March 2012 - 15:48
Given enough leverage a skateboard wheel will push the car into a turn, so I can't see this being a problem.
My beef with the concept is what happens around. The thing has a huge rearward brake bias. It will suffer massive weight transfer between the rear wheels and the inside rear will lock easily. Probably disrupting the outer one and having it locked also. I guess this was reported from the first test. So you have a car that loses a lot of braking power when it turns in. And this is not the recipe for a fast racing car.
When you look at a square care, you will see it braking heavily into the turn, the weight transfer from rear to front compensating the in/out transfer and only the inner rear wheel really getting silly. You lose way less braking power in a car with an already front biased braking setup.
The other big issue is what will happen when the balance is disrupted. When it's touched by another car or when the driver makes a mistake and swallows the curbs.
#148
Posted 23 March 2012 - 15:48
Kinda like you can turn this thing around relatively easily.
#149
Posted 23 March 2012 - 15:54
Like desmo said on previous page, the weight distribution is all the way to the back and the front wheels are such a far way in front that you effectively have a big lever effect, so the front tyres don't have to work very hard to make the thing turn.
Kinda like you can turn this thing around relatively easily.
Now I see where their inspiration came from.
(OT. Have you ever picked up the front of one and the water all rushes to the back and it stands on its backend and then you run away as the workmen are coming back.)
#150
Posted 23 March 2012 - 16:00
It will be interesting to hear about tires in an endurance setting though.
Edited by Slowinfastout, 23 March 2012 - 16:03.