21 replies to this topic

[Ali_G]

After watching the race at Spa today, I can only come to one sensible conclusion. The aerodynamical changes to the 2009 cars have vastly helped with reducing turbulence coming off the cars and helped the cars to follow in turbulence. Why then you ask have we not seen as much passing on other circuits as we have seen at Spa today ? Well, its not the circuits that are the problem.

Spa is a fast circuit, with fast corners. For the last 15 years, this type of circuit was deemed to be the anti-Christ for overtaking. You think of Eau Rouge leading onto the Kemmel straight. Estoril leading onto the main straight at Magny Cours. Becketts leading onto the Hangar Straight at Silverstone. All examples of fast corners leading onto long straights with genuinely good passing opportunities at the end. On the flip side, new circuit are generally designed with the idea of a hairpin or slow chicane leading onto long straights. Think Malaysia, Bahrain, Abu Dahbi, think Heman Tilke. The idea being that through a slow corner, the aerodynamic turbulence won't matter and cars can follow closer down the straight.

This is simple logic. Very simple stuff. But to me, its is wrong. Ignore aerodynamic turbulence for a minute. Now, imagine two corners, one fast and one slow. Now, imagine two cars going into each corner side by side. If there is a long straight after each corner and if only one car can go through each corner at one time, in which scenario will the cars be the closest at the end of the following straight. Ignoring turbulence it would be the fast corner. This is due to the yo-yo effect. Through any corner, the car infront will apply the accelerator a car distance plus the distance between the two cars before the following car will do so. If the corner is flat out, there is no braking or acceleration, so the gap between the cars will stay the same. If it is a fast corner, there is mild braking and acceleration and so the distance will increase slightly. The gap will generally keep increasing as the corner gets slower. We are then getting down to very slow hairpins where the gap is increased to its very maximum.

We now come accross the logic that ignoring aerodynamics, cars can follow closer through fast corners in comparison to slow corners. This is obvious in all forms of racing. Look how close NASCAR cars follow each other on ovals. Yet, at Watkins Glen and Sonoma they don't follow as close due to slow corners breaking them up. To my mind, aerodynamics have little to do with the lack of passing on modern circuits with this slow corner - long straight setup. The cars due to the slow corners just can't get close enough to the other car to pick up enough of a slipstream.

And this all leads us back to today. Time and time again today, we saw cars following each other through Eau Rouge with ease. The 2009 can following each other much better. Hell, I think they could prob follow each other through Estoril Corner at Magny Cours now with relative ease. I honestly think its time now to look at this ridiculous canon of slow corners on long straights as it simply doesn't work.

[Clatter]

After watching the race at Spa today, I can only come to one sensible conclusion. The aerodynamical changes to the 2009 cars have vastly helped with reducing turbulence coming off the cars and helped the cars to follow in turbulence. Why then you ask have we not seen as much passing on other circuits as we have seen at Spa today ? Well, its not the circuits that are the problem.

The whole field is seperated by little more than a second, it's always going to be difficult to overtake when they are all around the same speed. Add the rev limited engine and the oppurtunities to slip stream are almost non-existent.

[OnyxF1]

The whole field is seperated by little more than a second, it's always going to be difficult to overtake when they are all around the same speed. Add the rev limited engine and the oppurtunities to slip stream are almost non-existent.

Yup, that's precisely right.

[Ali_G]

The whole field is seperated by little more than a second, it's always going to be difficult to overtake when they are all around the same speed. Add the rev limited engine and the oppurtunities to slip stream are almost non-existent.

I found today that there was a lot of passing where there was at least a .5 of a second a lap difference between both cars. I don't think we could ask for much more.

The reason Fisichella couldn't attempt to pass Kimi today had nothing to do with aerodynamics or the like but that cursed KERS system.


On the rev limited engine. A poster here came up with a novel solution to this. Mandate that cars can only use 6 gears during qualification and have to stick with these ratios for the race. This would automatically let the teams to set the 7th gear to a ratio optimal to being in another cars slipstream and to overcome the limitation set by the engine rev limiter.

Edited by Ali_G, 30 August 2009 - 13:26.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Eau Rouge is flat.

[Ali_G]

Eau Rouge is flat.

In a slipstream ? If it is, it shows how good these cars have becoming at following each other aerodynamically.

Edited by Ali_G, 30 August 2009 - 13:32.

[Hellenic tifosi]

Excellent point!

Also, Interlagos is a great circuit for overtaking, with a very long, sweeping, flat out curve leading to the s/f straight.

[Ogami musashi]

Fast corners magnifies the trajectories differencies.

In any way 2009 cars showed to be able to follow each other closer (while having as much downforce as last year) and in combination with the track layout (fast flowing corners) it just produced one of the best GP ever i think (in terms of overtaking possibilities)

[Ross Stonefeld]

A curve that requires no cornering. In both cases you have a relatively short corner, followed by a lengthy straight and a hard braking zone. The time spent on the straight is the most important as it allows the overtake to play out.

[Ogami musashi]

You speak about eau rouge?

Eau rouge is 5g's this year. Hardly a no cornering curve.

There were overtaking at some other places.

[Ali_G]

A curve that requires no cornering. In both cases you have a relatively short corner, followed by a lengthy straight and a hard braking zone. The time spent on the straight is the most important as it allows the overtake to play out.

Car have to be close enough to each other leading onto the straight or they just won't be able to get close enough on the straight. Is Eau Rouge flat out while sitting in another cars slipstream.


On an aside, a hairpin at the end of a straight isn't enough. A shallow corner just before the hairpin is better. Think the end of he back curve at Hockenheim. hairpin at Montreal and the Dunlop Curve at the Nurburgring. The lead car stays left to optimise the line through the hairpin. The following car can then straight line this curve and go down the inside at the hairpin. More likely to increase passing than just with a hairpin alone.

Excuse the awful drawing but this is the sort of hairpin that should be at the end of a straight.



Blue line denots the lead car. Red line denotes the closely following car. As you can see, the red car will get a straight line advantage to go down the inside.

Edited by Ali_G, 30 August 2009 - 14:00.

[Ross Stonefeld]

With a kinked entry it's even easier to defend.

[alfa1]

On the rev limited engine. A poster here came up with a novel solution to this. Mandate that cars can only use 6 gears during qualification and have to stick with these ratios for the race.

Oh its easy to keep adding extra rules to patch over problems isnt it?
How about we solve the problem by REMOVING a certain rule from the rulebook. Guess which one.

[Ali_G]

With a kinked entry it's even easier to defend.

I'll bow to your racing knowledge but I would have thought it would be a bit easier as it gives a driver two well defined lines in the corner.

[Ali_G]

Oh its easy to keep adding extra rules to patch over problems isnt it?
How about we solve the problem by REMOVING a certain rule from the rulebook. Guess which one.

I have no problem with ridding ourselves of the imposed rev limit. I'm just throwing out a simple solution.

[DOF_power]

I have no problem with ridding ourselves of the imposed rev limit. I'm just throwing out a simple solution.

The rev limit gone will improve things but it won't get us epic slipstream races like up until the early 70s.
I'd also prefer an automatic aerodynamics that can give an artificial advantage to the car behind just in the old slipstream days days. And AWD with active diffs.

[Ali_G]

The rev limit gone will improve things but it won't get us epic slipstream races like up until the early 70s.
I'd also prefer an automatic aerodynamics that can give an artificial advantage to the car behind just in the old slipstream days days. And AWD with active diffs.

What advantage from the old days are you talking about ?

The slipstream due to wings etc is prob more that in the era years where the cars had no wings.

Edited by Ali_G, 30 August 2009 - 18:22.

[RSNS]

I think, nowadays, overtaking is possible when a curve has two possible and equally effective trajectories. This is easier on fast but non constant radio corners. Shumacher used to overtake using that possibility. But then, it is easy to design a curve with two trajectories but difficult to achieve that they are equally effective.

Also, circuits ought to be larger, I mean, the road should be broader.

[h4887]

Surely a lot of the problem with overtaking is the incredibly short braking distance?

[Ogami musashi]

Surely a lot of the problem with overtaking is the incredibly short braking distance?

You could see at spa that no... People fail to look at the facts: the part of overtakings occuring on braking in F1 is quite significant.

[Captain Tightpants]

One word, four letters and all of them capitals:

KERS.

[Mauseri]

In some hairpins there is good racing, but only if the section leading to the hairpin works. Braking to a hairpin is a good place where to do the overtaking, the acceleration out of it is much worse place, except if you made half pass in the braking already. Yo-yo effect is very important, and I don't think it's taken seriously enough in track design.

As for F1, they should still improve the aerodynamics for fast corner racing. Get rid of the diffusers alltogether and improve the ground effect I'd say...

Edited by micra_k10, 31 August 2009 - 14:41.