F1 New Wing Technology DRS
#1
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
F1 New Wing Technology DRS
If anyone has watched the F1 race this weekend, they spent a lot of time reviewing the wing mods that the driver can initiate with a button to get less drag down the straight by activating a lever that opens the wing partially up. (by 2"). supposed to reduce downforce by about 100lbs. (speed unknown)
This was supposed to increase staightline speed by near 10mph (195mph was the top speed found in qualifying), but in qualifying this top speed was reached without it, and in the race there was a rare two car drag race down the main straight where one car used it and the other didnt. the announcers were laughing saying the engineers would be scratching their heads on this one.
The great thing about this short clip was that the speed of the car was shown for both cars digitally and it showed when exactly the DRS system was engaged.
pretty interesting and impressive that these guys at the speeds they run, can handle more things to operate. DRS, push for pass, etc. I guess they can handle it. they dont even shift anymore.
This was supposed to increase staightline speed by near 10mph (195mph was the top speed found in qualifying), but in qualifying this top speed was reached without it, and in the race there was a rare two car drag race down the main straight where one car used it and the other didnt. the announcers were laughing saying the engineers would be scratching their heads on this one.
The great thing about this short clip was that the speed of the car was shown for both cars digitally and it showed when exactly the DRS system was engaged.
pretty interesting and impressive that these guys at the speeds they run, can handle more things to operate. DRS, push for pass, etc. I guess they can handle it. they dont even shift anymore.
#2
Former Vendor
It didn't really seem to do anything. I guess we will see if it works better at any other tracks.
Evidently the Red Bulls are so quick they don't even need KERS, so does KERS actually make the cars slower?
Evidently the Red Bulls are so quick they don't even need KERS, so does KERS actually make the cars slower?
#3
Nordschleife Master
Yeah, I felt Jenson's pain while labouring behind Massa.. watching the wing flip up on Jenson's car but not accellerate past the Ferrari.
Also, I think Jenson got burned on his drive-thru penalty. As I watched the race, I mentioned to my girlfriend that Jenson was ahead and Massa clearly bumped him over to the right, forcing him off the track (into the runoff road..) The commentators didn't call it, but then we heard the radio transmission from Jenson confirming what I saw. I think Jenson could have been 3rd if not for Massa...
Also, I think Jenson got burned on his drive-thru penalty. As I watched the race, I mentioned to my girlfriend that Jenson was ahead and Massa clearly bumped him over to the right, forcing him off the track (into the runoff road..) The commentators didn't call it, but then we heard the radio transmission from Jenson confirming what I saw. I think Jenson could have been 3rd if not for Massa...
#4
Drifting
The thing that surprised me the most about DRS was how little Bob Varsha knew about the system. As Button's trying to go past Massa, he got all excited about how Massa didn't use it. Umm.. sorry Bob, but that was kinda the point - the FIA designed it so only the PASSER can use it for an aero advantage on the PASSEE. I'm sure Massa would've used it if he had been allowed.
I think it's long past the time for F1 to go to moveable wings, and using them to make passing easier is probably also a good idea.
I think it's long past the time for F1 to go to moveable wings, and using them to make passing easier is probably also a good idea.
#5
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
I dont know, they are quoting the engineers and say that they got 10mph faster straightline speed, but even their speedos on the telemetry broadcast, showed almost equal top end. many of the cars just clicked to 300Km/Hr. some did 308Km/hr, but the top car did that without even using the system.
If the downforce quoted is correct for what the "slat" buys them, then 100lbs of downforce is roughly 10lbs of drag, and at 190mph, the HP gain doesnt seem that great, (actually about 5hp) compared to the total drag and 700hp available. IN fact, the HP required to go from 180mph if thats how slow they were going without the DRS device engaged to 190mph, is near 16% more, so 5hp for example, is less than 1%
(if 180 and 190mph were terminal velocities)
Edit to show formula:
10lbs of drag woud equal 5hp at 190mph. ( Power (hp)=Force (Lbs.) x Speed / 550 )
Be interesting to know the real story.
If the downforce quoted is correct for what the "slat" buys them, then 100lbs of downforce is roughly 10lbs of drag, and at 190mph, the HP gain doesnt seem that great, (actually about 5hp) compared to the total drag and 700hp available. IN fact, the HP required to go from 180mph if thats how slow they were going without the DRS device engaged to 190mph, is near 16% more, so 5hp for example, is less than 1%
(if 180 and 190mph were terminal velocities)
Edit to show formula:
10lbs of drag woud equal 5hp at 190mph. ( Power (hp)=Force (Lbs.) x Speed / 550 )
Be interesting to know the real story.
Last edited by mark kibort; 03-27-2011 at 10:29 PM.
#6
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
The thing that surprised me the most about DRS was how little Bob Varsha knew about the system. As Button's trying to go past Massa, he got all excited about how Massa didn't use it. Umm.. sorry Bob, but that was kinda the point - the FIA designed it so only the PASSER can use it for an aero advantage on the PASSEE. I'm sure Massa would've used it if he had been allowed.
I think it's long past the time for F1 to go to moveable wings, and using them to make passing easier is probably also a good idea.
I think it's long past the time for F1 to go to moveable wings, and using them to make passing easier is probably also a good idea.
#7
Rennlist Member
IMO some of this crap is 100% contrived BS. Way too complicated w/o a clear purpose.
Here's an idea, you pretentious FIA clowns: You want more passing? Make the front wing no larger than the rear wing, and single element only, make the rear wing single element only (like on a Cup car), and do away with ALL the other gizmos and aero aids. Oh, and drop the retarded turbo inline 4 idea because it will sound like ***.
Here's an idea, you pretentious FIA clowns: You want more passing? Make the front wing no larger than the rear wing, and single element only, make the rear wing single element only (like on a Cup car), and do away with ALL the other gizmos and aero aids. Oh, and drop the retarded turbo inline 4 idea because it will sound like ***.
Trending Topics
#8
Rennlist Member
IMO some of this crap is 100% contrived BS. Way too complicated w/o a clear purpose.
Here's an idea, you pretentious FIA clowns: You want more passing? Make the front wing no larger than the rear wing, and single element only, make the rear wing single element only (like on a Cup car), and do away with ALL the other gizmos and aero aids. Oh, and drop the retarded turbo inline 4 idea because it will sound like ***.
Here's an idea, you pretentious FIA clowns: You want more passing? Make the front wing no larger than the rear wing, and single element only, make the rear wing single element only (like on a Cup car), and do away with ALL the other gizmos and aero aids. Oh, and drop the retarded turbo inline 4 idea because it will sound like ***.
#9
Rennlist Member
#10
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
I think we are finally on the same exact page! amen.
IMO some of this crap is 100% contrived BS. Way too complicated w/o a clear purpose.
Here's an idea, you pretentious FIA clowns: You want more passing? Make the front wing no larger than the rear wing, and single element only, make the rear wing single element only (like on a Cup car), and do away with ALL the other gizmos and aero aids. Oh, and drop the retarded turbo inline 4 idea because it will sound like ***.
Here's an idea, you pretentious FIA clowns: You want more passing? Make the front wing no larger than the rear wing, and single element only, make the rear wing single element only (like on a Cup car), and do away with ALL the other gizmos and aero aids. Oh, and drop the retarded turbo inline 4 idea because it will sound like ***.
#11
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
So, half the MPH, same drag, it would be would be 3hp saved.
(for losing or saving 10lbs at 100mph). Again, thats dropping near 100lbs of downforce by reducing it with a micky mouse drag reduction system or even just taking out wing angle of near 5 degrees for a high lift wing like what Winders was showing the link too. Now, if you are mazda miata with 100rwhp this is a big deal.
I think the 10:1 L/D is pretty close too. most of the wings, even the high lift wings discussed in the other thread, had something close to 10:1 L/D.
.
(for losing or saving 10lbs at 100mph). Again, thats dropping near 100lbs of downforce by reducing it with a micky mouse drag reduction system or even just taking out wing angle of near 5 degrees for a high lift wing like what Winders was showing the link too. Now, if you are mazda miata with 100rwhp this is a big deal.
I think the 10:1 L/D is pretty close too. most of the wings, even the high lift wings discussed in the other thread, had something close to 10:1 L/D.
.
#12
Rennlist Member
So, half the MPH, same drag, it would be would be 3hp saved.
(for losing or saving 10lbs at 100mph). Again, thats dropping near 100lbs of downforce by reducing it with a micky mouse drag reduction system or even just taking out wing angle of near 5 degrees for a high lift wing like what Winders was showing the link too. Now, if you are mazda miata with 100rwhp this is a big deal.
I think the 10:1 L/D is pretty close too. most of the wings, even the high lift wings discussed in the other thread, had something close to 10:1 L/D.
.
(for losing or saving 10lbs at 100mph). Again, thats dropping near 100lbs of downforce by reducing it with a micky mouse drag reduction system or even just taking out wing angle of near 5 degrees for a high lift wing like what Winders was showing the link too. Now, if you are mazda miata with 100rwhp this is a big deal.
I think the 10:1 L/D is pretty close too. most of the wings, even the high lift wings discussed in the other thread, had something close to 10:1 L/D.
.
#13
Nordschleife Master
There are a couple of factors with the DRS that (IMHO) reduce it's effectiveness at helping to pass:
1: Dirty air vs Clean air. When you are drafting, the effect of the DRS is less than in open air. Restricting KERS to wannabe-passers instead of DRS would provide more passing entertainment, as using KERS in the draft provides more power than the drag that DRS elimates.
2: When the DRS is activated, especially in clean air, weight is removed from the rear, adding weight to the front, and a very partial increase in rake and therefore angle of attack, and therefore downforce, to the front wing, and therefore a small increase in induced drag from the front wing. DRS should do both front and rear wings, IMHO.
I do agree with Veloce Raptor though; F1 needs to simplify. The designs are overly complicated, and the rule books even moreso.
1: Dirty air vs Clean air. When you are drafting, the effect of the DRS is less than in open air. Restricting KERS to wannabe-passers instead of DRS would provide more passing entertainment, as using KERS in the draft provides more power than the drag that DRS elimates.
2: When the DRS is activated, especially in clean air, weight is removed from the rear, adding weight to the front, and a very partial increase in rake and therefore angle of attack, and therefore downforce, to the front wing, and therefore a small increase in induced drag from the front wing. DRS should do both front and rear wings, IMHO.
I do agree with Veloce Raptor though; F1 needs to simplify. The designs are overly complicated, and the rule books even moreso.
#14
Rennlist Member
Why should someone behind be allowed an advantage to pass? Usually someone is behind because they've been bested by the person in front. Usually, but not always of course. While it didn't seem to give any mass advantage, there were also certainly times when we saw car2 pickup speed and close on car1. However that could just have been draft.
At no stage do I think Massa did anything particularly wrong. Why the hell should he have to just pull over for Jensen? Would any of you? It's bad luck, but it's also racing.
To be honest I also agree with those that feel that F1 is overly complicated. It's interesting from a technical view but also makes the races largely processional and quite frankly boring. The best part about the circus is qualifying which is now basically the most expensive Time Attack on the planet.
At no stage do I think Massa did anything particularly wrong. Why the hell should he have to just pull over for Jensen? Would any of you? It's bad luck, but it's also racing.
To be honest I also agree with those that feel that F1 is overly complicated. It's interesting from a technical view but also makes the races largely processional and quite frankly boring. The best part about the circus is qualifying which is now basically the most expensive Time Attack on the planet.
#15
Nordschleife Master
Masa was definitely not doing "one move". He would go inside to block (move 1), but then go back to the outside to setup for the corner (move 2). And he did this over and over, every lap. They want more passing in F1, enforce the one move.