http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/102996 I knew they had been dealing with problems, but did not know they are using the Toyota wind tunnel.
If Fernando wins the WDC, it will be a miracle and possibly the most amazing championship in the history of F1.
I was under the impression that the rules put a limit on how much they can use company owned testing and that was ultimately the reason to outsource a portion of the wind tunnel testing. Anybody confirm this?
I could be wrong, but believe the only restrictions are model size (<60%) and total run time - Doesn't matter who's tunnel you're using, or how many, but no more than XX runs per day/week I believe. As for the "shutdown" - It's not happening until the off season, so it's not the complete disaster of a few years back. I guess they're using multiple tunnels to try and correlate the data between 'em and what Clifford himself is saying - More data points must be good (or confusing as all hell of course ). Cheers, Ian
Is the wind tunnel that inside the factory in Maranello? Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
Yep. Done by some fancy ass architect. Used by both the road car guys and the team I believe. It can take full size models, but the sporting regs limit 'em to 60%. IIRC, they still use the old tunnel as well. Add in the Toyota tunnel in Germany and I suspect they're buried in conflicting data........ Cheers, Ian
With a useless teammate who hasn't seen a podium in TWO YEARS and moe larry and curly in the wind tunnel I agree. it will be a staggering achievement if el magico pulls it off-which by the way I still don't think he'll do barring a major upgrade in performance, which definitely ain't gonna happen if they can't get their act together in the wind tunnel.
Nice idea! The (main) problem is to firstly define "accurate"..... 60% models aren't bad, but the air remains at 100% and that introduces some serious maths when extrapolating the data returned. Throw in contra-rotating tires, rolling road, yaw & wind effects, boundary layer and to some extent tunnel constraints and no two tunnels will ever return the same results - The art (for that's what it remains) is understanding the data versus the real world. CFD was, of course, going to solve all these problems. So much for that idea...... Cheers, Ian
Agree but multiply the above by three and as you said it becomes data overkill. Let the non-podium teams stay at the circuit the day after a GP and let them test.....
That tilts the playing field..... I've been saying forever that they should *all* have the opportunity to test on (most) Mondays after the race. Virtually no additional expenditure as they're already there etc etc. I've never heard an argument as to why they don't do this BTW. Cheers, Ian
I am sure the wind data will improve once Domenicali and Massa turn the car around so the nose finally point against the oncoming wind.
To *unfairly* close the gap IMO...... I do a better job than you, so get penalized? No thanks! This isn't a spec series! "Err, <insert_driver_name_here>, we need tomorrows test - Please allow XXX past and finish 4th. Please confirm you understood that message." Cheers, Ian
And if team D knocks off team C off the podium, team C can test and improve their car. It would keep engineers on their toes. Also it would be a team "ban"-so if Fred finished second and phil fifth phil couldn't test either as he drives for Ferrari.
The current powers that be continue to think that all will be made right in F1 with just one more tweak or gimmick.
The problem is, the Wind tunnels give one set of results, the CFD gives another set of results and the car on track give a third set of results that that doesn't always tally up with the wind tunnel or the CFD results!
