Newsgroup: it.sport.formula1
Titolo: FFp1 di oggi.

Mi aspetto un 31.5 32.0 per i primi in ffp1.
 
Leclerc e Sainz si buscavano, lo scorso anno, ma a Dicembre, un secondo 
al giro sul passo gara dalla mercedes.
Viste le caratteristiche del circuito sono curisoso di capire come 
siamo messi in una situazione in cui, da quel che si dice, dovrebbe 
essere Ferrari a soffrire di più tra i team di testa.
 
Importantissimo a questo punto non fare cazzate e portare entrambi le 
macchine alla fine. Bisogna lottare per il campionato del mondo 
costruttori.
 
-- 
Voster semper voster
Lele®
 
-- 
Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
 
 

 costruttori. 
 
Vedila così: far peggio di RBR in Bahrain è piuttosto complicato... :-D

 Vedila così: far peggio di RBR in Bahrain è piuttosto complicato... :-D
 
non direi, non tanto per l'affidabilità, quanto per la possibilità di fare incidenti
è necessario stare lontano dai guai
 
saluti
Roberto
FV

 Vedila così: far peggio di RBR in Bahrain è piuttosto complicato... :-D
 
Intanto cerchiamo di stare davanti alla Mercedes e poi vediamo cosa 
succede tra i primi 4. Bisogna stare attenti all'affidabilità ed 
evitare minchiate come la peste con entrambi le auto, il campionato è 
lungo e verranno piste piu favorevoli.
Lo 0 delle RBR, non lo nascondo, è un tesosretto sul quale lavorare in 
ottica campionato.


 è necessario stare lontano dai guai 
 
Il riferimento più che altro era ai punti raccolti...

 ottica campionato.
 
Eh...

 corso ad inizio anno nel 2021...mi sembra plausibile. 
 
E' vero che l'allargamento in un paio di punti probabilmente ha reso la pista più veloce, ma 3 giri 1'30"8.
1" in più.

 ma 3 giri 1'30"8. 1" in più.
 
Un tempo monstre se la pista fosse la stessa.


 altri.
 
Questo è sicuro.
Però è strano. Imho hanno sbagliato qualcosa a livello di 
rigidità/flessibilità del fondo e adesso sono nelle canne.


Il giorno venerdì 25 marzo 2022 alle 11:24:23 UTC+1 Lele® ha scritto:
 
30"7 per CL.
Meno di 1" rispetto a fine 2021.
Non male.

 rigidità/flessibilità del fondo e adesso sono nelle canne.
 
Non è una questione di flessibilità... Se così fosse metti un paio di pelli di carbonio in più, diventerai un po' più pesante, ma il problema sarebbe risolto.
La questione è molto complicata.
La spiega bene Migeot in uno dei migliori articoli che ho letto negli ultimi anni.
 
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/the-mechanics-behind-porpoising-in-f1-and-how-to-fix-it/8693581/
 

 Lele®
 
1.30.7 frenando...
 
Poi dice che ste macchine vanno piu piano.
Se non hanno modificato la pista a Monza fanno il record in qualifica e 
gara.



Ma fra un pò la FIA gli farà passare ste fregole.
Pullman in viaggio da Place de la Concorde a Maranello!
S

 gara.
 
Monza ha 2 chicane lente che non sono proprio il pane di 'ste macchine, anzi.
Però tra Lesmo e Parabolica qualcosa dovrebbero guadagnare.
Qualcosina si vede anche qui: alla prima chicane sono i soliti pachidermi, ma nella zona della 20 fanno paura. :-)
 
Tornando ai tempi... Meno di 1" sopra i tempi 2021 con vetture che pesano tra i 40 e  50 kg in più. Considerato che 10 kg sono almeno 3/10 (probabilmente di più visto quanto è lunga) si fa presto a misurare... :-)
 
Il confronto sul long-run da 10 minuti circa tra MV e LH è stato ancora più imbarazzante che a vuoto: tempo di attacco uguale e fine con 3" di differenza...
La RBR è partita molto bene.
Ma Ferrari è lì.
Prossima FP2 interessante.


Link solo per abbonati. :( Che dice?
 
 
-- 
Ciao! Stefano

 La RBR è partita molto bene. 
 
" Sergio Perez (Red Bull) ha sostituito turbo e MGU-H della power-unit 
dopo i problemi accusati lo scorso fine settimana in Bahrain"
 
Se lo volesse sostituire anche domenica pomeriggio per me va bene.


 MaxBass #I-D +GTT ha detto questo venerdì :> tempo di attacco uguale e fine con 3" di > differenza... 3" sul giro secco?Oppure 3 decimi al giro?> La RBR è partita molto bene. " Sergio Perez (Red Bull) ha sostituito turbo e MGU-H della power-unit dopo i problemi accusati lo scorso fine settimana in Bahrain"Se lo volesse sostituire anche domenica pomeriggio per me va bene.-- Voster semper vosterLele®-- Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
 
 
E volevano farci passare la stronzata dei problemi di pescaggio 
-- 
Parma45
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
 

 dopo i problemi accusati lo scorso fine settimana in Bahrain" 
 
Mi riferivo alla performance in pista. :-) 
Perchè abbiano già punzonato la seconda unità di quei componenti mica l'ho capito...

 E volevano farci passare la stronzata dei problemi di pescaggio 
 
Di sicuro comunque SP problemi al turbo non ne ha avuti o almeno un po' di fumo si sarebbe visto...

 Link solo per abbonati. :( Che dice? 
 
Riporto la parte davvero interessante.
Il soggetto sottinteso della prima frase è ovviamente il porposing.
 
 
It was unclear what the root cause was, with many (ourselves included in this one) suggesting that it was a cyclical stall-and-reattachment of airflow under the car which was producing the lifting and rising motion.
 
But that’s not quite right, explains Jean-Claude Migeot, the former chief aerodynamicist of Tyrrell and Ferrari in F1. He contends that stall cannot be the cause, firstly as detached flow can’t interact with the dynamics of the car, and also because the point at which the car begins to porpoise on the straights is long before the ideal point selected by F1 designers for the floor to stall and find extra speed under acceleration.
 
“The car started porpoising by the end of the pitlane, not far after that, which is not that high speed,” Migeot explains. “So if people design and set up their car to go into stall at that stage, it'd be massively wrong. So of course, the stall will happen, but much later; it depends how the underbody is designed. But it can't provoke this kind of thing because stall cannot interact with the mechanics, because it's detached, it's too late.
 
“It's like when a plane is stalling, it's falling like a stone because it cannot hang onto something. [Porpoising] is a very dynamic phenomenon. There's elastic forces in that process that change very quickly with ride height and that happens when the flow is attached both sides, on the body and on the ground.
 
“Stall is often helpful in a straight line because it stops the car sinking more, which means you can set it to lower on medium and high-speed corners. We are in a passive suspension era, so the car is sinking from zero speed up to the maximum speed it reaches, and stall is sort of limiting factor which help to set the car near to the optimum for the fastest corners.”
 
Instead, the cause of porpoising lies in studying the harmonic motion of the car, and the interaction between the aerodynamic forces and the suspension. At its absolute simplest, the aerodynamic forces produced by the underbody – now featuring Venturi tunnels – is very high, bringing the car down towards the ground and creating a nearly closed system underneath.
This leaves the car susceptible to resonance, the car in a position where it is effectively undamped. Since the undertray resembles a wing body, the long chord length means that it can produce resonance at low frequencies.
 
Migeot explains that, with the strength of the downward forces produced by the Venturi tunnels, the derivatives of those forces begin to produce a “very annoying” amplitude which then affects the dynamics of the car.
“When the car is shaking up and down quickly it can generate other forces,” he says. “It’s the same for an aeroplane when it’s climbing. When the pilot is pulling the stick there is an oscillation of incidence and there is a first link to the speed of pitch. But this coefficient is stabilising so in fact, the movement of the aeroplane is completely stable.
 
“For a Formula 1 car, it's destabilising because it increases the downforce when the car goes down and it's diminishing it when the car is moving up. That's the first step. The second step is these forces are big only in certain circumstances. Actually, up to last year, they were ridiculous; they were so low, that it was not even worth measuring them because they had no influence.
“But when you have a system which is almost a closed channel, which used to be the case with skirts, which looks like the case now when the perimeter of the floor is very close to the ground, the amplitude [of the forces] start to be annoying, really annoying. And this happens because there is an interaction.
 
“This starts because we're talking about long chord [floor] - we're talking about a length of several metres, which is in the same frequency range than the natural frequency of the car. The car has two natural frequencies – actually, there are four, but let's put the wheels bouncing outside of the picture because that's where they're controlled by the dampers. The body has two natural frequencies - the heave frequency, which is the movement you see at Barcelona, and the pitch frequency.
“When you look at the Ferrari, you see the rear moving up and the front a little bit. That’s because it's much stiffer on the front than the back. The movement is not parallel to the ground, but it's sort of rising back much more. That's the natural heave movement of the car.”
 
For clarity, every object has a natural frequency, at which it begins to vibrate. You might have even felt it yourself with motion sickness; your body is subjected to a frequency that induces nausea. Close to that value is a resonance frequency, at which the oscillations are at their greatest.
All structures are developed with that resonance frequency in mind, and numerous steps are taken to either avoid that frequency being driven into the structure by winds or seismic action – or tune it out. For example, the Taipei 101 tower in Taiwan makes uses a mass damper system to offset any resonant movements.
 
Cars have their own natural frequencies in heave (the up and down motion of the car) and pitch (the front-to-back rotation around the transverse axis where the car rocks backwards and forwards). Migeot says “this frequency in my time was typically 5Hz and 8Hz - five for the heave, eight for the pitch. Now with the stiffer tyres, I guess it's gone up a little bit but not that much because we’re talking about a stiff suspension.
“If the floor is on a very short chord like a wing, the phenomenon could be the same under the front wing, for instance, when it's very low [to the ground]. But the chord being so short, it's exciting frequency (the point at which the wing begins to oscillate dramatically) is much higher than the car frequency. So it's completely filtered.”
 
The next thing to note is that frequency is equal to one divided by the time period. Assuming that the heave frequency of the car is 5Hz, which is one complete oscillation, then the airspeed passing under the car would need to pass from the front to the back of the floor in a tenth of a second (or within a similar ballpark) to produce one half of that oscillation – so either the car lifting up or moving down.
 
Migeot adds that if the airspeed is much lower than that – or much higher – then there’s no interference from the forces produced by the airflow. That’s why the previous example of the front wing won’t produce the same phenomenon, as the chord length is much shorter and thus takes much less time for the airflow to pass under it.
"If the time is similar; actually, this kind of speed may have half a tenth when the time for the air to go under from the leading edge to trailing edge is of a similar order - maybe twice or half as fast - that's an interaction,” he says. “And because of that interaction, the phase of the aero forces changes. That's mechanical engineering. To look at the dynamic mass damper system, the force is not synchronous with the movement - it's delayed.
 
“So it creates what I call an anti-damping which makes the dampers inefficient, because of the force which is opposed to the aero force. That's why you see the car bouncing like the damper was broken, because with increasing speed the damping is less and less and less effective.”


Secondo me a 'sto giro gli mettono il doppio sensore anche alla 
macchinetta del caffè
 
-- 
LvM
I would challenge you to a battle of wits but I see you are unarmed.
Christopher Hitchens

 
E che cazzo, come letto sui NG inglesi di F1:
"Visti i precedenti, stanno sicuramente barando!!".
S

 S
 
Quei fianchi così generosi sicuramente nascondono due Pratt&Withney, 
altroché...oggi ad una uscita dal box si è sentito chiaramente il sibilo 
dei turbofan in spool up.