Driving in the rain

[tinchote]

I was really puzzled by the race yesterday. Over the years I have seen many F1 races in the rain, and from most of them I remember cars sliding everywhere, spins, crashes, inconsistent lap times.

Now suddenly yesterday we have a full-wet race with just one retirement? What's going on? Before the season started, some drivers were saying that with no traction control rainy races would be impossible to drive. I feel like I'm missing some big point here. And, to make it worse, the dominant race winner declares that he was using the dry low-downforce setup :confused:

[Ranger]

But this is Monza we're talking about. 90% of the challege is taking the chicanes which are much the same anyway.

[ioan]

Maybe they are better without TC?
Maybe having full control of the car is given drivers more confidence?

I think we will get more answers to this soon.

[jens]

In 2009 the cars will have less aerodynamical grip, so we may start seeing more spins next year.

[52Paddy]

In 2009 the cars will have less aerodynamical grip, so we may start seeing more spins next year.

If what you're saying is true: This is desperation. Enforcing rules and regulations to force drivers into uncontrollable circumstances. In my opinion, the whole concept is wrong! We don't need retirements or crashes to liven up a race, we just need bloody good racing (something which we got at Monza but often don't get these days.)

[52Paddy]

And, to stay on topic, it is interesting how difficult the track looked in qualifying as opposed to the race itself. The exit of Ascari caught so many people out of Friday and Saturday but people had cracked it by race day. Most had anyway, I still remember people going off there. However, I think the lap times were 12 seconds slower than an average dry time, if I heard Declan Quigley (Setanta Sports commentator) correctly.

[ioan]

In 2009 the cars will have less aerodynamical grip, so we may start seeing more spins next year.

But they will get more mechanical grip!
And while you can control mechanical grip, usually with the throttle, you can do squat about suddenly losing aero downforce!

So, IMO less aero downforce + more mechanical grip will be beneficial to wet racing.

[ShiftingGears]

If what you're saying is true: This is desperation. Enforcing rules and regulations to force drivers into uncontrollable circumstances. In my opinion, the whole concept is wrong! We don't need retirements or crashes to liven up a race, we just need bloody good racing (something which we got at Monza but often don't get these days.)

It won't make them more uncontrollable. The drivers adapt to any car they're given, and that will be no different in 2009.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

But they will get more mechanical grip!
And while you can control mechanical grip, usually with the throttle, you can do squat about suddenly losing aero downforce!

So, IMO less aero downforce + more mechanical grip will be beneficial to wet racing.

How are they getting more mechanical grip?

(I haven't read the regs for next year but I know they will have slicks :) )

[Rollo]

Bear in mind that the total grip equation is solely determined by how much rubber you can actually get to contact with the surface of the road.


But they will get more mechanical grip!
And while you can control mechanical grip, usually with the throttle, you can do squat about suddenly losing aero downforce!

Mechanical grip is a function of three things: namely suspension geometry, tyre compound and steering. But the thing that mainly determines mechanical grip is the size of the contact patch of the tyre to the road.

You can play with the unsprung mass of the car, the roll, pitch and yaw of the car as well as camber and the front-rear weight distriubtion. These will have the effect of distorting the shape of that contact patch. The whole point of downforce in the first place is to shove the car to the road and effectively make that patch either bigger or more stuck to the road more often.


So, IMO less aero downforce + more mechanical grip will be beneficial to wet racing.

Not at all,
If F1 goes to slicks, then there is a bigger contact patch in the dry (because the grooves aren't there) but in the wet, there is almost three-quarters of bugger all difference because the contact patch size will not have changed at all.

Less downforce and no change in mechanical grip =

In 2009 the cars will have less aerodynamical grip, so we may start seeing more spins next year.
This is correct.

Even in the wet it's still not the grooves which provide grip (because they don't actually contact the road) but the blocks of rubber that actually touch the road which do.

[ShiftingGears]

Even in the wet it's still not the grooves which provide grip (because they don't actually contact the road) but the blocks of rubber that actually touch the road which do.

But if you don't have the grooves in the tyres, the tyres will just touch the water on the road because theres nothing to channel it away.

[leopard]

I was really puzzled by the race yesterday. Over the years I have seen many F1 races in the rain, and from most of them I remember cars sliding everywhere, spins, crashes, inconsistent lap times.

Now suddenly yesterday we have a full-wet race with just one retirement? What's going on? Before the season started, some drivers were saying that with no traction control rainy races would be impossible to drive. I feel like I'm missing some big point here. And, to make it worse, the dominant race winner declares that he was using the dry low-downforce setup :confused:

From what I see at a distance, it might have rained before the race and was only drizzling at the start of the race and went normal half of the race and after. Some of mechanics were there even without raincoat. I think the full wet tyres work perfectly in that sort of weather. The worn tyres after several laps still had the proper grip as the track went dry. Hence some of drivers like Alonso, Massa, and Hamilton changed their wet tyres into intermediate ones. Hope this helps,

[ShiftingGears]

Bear in mind that the total grip equation is solely determined by how much rubber you can actually get to contact with the surface of the road.



Mechanical grip is a function of three things: namely suspension geometry, tyre compound and steering. But the thing that mainly determines mechanical grip is the size of the contact patch of the tyre to the road.

You can play with the unsprung mass of the car, the roll, pitch and yaw of the car as well as camber and the front-rear weight distriubtion. These will have the effect of distorting the shape of that contact patch. The whole point of downforce in the first place is to shove the car to the road and effectively make that patch either bigger or more stuck to the road more often.



Not at all,
If F1 goes to slicks, then there is a bigger contact patch in the dry (because the grooves aren't there) but in the wet, there is almost three-quarters of bugger all difference because the contact patch size will not have changed at all.

Less downforce and no change in mechanical grip =

This is correct.

Even in the wet it's still not the grooves which provide grip (because they don't actually contact the road) but the blocks of rubber that actually touch the road which do.

You can get an increase in mechanical grip without increasing tyre width, by making the cars wider, as well.

[52Paddy]

It won't make them more uncontrollable. The drivers adapt to any car they're given, and that will be no different in 2009.

Thats true. Drivers will adapt over time. But why these specific rules then? Why have they put these rules in place? If it is indeed to make the cars more difficult to drive, it won't necessarily mean we will see more spins. Maybe at the first or second round, but the drivers will become accustomed. It just means they have more limitations. Laptimes will be different, but thats about it.

[ioan]

Was reading about those changes and this part made me think that there will be more mechanical grip:


- A change in the size of the cars: The maximum width will increase from 1800mm to 2000mm, with the minimum width being 1980mm. The wheels will also increase in size, from 355mm to 365mm at the front, and from 380mm to 460mm.

Maybe I was wrong, but I doubt it.

[Rollo]

No, It's a fair assumption. Bigger wheels = bigger contact patch = more mechanical grip. Can't fault that logic at all :)

[aryan]

Was reading about those changes and this part made me think that there will be more mechanical grip:



Maybe I was wrong, but I doubt it.

Agree with you on this one.

Aerodynamic grip is hard to control. You come behind a car, and the turbulent air means you've lost huge amounts of grip, suddenly. There is no way to control that.

Less aerodynamic grip combined with more mechanical grip will not make things more difficult for the drivers (either wet or dry). It will make the cars so much more predictable, which should increase drivability (as well as hopefully providing more overtaking opportunities and reducing the problem of lack of grip on the dirty lines of the track).

[truefan72]

all excellent points.

so the cars are getting bigger!

[schmenke]

I was really puzzled by the race yesterday. Over the years I have seen many F1 races in the rain, and from most of them I remember cars sliding everywhere, spins, crashes, inconsistent lap times.

Now suddenly yesterday we have a full-wet race with just one retirement? What's going on? Before the season started, some drivers were saying that with no traction control rainy races would be impossible to drive. I feel like I'm missing some big point here. And, to make it worse, the dominant race winner declares that he was using the dry low-downforce setup :confused:

Monza, as most circuits are nowadays, is far more foregiving with their tarmac chicanes and run-off areas.

[leopard]

all excellent points.

so the cars are getting bigger!
Bigger cars need bigger tyres I think. :)

imo In wet, mechanical grip hold the more important role than grip gained from downforce effect, how much the rain influences function of the aerodynamic device whether it is good or not would be something uneasy to determine. The idea of low downforce is good in wet may be acceptable, air turbulence and rain itself gives less disadvantage to the cars using such set-up. This might be also the reason drivers behind got more obvious advantage of slipstrim from drivers in front.

Camber and tyres' pressure are essentials to produce maximum mechanical grip besides quality and construction of the compound. The less pressure gives maximum contact patch on the ground, but more contact will generate temperature that means give more pressure to the tyres. The perfect set-up would be a compromise between both of them.

[ShiftingGears]

Thats true. Drivers will adapt over time. But why these specific rules then? Why have they put these rules in place? If it is indeed to make the cars more difficult to drive, it won't necessarily mean we will see more spins. Maybe at the first or second round, but the drivers will become accustomed. It just means they have more limitations. Laptimes will be different, but thats about it.

Overtaking opportunities. Seeing as faster cars have difficulty passing slower ones due to the dirty wake of the front car affecting the cornering ability of the trailing car, the FIA are removing some aerodynamic grip from the cars and giving it back in mechanical grip, so the cars should be able to tail other cars without the dirty wake influencing their cornering speed as significantly. You saw it at Hungary - Kimi could not pass Alonso because Hungary is all corners and no straights. Reliance on aerodynamic grip was the significant factor there.


I don't see why it should make the cars more difficult to drive, because I have read that the grooved tyres, when reintroduced, made the cars more likely to snap out of control once the grip level was exceeded, rather than a gradual loss of grip as with the slicks. I know JV was very unhappy about it in 1998.

[ShiftingGears]

Was reading about those changes and this part made me think that there will be more mechanical grip:



Maybe I was wrong, but I doubt it.

That's right, assuming that next years tyre compounds have the same grip level.

[ShiftingGears]

Agree with you on this one.

Aerodynamic grip is hard to control. You come behind a car, and the turbulent air means you've lost huge amounts of grip, suddenly. There is no way to control that.

Less aerodynamic grip combined with more mechanical grip will not make things more difficult for the drivers (either wet or dry). It will make the cars so much more predictable, which should increase drivability (as well as hopefully providing more overtaking opportunities and reducing the problem of lack of grip on the dirty lines of the track).

If the tyres aren't a lot harder, then the dirty lines are still going to be an issue. Because the gripper tyres give off more rubber, resulting in the dirty lines. Harder tyres = less rubber chunks coming off the tyres = less dirty lines.


Also, graining isn't as much of an issue with slicks. So, I think the slicks + wider cars and tyres are a great idea.