|
Post by silverdragon on Jan 2, 2013 10:17:18 GMT
Firefox can't establish a connection to the server at forums.speedtv.com.
Basically a 404 error, I keep getting that message off that link?... is it unique to Firefox or are any other browsers affected?...
|
|
|
Post by freegan on Jan 2, 2013 12:13:30 GMT
Firefox can't establish a connection to the server at forums.speedtv.com. Basically a 404 error, I keep getting that message off that link?... is it unique to Firefox or are any other browsers affected?... Comodo Dragon (a variant of the Chrome browser) can't get there, either. It reports "This webpage is not available The webpage at forums.speedtv.com/ might be temporarily down or it may have moved permanently to a new web address. Error 108 (net::ERR_ADDRESS_INVALID): Unknown error." The home page, www.speedtv.com/ is accessible but there is no tab for the forums there although there is a link at the foot of the home page that produces the same error code. Could they have gone the same way as Discovery?
|
|
|
Post by ponytail61 on Jan 3, 2013 4:57:55 GMT
I can get to the forums page on FF. Must be fixed.
|
|
|
Post by srracing on Jan 5, 2013 17:02:19 GMT
Just dropped by for a rare look and saw me mentioned. (Sorry guys, but I hate this forum's format and navigation, and colors, etc. )
Yes, I doubt that MB is going to directly test the upside down myth. However, with the data acquisition on the car, it would be easy to show that the down force far surpasses the weight of the car. (Of course this won't convince the non-technical)
Regarding the manhole cover thing. Maybe an interesting test. But already known and proven. I was AT the Detroit F1 race (82?) and heard and SAW the covers lift in practice. They were welded down for the race. I was told it also happpend at Long Beach that year or the following. Since then they have always secured them.
Regarding perfomance myths. You can't really compare apples to apples. But, an F1 car is lighter and has 10-15% more HP than a Champ Car or an IRL car. So all things equal F1 wins no problem. However we sacrifice HP for down force. So since the F1 car is only designed for closed road courses, we use much more of its HP for down force. Seldom does an F1 car reach speeds much over 200 mph. Whereas a IRL or Champ car will far exceed that on a superspeedway.
As far as any of the cars beating a plane, person or animal; It depends upon the distance and matchup. But with the right gearing there isn't much that will beat any of those cars at 60 foot +, etc.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jan 5, 2013 17:12:05 GMT
is that lifting the manholes OUT of the collars, or just clanking them? my truck clanks them, and I can guarantee you there is no low pressure zone under it.
(but here's a question - is it even possible to lift an object the size and weight of a manhole cover with a vacuum device? say you had a polished steel plate the right diameter and weight and you put a vacuum device on it - is the surface area great enough to be able to support the weight without pulling away? if not, then you are going into the realm of pushing the cover up with airflow under and through it. what's the terminal velocity of a manhole cover?)
|
|
|
Post by srracing on Jan 5, 2013 21:47:03 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Jan 5, 2013 22:21:06 GMT
(but here's a question - is it even possible to lift an object the size and weight of a manhole cover with a vacuum device? say you had a polished steel plate the right diameter and weight and you put a vacuum device on it - is the surface area great enough to be able to support the weight without pulling away? if not, then you are going into the realm of pushing the cover up with airflow under and through it. what's the terminal velocity of a manhole cover?) Terminal velocity is the maximum speed an object will reach when in free fall, and has nothing to do with F1 cars and man hole covers (unless you throw them out of an aircraft). What is REALLY being talked about is ground effect; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_effect_in_carsf1-grandprix.com/?page_id=1643#The only figures I can find in the above is 150 lbs of force, which is around 68 kg. (This for an early F1 design, I suspect that the figure would be higher for newer designs). However web-investigation into man hole covers indicates they have starting weights of around 50 kg - so it is possible they could be 'sucked' out of the ground. In fact it appears that this happened during a race some 30-40 years ago, although I've not been able to find conclusive evidence to confirm this.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jan 5, 2013 22:47:25 GMT
(but here's a question - is it even possible to lift an object the size and weight of a manhole cover with a vacuum device? say you had a polished steel plate the right diameter and weight and you put a vacuum device on it - is the surface area great enough to be able to support the weight without pulling away? if not, then you are going into the realm of pushing the cover up with airflow under and through it. what's the terminal velocity of a manhole cover?) Terminal velocity is the maximum speed an object will reach when in free fall, and has nothing to do with F1 cars and man hole covers (unless you throw them out of an aircraft). What is REALLY being talked about is ground effect; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_effect_in_carsf1-grandprix.com/?page_id=1643#The only figures I can find in the above is 150 lbs of force, which is around 68 kg. (This for an early F1 design, I suspect that the figure would be higher for newer designs). However web-investigation into man hole covers indicates they have starting weights of around 50 kg - so it is possible they could be 'sucked' out of the ground. In fact it appears that this happened during a race some 30-40 years ago, although I've not been able to find conclusive evidence to confirm this. however, that 150# of force is applied to the entire area that is subject to the ground effect. similar to the fact that the atmosphere presses down with millions of tons, but those millions of tons are not all on YOU. the two ways a car could lift a manhole out of the collar are to either reduce pressure above the manhole sufficiently that the normal atmospheric pressure under it lifts it, or to cause the air in the tunnels under the manhole to be evacuated rapidly enough to cause the manhole to be lifted via air friction. say, atmospheric pressure is in the neighborhood of 14.7 PSI and a manhole is roughly 30 inches in diameter. if my calculations are correct, that means a perfect vacuum could lift a manhole cover weighing 5 tons. the critical question, then, assuming a manhole cover weighs 150# is (still assuming my calculations are correct) whether the car can generate a 1.5% vacuum through ground effect, and whether the holes in the manhole cover can bleed off the vacuum rapidly enough to prevent it lifting.
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Jan 6, 2013 13:05:23 GMT
The Manhole problem. Sticky Tyres yanking the cover off is involved, The Drag BEHIND the car "Sucking" up the cover because of related pressure under the cover compared to the exact moment a cars "Hole" in the atmosphere created by aerodynamics passes is a problem, the underneath of the car is NOT aerodynamic in any way, the Ironing board as its called SHOULD prevent that....in F1 that is.....
Suggestion, slide a wooden block over a flat surface fast. VERY fast, so that it creates a wake in its aerodynamics... doesnt really matter what shape as long as it creates a "Hole" as it passes... Have a small hole with a loose fitting light plastic cover that doesnt protrude over the surface in that run...
If the cover lifts as the block passes, we have proof of concept?....
|
|
|
Post by srracing on Jan 8, 2013 15:23:12 GMT
Yes, in current F1 cars. In the 80's when this was occuring, they had lots of bottom side aero.
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Jan 11, 2013 10:39:16 GMT
Comment on this earlier note... If an F1 car manages to get above 200mph "straight Line" speed, the F1 organization will do things to slow them down....
Its accepted that 180 to 190 on "the long straight" is "Enough" for F1 racing.... if they get faster than that, and we all know they will try, they believe that is into the magic "danger" area for the corners?.... Its also rather boring as a spectator to sit on the straight bits and all you witness is a loud flash of colour....
This is why they limited maximum RPM a while back. The higher revs gave higher straight line speed, so setting a maximum gets them bouncing of the limiter and makes choice of gear setup important...
The way F1 works its how fast and safe you can do the corners.... F1 will sacrifice straight line speed on its own, to corner better, so, even with the new "DRS" Drag reduction for straight line speed, the corners, thus lap times by navigating corners fast, is more important?...
New thinking and run off areas the size of a car park also have changed the sport so that a slight over-cook of the corner leads to running off the track and loosing a place or two rather than a crash-out and retirement... Thus more cars finish.... and there are less high speed accidents if you KNOW you can safely run off the track, stop, and try again?..... It will always be a dangerous sport anyway, but, crashing and walking away is far more acceptable than loosing two or three drivers per season in serious incidents.... Its also more entertaining for the crowd to see someone like Seb Vettle start from last place and get a podium finish with a "Fight Back" race?... He is a gifted driver, he doesnt give up easily.
I suggest that if you took off all but the absolute necessary in Downforce, and put in the faster cogs for straight line, an F1 car is almost guaranteed to be able to go well over 200 mph on the straight.........
As a Drag race car, if you entered an F1, I sometimes wonder just how fast they would get there on a Quarter Mile strip?...(Or even half mile...) But then again, just what tyre choice would that make?.... do they make drag race tyres for F1 even?... how long would it take to shred that tyre anyway?.... do they have a class F1 would fit into?.... If you went ahead with THAT idea, just what would you end up with, or would it just prove the current Drag racers are the ultimate anyway.................. (I am wandering off topic again?.....)
I know SR will know this already, but just for those that dont, This straight line speed ability is almost useless though, because as I say, the tracks are built with corners that have varying degree of difficulty to make it more entertaining, thus how you get round the low speed corners and combination of corners, if you have a car that can do those exceedingly well, it will overtake the car that just flashed past with the extra 20 mph on the straight...... We have seen that repeatedly in each season, faster straight line cars loosing that advantage on Corner combo's.... Getting the balance right is half the battle of downforce. Too MUCH downforce and you loose too much speed on the straight bits, even though you are faster on the corners, you cant make up the gap you just lost on the straights.... Setting up a gear box to do the max acceleration OUT of the corners is therefore more useful than having high-speed cogs for straight line speed, unless the course has a very long straight, or more than one straight where speed is better than corner ability... So then having faster accel cogs with longer gaps will give you that straight line speed.... Or will it?...
Bottom side aero, the floors of early F1 cars had more "Wing" than the outside of the car in some instances.
So they banned "Underfloor" aero, because its very hard to know what they are doing under there because its not visible.....
It was suggested that the drivers were using manual operated ducts to add downforce in corners and loose it on the straights?.... Well, before the rules said you cant do that, why not?...
This has caused some questions, and I am partially on the Drivers side with this, being that the no ventilation thing can make the inside of the cockpit rather a warm place to be.....
Racing cars, speed is not always King, in F1, the ability to change direction at speed is more important, thats why they are so concerned with downforce ...
We already know Drifting corners is slower than Gripping the tarmac.
Or is it?... Time for a separate thread.....
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jan 11, 2013 16:27:14 GMT
a race where all the cars just went fast until someone won would be a boring thing.
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Jan 11, 2013 16:44:20 GMT
The reason for slowing the cars down has more to do with safety and track design than anything else. A lot of F1 tracks were never designed for the speeds F1 cars are capable of reaching, meaning that if something goes wrong and a car leaves the track at such speeds it is likely to result in someone dying as there just isn't enough room for the cars to slow down before hitting anything. In terms of the cars themselves there is a limit to how safe they can be made, and the speeds at which their protective systems are effective - no car is going to allow a driver to walk away from impacting with a concrete barrier at 200 miles per hour. There are also limitations in the protection, specifically that the cockpit is open at the top - and an F1 car that looses down force at high speed may well flip over and land on the cockpit. These problems are what have caused the death or injury of several drivers over the years - the last being Ayrton Senna; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Ayrton_Senna
|
|
|
Post by srracing on Jan 13, 2013 0:53:07 GMT
This is why they limited maximum RPM a while back. The higher revs gave higher straight line speed,. The new 15K RPM limit was primarilly to limit further development costs and interestingly enough to maintain the "F1 characteristic sound" The RPM limit will have no direct affect on top speed, That is a function of HP, gearing, and aero. Given the current HP, the engineers and testing have determined that the best lap times come with a predefined downforce. It just so happens that that downforce limits the top speed (on given tracks) to under 200 mph. Certainly IF technology gets them to fast for the venue, they will change rules to keep the speeds down Depends. On the current tracks that is arguably true. But I have driven many US tracks where we do just the inverse. ie. Sacrifice cornering for straightline. We will dial out all the wing downforce (front and rear) to give us maximum straight line speed. On some tracks for qualifying you will run max down force for the fastest lap time. However for the race we may remove much of the down force so that we have better straightline speed at the passing zones in the straights. If you removed much of the downforce and changed tires, you would achieve closer to 300mph Nothing off the shelf, but all the tire manufactures have chemical compounds that could easily have tires ready in a few days Bracket racing A F1 car (even modified per above) on a 1/4 mile strip would be impressive, but not near as quick as a current top fueler. We are talking about a 2000 lb car with over 7000 HP with a drive line with no required shifting to keep that HP to the wheels for the full 1/4 mile. (reaching 325 in 4 and 1/2 seconds.) The Top Fueler uses more HP to turn the blower than the F1 car even has. I don't think I would say "useless". They want it to make passes on the straight, because it where they do it in most all cases. See my point above. Exactly Not really. Since the cars are inspected before and after the race, that was not much of an issue. The issue was safety. The tunnel/diffuser downforce was great UNTIL, you lost that vacuum. A slight bump or etc, and you could bleed the vaccum and they became an aircraft. That was why the rules were changed.
|
|