Quote:
|
Originally Posted by GuidoK
I'm sure that RB and Ferrari can come up with a floor that creates more downforce than the current one they use, so that they potentially can run less aero on the top of the car, but that floor would probably proproise so much more that driving becomes undoable.
So maybe having the car that porpoises the least might not be a good thing. You might not have the full potential downforce from that floor.
|
This last statement in itself is a contradiction. Having no porpoising is a bad thing, but having additional porpoising is also a bad thing?
No, having porpoising is never a good thing, it means you don't know how to manage underbody air flow, and or downforce generation and maintaince (keeping the car in the sweet spot of ground effects aka ride height vs. donforce generation) as a result is sporadic and upsets the suspension. Again watch Kyle's video on this, he explains it extremely well.
Porpoising in itself means you aren't using the full potential of the underfloor because it keep stalling and you lose a massive amount of downforce. You also mess up the mechnical grip that car will have because the suspension is getting flucutating loads. Having a car that doesn't porpoise and in its optimal ride height range means you are using its floor to the full potential at all times. Like the w13 was doing last weekend, you could see it was running as low as possible with the tea tray nearly touching the ground. The reason why the w13 is slower is because it has significantly less development than RB and Ferrari, but now they understand and have solved porpoising they can develop the car to be faster. They still have a bunch of weight to lose, and now they can begin to optimize the floor further.
BTW ferrari attemtped to release an anti porpoising floor in barcelona and it didn't help, this should show how difficult it is to fix this problem (especially since ferrari has more wind tunnel and cfd time), as well as how it is undesirable to have porpoising.