Williams difuser under investigation........

[steve nielsen]

Reports in the British motorsport press are claiming that BMW WilliamsF1 may have to replace their current diffuser in time for the Austrian Grand Prix, should the FIA issue a rule clarification.
The Grove-based team's current diffuser is thought to be 'outside the spirit of the rules' according to rival teams, although its measurements are legal.

The FIA is unlikely to make a full decision until they meet later in the month, but the team faces the possibility of changing their current diffuser and losing any possible advantages that it may have given them in Austria.
______________________

From formula1.com

[Sparky]

Anyone else speculating about a connection between the 'legal but outside the spirit of the rules' Williams diffuser and the rash of early season rear-end collisions?

Or am I being unfair?

[Bononi]

Someone should clarify this "legal BUT outside the spirit of the rules" !!!!
Is there such "legal but..." or that should mean "illegal" anyway ?

Confusing.

[steve nielsen]

well , as it says, the size is legal, but there are many things that can be illegal, and Yes: this could be a explanation for those rear enders.

[Orange]

Anyone have a pic or explanation about how this diffusor is "outside the sprit of the law"?? (read: innovative)

[steve nielsen]

it's hard to find pictures of the difuser, it's the least interesting part of a car to photograph.

the story is now on autosport.com as well

[steve nielsen]

A dutch F1 site reports(f1racing.net) that both BAR and Williams have an illegal difuser and have been told by the FIA they can'nt use it anymore.

[Don K]

Originally posted by Bononi
Someone should clarify this "legal BUT outside the spirit of the rules" !!!!

In fact it's very easy.
Over the last years, several rules have been introduced that were meant to decrease the speed.
So whenever a team produces a car that can go fast, it is a violation against the spirit of these rules.
In fact, whenever a driver has the nerve to go faster than my favourit driver,
he is violating the spirit of the rules and should get an immediate stop-and-go-penalty!

Don K.

[Billy_Hunt]

Ferrari are expert's at doing this kind of thing and have done so many times in the past.
If it isn't against the rules then whats the problem ?
This seems to be the FIA stance when Ferrari are involved so it should be the same for the rest of the teams.

Good on Williams !

(P.S. Bet I can guess which Team complained first )

[Carla O]

Originally posted by Billy_Hunt

(P.S. Bet I can guess which Team complained first )

the *F* one?

[Bononi]

Originally posted by Don K
In fact it's very easy.
Over the last years, several rules have been introduced that were meant to decrease the speed.
So whenever a team produces a car that can go fast, it is a violation against the spirit of these rules.
In fact, whenever a driver has the nerve to go faster than my favourit driver,
he is violating the spirit of the rules and should get an immediate stop-and-go-penalty!

Don K.

lol !

That's a very exact explanation Don !!!! Even Bernie won't do it better !!

[Valve Bounce]

Williams comments on regulation interpretation allegations

*
Reports in Autosport suggested that the Williams team might be forced to changed their rear diffuser for the upcoming Austrian GP following concerns lodged to the FIA, although the FIA's spokesperson, Francesco Longanesi told Reuters that he was not aware of any formal protest lodged concerning the Williams team's contender.

The team's technical director, Patrick Head in turn said: "We've been running within the regulations up to and including Barcelona and we will continue to do so from Austria onwards".

For awhile, I thought they had a picture of TGF's face there which made Rubens and Jacques want to ram it.

[laxman]

Ferrari are expert's at doing this kind of thing and have done so many times in the past.
If it isn't against the rules then whats the problem ?
This seems to be the FIA stance when Ferrari are involved so it should be the same for the rest of the teams.

Good on Williams !

(P.S. Bet I can guess which Team complained first )

yeah,the other teams have not allowed ferrari's 'innovative legal but outside the spirit of the game' tweaks.so why should they allow anyone else to get to away with it.

[Tristan]

If it's in in the rules, then it's in the rules, surely? Any ****** about "being within the spirit" of the rules surely stifles innovation. If it's illegal, then force them to bin it and punish accordingly and if necessary. If it's legal, then let Williams get on with it. My points regarding Ferrari's ENTIRLY legal engine management systems apply here.

Just out of interest, just HOW, exactly, could the diffuser have aided those rear-end shunts?? Anyone know?? This is further fuel to the my argument that there IS something funny about the way the Willy slows down.

[steve nielsen]

Originally posted by Tristan

Just out of interest, just HOW, exactly, could the diffuser have aided those rear-end shunts?? Anyone know?? This is further fuel to the my argument that there IS something funny about the way the Willy slows down.

The difuser usualy causes a "vacuum" effect behind the car(there is very litle air presure there), so maybe the Williams difuser caused a even greater vacuum, so that cars driving behind had no frot wheel downforce when they where trying to brake??

[Dino IV]

Wrong, steve. A diffuser has some purposes, one of which is exactly the opposite of what you say. It doesn't generate but reduces the 'vacuum', the wake behind the car. The lower the pressure in the car's wake the more drag the car produces which is unevitable on i.e. a fast-moving square block but highly undesirable on a racing car. The diffuser reduces the speed of the high speed, low pressure underbody airflow as much as possible by expanding its space. By doing so quickly it sucks the underbody flow better from underneath and fills the wake more behind the car. The higher the boundary layer lets off the diffuser surface the better it performs. That's why adding high energy exhaust gasses into the diffuser enhances the diffuser performance. It enables the boundary layer to stick longer than normally possible. Another effect is the use of the rear-wing for enhancing diffuser performance. The airflow out of the diffuser can be stimulated by the low pressure area under the rearwing.

Williams has found a loophole in the rules and made a modification to the most outward diffuser channels which are the ones closest to the rearwheels. That section is normally boxshaped, like this |---|, some 1,5-2 inches high and 4-5 inches wide. Williams has them now with a little triangular pointing on top, like this |-^-|, about an inch higher than normal. It's really the smallest of details and hardly performance enhancing note worthy. It will optimize that outer part of the diffuser a littlebit ofcourse otherwise they wouldn't modify it, but you can't tell anything from the outside about a 0.25 % increase of efficiency of that particular small detail of a part of the car, let alone changed performance.

That 'spirit of the rules'-thing is Mosley's pride and rule-joy and he has not convinced anyone that it holds since he initiated them back in '93. Someone sack the guy please ...

[laxman]

dino,
Thx for the information.Just one doubt.
If the williams diffuser is creating a larger vacuum than usual,then from what i know,there will be more drag slowing the car.So what are the other teams complaining about??
On the other hand,if it improves the performance,they why is it that all cars seem to be sucked to its back end??
It should be the opposite,shouldnt it.

The reason for the accidents may be the gear shifts after all.
Did RS have the same problem in teh last race?

[senna12]

Marshal originally mentioned on another thread the point that Williams are currently using brakes from a different manufacturer than all the other teams (Composite generale as opposed to Brembo), and the composites used are extremely effective, allowing the drivers to brake later than normal. Apparently, these brakes are most effective when the drivers give them an initial pump, to heat them up, before standing on it. The article in question is from itv.f1.com,in the mole section.
Whether they're the problem, or just part of it, it's another thing to consider....

[Dino IV]

Laxman wrote:
Thx for the information.Just one doubt.
If the williams diffuser is creating a larger vacuum than usual,then from what i know,there will be more drag slowing the car.

Please read again. The diffuser is no 'vacuum' creator, but exactly the opposite a 'vacuum' filler. It 'pumps' air from the underbody to the wake of the car.

So if there's a change, an optimization of the diffuser, it works slightly better doing so. But this being such a small detail you wouldn't be able to have a significant performance change because of it.

Imagine it like cutting off 1 inch off your rearview mirrors on your car. Measuring the piece in a lab will result in about 1% less drag the mirror generates. But you wouldn't notice any measurable change on your tacho, would you? Let alone hughly improved braking or acceleration.

I don't understand the Ferrari-comments in this thread btw. Ferrari, as well as McLaren, as well as Williams as well as others occasionally send complaints to the FIA about stuff of the competition which they think is besides the rules. Or they wrap it in another form passing the FIA an idea (similar to the competition) and asking for clearance using it. When they don't get that clearance they immediately point to the other team etc. So it's a game of very 'nice' politics all around, not only from Maranello.

[laxman]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Laxman wrote:
Thx for the information.Just one doubt.
If the williams diffuser is creating a larger vacuum than usual,then from what i know,there will be more drag slowing the car.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Please read again. The diffuser is no 'vacuum' creator, but exactly the opposite a 'vacuum' filler. It 'pumps' air from the underbody to the wake of the car.

What you have said is what i meant dino.I know a diffuder acts like a vacuum filler to eliminate drag.what I was reffering to was the accidents.The original theory was that the willams car was creating a larger hole and this is what I was talking about.
the brakes theory is a very interesting point.However I shoudl think that the brakes must be up to temperature in race conditions.If they have to do that throughout the race,then their performance woud be worse than the other brakes.So whats the point in using them in the first place??
However dont think this is the problem.I just saw highlights of the last race.You had an incident where DC came up behing a williams(i think it was montoya) and got it all sideways under braking.It was clearly bad air from the williams(or no air.....it looked like he did not have any wing on.......go see it)This just prooves that teh williams diffuser was creating a larger hole.
....anyway thats my theory.

[Dino IV]

That rational defies all logic, laxman. When a duty of the diffuser is to fill that gap to reduce drag and a little improved design is introduced it would be a logical assumption that the new version performs that duty a littlebit better than the old one, no matter how small the change. If not, the new design would increase drag and that ain't feasible so it wouldn't make any sense to introduce it on the car. So no, no new diffuser would increase that 'vacuum'. So it's rubbish to link that to any mistakes made by other drivers in collisions with the Williams. The assumption that DC would go sideways because of this is really ridiculous.

Considering the brakes: the limiting factor under braking are the tyres. When the adhesion limit is reached under braking it doesn't matter if you got steel brakes or a multiple set-up of giant composite brakes, the car wouldn't brake any harder. Callipers in F1 are mostly A+P and Brembo, discs\pads are mostly Hitco or Carbon Industrie or a combination of the two, fore and aft i.e. Braking is optimised to such an extent that the brake points between the drivers and cars vary only a few metres. But that's clearly visible by the lack of overtaking and the wide lines when someone misses his braking point. Again this has nothing to do with the Williams collisions.

[Billy_Hunt]

OK Dino put us out our misery do you feel there is something on the Williams which caused the collisions, perhaps a sudden drop in speed when they down shift ? or something ?

Or is it all just a coincidence ?

[laxman]

Dino,
You have to understand that every diffuser has its own charecteristic air flow on the rear of the car.When i say larger vacuum,It dosent necessarily mean larger in volume.I mean larger in length.The rear wings also push air to the rear of the car.So with an effective combination,the performance of the williams diffuser may actually be helping them.I actually have very little doubt that the air from the williams is very bad.I an not critisizing your judgemant dino,but just take a look at the tapes again.There is no doubt in my mind that the reason why the cars banged into the williams rear end was because their wings were not working which made the drivers feel that the williams cars were braking early.

Its about eliminating all the impossible things.Once you have done that,the only theory left,though improbable, must be true.
....no prizes for guessing where i took that from

[Dino IV]

I am not sure they use engine braking. That upsets the carbalance a lot, but could on the other hand stabilise the rear end when fine tuned optimally. But as said the decelleration is borderlined by the adhesion limit of the tyres, not by all the braking machinery you use on them. Braking equipment in F1 is highly sufficient for that limit, so any more engine braking won't better your braking performance.

I don't understand the direction in which some of you try to explain these collisions. When for some magic gift the Williams would have a significantly better braking performance it wouldn't mean they would brake earlier by any means, would it? The reference point would be the entrance speed of the corner when the brakes are released. That's the speed the driver wants to brake down to. When they have an extremely efficient braking system the distance from that point to the point where the driver would start braking would be significantly shorter thus even lessening the chance of a collision. So that wouldn't explain it.

When we would argue that maybe the Michelin's adhesion limit would be slightly worse than the Bridgestones, which could be a reason for bad braking performance of the Michelin-shod cars, thus earlier braking points and enhanced risk for collisions, we would have to conclude that firstly it hasn't occured on any other Michelin-shod car than the Williams and secondly that Michelin-shod cars would have an impossible job of outbraking any Bridgestone-shod car, which isn't true either. So yeah, I'd say just coincidence.

[Dino IV]

Sorry laxman, the above was in reply to Billy.
When you look at each accident alone you won't find similar causes of the 'follower being sucked into the Williams'. Ralf let go of the accelerator way to early in Oz, Barrichello got fooled by Frentzen's Jordan and Ralf's swerve in his path in Brazil and Jos misjudged the re-entering of his line behind Montoya under braking. As said I guess it's been just bad luck for the Williams. Things like that happen and when there's one team involved in a few it doesn't necesseraly mean it's some technical wizardry that causes it. Barrichello (and Frentzen the last GP) has had remarkable similar overtaking accidents in a row by plunging his outer front wheel in someone elses sidepod. We could probably argue for ages that maybe some highly magnetic rim material is causing that but it wouldn't be very plausible.