fw 26 wallrus wing would have worked

[mamba]

i did some testing on cfd software and came up with a diffrent story with it
before the fia changed the height rules for the front wings the wing dose have huge advantages if it was brought in those days before the changes.

[Mark Webber]

theory doesn't always work in the prac world

[Kempi]

If they hadnt thought it worked, they wouldn't have built it, would they?

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Kempi

If they hadnt thought it worked, they wouldn't have built it, would they?

There are so many things in F1 that don't work.Last years Bridgestones for example.

[ASCII Man]

Originally Posted by Kempi

If they hadnt thought it worked, they wouldn't have built it, would they?

They thought it would work, but it didn't, that's why they're not using this concept anymore.

[ScuderiaV8]

It may well work well when looking at it purely from an aerodynamic view, but it has to be put into perspective with how it affects the whole of the front of the car. I think the main problem was how the nose shifted the weight distribution of the car forwards, perhaps due to having to reinforce the shorter nose to pass the FIA crash tests. Other teams have analysed the idea and the aerodynamic benefits clearly don't outweigh the problems it creates.

[pink69]

It may not have worked, but it was still nice to see someone trying something different. As I remember it, in pre-season testing they were on a par if not out-pacing Mclaren at some test sessions.

[maximus]

Mclaren were rubbish in 2004 though.

[Knowlesy]

Welcome to the forum, Dr Antonia Terzi.

[Dutton]

Originally Posted by maximus

Mclaren were rubbish in 2004 though.

Only the first half.

[maximus]

Well yeah but what I mean is that they wern't a good yardstick in pre-season testing.

[Knowlesy]

Nobody ever is.

[Woolley]

Originally Posted by ScuderiaV8

I think the main problem was how the nose shifted the weight distribution of the car forwards.

That pretty much sums up what I was told by someone very much in the know. It did work, but a lot of research was required to offset the side effects raised by the additional weight and its position.

[Knowlesy]

All of which failed to save some high profile jobs.

[Woolley]

Which pretty much sums up the rest of what he told me...! (And no, one of them wasn't his. Different team)

[avsfan733]

theoretically, something can be designed to the perfect Colin Chapman quote of falling apart at the finish line but its not reality. I always wondered wether how this situation came about.

My theory is that because so much work is going on at all times aero chassis and engine. That sometimes things can be mised even at the f1 level. Those working on the aero are probably the people most encased in the theoretical engineering when it comes to racing and so are most apt to make the misjudgements we saw with williams. Remeber though this was also the first design to come out of their wind tunnel which was later found to have some serious calibration problems. That could have effected what they saw as the balance of aero and the drag on the car which could lead them to view the nontraditional solution as more valid than it appears.

Remember if it had worked this discussion would be about banning the walrus nose because its hideous, not that it might work in the theoretical realm. And having your idea banned is in my mind one of the most important compliments you can pay a designer

[Matski]

Theres a possibility the tusks are coming back this year. look on BMW-Sauber-f1.com the car pictured under wraps has a suspiciously short nose.. from the side it does look alot like the FW26 A (course it could just be an old picture)

The '26 was a great car - just becasue it actually tried something radical, and it didn't look the same as all the other cars.

The reason why it failed was due to wind tunnel calibration problems that williams were complaining about all season, I think th fact was that they couldn't get any reliable data either way on whether it was better or not.