Pete
Lyons' fantastic Can-Am Cars in Detail:
 |
March/April 2014
Reload
to see the latest news
All news content copyright Michael J. Fuller, unless
otherwise noted |
|  4.25.14
>>I'm
still digging through shots from Audi's Monza test, but this morning
Audi released a CAD rendering of the LM variant they will be running at
Spa. Note there is no longer a gap between the trailing edge of
the bodywork and the trailing edge of the rear diffuser.
Typically this gap is where the air leaving the hot radiators
exits the car. Instead, the trailing edge of the engine cover shares the same point as the trailing edge of the diffuser. So
that begs the question, where does the radiator exhaust go now?
The hint is most definitely the strakes within the rear fender
trailing edge boxes and their slightly larger shape inboard.
More later. | |  4.22.14
>>Detailed
shots of the Audi R18's front wing arrived in the in box overnight.
It's about what you'd expect and certainly benefits from years of
Audi LMP development. That we've ended up with front wings is
ultimately the direction the regulations were heading with splitters
evolving into long chord wings evolving into long chord wings with
secondary flaps. The rather ridiculous pretense that these
devises have thick trailing edges to declassify
them as wings was dropped and this is where we are. In the end
the manufacturers were a pretty big influence pushing the ACO into that
direction, ultimately pointing out the futility of policing non-wing
wing regulations in this case.
Here our spy camera has zeroed in
on the Audi's long chord, 3D-sectioned, front wing mainplane, low in
the middle and raised outboard, is topped by a short chord flap
that follows the contours of the mainplane's trailing edge. The
flap's trailing edge is notched in the center in order to clear the nose box.
I
suppose the flap is adjustable though I can't make out any pivoting
slot gap adjusters. The only ones visible appear clearly fixed
with no means of adjustment and machined feet where they mate with the
mainplane.
|  Looking
at the underside of the mainplane is a pretty familiar sight if you've
followed Audi front splitter/wing development since the R10 (1, 2, 3).
Presumably the vortex generators are still in place to control trailing
edge flow. Recall the difficult environment the wing has to work
in considering the regulations mandate these devices must be enclosed
in bodywork. And the proximity of that bodywork really
complicates things; this really hampers wing trailing edge
flow and therefore pressure recovery. This is what led to,
amongst other things I'm sure, the cascading/slotted bodywork that Audi
has utilzisd for the last few years (since the R15) above the front
wing. In this case I can imagine the VGs are playing their part
in controlling the secondary flaps's trailing edge flow, perhaps
reducing/limiting its interaction with the bodywork above it, thus the
wing "breathes" easier. |  A
shot of the front end reveals some of the R18's mechanical details.
You can't miss the strake (1), and note that it's attached to the
brake backing plate (2). The brake duct (4) has a lead-in element
(3), the purpose of which I believe is to deflect debris away from the
brake duct inlet. Both the upper and lower A-arms are shrouded
(5) and we can also see the front drive shaft (6). | Mulsanne's Corner Book Store
A selection of sports car related DVDs and books, with a technical slant. |  4.19.14
>>Toyota's
approach to the turning vane is slightly different. Located aft
of the wheel in order to better control the wake off the front wheel,
they appear to be mounted directly to the outer edge of the floor.
However, as they aren't attached to the suspension, and thus not
deemed as part of the suspension system (right?), surely they should be
categorized as bodywork? Regardless, even categorized as bodywork
there seems to be no regulation governing how far they can project
down. |  Looking closer, could there be two VGs? |  And it clearly is two... |  A sharper close-up. | Mulsanne's Corner Book Store
A selection of sports car related DVDs and books, with a technical slant. |  4.18.14
>>Rebellion's
Oreca designed and built, Toyota powered, R-One has had its first
shakedown at Paul Ricard. As with the Dome we viewed about a
month ago, the R-One clearly has a bit of work still yet to be done (no
head lights or headlight buckets, missing wind shield wiper, etc.).
Somewhat interesting, if not at all surprising, is how
drastically different the actual carlooks compared to the original
rendering that was first revealed last July (6.20.13).
The R-One also seems to have adopted the turning vane trend (1). | | >>I've finally dug up better evidence
regarding the depth of those new front turning vanes (vortex generators, VG) we've seen
sprouting on the Audi, Porsche, and Toyota too.
And sources now confirm that the devices on both the Audi and the Porsche indeed do extend below the reference plane.
That, coupled with the accompanying images and I think there's
little doubt anymore about how far down these devices hang. In my
opinion this would be a curious interpretation. The vertical
dimension component that defines the volume that these new devices are
residing is referenced from the reference plane (300 mm above
the reference plane). Further more, while the regulations don't
seem to have an element of, "nothing can extend below the reference
plane", there is the old cover-all, "What is not expressly permitted by the present regulations is prohibited (Art 2.1.1)."
As
for legality, well, in my estimation these devices simply aren't legal
given the spirit of the regulations. But that is by the by; that
everyone is doing it means, more than likely, there won't be any
protests and they've been accepted as legal. Ultimately legality
revolves around the vortex generators being defined as suspension and
not bodywork. Furthermore, I'm told by insiders that a similar
device could be attached to the rear suspension. But as I
mentioned, more importantly there doesn't seem to be any regulation
that prohibits the reference plane from being crossed with an aero
device.
Porsche 919 VG images: Speed Chills.
|
| Mulsanne's Corner Book Store
A selection of sports car related DVDs and books, with a technical slant. |  3.25.14
>>More
really crappy images pulled out of grainy, intentionally unclear,
videos. You're welcome! Yup, working with scraps. So
at the beginning of March Toyota released this video.
And here are some of the shots that I pulled out of it.
Granted, with the FIA test in three days you might wonder what
the point is (It'll be "feast" then, as opposed to this famine,
right?). Let's just say I like the feeling of completeness and
checking that box.
From this view the most striking detail is how low the rear fender trailing edge is relative to the rear wing endplate (1).
More notes below. |  Stepped shape to the front fender trailing edge in lieu of the new cockpit visibility regulations (1). It's
hard to read the cockpit shape inasmuch as the trailing edge is
regarded (2). Did Toyota opt for a legality blip (the TS030 had it after
all)?
Elongated rear fender leading edge not too dissimilar to the
TS030 (3). Note the area in shadow below the rear fender leading
edge, close to the floor (4). |  Very
tall leading edge shape to the front fenders. The shape isn't too
particularly different than last year but for the radius of the very
top of the leading edge (1). It appears much tighter. |  But
perhaps the most interesting shot is this one. With a bit of
squinting, could that be the Toyota's exhaust pipe? But what is
more interesting here is this: all the deliberate sculpting in
the vicinity. This seems very much to hint at the exhaust being
used to interact with the exit flow from the front wing/diffuser area.
The interaction would certainly be small. And the only
regulation regarding the exhaust and any aerodynamic interaction
regards the rear diffuser
(Art 3.4, Bodywork, look it up). Though I suppose it could be
argued whether or not the exhaust can be seen from the top in this
position.
Playing Devil's Advocate on the morning of the 26th;
though how much exhaust pressure can be expected if Toyota are running
some sort of exhaust recovery system (I must admit I haven't read any
of the pre-season PR material, have they said in general what systems
they are running this year?)? And other eyes place the exhaust
coming from its usual location (engine cover)...but we'll know in a
couple of days what's going on... | |  3.24.14
>>Thanks to a video
that popped up on Youtube a couple of weeks ago we get a glimpse of the
updated Porsche 919. The myriad of changes that the Porsche 919 has
undergone since it's public debut at Geneva is rather immense and I'm
not really going to catalog them here...though if you insist...new
sidepod and front wheel well exiting at 2 (new legality shutting too)
& 3, rear wheel well exit (4-or is it a duct to draw air into the
area above the cheese wedge as on the Toyota?), diffuser strakes
trimmed short of the diffuser trailing edge (5), substantially more
angular engine cover trailing edge (6), revised rear fender well
legality exit shuttering (7), revised inboard BHH shape (8)...etc.
And that's just scratching the surface as there are many changes
up front too (see Antonio's page for 919 Debut to 919 Sebring comparisons).
But what really caught my eye was the front diffuser strake that is visible (1). |  Remember back in December (12.18.13)
when I pointed out similar on the Audi R18? The strake falls into
that newly defined "free" area around the front wheels (500 mm wide
'X', 800 mm long 'Y', 300 mm tall 'Z') that is covered under Article
3.5.4. The Z height is referenced from the Reference Plane.
As on the Audi, I question as to whether or not the strake
actually extends below the
reference plane. I'm drawn to that conclusion because even with
the chamferred floor, I don't beleive that that much of the strake
would be visible from these angles.
| But
back to the Porsche 919. Is the Porsche program in trouble? Back in
December I Tweeted a rumor regarding personnel issues on the 919
program:
 |
You'll
find I use Twitter for less substantiated rumors, just to see what they
dredged up. But over the Sebring weekend I had further
confirmation
that indeed the 919 program's turnover has been high and there are,
"issues." It was suggested that there's been enough turnover to,
"Repopulate the team at least once over." Don't take that
literally,
the point being simply that turn over has been extraordinarily high.
And strangley
enough, I was told, and have since confirmed, that at the begining of
the project that Porsche wanted to divest themselves of anyone with
previous experience with their RS Spyder project. As such, I
understand at least one prominent figures involved with the RS Spyder
is no longer, or perhaps never was, involved with the 919 project.
This
all leads me to some of the rumored car issues Porsche has been having.
For starters, I was told that at the most recent Sebring test (the one
in the video above) that the 919 was consistently a, "few seconds off,"
the Audi's times. Furthermore, Porsche is rumored to be having
reliability issues to such extent that they have yet to achieve more
than 1000 kms consecutively without a problem. I have confirmed Porsche
did appear to have, "some troubles" at Sebring and that they extended
their test by a day, presumably to make up for lost track time.
Furthermore, there are whispers of issues with the V4 and I understand that firing
the order has been revised. Could that have been the source of the
extreme vibration issues? It seems likely.
But for now it's
difficult to put the Porsche 919's performance relative to the Audi R18
into perspective. For starters we have no idea to what kinds of
programs the two outfits were running to at the Sebring test. Could
one have been in Le Mans downforce configuration? It's been suggested.
In contrast there does
seem to have been a fairly
serious issue with the engine and it has been suggested
that a lot of the car's issues are boiling down to brain drain and the
high turnover rate within the project; new, inexperienced personel
making the same historic mistakes and having to learn from them.
However, all is not lost and the final suggestion is that what
we're seeing is the rough draft and that Porsche will come on full song
next season with what is, in effect, an entirely (mostly) new car.
The rapid deveopment we're witness already is certainly a sign of
some of this.
|  >>Dome
today unveiled their new S103 LMP2 that is to be fielded by Strakka
racing this year. It rolled out for a very short systems check
and photo shoot today at the Turweston Aerodrome ahead of the FIA test
at Paul Ricard this weekend. Note the missing side legality panel
and, at least in this shot, the missing center rear wing mount; still
some work to be done? Who was it that said any of this was easy? |  I've
been banging on it for a while now, and I'll point it out again, note
the Dome has that legality "handle" on the trailing edge of the
cockpit. This allows a much earlier departure downwards for the
trailing edge as noted by my quick sketch to the left: red the
conventional interpretation, blue the legality handle interpretation.
Imagine how much better airflow the rear wing receives with the
more plunging trailing edge? |
|  3.5.14
>>I
had to decide what I was going to cover tonight, especially given the
main news of the last few days; the Porsche 919 reveal, or something
that received less coverage, the Ligier JSP2 LMP2. I've got to be
honest, the 919 debut was effectively a livery reveal and across the
last couple of months of 2013 (yeah, I've taken two months off since
then) I've charted the car's early development as the images have
trickled out (we sure have been squinting though, haven't we, given the
camouflage). Not to mention, given the images that are coming out
of this week's Sebring test, the design is a bit of a moving target at
the moment. Yes, a lot of other little tech tidbits were unveiled
this week (hey, 90 degree V4 turbo, where did I hear that before?
Oh, right: 10.30.13) and I'll get to them in due time. But let's look at the Ligier instead.
The
Ligier JSP2 comes out of Onroak Automotive's design office and, reading
the press release accompanying the images, was designed by Nicolas
Clemencon and team.
Wind tunnel development has been conducted at Onroak's go-to facility, RUAG in Switzerland. |  In
October Onroak released this image of their ongoing LMP2
development. The emphasis in the importance of front fender
development is pretty evident here given the very vertical and fin-like
leading edges that can be seen (1). Though the rear end is still
very Oak LMP2-like (2). The in-between bits are a bit
unremarkable at this point of development. Perhaps more
interesting, if easily overlooked, is the legality bump (3). This
allows a localized height reduction of the trailing edge shape of the
cockpit while still meeting the mandated height minimum. |  A few months later (December)
and the concept is starting to mature and everything has evolved
further. The front fender leading edge shape is more refined (and
the model appears a little less "developmental" looking in this area).
Just ahead of the front wheel, the wheel well opening isn't a
constant radius (1). The front fender trailing edge is the same
but for the mandatory visibility notch (2). The legality blip is
still there (3), reducing the trailing edge height must be important!  Insiders
say it could be worth approaching 5% compared to a more
conservatively interpreted cockpit shape. After rebalance the
gain wouldn't be quite that high, but it is substantial nonetheless.
The Ligier has an oval shaped opening (4) just behind the
legality blip who's function is unknown. That it opens into an
area of low pressure might give some clues. Onroak released an
image of the tub (right) and you can see that the hole runs into the
cockpit.
The leading edge of the rear fenders (5) extends more
forward than the October model, interestingly the BHH over the top of
rear fender has been closed off (6). Testing the inner fender
option? Though insiders guide again and state that the inner
fender option is not efficient at all, hence the head scratching over
why Porsche has gone that route. Finally note the Toyota TS030 detail just above the cheese wedge.
It's
been pointed out, and I agree that it's a possibility, that the models,
espcially the second one, could be LMP1 developments for the OAK.
While it's hard to see from the side view, the rear wing widths
appear more inline with LMP1 2014 (1800 mm wide rear wing on a
1900-1800 mm wide body) than current LMP2 (1600 mm wide rear wing on a
2000 or thereabouts wide body). An email has been sent.
The JSP2 car build is now well advanced and if all goes to schedule the Ligier will hit the track this Friday. |
|
|
