Hi again dear friends,
1. This article is very interesting. Please read it until the end. Thanks!
2. My father was LENINE1, that is, Vladimir Ilitch Lenine, that directed the
Bolchevique Revolution in 1917. I'm 80 years old. Following the example of my
father and inspired in Ayrton Senna da Silva, I want to direct a Revolution
in F1. If you want to participate in this Revolution, please tell me! My
mother was the very beautiful Brazilian journalist Ana Paula Francisca Teresa
Couto Rochedo that went to Russia in the beginning of 1917. I was born in 22
of November of 1917. :)
3. PRODUCTION CARS MAKERS: PLEASE LEARN SOMETHING WITH McLaren!
In F1 a better chassis means less drag with the same downforce. Once the Drag
is given by
? rho Cx Sx V^2 (1)
less drag means lower Cx (assuming the same speed V, the same air density rho
and the same frontal area Sx).
Once the downforce is given by
m g + ? rho Cz Sz V^2 (2)
the same downforce means the same Cz (assuming the same weight m, the same
speed V, the same air density rho and the same horizontal area Sz).
Once the Cx is related with the Cz by
Cx= Cx0 + k Cz^2 (3)
we conclude that a better chassis means lower Cx0 and lower k.
Mika told me the top speed, Vmax1, and the maximum deceleration
Gbrakes_top_speed1 of the German GP Qualification and the top speed, Vmax2,
and the maximum deceleration Gbrakes_top_speed2 of the German GP.
From these Telemetry Data I found that the McLaren chassis is characterised by
Cx0=0.57 and k=2.37.
Schumi told me the same Telemetry Data and I found that the Ferrari chassis is
characterised by Cx0=0.77 and k=4.89.
I don't know the Telemetry Data of the remaining teams, but I have the
feeling that the McLaren chassis is the best chassis (that is, has the
smallest Cx0 and the smallest k) and the Ferrari chassis is the worst
chassis (congratulations Schumi, you're the best F1 driver!).
In 1980 very few production cars have a Cx=0.30.
Today Opel Tigra, Audi A4, Audi A3 and Audi A6 have a Cx=0.28 (see the text in
the appendix).
Does this mean that the optimal Cx of a production car is 0.28?
Or does this mean that production car makers have lot of things to learn with
McLaren?
4. PRODUCTION CAR MAKERS: PLEASE LEARN SOMETHING WITH FERRARI!
Once the Ferrari chassis is so bad, how to explain the good results of
Ferrari?
I have the feeling that the Ferrari engine has a much greater maximum torque
and a much more flat torque curve than the Mercedes engine.
This means that the Ferrari has more acceleration and, once the energy
efficiency is 'proportional' to the torque, the Ferrari has a smaller fuel
consumption (which means less fuel weight and so still more acceleration).
Actual production cars energy efficiency is very small, around 0.25 at the
speed of 120Km/h, and the theoretical limit is 0.45 (see the text in
appendix).
This means that production car makers have lot of things to learn with
Ferrari!
5. SEMI-AUTOMATIC GEAR BOXES
Almost all production car drivers don't know the torque curve and the
relations of the gear box of their cars and so they don't get the maximum
acceleration in overtaking, which means less insurance in overtaking.
A good automatic gear box will change gears at the right times (that is, at
the right RPMs) maximising the acceleration and so maximising the insurance
in overtaking.
The idea is 'pulling' the gear i until a RPM_i such that the RPM_i+1 at gear
i+1 is exactly equal to the engine RPM_maximum_torque.
For example, driving a Citro?n AX 1.1 we must 'pull' the second gear until
RPM_2=5500 RPM (that is 72Km/h) because the RPM_3 at 72Km/h in third gear is
3750 RPM, which is exactly the RPM_maximum_torque of the Citro?n AX 1.1. I
think that the Citro?n Saxo 1.1 has a very similar gear box and torque curve,
so these results are also valid for the Citro?n Saxo 1.1.
This means that a engine with a smaller RPM_maximum_torque will have a longer
life (Why?).
Of course that the Mercedes A140 engine will have a very short life! (see next
section to understand why!) :)
The main problem of the actual production car automatic gear boxes is that
they imply much greater mechanical losses (p_mec=0,45, p_mec is defined by
P (1-p_mec)= ? rho Cx Sx Vmax^3 (4)
and production cars with manual gear boxes have a p_mec=0,25. Note that these
values of p_mec include tyres friction).
F1 Semi-Automatic gear boxes have a much lower p_mec=0.15 (including tyres
friction). So it seems interesting to adapt this technology to production car
automatic gear boxes!
6. MERCEDES: PLEASE LEARN SOMETHING WITH McLaren AND WITH FERRARI!
The new small Mercedes production car A140 is a disaster!
Senna would say: Mercedes, o teu A140 uma bela carro?azinha! :-)
The Mercedes A140 has a Cx=0.45, EE(120Km/h)=0.13, RPM_max_torque=5250 RPM
and a fuel consumption of 12 litres in a course of 100Km done at the
stabilised speed of 120Km/h.
This means that making a course of 100Km at the speed of 120Km/h is heating
the air with the heat produced by the energy contained in 0.87*12=10.44
Litres of fuel, which is about 10.44*37*10^6= 386 *10^6 Joules= 386 Mega
Joules!
So, although the Mercedes A140 is the worst production car of its class (small
cars), it's very hot! :-)
If you like hot cars, buy a Mercedes A140! :-)
Note that a very small Energy Efficiency means a very small maximum torque,
that is very small acceleration in overtaking, that is the Mercedes A140 is a
very dangerous car! :-)
Senna would say: Mercedes, por favor interrompe a produ??o da tua
carro?azinha, imediatamente! :-)
The other Mercedes production cars are also a disaster and, of course, very
very hot! :) (see the text in appendix).
Senna would say: Mercedes, quando chegares aos calcanhares da Ferrari e aos
calcanhares da McLaren, por favor avisa-me! :)
So Mercedes have also a lot of things to learn with McLaren and with Ferrari!
I'm sorry, Mercedes, you're... I'm sorry, I can't find the words! :)
I'm so sorry Mercedes... Do you forgive me?!! :)
7. ACTIVE SUSPENSIONS
1994: Who did permit the realisation of a GP in a track that had a corner
done at the speed of 270Km/h (remember Senna's Telemetry Data), with a 5
meters long escape that ended in a wall without any tyre before?
1994: First FIA KILLED Active Electronics. Next FIA KILLED 'Drive By Wire'
Systems. Next FIA KILLED Active Transmissions. Next FIA KILLED Active
Suspensions. Next FIA KILLED RATZEMBERGER with -722g's during 13ms. Next FIA
KILLED SENNA with -66g's during 48ms.
Note that 1ms=10^-3=0.001 seconds and g=9.81 m/s^2 and the maximum
deceleration the Brain supports (without suffering irreversible lesions), in
the +Gx direction (frontal crash) or in the +Gy direction (lateral crash), is
-45g's during 50ms.
Note that a F1 car (Cx=0.81, Sx=1.5 m^2, c_friction=1.37) at the speed of
270Km/h needs 120 m of good track to reduce the speed to 76Km/h, the maximum
crash speed in a frontal crash (see the exercise1 bellow). Of course that
this braking distance is the minimum length that the Senna's escape should
have. If you want I can send you the Excel model that I used to calculate
this braking distance. Please tell me the format: Excel 97 or Excel 5.0-7.0.
Exercise1: Considering a frontal crash with Chassis_deformation=0.5 m and a
constant crash deceleration G=-45g, calculate the crash speed Vcrash and the
crash time delta_t. Note that we have
Chassis_deformation= Vcrash delta_t + ? G delta_t^2
and
delta_t= -Vcrash/G
Solution: Vcrash=sqrt(-2.Chassis_deformation.G)=76 Km/h, delta_t=47.8 ms.
Exercise2: Calculate the 'Lady Di' crash speed Vcrash and the crash time
delta_t considering a constant crash deceleration G=-40g and a
Chassis_deformation=1.75 m and that the 'Lady Di' crash was a frontal crash.
Solution: Vcrash= 133 Km/h, delta_t=94.1 ms.
FIA didn't know these numbers?!! I'm sorry FIA, you don't have any excuse.
Congratulations FIA, you're the Serial Killer of the year 1994.
If FIA hadn't KILL Active Suspensions, perhaps today almost all production
cars would have Active Suspensions, that is, they would have much greater
corner speeds, that is, they would have much greater driving insurance.
I'm Sorry FIA, you're nothing more than a Serial Killer.
Senna would say: A F1 est mesmo a precisar dum 25 de Abril Americana!
8. I still have a lot of things to say but I can't find the words. I'm sorry,
I'm crying...WHAT'S A DISASTER, FIA, WE ARE IN WAR.
9. Senna would say: FIA, CAPITULAS OU QUERES MORRER COM MILH?ES DE BALAS NO
CORA??O? FIA, VAIS REINTRODUZIR AS SUSPENS?ES ACTIVAS NA F1 J NA PRXIMA
TEMPORADA OU QUERES SER FUZILADA?
10. Senna would say: 1. ISOLAR A FIA. 2. CERCAR A FIA. 3. APERTAR O CERCO
AT QUEIMA ROUPA. 4. FIA, CAPITULAS? 5. SE N?O, FOGO!
11. Senna would say: Ai, FIA, Ai dos vencidos! Agora alm das suspens?es
activas, vais reintroduzir a Electrnica Activa, os Sistemas de 'Drive by
Wire', as Transmiss?es Activas e vais introduzir novos motores de 5 litros,
pois eu j estou farto de andar a pisar ovos a 340Km/h! :-)
Note that assuming that a 5 litres V10 Ferrari engine would have a power
P=1917 HP (1HP=746 watt), assuming very little downforce, that is, Cx=0.89
(remember that the Ferrari chassis is very very bad :) ), Sx=1.5m^2,
p_mec=0.15, we would have a top speed, Vmax, of
P (1-p_mec)= ? rho Cx Sx Vmax^3 Vmax=( 2 P (1-p_mec) / (rho Cx Sx) )^ 1/3
Vmax= 414 Km/h !!!
12. I'm so sorry, FIA... Do you forgive me?!! :)
13. Ora bolas, se tivesse feito isto 4 anos o Senna estaria hoje a
experimentar o seu novo V10 de 6.9 litros de 3000 HP! I'm sorry Senna, I'm
sorry Ratzemberger...
Exercise3: Considering that Senna's car would have a Cx=0.81, Sx=1.5 m^2,
p_mec=0.13 and rho=1.2 Kg/m^3, calculate the top speed Vmax of
...
read more »
We ain't yer friends.
Thanks!
Don't know why, I read it. If you haven't, don't bother.
Of course. And I'm E.A. Presley.
<snipping all the technical shit>
YOU WASTED MY BANDWIDTH WITH A 736-LINE MESSAGE. HAVE YOU ANY IDEA OF HOW
MUCH TELEPAC IS CHARGING FOR INTERNET ACCESS? BESIDES, AT LEAST HALF OF
YOUR IDEAS ARE STUPID.
Automatic gear boxes suck. You can't get the feel of the engine and that
shit shifts to a higher gear when you're trying to do a steep climb. And
what about your conclusions regarding active suspensions? Allowing higher
corner speeds thus getting better security? If you increase corner speeds,
you get less security, because you're driving faster. Didn't they teach you
that at driver's ed?
And who the ***s cares about your aerodynamics theories and your physics
knowledge? If you want to rule auto-industry, get a job at Ford Electronica
in Palmela. You can work on the production line. You'd like that, wouldn't
you, commie?
We're here at RASF1 because we're F1 fans. We want to discuss the sport.
Some of us probably understood what you said. I OTOH didn't. I'm a
comunications student, and while I know some technical stuff from reading
auto magazines, I ain't interested in what you have to say.
--
Paulo Costa
========================================
I'll get you yet, even if it's the last thing I do.
- assorted fictional bad guys
> I'm a comunications student, and while I know some technical stuff
> from reading auto magazines, I ain't interested in what you have to
> say.
Grades at school getting you down? ;)
Eureka - so that was why my F1RS times were so poor. :-)
.................................
TelePac must not be charging all that much for internet access, you've felt at
leisure to sit & not only read this message, but to count the number of lines
contained therein!!
ROTFLMAO!
--
Chuck Kandler #70
K&S Racing
http://KSRacing.home.ml.org
http://Mich98.home.ml.org
Indycar driver, Virtual airline pilot, Flight Simulator scenery designer,
Webmaster, Auto technician, father & husband....Who has time?
By the time I read this the revolution will be over!
Snip a ton of ???????
<rather large snip>
I'm *sure* I read all this in the Unabomber's manifesto.
Alan M
claim to have an opinion about:
Hey laughing boy
I don't know about your newsreader, but mine tells
me how many lines the message contains. It can also be
configured to limit the message size to a limited number
of lines.......
F.R.E.D.
take _me_ out to respond....
Just a guess:
Chuck Kandler uses: X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I)
A Netscape 4.05 news reader.
You use: X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
A Freeware news reader from Fort'e
I use X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.45
A registered news reader from Fort'e
Fort'e Agent 1.5 is the best IMO
> I don't know about your newsreader, but mine tells
>me how many lines the message contains. It can also be
>configured to limit the message size to a limited number
>of lines......
> > I'm a comunications student, and while I know some technical stuff
> > from reading auto magazines, I ain't interested in what you have to
> > say.
> Grades at school getting you down? ;)
Not really. My grades were actually pretty good (except for that other
thing I gotta do the exam next month, but that ain't bringin' me down).
--
Paulo Costa
========================================
I'll get you yet, even if it's the last thing I do.
- assorted fictional bad guys
> .................................
> > YOU WASTED MY BANDWIDTH WITH A 736-LINE MESSAGE. HAVE YOU ANY IDEA OF HOW
> > MUCH TELEPAC IS CHARGING FOR INTERNET ACCESS?...................
> TelePac must not be charging all that much for internet access, you've felt at
> leisure to sit & not only read this message, but to count the number of lines
> contained therein!!
> ROTFLMAO!
He who laughs last laughs the best.
I transfer the messages so I can read them off-line. And Microsoft Mail &
News gives me how many lines there are on a message, eg your message was 25
lines.
--
Paulo Costa
========================================
I'll get you yet, even if it's the last thing I do.
- assorted fictional bad guys
