Leading-Edge Motorsport Technology Since 1990

Renault RS27 Full details of the Formula 1 championship-winning V8

Genesis of the Red Bull • The V8 engines • Advanced CNC machining • How an F-duct works • Flexible wings • J dampers RENAULT RS27

fter eight seasons, Renault’s RS27 is the most successful Formula 1 engine, winning four championship titles, and at the time of writing The best of having won 58 races, as well as Aracking up 64 pole positions and 54 fastest laps. And with Sebastian Vettel having just claimed his fourth successive title, and with Red Bull, Lotus, Caterham and Williams all using the engine this year, those scores could increase still further at the last two races of the year. the V8s The engine has been in circulation during some of the most demanding changes in Formula 1. When the engine was first Racecar Engineering takes a closer look at the conceived in 2004, the chase for ultimate headaches and triumphs that came of designing revs was on, and the first engines were designed accordingly. From there, rev limits the most successful engine in modern F1 history were reduced, first to 19,000rpm and then to 18,000rpm, and the specification of the BY ANDREW COTTON engines was frozen. Alongside those changes came the introduction of KERS and exhaust-blown diffusers, both of which changed the way in which the engine was being used. At the fore- front of it all was the Renault RS27, assembled at Mecachrome in France. The scale of the engine build is simply incredible. The company has built 1,271 engines, 683 for the track and 588 for the dyno. Between them, the engines have run more than two million kilometres and, despite the freeze in regulations, development has been taking place to produce reliable engines that have been adapted for a completely different world of Formula 1 compared to 2006.

www.racecar-engineering.com • Formula 1 supplement RENAULT RS27

‘All of the systems and parts require a leader of the RS26. ‘After that, we adapted By the end of the year, five variations of the great deal of attention, care and maintenance,’ all the parts to create the V8, but the general engine had been introduced, including low says Rob White, deputy managing director, shape – like scavenging, oil circuit and water friction pistons, new valves, improvements to technical, at Renaultsport. ‘However, the circuit – was all the same.’ the oil system, conrods and camshafts. Power most difficult parts to maintain are always Changing to the V8 meant that vibration had increased from 680bhp to 700bhp. the perennially stressed parts, such as the was a problem, as was cylinder head For the 2007 season, the engines were pistons, connecting rods and bearings that reliability. ‘The first thing was to look at the fixed in specification, and changes were the power travels through. vibration, torsional vibration behaviour,’ says only allowed for issues of reliability. ‘Midway For example, the pistons are stressed to Taillieu. ‘We had to choose between two through 2006, the atmosphere became very more than 8000 times the force of gravity or three firing orders, so we made a lot of different,’ says Axel Plasse, project leader (they accelerate from 1-100km/h in less than simulation around that and chose the best one for the RS27 engine. ‘We had to face a very 1/2000th of a second). The actual weight for the reliability and the acoustic behaviour. new challenge as we learned that the engine of a piston is only 250g, but when the engine The acoustics in a natural aspiration engine is freeze was coming. It almost felt that all the revs to its maximum limit of 18,000rpm major for the performance. work we had done should be thrown away as – equivalent to 300 revs per second – the ‘At the time, the engine was not frozen. At we would have to use the previous engine. acceleration exerts a force of two tonnes on the time, we had a lot of problem with pistons This completely changed our mentality – I can the piston and conrod.’ because we tried to increase the revs. We had remember writing to Rob White asking if we cracks on the roof of the pistons, due to the still had jobs! There was a point where we BEFORE THE RS27 load, which comes from the revs. The higher couldn’t go backwards – we couldn’t put the It was on 6 October 2004 that the first official the revs, the more the load and the more big pieces we had developed back on to the shelf technical specification of the RS26 – the stress, and then you have cracks and break as they were bespoke. We managed to push a first Renault V8 – was distributed around the the piston. We had to redesign the pistons lot of the innovations through, but it was very Viry-Chatillon offices. The objective was to and change the materials. The number of close and the 2007 engine, which has been design a V8 engine with a 90-degree angle references of piston was between 70-100, so used for seven seasons since, came within a as close as possible in specification to the there were a lot of iterations.’ hair’s-breadth of not being born.’ RS25 V10, which respected the FIA’s targets In March 2006, the Renault F1 team won ‘At the beginning, we were very worried by for mass, centre of gravity and crank centre its first race of the season, with Fernando the new regulations,’ says Taillieu. ‘However, line height. The objective was to use as many Alonso, while Giancarlo Fisichella followed we discovered that to limit the revs and RS25 pieces as possible to minimise the risk that up with victory in Malaysia and Alonso development was interesting. The main focus of reliability and performance. again in Australia. For the San Marino Grand was on friction between the parts. We did ‘The first V8 came from the last V10, and Prix in April, the team introduced the B a lot of work on the coatings between the we designed it with the maximum technology spec of the RS26, with a new cylinder head, parts; we developed a carbon coating and the of the V10 to help with reliability and not to insulated ports, new camshafts and enhanced lubrication system, in order to reduce the oil imagine new things to make sure that all is exhausts. Later that year, injection was flow. The more oil you put in the engine, the OK at the first race,’ says Léon Taillieu, project increased to 100bar for the French Grand Prix. more difficult it is to scavenge the engine. If

The objective was to design a V8 engine with a 90-degree angle as close as possible in specification to the RS25 V10

Formula 1 supplement • www.racecar-engineering.com RENAULT RS27

After 12 constructors’ titles, Renault returned to ‘its core activity as an engine supplier’ in 2011, supplying four teams with the RS27 during 2013 oil stays in the engine because front of the engine, but it was you are not able to correctly not a big issue. scavenge the oil, you increase ‘It is more than 50bhp friction between the moving and between the first V8 and the last static parts. one. The change from 2007 is ‘We worked on the vibration between 30-40bhp.’ and in all areas that we were able to work. If you change the oil, you STANDARD ECU reduce the friction between the The introduction of the standard parts, and therefore you reduce McLaren ECU in 2008 again the reliability of the parts. They provided a lot of work for come into contact, and then you the engine department. The have to develop a specific coating introduction automatically to make the engine reliable again. outlawed launch control, active When it is reliable again, you use engine braking and many other this oil with even less friction, elaborate control algorithms. For so you reduce the friction and the 2009 season, a new rule Engineers at work on the soon-to-be-retired Renault V8 at the increase the power! limited each driver to a maximum Mecachrome facility in Aubigny-sur-Nère, central France ‘Our target was to have the of eight engines per season. The engine at the minimum weight, engine had to be validated for directly affecting the tuning of the traditionally been our credo to 95kg, in order to give to the team life of approximately 2500km engine – so the injectors, trumpets, increase the rpm as a normally the maximum opportunity with and the rev limit reduced to inlet ports and everything to do aspirated engine will generate ballast so for our side for us to be 18,000rpm. KERS was also with the inlet system. We changed power from rpm. For a given at 95kg and minimum height of introduced at the same time, a lot of the reference points and torque level, if you increase the the centre of gravity. We are not which meant that the demand on reworked a significant proportion rpm by 10 per cent you increase able to go below this weight or the engines was different. of the engine. We have also seen the power by 10 per cent. centre of gravity by regulation. ‘When the FIA introduced an increase in engine life and ‘To reverse this process and We had a small amount of ballast the reduction in rpm in 2009, a reduction in the number of reduce to 19,000rpm and then on the engine – less than a kilo they opened Pandora’s box,’ says engines per year. to 18,000rpm was a major sea – and we had a small possibility Plasse. ‘We had a one-shot, intense ‘Normally, when you drop the change and we felt that we to change it from the back to the opportunity to change the parts rpm, you drop the bhp. It has would really lose out. However, ‘At the beginning, we were very worried by the new regulations’ www.racecar-engineering.com • Formula 1 supplement RENAULT RS27

we are now six per cent more fuel efficient, and all without changing any parts. This gives a major advantage as six per cent of a total fuel load equates to around 10kg of fuel, or between a 0.2–0.4 sec gain per lap.

BLOWN DIFFUSERS That all changed again in 2010, as by agreement KERS was not used, to keep costs in check. It was, however, a time when Renault started to experiment with exhaust blown diffusers. ‘It is something that we had undertaken in a different world in a previous life and era, and so we had some parts that were turnkey and could be adapted to the V8 relatively easily,’ says White. ‘As we started to undertake exploratory work with our teams, it was clear that there was a performance vector to work upon that was in the system of references that was fixed engine spec. It was a given. Some of it came about from work that we were doing for reliability purposes. Initially, we reminded ourselves about this subject because some of the choices that we were driven to take for reliability purposes were – paradoxically – favourable for reliability in the measures taken to help our chassis colleagues to generate downforce.’ There were few changes to the hardware, although at the time there was a clear need for development. By 2011, almost every team was experimenting with some form of blown diffuser. Engine throttles were used to control exhaust mass flow and other techniques used to control engine torque delivery. Renault have continually made performance gains without increasing bhp, for instance through retuning, ‘When we change the as well as working with partner Total to find improvements through fuels and lubricants pressure drop at the exhaust of the engine, you change the we have still managed to improve quicker, purely thanks to the improvements have been without temperature of the piston,’ the horsepower and make the improvements in fuel. any increase in bhp whatsoever. says Taillieu. ‘You increase the car go faster! This is partly due ‘There have also been ‘We have radically improved performance of the car through to the retuning at 18,000rpm, performance improvements the fuel consumption, not just the blowing and map, but after but also due to several other thanks to the way that the engine in the improvement of the fuels that, the piston is not reliable and important ways we worked with is installed into the car, including – we use, but also in the strategy so you increase the performance the engine. We have also worked but not limited to – the now- of how we consume fuel. We of the car and the engine.’ very closely with our fuel partner, famous blown exhaust, engine have got more sophisticated in With the location of the Total, to jointly gain performance operating temperatures and how we use the engine, such exhaust exits fixed for 2012, through fuels and lubricants. so on. This cycle of continuous as cutting cylinders in corners coanda exhausts were used to They have greatly helped us in development, particularly in the and reducing the amount of try to drive hot exhaust gas into improving fuel consumption and past three years, has contributed fuel used, plus using different the required area of the diffuser reducing friction – I would say to the cars being more than one engine modes at different points to maintain the downforce we are now one to two per cent second quicker. Most of these of the race. It is fair to say advantage, but the topic had

Formula 1 supplement • www.racecar-engineering.com RENAULT RS27

largely dissipated. The engine redesign and recalculation spec remained frozen, with only we pushed through different reliability open to change. designs and build in 2011 Driver torque maps became and 2012 to guard against a hot topic as engine engineers reliability concerns. sought to get the most out of the ‘Another large area of engine and its maps to improve development is to the oil overall handling. A clarification system. We have spent a large further restricting the scope time looking at reducing the of engine maps permitted was dissipation across the engine published mid-season. and ensuring oil consumption While overt development has is the same across all the been outlawed for eight years, engines. It is basic work to behind the scenes there has been understand the different a dramatic improvement to the parameters and the impact on RS27. ‘We have largely corrected performance, but by doing this any outstanding issues and also we can use less oil and therefore reinforced some of the more carry less weight, therefore fragile parts of the engine, such achieving an overall lap time as the crankshaft, which has seen gain. Finally, in 2010 refuelling slight changes to its architecture was outlawed, so we needed to and how we install it into the work on fuel efficiency and how engine,’ says Stephane Rodriguez, we use the engine at different project leader for the RS27. points along the lap to improve ‘We have also reinforced overall race time.’ the conrods to stop breakages In the final year of and to improve the dynamics Top: RS27 exhausts put through their paces on the Renault test bench competition, the spec was frozen of the system. However, the Above: running the rule over components at the Viry-Châtillon facility and Renault had already turned principal updates have been to its attention towards building the pistons, which are the most the V6 hybrid for the 2014 stressed parts of the engine. ‘When the FIA introduced the season. Renault built a new Due to the increase in engine dyno facility in Viry-Châtillon life, these parts now have to reduction in rpm in 2009, they and in mid-October unveiled a sustain these enormous forces new dyno at the Mecachrome for a longer time, so through a opened Pandora’s box’ facility where the engines are www.racecar-engineering.com • Formula 1 supplement TEST DRIVE OUR NEW WEBSITE

www.fhsracing.co.uk

With full information on our products and services, Flexible Hose & Fittings plus an inventory of product downloads, our website is the ideal place to start planning your next fluid transfer assembly, whatever your formula of racing. Rigid Lines & Swagetite Check it out or call us at the number below for an intelligent conversation. Make the connection.

Filtration • 3D cad design service • hose assembly Solenoid valves • hard-line manufacture • cnc machining • filtration design Ancillary Parts & Services • laser marking +44 (0)1753 513080

INTELLIGENT CONNECTIONS

FHS Motor Racing Ltd | 656 Ajax Avenue | Slough, Berkshire | SL1 4BG Fax: +44 (0)1753 513099 Email: [email protected] RENAULT RS27

first run in before transport range, so everything to do with and final preparation takes place operating these engines over this at the headquarters near Paris. speed range is extraordinarily ‘Downspeeding the engine difficult. We should never required us to make some underestimate how good these changes, and at the time they engines are. The torque response were introduced there were some is instantaneous, they run clean retuning opportunities permitted from less than 4000rpm to in the rules,’ says White. ‘Within the red line, and the drivers get the scope of the time available grumpy if the torque is delayed and the resources available we by a tenth of a second. did the best possible job. We were ‘Many people assume that pleased that we did not suffer the engines are similar since the significant performance drops specification has been frozen. with either of the reductions. However they are all very different These remain extremely high as the specs were frozen at a revving engines and operate point in time when the V8 was Due to increased engine life, components have to sustain forces for longer over an extremely broad speed relatively immature. The technical regulations are strict and there THE OUTGOING ENGINE REGULATIONS AT A GLANCE are some common characteristics including the bore size and ENGINE BASICS KERS may not exceed 400kJ which was replaced may not rpm limit, but there are many • Engines must be 4-stroke, in any one lap. be used during any future thousands of design decisions that 2.4-litre V8s, with a V-angle qualifying session or race are not fixed in the regulations. of 90 degrees. TORQUE CONTROL with the exception of the last ‘Perhaps it is not obvious • Crankshaft rotational speed • The only means by which Event of the Championship. but – in an unfrozen engine must not exceed 18,000 rpm. the driver may control • The engines are sealed environment – there is more • Engines must be normally the engine torque is via a and identified by the FIA, opportunity to converge on aspirated. Supercharging is single chassis mounted foot their installation in the car common solutions between the forbidden. (accelerator) pedal. is declared and their use is engine suppliers. The engine • Minimum weight of 95kg. • The accelerator pedal shaping followed by FIA technical contribution to car performance • Engines must have two inlet map in the ECU may only staff. An engine is deemed to is just as important now; even if valves and two exhaust be linked to the type of the be used once the car’s timing frozen in performance, the impact valves per cylinder. tyres fitted to the car: one transponder shows that it has on the car remains as important • Cylinder bore diameter must map for use with dry-weather left the pit lane. as it ever has been.’ not exceed 98mm. tyres and one map for use • Between Events, the engine • Variable-geometry inlet with intermediate or wet- exhaust flanges are sealed in TECH SPEC systems or exhaust systems weather tyres. so that the engines may not are not permitted, nor are • Engine control must not be be started (or dyno tested). Configuration: 2.4-litre V8 variable valve timing and influenced by clutch position, No of cylinders: 8 variable valve-lift systems. movement or operation. ENGINE HOMOLOGATION • With the exception of electric • The idle speed control target (SPORTING) No of valves: 32

fuel pumps, engine auxiliaries may not exceed 5000rpm. • Under regulations introduced Displacement: 2400cc must be mechanically for the 2007 season, only driven direct from the ENGINE USAGE (SPORTING) homologated engines may Weight: 95kg engine with a fixed speed • Unless he drives for more be used in F1. The basis V angle: 90-degree ratio to the crankshaft. than one team, each driver of the homologation is the RPM: 18,000 (from 2009) • Only one fuel injector per may use no more than specification of engines used cylinder is permitted; it must eight engines during a during the 2006 Japanese Fuel: Total inject directly into the side or Championship season. The Grand Prix. Oil: Total the top of the inlet port. eight engines may be used at • No fundamental changes any race as required. have been made to the Power output: >750bhp (typical KERS AND ENERGY • Should a driver use more than engine specification since this car installation, typical temp/ RECOVERY eight engines he will drop 10 point and no modifications pressure/humidity) • With the exception of one places on the starting grid at are permitted without the Spark plugs: semi surface discharge fully charged KERS, the the first Event during which prior approval of the FIA Ignition system: high energy total amount of recoverable each additional engine is following consultation with inductive energy stored on the car used. If two such additional all engine suppliers. must not exceed 300kJ. Any engines are used during • Performance-enhancing Pistons: aluminium alloy which may be recovered a single Event, the driver changes are not permitted. Engine block: aluminium alloy at a rate greater than 2kW concerned will drop 10 grid Changes are normally must not exceed 20kJ. places at that Event and at approved to facilitate Crankshaft: nitrided alloy steel with • The maximum power, the following Event. engine installation in tungsten alloy counterweights in or out, of any KERS • If an engine is changed in different cars, or for reasons Connecting rods: titanium alloy must not exceed 60kW; accordance with Article 34.1 of reliability or benign Throttle system: 8 butterflies energy released from the (after qualifying), the engine housekeeping.

www.racecar-engineering.com • Formula 1 supplement

FORMULA 1 – ENGINES The rest of the V8s With 87 victories between them – not to mention the odd failure – these engines had varied fortunes, but they all had something going for them…

etween 2006 – when had to be switched to the spec have produced a long line of race- laps in the lead, making it the the 2.4-litre V8 engine McLaren Electronics unit. winning engines, and the FO108 most successful engine of the formula was introduced In 2007, some minor was no exception. It is said to be modern era – a statistic that Red B – and 2013, seven modifications were made to very driveable in comparison to Bull and Renault may dispute. different engines were built and the engine. The combustion some other engines. In the same season, engine raced. The Renault RS26/RS27 chamber was revised as were The Mercedes was to score FW058-01 – used by Lewis was the most successful, but the valves, the inlet and the three race wins with one single Hamilton – also became the first some of the other six are too exhaust chambers – all aimed engine: in 2009, Jenson Button hybrid-equipped powertrain in often overlooked. at optimising the torque curve, used FW049-01 to win races Formula 1 history to win a race, 'If you put the four engines given the mandated limit of in Bahrain, Spain and Monaco. at the Hungarian Grand Prix. currently racing alongside each 19,000rpm. For the same reason, The unit went on to be used other and take them apart they changes were made to the piston, for Friday practice in Germany Cosworth CA are not the same,' says Rob White the piston pin and the piston and Hungary, accumulating a Teams: Team Lotus/Lotus of Renaultsport F1. 'They don’t cooling jets to aim for the best total of 2016km. Racing, Marussia, HRT, Williams behave the same way in the possible reliability when running It also scored two pole Wins: 0 car and there is nothing in the at the limit. positions (Spain and Monaco) and The Cosworth engine was current regulations that says they In 2009, the max RPM was spent 72 per cent of its racing believed to be the highest should do. It is wrong to assume further reduced, and the engine that because each engine is of life increased. To cope with this, relatively stable spec that they modifications were made to the are all the same.' inlet trumpets, the position of the injectors and the configuration of Ferrari 056 the exhausts. Teams: Ferrari, Toro Rosso, Ferrari's V8 engine was a title Spyker, Sauber, Force India winner and clearly a very capable Wins: 45 unit. It is worth remembering Driveability was a key factor that Sebastian Vettel won his for Ferrari when it was defining first grand prix (Italy, 2008) in a the target characteristics for Ferrari-powered Toro Rosso. the 056, with the regulations requiring fixed inlet trumpets. Mercedes-Benz FO108 Engine management was initially Teams: McLaren, Mercedes, controlled by an integrated Force India injection and ignition system Wins: 40 from Magneti Marelli, which later Mercedes-Benz HPP in Brixworth Mercedes-Benz F0108

Ferrari 056 Cosworth CA www.racecar-engineering.com • Formula 1 supplement FORMULA 1 – ENGINES

'Ferrari's V8 was a title winner and clearly a capable unit. Sebastian Vettel won his first Grand Prix in a Ferrari-powered car'

revving unit in Formula 1, and Toyota power, and then in 2012 units had to run at reduced was only fitted to the works cars according to some it was at one to Renault revs. The engine had a relatively and those of the satellite Super point the most powerful. According to Williams small bore and a long stroke. Aguri team. The power developed by engineers, the Cosworth unit Despite the lower revs, there the CA was certainly more was more limited in terms were seven engine failures Toyota RVX-V8 than respectable from the outset, of mapping, and needed in races during 2006 – the Teams: Toyota, Williams, climbing to in excess of 755bhp more cooling in comparison highest failure rate of the V8 Midland in its life, or 315bhp per litre. to the Renault. It also suffered era. ‘We encountered seven Wins: 0 The latter specification Cosworth from higher degradation over engine failures in the course Toyota's RVX-V8 was thought to 3-litre 'TJ' V10 engines produced its engine life. of 18 grand prix weekends, all be the most reliable 2.4-litre V8, around 915bhp (or 305bhp per of which were reciprocation- but this led some to claim that litre) for Red Bull during the 2005 Honda RA806E related problems,’ explained it was too conservative and that season, reducing to 735bhp in Teams: Honda, Super Aguri one Honda engineer. it was not as powerful as other restricted guise for Toro Rosso Wins: 1 'Many of them were caused units. After Toyota pulled out of during the 2006 season. Honda's V8 engine won just by the uneven quality of the F1 at the end of 2009, the engine The engine was mandatory one single race – Jenson Button parts affected by vibration in the was still available to customer for new teams joining Formula 1 in the 2006 Hungarian Grand crankshaft area. This had never teams. None took up the option. in 2010, but saw its greatest Prix – though it could have been a problem with the V10. As success in the back of the won many more. Its reliability a result we had to improve the BMW P86 Williams in 2006. A race win in the beginning of the V8 era quality control process. The long Teams: BMW-Sauber at Monaco came tantalisingly was without doubt quite poor, stroke increases piston speed Wins: 1 close, before the unit failed. meaning that during the first half and that makes durability harder BMW never sold its engine to For 2007, the teams switched to of its debut season the to achieve.' customer teams. Few technical By 2009, the engine had details were ever released, but in received a number of updates, 2009 it was rumoured to produce including a new induction 810bhp – which would make it system, fuel system, cylinder the most powerful of the era head and a new injector as (more power than the Cosworth well as modifications to the CA). That season it was mated structure of the pneumatic valves to super capacitor-based KERS. to reduce friction. In addition However, it never really delivered to increasing peak power, the the expected results and was updates improved low- and mid- quietly dropped. BMW left the range torque. sport at the end of the season Curiously, Honda R&D and Sauber promptly switched to continued to develop the engine Ferrari power. even after the company quit the sport at the end of the 2008 Note: this supplement went to season. Honda never released press shortly before the 2013 its engine to customer teams – it Brazilian Grand Prix weekend Honda RA806E

Toyota RVX-V8 BMW P86

Formula 1 supplement • www.racecar-engineering.com RED BULL 2009-2013

www.racecar-engineering.com • Formula 1 supplement RED BULL 2009-2013

Keeping it in the family Adrian Newey’s recent Red Bulls have towered over the competition. We look back with him BY SAM COLLINS at this trail-blazing lineage of victorious V8s

Formula 1 supplement • www.racecar-engineering.com RED BULL 2009-2013

he 2.4-litre V8 era there was no big regulation Sebastian Vettel in the Toro was generally a fairly change, the concept we were Rosso STR3 Ferrari at a damp open period which using had reached its limits,’ Monza in 2008 – the first victory saw cars powered by he says. ‘So we went a new way for a Red Bull car, and Adrian BMW, Honda, Ferrari, with the MP4/16 and MP4/17, Newey’s first win since 2005 TRenault win races, while Toyota but I didn’t get the DNA quite and Cosworth saw a number of right with those. podiums. But what will almost ‘Continuity is hugely certainly be remembered will be important. Really, Red Bull Racing the dominance of just one team – is a team that first raced in 2005, Red Bull Racing. and in truth that was a Jaguar Red Bull Racing arrived in painted blue. Then it had a steep Formula 1 in 2005, buying learning curve of developing the the assets of the Jaguar team, culture – there were quite a lot including its staff and its Milton of new people joining, and some Keynes base. It had a fairly people from the Jaguar days anonymous first season, but choosing to leave. So it was a things started to change in 2006 period of quite rapid change and when Adrian Newey joined Red that took time to settle down, Bull Technology, the company and to develop a way of working that develops the cars raced by – a culture and an ethos – to Red Bull Racing, and which in the develop some of the bigger past has also looked after designs tools, be it developing the wind for Toro Rosso. Indeed the first tunnel, developing simulation… win for a Red Bull car was at the things that you can’t just go to 2008 Italian Grand Prix when Argos and buy.’ the Toro Rosso STR3 (a Ferrari- engined variant of the Red Bull DEVELOPMENT CURVE RB4) took the flag driven by a ‘It takes some time to develop all young German named Sebastian those from scratch, and to learn Vettel. It was the first win for a how to use them and how to work Newey-designed car since 2005. with them,’ he adds. ‘Once you get It would certainly not be the last. to that stage, continuity becomes In the last two decades, very important. People have Newey’s cars have won 10 World learned to work with each other Constructors’ Championships and and it’s then making that an ever 11 Drivers’ titles. His philosophy is tighter-knit group and trying to not one of aggressive revolutions maintain it as the team continues in design, but rather gradual steps to grow. It’s been flat for the last in a particular direction. couple of years in numbers as a solution we could find to the big his RB7 – which also featured ‘The way I have always tried result of the RRA, which I think is aerodynamic regulation changes,’ the concept – Kinky Kylie. Newey, to work is that if you can get the very good. But it’s an evolutionary he says. ‘That was really the however, takes something of concept right in the first place then thing which took us three or four biggest regulation change since a more reasoned view for the within stable regulations I think it years to settle down into.’ flat bottoms came in back in 1983. layout: ‘the pullrod suspension at is good to evolve a car from there,’ In 2009 a major regulation We are always trying to maximise the rear helped to package some says Newey. ‘That’s what I did at change was introduced to F1 the downforce, have a reasonably of the major components lower Williams with the FW14 through to – the aerodynamic packages of broad operating window, get the down, so the design was really the FW16. That concept stopped the cars were overhauled and weight distribution where you a combination of c of g height at the end of 1994 when there given wider front wings and want it, have something that is and general packaging, which we was a big regulation change. As a much narrower rear aerofoils. structurally sound, and all with felt suited the new regulations result, the Williams FW17 was a The bodywork was de-cluttered a light c of g. It’s all the obvious much better than the pushrod. It brand new car that had nothing to as the majority of winglets were points – there’s no magic bullet basically allows much tidier flow do with the FW16 due to the rule outlawed. Slick tyres were re- in it. That big regulation change to the lower beam wing.’ changes. From then, the FW17 to introduced and hybrid powertrains came at a good time for us, That said, at first the concept FW19 were very much evolutions would be allowed for the first because it coincided with the ended up being something of each other. It was the same time in the form of KERS. point where we had started to gel of a hindrance once it became during my time at McLaren, the Newey’s response was the together as a team.’ clear that the loophole in MP4/13, MP4/14 and MP4/15 Red Bull RB5 (aka Toro Rosso The rear of the car featured regulations identified by Honda’s were all very similar.’ STR4) – the first in a family line pullrod-actuated dampers which Ross Brawn would not be closed. Newey admits, however, that that would come to dominate hadn’t been seen in F1 for As a result, the Brawn BGP001, this approach has not always Formula 1. ‘The RB5 of 2009 was some years, and the resulting Williams FW31 and Toyota worked as it should. ‘At the end the first of a new line of cars with compact and ‘great’ rear end is TF109 all featured so-called of the MP4/15, I felt that while which we came up with the best the reason why Vettel dubbed double deck diffusers, the Red ‘The RB5 was the first of a new line of cars with which we came up with the best solutions to the big aero regulation changes’ www.racecar-engineering.com • Formula 1 supplement RED BULL 2009-2013

Bull RB5 did not and as a result it was left with a significant aerodynamic disadvantage. ‘I think with a single diffuser car, pullrod suspension is a very elegant solution,’ Newey says. ‘But for a double diffuser, with the height that the diffuser then uses, it’s much less clear cut. It compromised the RB5 a little bit by having to try and package a double diffuser on to a car that just wasn’t designed for it. RB6, of course, was designed for the double diffuser, and then we debated whether to stay with the pullrod or not. I think we elected to, because by then we had some experience with it, and were happy with how it worked in general. But equally, had we spotted double diffusers earlier, we may have stayed with pushrod for RB5 and RB6. The whole thing with the double diffusers was not about the regulations. It was about Max Mosley’s stand against the teams – especially Ferrari and McLaren – and we rather got caught in the crossfire.’ Once Red Bull caught up in the diffuser race, the RB5 became a force to be reckoned with – winning six races. Its successor, the RB6, however, was built with the double diffuser in mind. It also introduced another technology LAT

The Red Bull RB5 – which gained six wins and five poles in 17 races – was the first in a design lineage which has gone on to dominate F1

Formula1 supplement • www.racecar-engineering.com RED BULL 2009-2013 LAT Red Bull Racing experimented with exhaust layout throughout the car, and attempted to hide its work with stickers. They were effective for about 24 hours...

which would come to dominate F1 ‘The 2010 car was the first the wire. Indeed, if the second the size of the fuel tank from the aerodynamics, the blown diffuser. year where we designed it from Renault driver (Vitaly Petrov) had no refuelling regulation and what It also had to accommodate a the outset to have a double not managed to keep Fernando impact the narrower front tyre much larger fuel tank as in-race diffuser,’ he says. ‘We got a lot out Alonso behind him, we would not would have,’ says Newey. ‘The refuelling was banned. of that concept and we were quite have taken the title.’ 2010 aerodynamic work started ‘The RB6 is an evolution aggressive with the packaging around June 2009, looking at the of the RB5,’ said Newey at the of the car. It had a very long BEST OF THE BUNCH monocoque where there was a car’s launch. ‘We tried to look at gearbox to maximise the area of There is little doubt, however, small regulation change to the what bits we could improve, but the double diffuser. Performance- as to which car Newey thinks V-section chassis we used. The it was more a case of looking at wise we have always had our was the strongest of the line in rest of the chassis work was the fuel tank and the diffuser. nose ahead with this family of terms of relative performance. aerodynamic optimisation and Last year we took the decision cars, and that’s certainly true of ‘With hindsight it is clear to see accommodating the extra 70-odd that we were going to fit a the 2010 car. But we struggled that the 2011 championship kilos of fuel.’ double diffuser to the RB5 and with a lot of reliability issues was the easiest one,’ he says. As was the case with the RB5 not change the gearbox, because both on our side and also on the ‘We had a car that we were just and all of the later cars, Newey and we didn’t have the time or the engine side. There were a lot of able to always extract a bit more his team had to accommodate two resource to do that. points thrown away as a result of performance from and that let us very different drivers – the 64kg of ‘Obviously for the RB6 we that, and to be honest quite a few keep our nose ahead all season.’ Sebastian Vettel who is 174cm tall designed the gearbox and rear errors along the way. The RB6 was described by and the larger 75kg frame of Mark suspension to have that from ‘We made much harder work driver Mark Webber as being ‘like Webber, who stands at 184cm. the outset. And like other people of the 2010 championships than you are driving a limousine’ due to ‘The car has to be designed around we were able to fit a somewhat we should have done. While we its extra size and weight – a result Mark, which means that the cockpit larger diffuser than we were able wrapped up the constructors’ of the larger fuel cell. has to be a bit longer than the to in 2009. We stuck with the championship with a race to go, ‘We initially concentrated on minimum regulation and the fuel pullrod rear suspension – having the drivers’ went right down to the challenges of almost doubling tank has to be moved rearwards been on it for a year and started slightly because fuel is not allowed to understand its strengths and to be stored ahead of the driver’s weaknesses, so we felt it was the ‘With the 2010 car we struggled back,’ says Newey. right way to continue.’ with a lot of reliability issues, and ‘Once we’ve done that, fitting But in hindsight, Newey feels the shorter driver in, Sebastian, that despite being a good design, there were quite a lot of points is relatively easy. With Mark we the RB6 may actually have been have a driver who’s on the heavier the weakest car of the family line. thrown away as a result of that’ end compared to Sebastian. That

www.racecar-engineering.com • Formula 1 supplement RED BULL 2009-2013

Apart from a system to reduce the disruption to airflow in the diffuser caused by the rear wheels, the RB8 was a relatively straightforward evolution to the RB7

means he has less freedom on earlier the deception would have FIA didn’t quite get the under-body great note. It did not use the fuel weight distribution. The obvious worked for months. aerodynamic regulations right, tank volume in the monocoque solution to that would be that That head-start in exhaust as double diffusers gave way to to accommodate the batteries. drivers have to carry ballast on technology would give Red Bull the even more controversial ‘hot This was a major change in the side of their seat, but that’s a clear advantage in 2011. With blown floors’, where cars would concept to the RB5, which was something that has been discussed 11 pole positions, six wins and use 100 per cent throttle 100 per the first Red Bull designed to take and hasn’t happened so far. It 383 points from 11 races it is fair cent of the time with the driver’s KERS. ‘On that car it was in the really means that if you make the to say that the RB7 dominated the right pedal becoming little more fuel tank, so the RB7 was kind wrong move, you’re locked into it first half of the 2011 F1 season. than a torque demand switch. Most of in-between RB5 and RB6 in for a while. It’s one less variable, Due to a regulation introduced radically, this idea was exploited chassis terms,’ says Newey. but it’s the same for everyone.’ for 2011 along with a new tyre by the Renault team with the front ‘When we freed up the volume The Red Bull RB6 was the first supplier, Pirelli, weight distribution exhaust exits seen on the R31. for fuel between RB5 and RB6, modern F1 car to be fitted with a was something less of a headache we also changed the shape of the blown diffuser. Designed to use for Newey and his team for the MORE KERS THAN BLESSING? monocoque alongside the fuel the exhaust gases to seal the RB7. The weight distribution of ‘I think some people were saying cell at the same time. Inevitably, diffuser off from turbulent flows all 2011 cars was fixed at no less that they were hot blowing the there’s always a fight between from the base of the rotating rear than 291kg on the front axle and floors to balance their KERS out, radiator packaging and fuel wheel, the concept first appeared 342kg on the rear, and with the which seems rather against the volume as they are fighting for in pre-season testing. 640kg minimum weight, teams whole principle of it,’ says Newey. the same volume.’ Red Bull was keenly aware only had a 7kg window to work ‘KERS is meant to be a fuel-saving The re-introduction of KERS that as soon as other engineers with. Other design limitations – strategy, so to claim that you burn joined DRS as headline changes realised that the exhausts had such as the c of g height for the excess fuel and blow the floor in for the 2011 season, but one of been repositioned, they would engine – also further reduced some order to offset the influence of the critical issues for the teams soon be on to the concept, so it of the design choices available. the KERS and achieve a neutral was the arrival of Pirelli as the tried to camouflage the layout But the big change in the brake balance seems rather sole tyre supplier to F1. With the in a fascinating way. Stickers rules went directly in Red Bull and against the whole intent of green RB7 proving to be the fastest with the image of exhaust Newey’s favour – a ban on double technology. The way we were car in qualifying and winning the exits were placed on the rear diffusers. This allowed the team to using the exhaust, the effect on most races, it could be said that bodywork of the RB6 exactly finally reap the full benefit of its KERS would be very small.’ Red Bull got the best out of them, where the exhausts used to be pullrod rear suspension. It will likely The RB7 was the first Red but Newey is not so sure. ‘Ferrari positioned. But the real exits had be said in years to come that the Bull to fully exploit KERS to any seemed to be pretty kind on their been moved to the now familiar tyres, arguably kinder than us,’ he position on the floor of the car. Red Bull camouflaged the new says. ‘It’s not as simple as having The deception worked for 24 a good tyre model, then you hours – it was one of the first layout during testing by placing understand the tyre. That might demonstrations of the power of allow you to understand it, but it the internet in F1 with thousands stickers of exhaust exits on the rear won’t necessarily mean you can of pairs of eyes studying each get good performance. In truth, I car for upgrades. Just a few years bodywork, where they used to be think our pace was down to the

Formula 1 supplement • www.racecar-engineering.com RED BULL 2009-2013 WRI2 The RB7 rear wings and suspension during an early view of the all-conquering car at testing, Circuit de Catalunya, Spain in 2011 overall car. I like to think that if pack with in the last couple of cut in downforce in losing that combined hugely reduced the we were on Bridgestones, our years. That led to a big rethink exhaust technology. We have exhaust effect, but did not reduce performance relative to the others over the winter. We designed the certainly suffered more than it to zero. Compared to the other would be probably fairly similar RB7 around that exhaust position, our competitors in terms of the teams, there are obviously two to where we were on Pirellis. In and were probably the only exhausts. We were the first to ways of skinning the cat in terms other words, I don’t think that the people to do so other than Lotus. do it in 2010, so we were on of getting the most out of the change from Bridgestone to Pirelli ‘Regulation restrictions – that track for two years and had exhaust given the limitations in particularly caused a change in like the lost exhaust – are a probably taken it further than the regulations. The concepts the competitive order.’ bit frustrating, because they other people. It was difficult to used were different in the In 2012, however, the Pirelli are precisely that: restrictions. get the car to work properly with philosophy and the way in which tyres were a dominant factor and They’re not presenting new it missing – we really had to go they achieve the effect.’ did indeed cause a change in the opportunities or revenues back and re-learn the baseline.’ Despite the change, the RB8 competitive order, with Williams particularly, they’re just closing was still just an evolution of the winning its first race for many doors. I enjoy regulation changes, EXHAUST AVENUE RB7, and a continuation of the years as a result. The resurgence but I always rather lament The RB8 was launched with a family line. ‘Generally speaking, if of the Honda/Brawn team – now regulation restrictions. fairly conventional solution, but a car is an evolution – which the in the guise of Mercedes – also ‘As a result of those after initial testing, it was fitted RB8 was– it’s kind of a gradual made Newey’s job harder. On top restrictions we had to go back with a Sauber-style solution, process,’ says Newey. ‘The of this, off-throttle blowing was and look at how we developed which differs from the Coanda knowledge from the development banned – Renault had admitted the car. Probably one of the key layout but achieves the same of the RB7 was constantly fed that it increased fuel consumption things there was the rear ride goal, reducing the disruption to into RB8. You have to get the by up to 10 per cent at a time height. The exhaust allowed us to air flow in the diffuser caused big bits out of the way, though, when the sport’s environmental run a high rear ride height, but it by the rear wheels. to hit the timescales, and the credibility was under stiff scrutiny. was much more difficult without ‘It was a combination of two longest lead items on the RB8 ‘It was a difficult task to stay it to sustain a high rear height, things that hit at one time,’ says were the chassis and gear case where we were,’ says Newey. ‘We so we had to go back down and Newey. ‘One was the restriction as well as the internals. The lost the exhaust technology with redevelop the car around that on where we could physically initial research centred on what the restriction on exhaust outlet lower ride height. put the exhaust exits, and the was needed for those long-lead position, that we’d otherwise ‘With the RB8 it was about other was the restriction on the time items and it then progressed have perhaps been ahead of the damage limitation from the mapping of the engine. Those on from there.’ ‘Regulation restrictions don’t present new opportunies – they close doors. I enjoy regulation changes, but I rather lament restrictions’ www.racecar-engineering.com • Formula 1 supplement

RED BULL 2009-2013 WRI2 The Renault RS27 V8, which powered the Red Bull RB7 to an impressive 12 wins from 19 races during the 2011 season

Red Bull supplied one of BLOWING THE NUTS different. The changes there those long-lead time items – its were very small. In 2012 we transmission – to a customer arly in the 2013 season, some small aerodynamic gains,’ introduced a very high wishbone team, Caterham. On the RB8 the RB9 tested with an Adrian Newey explains. ‘It was with the driveshaft passing the layout is little changed from Einteresting wheel nut trying to do what we had when through the middle of it which the RB7 and the unit found in layout – there was a hole in the we had the wheel covers in the brought an aerodynamic benefit the CT-01 and CT-03 (The Lotus centre of the nut passing right past. The way we did it last – and that’s been widely copied T128 used the RB5 gearbox). though the hub. These became year was declared illegal during by others in 2013. That was quite ‘With the gearbox, everybody cheekily known as ‘blown nuts’ the season, at Montreal. The a decent step, but it’s the usual now has instant shift, which and were also trialled by the solution that ourselves and problem in Formula 1… everyone means that you’re engaging the Williams team. At the time their Williams then experimented sees it and copies it.’ new gear before you come out purpose was not disclosed, with at the start of this year It is worth noting here that of the old gear, and you’re using though some speculated that was much the same thing, but the RB8 pushed the regulation the backlash to get out of the they were for brake cooling. done in a way that was legal. hard in a couple of areas, resulting original gear before you have the ‘Last year we had a duct ‘Overall, however, we did not in two high-profile issues with two gears fighting against each through the wheel which gave find a big benefit to doing it.’ the FIA. First the team was forced other,’ says Newey. to change the design of the ‘After that it is just reliability rear floor of the car. A new floor and packaging. On the RB8 the used at the Spanish Grand Prix gearbox internals were the same and the Monaco Grand Prix as on the RB7, and quite a few featured a small cutout ahead of the assemblies carried over of the rear wheel, but this was too. Wheel bearings, pedals and questioned by rival teams who that sort of thing were all the argued that it did not conform same, so we only changed parts with the technical regulations. where there was a reason to do These state: ‘All parts lying on so. Between RB8 and RB9 there the reference and step planes, was virtually nothing new about in addition to the transition the transmission. The internals between the two planes, must

are as near-as-damn-it identical, WRI2 produce uniform, solid, hard, although the casing was slightly continuous, rigid (no degree www.racecar-engineering.com • Formula 1 supplement UK-A4-adverts-2013.indd 1 3/12/2013 1:12:54 PM RED BULL 2009-2013

The RB8 wasn’t as dominant as its immediate predecessor, but it still bagged seven wins and eight poles from 20 races, again taking both the drivers’ and constructors’ titles

of freedom in relation to the Another run-in with the FIA mid-RPM range than previously Red Bull was doing. Nonetheless, body/chassis unit), impervious technical department took place seen at other events. In my Bauer referred the matter to the surfaces under all circumstances. at the German Grand Prix. This opinion this is therefore in breach event stewards. Forward of a line 450mm forward time it centred on the torque map of the technical regulations as the Three hours after Bauer’s of the rear face of the cockpit loaded on to the car’s McLaren engines... Furthermore, this new report was released, the FIA entry template, fully enclosed ECU. The FIA’s technical delegate, torque map will artificially alter stewards of the meeting holes are permitted in the Jo Bauer, discovered the code the aerodynamic characteristics announced that no further action surfaces lying on the reference ahead of the German Grand of both cars which is also in would be taken. Their statement and step planes provided no part Prix and issued the following contravention of technical read: ‘The stewards received a of the car is visible through them statement: ‘Having examined directives.’ The mid-range torque report from the FIA technical when viewed from directly below.’ the engine base torque map, map is critical in optimising the delegate, along with specific To circumvent this, other it became apparent that the car’s exhaust gas flow to get a ECU data from Red Bull Racing teams – such as Ferrari – used maximum torque output of both blown diffuser effect, though it Cars 1 and 2. a tiny slit between the hole engines is significantly less in the was not clear that this was what ‘The stewards met with the and the outer edge of the floor, team representatives and the meaning that the hole is not representative of the engine ‘fully enclosed’. The FIA technical ‘We’d think we had a handle on the supplier Renault. While the department said that in its 2012 tyres, but then something stewards do not accept all the opinion the floor did not meet the arguments of the team, they rules as it interpreted them, and would happen to make us realise we however conclude that as the for the next race in Canada, Red regulation is written, the map Bull changed the design. hadn’t properly understood them’ presented does not breach the www.racecar-engineering.com • Formula 1 supplement RED BULL 2009-2013

KERS: RED BULL’S ACHILLES HEEL

f the Red Bull RB5-RB9 family But most of the other problems line does have an Achilles’ have been – I think more than Iheel, it must be its energy anything – simply our lack of recovery systems, as team radio experience in that area.’ transmissions during races This is one of the key areas regularly reveal system failures in the design of the RB6-9. – something that by 2013 was Placing the lithium chemistry almost unique to the team. cells – thought to be supplied ‘At the root of the problem is by SAFT – at the rear means the fact that we tried to develop the car has some significant the KERS package ourselves,’ differences to its rivals. The says Adrian Newey. ‘It’s based on team’s package is still largely the Magneti Marelli system that based on the Magneti Marelli Renault used in 2009 and which system which first appeared in we briefly tested on the RB5 2009, with some components pre-season before electing not similar or identical to those to race it. Since then, everybody used by Ferrari. The unraced has gone off in different Peugeot 908 Hybrid4 LMP1 directions with that system as a is also thought to share some basis, including ourselves. components with this system. ‘Developing KERS just isn’t our strength. We are mechanical TRICK MISSED engineers, aerodynamicists and ‘In hindsight we missed a trick vehicle dynamicists – not KERS by not properly developing KERS specialists. Part of the problem in 2009,’ admits Newey. ‘The is that we have chosen quite potential was always there, but aggressive packaging, putting in 2009 we were not mature the batteries alongside the bell- enough as a team to take on housing at the back of the car, that challenge. You could argue which we’ve felt was good for that between then and now in the overall package of the car. 2013 we have gained 0.4 secs Everybody else now has from KERS. The rest has been the batteries at the base of the usual aero developments. the fuel tank. ‘It’s fair to say that we ‘From a packaging point of always struggled at high track view, we felt that ours was a temperatures. Having the better route. We knew there batteries where they are brings would be heat issues with our weight distribution benefits in placement of the batteries as it terms of the car overall as we is a fairly hostile environment, have shifted that mass rearwards and heat management has – but thermally it is not where been a little bit of a problem. you would choose to put them.’ text of the Formula 1 technical regulations were introduced. The regulations and therefore decided cars were converging and the grid to take no action.’ was getting tighter. Despite this, Newey admits time among our engineers than Drivers of rival teams felt that ‘So, if you are a tenth that the 2012 Pirelli tyres were we would have done previously, the RB8 had more downforce, but or two tenths a second slower, more challenging than expected. or we would have done with a transmitting that downforce to it might be a few grid places ‘The tyres were very difficult to Bridgestone or a Michelin. the track was just as important in dropped, whereas the previous understand,’ he said. ‘Sometimes ‘If you compare them to 2012. Indeed, one of the biggest year it might have made no we thought we had got a handle – say – the height of the tyre talking points of the 2012 difference at all. It all put tyres on them, but then something war between Michelin and season was the tyres, the impact into a bigger focus and quite would happen that made us Bridgestone, then you got to of which Newey felt has been often when you get these big realise that we’ve not properly the point where the race was somewhat overplayed. swings between grid results understood them. really a series of qualifying laps ‘Everybody talks like the between the teams, tyres are and the drivers would therefore tyres have become so much singled out as being the reason. REVERSE ENGINEERING push very hard throughout more critical in 2012 compared to ‘But that’s a bit too simplified ‘Effectively we were trying to without worrying too much about the previous year,’ he says. ‘I think in truth. Some cars will be better reverse engineer someone else’s degradation, be it thermal or wear. they were trickier to use in high speed corners and not product, so it was and still is That’s different now. I think that generally, but equally the grid so good in low speed corners. tricky – and this is the same for brings a different set of skills to closed up again and that was Some cars may be better on all of the teams. Inside our own the floor, almost like Prost in the partly due to regulations being bumpy circuits, but tyres are team we did not highlight anyone 80s, when he got the reputation restrictive and 2012 being the visible feature that people purely as a tyre specialist. But it’s for being The Professor, thinking the fourth season since those just latch on to.’ fair to say that we dedicated more about how he did the race. I think

Formula 1 supplement • www.racecar-engineering.com RED BULL 2009-2013

THE ANACHRONISTIC ADRIAN NEWEY

hile every other car on manufacturing use computer- very late-70s or early-80s – was the grid between 2009 controlled machinery. The team becoming the major performance Wand 2013 started out have got used to me now.’ differentiator between the with a click of a CAD screen, the While Newey still relies cars. So it makes sense for the Red Bulls all started life as a on paper and French curves, aerodynamic side to lead the hand-drawn design on a piece of the rest of his engineers use overall design of the car in terms paper in Adrian Newey’s office advanced digital tools to of packaging. All the cars that I’ve in Milton Keynes, England. develop concepts. The team been in charge of, dating back to ‘Whether you use a CAD has a partnership with Siemens, the IndyCars of the mid-80s, have system or a drawing board, and uses its NX software. It been designed to that ethos.’ ultimately it’s a way of taking also utilises Teamcenter PLM to This does not mean that thoughts from in your head, ensure accuracy and consistency aerodynamics always take priority, of course. Newey takes a pragmatic view to handling the engineering trade-offs. ‘We have sufficient research and simulation tools that we should be able to answer questions. So for instance, if there’s a compromise to be made between weight or stiffness – which are the usual things – then we should be able to input numbers and let them speak for themselves.’ But Newey is perhaps of the old school of racecar designers, as he loathes the level of restrictions found in the F1 technical regulations – so much so that he has more than once putting them into a medium, of models and bills of material. considered a career change to developing them in that medium ‘It’s the system that the guys the world of the Americas Cup. and then communicating it here all felt comfortable using,’ ‘I rather lament it. All of those with others,’ explains Newey. adds Newey. ‘We benchmarked changes of the concept from ‘It’s almost like a language, various systems in terms RB5 to RB9 are always due to a pitch connection which can give and what system you use is of overall performance and regulation restrictions. Ultimately some benefits in ride.’ personal preference. But it is fair flexibility and how we wanted if the regulations become tighter There is some speculation to say we couldn’t realistically to use it, and found that it was and tighter then you end up with that the RB9 is also fitted with a cope with many people in the the one most suited to us.’ F1 becoming GP1. All the cars system that links the suspension company using drawing boards! Newey’s design methodology will converge to become more diagonally, but Newey would not ‘Once I’ve done my paper is primarily aerodynamic, or less the same and I think that be drawn on this. drawings, they then have to something most teams now would be a great shame for the Throughout the car there are be scanned, and then there’s imitate. ‘It’s the way I’ve always sport. For me, what differentiates many detail changes from the a team of two or three people operated, pretty much from the F1 from tennis or golf is the fact RB8, but one of the most notable that have to take those start of my career,’ he says. ‘I that it is a combination of man lies at the front of the car. A minor drawings and turn them into graduated as an aeronautical and machine, and to win either rule change relating to the height solid surface models. Nowadays, engineer, which means not simply the drivers’ or constructors’ titles of the nose at the start of the a drawing itself is of no use aerodynamics. Aerodynamics you need a combination of good 2012 season saw all of the cars to anybody. Whether you’re was one of the subjects that one driver and good car. feature a rather ugly hump. Red evaluating it in CFD or in a wind takes on the course, but so are ‘If the regulations mean that Bull uniquely fitted a slot in the tunnel, the manufacturing is structures, controls and so on. the cars are all more of less nose which it initially claimed in the electronic world. The It seemed quite apparent to me the same, it would reduce the was for driver cooling, but later wind tunnel model and the that aerodynamics – from the attraction of the sport.’ admitted to using for cooling some internal components. It also seemed to have an aerodynamic that’s coming back, which gives as many admiring glances RB9 retains its front torsion bars, function as it was linked to a some variety and change in the from rivals. It was once again though they are not visible when second slot under the nose. A rule field both race-to-race, during an evolution of the previous the bulkhead is inspected. change would have allowed Red the race and qualifying to race. year’s cars but featured some ‘The torsion bars are still Bull to fit a non-structural panel in I think that’s all good for the sport interesting details. At some point fitted, but are a bit more recessed this area, but Newey and his team – certainly good for spectating.’ in the family line, interlinked in the bulkhead than on previous decided against that approach. The RB8 was followed up suspension was introduced. cars,’ he says. ‘We have had front- ‘We do have the vanity panel by the RB9 – a car that courted Unlike some cars with such to-rear interlinked suspension on on there, but it does not stretch no less controversy and just systems, Newey claims that the the car for quite a few years – it’s the whole way to the front of the www.racecar-engineering.com • Formula 1 supplement RED BULL 2009-2013

At the time of writing, the RB9 had garnered 11 wins from 17 races, with nine pole positions and 10 fastest laps. Sebastian Vettel won the drivers’ championship with three races of the season left

nose as the weight of it would be strong as many expected that it effectively changing the toe the constructors’ championship. too high for that,’ he explains. ‘But would be. Then, after the spate of the tyres. In reality the main But with the resource restriction we have dropped the letterbox of failures at Silverstone during benefit was wear management. agreement in force, the engineers vent which cooled the driver and the British Grand Prix, the Italian In qualifying you take a lot out of at Red Bull had to not only ensure some electronic systems.’ company was forced to essentially the tyres – you are driving them that the RB9’s development rate With the letterbox vent revert to its 2012 tyres. Perhaps as hard as you can and slip can be allowed it to keep its nose ahead, dropped on the RB9, the same as a result of this, the RB9 seemed quite high. On the very heavily but also make sure that they did solution found on both the 2012 to make a significant step forward handed circuits you take a lot out not fall behind on development and 2013 Saubers was employed, in pace. However, the mid-season of the left-hand side of the car of the RB10. which featured a vent facing the tyre change also saw a practice typically, so by swapping them for ‘We are having difficulty driver. It is also linked to a slot used by a number of teams the race you get some benefit.’ balancing the 2014 development under the nose. including Red Bull outlawed. Cars with the 2013 car,’ Newey McLaren’s Matt Morris – who were regularly seen on track with IN CHARGE – AGAIN admitted, ‘we are dealing with oversaw its introduction when he the right rear tyre fitted to the left As the European season came it as best we can. The people was technical director – explains rear and vice-versa. to a close at Monza in Italy, the working on the long-lead time that its concept is really very ‘The 2013 tyre construction RB9 was – like its predecessors – parts like monocoque and gearbox simple. ‘Everybody is interested had ply steel built into it which dominant. Drivers from Mercedes, are exclusively working on 2014 in it, but it is something that is a way of changing the toe Ferrari and Lotus soon all admitted now, and at the same time there is not actually worth much without changing the toe,’ says that they could not catch Vettel is a small team of people working performance,’ he says. ‘When Newey. ‘It’s nothing especially in his RB9, and Red Bull headed full-time on this year’s car. you look at the hump it is clearly magical – by swapping the into the flyaway races with a ‘It’s possible that there may be not the best dynamic device on tyre from side to side you are seemingly unassailable lead in some small carry-over from RB9 the planet, so we just used it to to RB10, but with the size of the improve the flow in that area.’ changes it’s not very much.’ One area where every team ‘By swapping tyres from side to The arrival of the RB10 early has struggled to some extent in side you are effectively changing in 2014 will draw to a close one the last two seasons is the tyres, of the most successful lines of With the original generation of the toe of the tyres – so this was grand prix cars ever – but it could Pirellis used at the start of the also mark the start of another season, the RB9 was often not as good for wear management’ equally strong lineage.

Formula 1 supplement • www.racecar-engineering.com RED BULL – TECH DISCUSSION Is Red Bull Racing using KERS to enhance mechanical traction?

ed Bull has dominated same top speed or the same that gives them a consistent 2. If torque were to be the F1 drivers’ and downforce with less drag and advantage? In other words, modulated so that the Rconstructors’ championship superior top speed. They don’t what would give them such an maximum traction is exceeded since 2010. This is often put 7. They are apparently able advantage and still be consistent for only a very small rotation down to more efficient downforce to take advantage of what with all the above? of the tyre and then relaxed generation, but David J Dodge appears to be high downforce/ The most important clue is to re-establish a new bond to believes that the car’s advantage high drag setups, while other their KERS problems. What could the pavement, then pushed is down to a clever way to teams are not able to do so they be doing to make it so over the limit again, some improve traction. He starts with a 8. Other teams are not stupid. If difficult in comparison to other additional thermal potential few facts and observations: sacrificing top end speed for teams? It must bring a significant of the tyre could be taken more downforce reduced lap advantage, or they wouldn’t advantage of and lateral 1. RBR cars are consistently the times, they would all be doing bother with the complexity. grip would be more stable. slowest of the top and mid- it. Does RBR really have a So here we go! It is This would yield better mid- field teams in speed traps higher downforce setup? theoretically easy to modulate turn grip, stability and speed 2. RBR cars can consistently do 9. Superior aero does not the output torque and charging 3. When the threshold of the fastest lap times (they seem to explain RBR input torque to an electric motor/ maximum traction is near, have most pole positions) dominance. Superior generator using capacitors, the modulation of torque 3. RBR has a higher average mechanical traction does batteries, inductors and a and the consequent slip- speed down long straights, 10. RBR has had consistent feedback signal. Torque changes catch would give the driver despite having a ~10kph problems with their KERS are instant and control is easy. feedback on impending loss slower top end. They cannot 11. No other team has had KERS Here are a few things that RBR of grip. (Note: this may be a be caught by faster cars problems since the first year could be doing with a more violation of the rules.) This 4. In order to have a higher 12. RBR is very technically sophisticated KERS: could yield fewer driver average and lower top speed competent, so why can’t mistakes and allow them to they must: they solve a problem that 1. If torque were to be modulated stay closer to the limit a) have better traction everyone else has solved? in response to the normal force 4. Charging input torque could out of the turns 13. They must be doing something of the tyres against the track also be modulated to enhance b) better traction into different with their KERS (in response to shock pressure, rear wheel traction during the turns 14. They don’t appear to be using for example) significant unused braking. This could yield c) better traction KERS on the straights (low top traction potential could be more effective rear braking, though the corners end speed). They do appear to recovered during high pressure and delay the onset of d) or all three be using it at turn exits phases (upside of bumps) and rear wheel lock-up 5. RBR’s superiority is often 15. The mysterious stuttering initiation of full wheel spin 5. This does not appear to attributed to the superior rubber marks on the exit of the during low pressure phases violate any rules (except for aerodynamic downforce Adrian Montreal hairpin may be a clue (downside of bumps) could be No 3 above). It is traction Newey is able to engineer delayed. This would yield better enhancement, not traction 6. If they had superior aero, they In light of these facts and turn exit acceleration, higher control. Almost everything an would have more downforce observations, what could RBR cornering speeds and stability, F1 team normally and legally with the same drag and the be doing that others are not, especially on bumpy tracks does is to enhance traction

Mark Webber’s RB9 at the ADRIAN NEWEY RESPONDS Nürburgring in July 2013 Racecar highlighted the points raised here with Newey who seemed a little cagey about it all, though he hinted that while the RB5-RB9 line does indeed seem to have low end of straight speed, and relatively high mid-straight speed, this is not down to the usage of KERS. ‘I doubt the gain is from KERS,’ he says. ‘We, like everyone, do work on how to best deploy it, but I think everyone is similar in how they use it. Is our traction better than others? I think it depends on the particular corner

LAT leading on to the straight.’ www.racecar-engineering.com • Formula 1 supplement 180 mph without moving an inch

Take cutting-edge wind tunnel technology. Add a 180 mph rolling road.

And build in the best in precision data acquisition capabilities. When we created the world’s first and finest commercially available full-scale testing environment of its kind, we did much more than create a new wind tunnel.

We created a new standard in aerodynamics.

+1 704 788 9463 [email protected] windshearinc.com TECHNOLOGY – CGTECH ADVERTISEMENT FEATURE A winning formula Freeform Technology uses CGTech's VERICUT, the world's most advanced independent CNC tool simulation and optimisation software, to provide peace of mind and a safety net for its machines

stablished in 2008, the more reasonable and we flew majority of Buckingham- out to their factory in Milan, Italy. based Freeform We were very impressed with ETechnology’s work is the company so we came back connected to the motorsport to get the finance in place, bit industry. This might be expected the bullet and re-mortgaged the as its co-directors knew each house just at the start of the other when they both worked global recession. at Red Bull Racing. Company 'Fortunately for us, Red Bull director Simon Burchett, explains: did help us out with work and 'At least 80 per cent of our free-issued material. We have work is F1, and then there’s found that like Red Bull, many of the non-F1 side of it that’s still the F1 teams we have worked for motorsport. The balance is made are very mature and supportive. up of subcontracts and composite They really appreciate a supplier companies that need additional that does good work and they capacity or pattern machining. don’t want to lose them, so they’ll Many have their own pattern do what they need to do to make shops, so we act as an overflow sure you keep going.' capacity for them.' The new CMS machine came Having decided to form a with a warranty of 3000 hours subcontract engineering company, or 12 months, whichever came the directors were well aware first – and not many businesses that while the metal-working hit that in the first year. Freeform side offers huge opportunities, clocked it up within nine months there were also many companies due to the fact that it had to keep who wanted to do it, making it it constantly running. 'It was our a ruthless industry sector with only machine, our only source of high start-up costs. Subsequently income. We were working from Jake Oliveira, CAM programmer, applied VERICUT NC simulation the decision was made to focus 6am until midnight, and if at to the company’s 5-axis DMG machining centre on producing patterns and any point in the first year that moulds for the ever-increasing machine went down, we would process, so to not have it was offered by the software. Other composite components market. have gone bust,' says Burchett. stressful to say the least. As small companies see it as a The Red Bull pattern shop had Having used VERICUT at soon as we could afford it, we massive overhead – we see it as three Breton machining centres. Red Bull, both partners were invested in the software because an essential tool of cost-cutting 'The first thing we did was go to keen to invest in the simulation it is not just for big businesses. and survival in the long run.' the company that supplies them and optimisation software. With only one machine, you have Every one of the 13 staff to work something out,' Burchett 'We could not afford it until the to protect it. If it goes down, you at Freeform will push the start recalls. 'However, the finance second year,' says Burchett, 'and are effectively unable to work, button, go home and be confident package was beyond us at the going home at night leaving and when the machine breaks it to let the NC program run until time, so that was a non-starter. the machine running wondering cost so much to fix. After a major the end of the machining cycle. We looked at second-hand what you would return to in the breakdown you think ‘with that 'And,' adds Burchett, 'the quality machines, but nothing suitable morning was quite worrying. money I could have had VERICUT’. of work we provide would be was available, so we approached 'We always had VERICUT at We felt it was a false economy affected by a machine tool that CMS Industries. The price seemed Red Bull, as it was part of the not to have the level of protection had suffered a crash, because the 'There is no point cutting a piece of material for three or four hours for it to be wrong, because the cost of doing that is considerable' www.racecar-engineering.com • Formula 1 supplement TECHNOLOGY – CGTECH ADVERTISEMENT FEATURE

accuracy of the machine will confidence in NX and 100 per be affected. So as soon as we cent confidence in VERICUT, could get VERICUT there really so it’s almost like an additional was no hesitation.' safety net for us. Our staff are After turning over a modest also confident, which allows them profit in the first year, the to do one job, leave it and then company purchased another setup their next job.' machine tool and started to Freeform prides itself on employ highly skilled staff. the fact that it has earned a Although the company was good reputation for delivering tight on floorspace, a project for quality, and has never delivered Renault F1 (Lotus F1) for brake anything late. 'We have – ducting components required admittedly – stretched the day. around 18 patterns. This made most people would say the the investment crucial. The working day ends at five, we’d tolerances were very tight say midnight, says Burchett. because any air leak would reduce 'Even if there’s just a slight efficiency. A new DMG machining change to the tool path, nothing centre was purchased to meet goes on the machine tools the project demands, and to also unless it has been run through provide the ability to machine VERICUT first – purely and simply metallic components. Today the Every NC program has to pass through VERICUT to ensure the safety of because it is safe. company operates three CMS the machine tools. VERICUT supports Freeform Technology’s production 'As soon as we got VERICUT, machines as well as two DMG of complex moulds and composite patterns for the motorsport sector we could programme to run machining centres. through the night, knowing we Native Siemens NX 3D CAD a problem paying for it. We minute lapse of concentration could leave the machine running models are supplied by most see it as a working overhead – that leads to a mistake can effect for the extra hours and it would customers. 'We’ve had VERICUT it is a key investment as far as a week of work. It becomes be safe. Sometimes we come for just over three years and its we’re concerned, having a counter-productive. Staff then in the morning and the machine performance is always robust,' machine that is smashed up have to work longer hours and is still running. If we didn’t says Burchett. 'It’s always been and unable to make the parts get tired, the morale drops and have VERICUT, there is the what you think it’s going to be – accurately is a liability. the standard of work declines.' chance you are going to come very accurate – and it’s not going 'There is no point cutting a For Freeform, VERICUT in, the machine has mangled to throw up any sort of spurious piece of material for three or simulation and optimisation the part which cost thousands, mistakes. Using the latest version four hours for it to be wrong software is as important as the job's not done, your of VERICUT we’ve noticed the because the cost of doing that is its CAM package. 'We’ve got to customer is not happy, you're difference in verification speed, considerable. It’s not just the cost have faith in our CAM package,' not getting paid, the machine it has been reduced considerably of remaking the part, it's the cost says Burchett. 'When we do a is broken and is going to cost and we can leave it run overnight.' of not being able to do another tool path it’s not going to gouge to repair. So for us, not having Four staff at Freeform carry job while you are waiting for that the part for some random VERICUT was not an option and out programming and verifying one to be finished – again. Our reason as we apply complex tool also we can sleep at night.' tasks, but the company is looking objective is to make sure what paths. We have 100 per cent to train more people because goes on the machine comes off at busy times it can become a right the first time. Mistakes bottleneck. 'Having four people upset the customer, ruin your programming with two VERICUT machine and business, and a five licences is never going to be that easy,' says Burchett. 'We will need another licence, but I don’t have

Formula 1 supplement • www.racecar-engineering.com FORMULA 1 – NEW TEAMS Revolving doors They came, they saw, and some stayed. A look back on the recent arrivals and departures from the Formula 1 grid

he V8 era has seen a expenditure that the team could the funding was available and claim the drivers’ title at the end number of teams come demonstrate has no influence on I believe that we would have of the year. and go as initiatives its performance, and dividends. produced a very competitive car.’ In 2009, Mercedes acquired a were introduced to The plan did not meet with 75.1 per cent stake in the team, limit the spending the success that the FIA had MORPHING TEAMS renamed it Mercedes GP, and Twhich encouraged new entries, hoped for. Lola was one of the The V8 era began without the went on to achieve such heights although there were some that companies that bid for entry to high spending BAR team, which as setting eight pole positions fell by the wayside as the cost cap the F1 World Championship in went west along with Jordan and in nine races during the 2013 was raised in 2010. 2009. The company was not Minardi as the new engine formula season, a feat that earned them Under FIA president Max awarded the entry, to the fury was brought in. Paul Stoddart ran the cover of the current issue of Mosley, an initiative was of company director Martin the team for five years, before he Racecar (V24N1). introduced in 2009 to limit team Birrane, who later committed his sold it to Red Bull in 2005, and BMW’s involvement in F1 was spending to £30m per year. comments to print in Racecar the drinks company started the not the long-term future that the Teams signing up for the optional Engineering, V22 N11. ‘Lola’s Toro Rosso team that competes German manufacturer had hoped cap would do so in exchange Formula 1 bid was a positive today. Jordan was sold to the for. The team acquired a stake in for greater technical freedom, project for Lola Cars International,’ Midland Group early in 2005 Peter Sauber’s outfit in 2006, but including constantly adjustable he said. ‘I personally funded the and the Group continued the sold it back to its Swiss founder wings, engines with no rev limit, whole programme through Lola F1 name ‘Jordan’ until 2005, when it in 2009. The team won just one a more powerful KERS system Team Limited, and we were ahead changed to MF1 racing, and then race – Robert Kubica – in Canada and, in theory, four-wheel drive of all of the competition having Spyker in 2007. That outfit was 2008, before the results tailed off should they choose it. Teams assembled the key personnel then sold again, becoming Force towards the end of the season. would also be allowed unlimited and provided the engineering India in 2008. out-of-season track testing with services, materials and wind Honda first acquired a stake HRT no restrictions on the scale and tunnel facilities to proceed. We in BAR, and then took 100 per The Hispania Racing Team was speed of wind tunnel testing. The had a wind tunnel model with cent control until a dramatic one of the few that entered minimum weight of cars was also the basic external shape defined, announcement arrived, in the the championship under the introduced, moving from 605kg and we completed over 90 data winter of 2008, that the team cost cap formula. It began as a to 620kg to offset those running runs in the tunnel. History shows would no longer continue. Team collaboration between Adrián KERS, and new for 2010 was also that of the three teams chosen, principal Ross Brawn, with a ban on refuelling, designed to two were uncompetitive and have dedication from a slimmed-down reduce travel and staff costs. since been sold, and one never team, continued with the car, Excluded from the cost appeared. I very much regret not which featured a double rear cap were driver salaries, fines being awarded a licence because diffuser and dominated the or penalties imposed by the I know with absolute certainty early part of the 2009 season, FIA, 2010 engine costs, any that had we been awarded one, enough for Jenson Button to

www.racecar-engineering.com • Advaanced Engineering supplement FORMULA 1 – NEW TEAMS

Campos, who ran a successful there from 1997, and base the team in lower formulae, and budget around that. In 1992, Enrique Rodríguez. The team Williams developed the FW14 gained funding through high- with a workforce of 180 people profile shareholders, and aimed to and a budget of £30m. become the first Spanish team to The car was due to be built enter the championship in 2009. with a Cosworth engine, EMCO The management of the team was gearbox which allowed for very in Madrid, the technical facility at tight packaging, JRI dampers Campos’s workshop in Valencia, at the front, standard at first while in 2009 there was a deal but with developments already agreed to build a new purpose- in the pipeline before the car built facility. Dallara built the was launched and a zero keel chassis, Cosworth supplied the chassis. Reductions in the price engines and – along with US F1 of computing allowed the team to and Manor Grand Prix – it entered create powerful CAD workstations the Championship in 2010. for a fraction of the cost that they However, financial problems were a decade previously, which led to José Ramón Carabante allowed it to design in incredible taking over the team, and detail for the time. installing Colin Kolles to replace The team also bought in a lot Campos in early 2010. The team of crash-testing equipment, to was named HRT and competed in circumnavigate the extremely the World Championship between restrictive rules. 2010 and 2012 before the team sold its assets to Teo Martin, MANOR GRAND PRIX owner of a firm specialising in The plans for the British team to recycling automotive parts. enter F1 essentially started in 2007, when owner John Booth US F1 was bought out by Tony Shaw. One of the teams that attempted Two years later, it was announced Top: the ill-fated HRT F1 team, which competed from 2010-12, holds the to hit the grid in the era of cost that Manor intended to contest record for the most starts without scoring a point. Centre: Jordan became capping was the US F1 team the Championship, renamed as Midland, and then in 2007 competed as Spyker (pictured) before being bought in 2010. It was not brought in Virgin Racing and now competing out by Force India. Above: Toro Rosso, formerly Minardi, debuted in 2006 under the cost-cap regulations under the Marussia banner. – planning for the team had The team is not a front runner with Bernie Ecclestone to receive looking at potential partners and started in 2006, with initial plans in 2013, but is one of the few guaranteed payments even if it sponsors for the future,’ said based around the need to provide new teams that is still on the grid. does not finish in the top 10 in sporting director Graeme Lowdon. $48m entry bond under the then It has run Cosworth engines for the constructors’ championship. ‘The biggest thing is external Concorde Agreement. the last three years, taken on a The deal means that will help to perception. We’re perceived to be Led by engineer Ken Anderson, new Xtrac gearbox in 2012 that attract sponsorship and the team on the same grid, in the same pit the plan was simple: go to saved considerable weight and now expects to stay in F1 until at lane as every other team now, Companies House in London and targeted beating Caterham. As least 2020. ‘It quite clearly would and it has just removed some of get the financial results from reported in issue V24N1, the team lead to questions when we’re that uncertainty.’ Williams that had been posted has secured a new agreement

Teams signing up for the optional cost cap would do so in exchange for greater technical freedom

Formula 1 supplement • www.racecar-engineering.com F-DUCTS Boosting straight speed The ingenious way of stalling the rear wing and achieving significant straight-line gains

eplaced by DRS for BY SAM COLLINS straight – so the effect needs to The key to optimising the 2011, one innovation be temporary, or ‘switchable’. F-duct system was to develop was still present on the (on slower, low-grip circuits and An attempt to achieve this a rear wing design that stalled RRed Bull RB6, which is when cornering), on a high- effect was first made during under the influence of the discussed in the new ‘owner’s speed straight ultimate speed is the 2004 season, when several f-duct, but did not compromise manual’ from Haynes Publishing. compromised by a high level of teams used ‘flexible’ rear wings, downforce when the system The following is an extract from it: downforce, as a high downforce which allowed the slot between was not in operation. The RB6’s wing produces a high level of drag. the two elements to close up system took time to develop, The F-duct was an innovation The idea behind the F-duct was under high load (for instance, on a and initially the air from the for 2010, first developed by to provide the car with a straight- high-speed straight), stalling the F-duct was blown over the wing McLaren. The system appeared line speed boost by temporarily wing. From the 2006 Canadian upper element. A reasonable on the RB6 for the first time at reducing the drag created by the Grand Prix, by regulation rigid stall was achieved, but at the the Turkish Grand Prix in May. rear wing. Two elements are used separators had to be fitted expense of a small reduction in Adrian Newey explains the rear wing performance when the system’s origins: ‘Really it was system was not being operated. experimentation. The F-duct ‘The technology actually stems The system was developed and technology actually stems from improved during the season and, the Cold War in the 1950s, when from the Cold War in the 1950s’ at the Japanese Grand Prix, a the Americans were worried major revision appeared, with the that the Russians would develop on the rear wing to prevent the between the wing elements to air from the F-duct being blown ways of jamming the electronics wing from stalling, by creating a prevent them from flexing. over the main wing element on their fighter aircraft, and so slot to allow high-pressure air to The F-duct achieved the same rather than the upper element. they developed, effectively, a bleed through. So, if this effect effect as closing up the slot The switching of the airflow pneumatic version of electronics. can be reversed, and the wing can between the wing elements, by from the lower to the upper So an F-duct is actually a be deliberately stalled, drag (and temporarily allowing extra air to duct in the engine cover is being transistor, but using air rather downforce) will be reduced and flow over one of the elements, achieved by using a ‘fluid switch’ than electricity.’ straight-line speed increased. Of causing the airflow to separate operated by the driver. The basic Although a high level of course, this is only desirable in a from it and hence stall it. It was method of operation is as follows: rear downforce is desirable situation when downforce is not found that this could create a top under certain circumstances so important – such as on a long speed increase of up to 4mph. • ‘Control’ air flows into the system ducting through an intake in the right-hand A schematic showing sidepod. In the ‘default’ the key components position, this air flows out of the RB6 F-duct through the ‘snorkel’ on the left-hand side of the cockpit. • ‘Stall’ air flows into the ducting The driver operates the F-duct from an intake in the bodywork by placing his left hand over the above the driver’s head, above snorkel in the cockpit the main engine air intake. In the default position, this air flows out through the outlet in the rear bodywork below the rear wing lower element. • The driver places his hand over the snorkel to activate the system. • The ‘control’ airflow is diverted along the ducting inside the engine cover, where it deflects the ‘stall’ airflow upwards so that it exits through the void in the rear wing upper element (early season) or over the main wing element (late season). The stall airflow creates turbulence at the rear of the wing element, stalling the airflow.

www.racecar-engineering.com • Formula 1 supplement 92x135 Motorsport_ad PS sept13_Layout 1 26/09/2013 12:12 Page 1

HYDRAFLOW the right MSc Advanced connection Motorsport for perfect fluid control Engineering Accredited by IMechE, IET and RAeS Cranfield’s motorsport Masters programme has led students onto careers with leading companies such as Williams F1, McLaren Racing, Red Bull Technology, Mercedes AMG HPP and Lotus F1 team. Our motorsport pedigree and excellence in teaching can HYDRAFLOW accelerate your career too. Situated in Motorsport Valley, Cranfield undertakes research and consultancy for Locks automatically Gloved hand operation

leading motorsport companies. Our facilities Lightweight and flexible include composites, dedicated off-road and vehicle dynamics laboratories, dynamometers, the connector taken wind tunnels, the Cranfield Impact centre (CIC) to the next stage and race car simulator – Cranfield Motorsport The Hydraflow 14J21 Clamshell is a threadless flexible coupling with a unique safety feature for Simulation. fluid transfer in motorsport applications and used with industry standard flanges.

Integral bonding wires

T: +44 (0)1234 754086 Aerospace standard spec E: [email protected] Safety strap www.motorsport.cranfield.ac.uk Another motorsport product from Specialty Fasteners, the designers and manufacturers of AeroCatch®

AeroCatch 2 AeroCatch 3 Tel: +44 (0) 1803 868677 www.specialty-fasteners.co.uk Cert No. 1259QM8001 Register for our next Open Day: ISO9001 www.cranfield.ac.uk/openday

Our main equipment: Our main equipment: Our main equipment: AIR JACKS AIR JACKS ENGINE/GBXAIR JACKS TROLLEYS ENGINE/GBX TROLLEYS FUELENGINE/GBX RIGS TROLLEYS FUEL RIGS PITFUEL GANTRIES RIGS PIT GANTRIES PIT STOPGANTRIES EQUIPMENT PIT STOP EQUIPMENT PITWALLPIT STOP STANDEQUIPMENT CUSTOMIZED PITWALL STAND CUSTOMIZED QUICKPITWALL RELEASE STAND QUICK CUSTOMIZED JACKS QUICK RELEASE QUICK JACKS SETQUICK UP RELEASE EQUIPMENT QUICK JACKS SET UP EQUIPMENT SPECIALSET UP EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT SPECIAL EQUIPMENT TYRESSPECIAL TROLLEYS EQUIPMENT TYRES TROLLEYS WEIGHINGTYRES TROLLEYS SYSTEMS WEIGHING SYSTEMS WEIGHING SYSTEMS

1 2 9 0 1 2 8125 12 9 0 819 ANNI 320 8 25 1 98 25 01 8 ANNI 3 8 25ANNI13 8 ANNI 3

And also our component production:And also our component production:And also our component wishbones,production: upright, radiators, frames, www.bredaracing.com wishbones, upright, radiators, frames, www.bredaracing.com tankswishbones, and other upright, car radiators,parts frames, www.bredaracing.com tanks and other car parts tanks and other car parts BREDA RACING s.r.l. - Italy - Padova www.bredaracing.comBREDA RACING s.r.l. -- [email protected] - Padova www.bredaracing.comBREDA RACING s.r.l. - - [email protected] Italy - Padova www.bredaracing.com - [email protected] F1 FRONT WINGS 2010 Winged wonders One of the hottest technical topics during the 2010 F1 season concerned the front wings. Our resident aero expert takes a look at the science and the engineering behind them

BY SIMON MCBEATH

ed Bull may or may not actually give you wings, but its Racing Rdivision certainly serves up plenty to talk about on the topic of wings. In 2007 we had controversy over flexible rear wings if you recall, after on-car footage of – intriguingly – the Red Bull’s rear wing leaning back at speed was seen on TV and subsequently in video published on the internet. Our analysis feature on that occasion (V18N1) said ‘it looked as if those clever F1 engineers had found another way to pass the tests and checks at scrutineering while still providing a degree of flexibility in the installations of the wings.’ Then in 2010, the situation was uncannily similar, with the same team (plus Ferrari) coming under the spotlight as footage and photos once again revealed something clever was going on. We all know that there’s more to F1 than ever meets the eye, and that most of the really clever innovations remain forever under wraps. In this case we could see what was going on, even if we couldn’t see entirely how it was being done. We can, however, attempt to understand properly why it was going on. Visually there were two separate things happening during the 2010 season, up to and most obviously including the Hungarian GP, probably

brought about by quite different LAT means. There was the simple The flexible front wings caught on camera during the 2010 Hungarian Grand Prix: the front flexing of the front wings in of Sebastian Vettel’s RB6 (top) hugs the ground, while Mark Webber’s (above) is in flex response to the aerodynamic loads, wherein the outer portions of the 1.8m wide (70.9in) span We saw the simple flexing of the wings in response wing assembly, suspended from two quite closely spaced pylons to aerodynamic loads, and then the whole front of under the nose, bend closer to the ground at speed. All centrally the car getting closer to the ground than normal www.racecar-engineering.com • Formula 1 supplement F1 FRONT WINGS 2010

Ground effect and front wing performance (three-element wing, pseudo-2D CFD, 200mph, moving ground) Downforce

Figure 3: At lower ground clearances the air near to the wing surface loses more energy, as depicted here by total pressure (Cp-total) losses 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.24 0.26 0.28 0.30 Height to wing underside as proportion of chord, c

Figure 1: downforce from a front wing increases as ground clearance decreases – but only up to a point

Figure 2: this front wing was evaluated in CFD for Aerobytes in V15N6

Figure 4: as ground clearance reduces, parts of the wing work better, but the more rearward parts struggle, and ultimately flow separation occurs

It also demonstrates why racecar about as low as they needed to engineers would ideally want be. But while this 2D CFD view to operate the front wing in the demonstrates the generic effect, region around the peak on this 3D flows are more complex and plot, to maximise the performance change the picture considerably, of the wing and to minimise as the next example (which Figure 5: a 2010 F1-style front wing – the forces on the potent outer fluctuations in wing-generated originally appeared in Aerobytes sections inevitably cause flex at speed downforce over a relevant dynamic in V15N6) shows. ride height range. Here a simple two-element mounted wings must do this to and/or getting the whole front front wing was evaluated in a 3D some extent, but others clearly wing nearer to the ground. PLAYING BY THE RULES CFD trial at two different ground do it more. And then there was Front wings on open wheel It’s tempting to superimpose clearances. Measured to the the rather different matter of the racecars operate in ground effect, some dimensions on to this. leading edge these were 92mm whole front wing – possibly the and – as is well known – proximity The 2010 F1 front wing had and 70mm, which approximated whole front of the car – getting to the ground amplifies the a maximum permitted chord 62mm and 40mm ground closer to the ground at speed downforce that can be generated (between 400mm and 750mm clearance to the lowest part of than seemed normal, and the from a given wing, relative to from the car’s centreline) of the wing’s underside. potential mechanisms by which its performance in ‘freestream’ 550mm. The peak on the graph in The first thing to note here is this might be have been achieved air, well above the ground. This the diagram at 0.136c therefore that the wing was still performing are what really lie at the centre effect increases the closer a wing equates to a height above the properly at these smaller ground of this controversy. McLaren gets to the ground, until at a ground of about 75mm. clearances, as would be expected. team principal Martin Whitmarsh certain height the effect reverses The 2010 FIA Formula 1 Secondly, at the lower ground commented that his team couldn’t because of flow separation and technical regulations stipulated clearance, the wing produced understand how this could be the downforce reduces again. that the minimum height of any 4.5 per cent more downforce, a done within the regulations, The diagram above (top left) part of the front wing measured significant gain and one not to be and the precise mechanisms is a typical representation of the statically may not be less than ignored. Hence the whole quest will almost certainly remain effect we’re describing, derived 85mm above the bottom of the to obtain lower ground clearance a mystery. What we can do, with ‘pseudo 2D’ CFD on a three- un-worn ‘plank’ (itself 10mm on what in F1 is compulsorily however, is look at the potential element wing section, and it thick and bolted to the so-called quite a high mounted front wing. benefits and downsides of illustrates simply how a front wing ‘reference plane’). This might However, it is fair to say that employing a flexible front wing, is sensitive to ground clearance. suggest the front wings were making ‘moveable’ systems like

Formula 1 supplement • www.racecar-engineering.com F1 FRONT WINGS 2010

these work to your advantage underbody further downstream. is no simple task, especially So not only was the front wing’s given the changing profile of downforce contribution increased the wing across the span, as by improving the efficiency of well as the proximity of the the end-plates, so too was the front tyre, chassis and other underbody’s contribution. And downstream paraphernalia. although the overall gain was There is another benefit to predominantly front-biased, it’s be had from allowing the front not all from the front wing. wing to flex too, and that is to bring the end plate nearer to WING LOWERING the ground. Doing this once The most contentious aspect of again strengthens the wing’s what was seen and photographed performance by reducing the on the Red Bulls, however, was amount of air that can flow the apparent ability to run the under the end plates into the whole of the front wing closer low-pressure area beneath wing, to the ground than anyone else. which allows more downforce Leaving aside for a moment the again to be generated. really contentious side – how this But according to highly might be have been done while Schematic showing the approximate order of wing flex and overall experienced F1 aerodynamicist remaining within the rules – the movement believed to have been happening on some F1 cars during 2010 Frank Dernie, with whom Racecar foregoing explanations on how had the opportunity to discuss ground proximity will increase the WHY DO FRONT WINGS STALL WHEN these matters, this also has an front wing’s downforce provides THEY GET TOO CLOSE TO THE GROUND? important effect downstream the ‘why’, and can also be applied too, because getting that front to the rest of the wing’s span, s air passes under the the climb’. What ensues is flow wing end-plate closer to the even the neutral, symmetrical leading edge of a front separation, where the flow no ground also reduces the adverse section across the central Awing it accelerates and, longer remains attached to the effect that the front wing tip 500mm, which also produced as Bernoulli described, its (static) wing surface and instead breaks vortex has on the underbody. downforce when in ground effect. pressure reduces. Then, from the away before it reaches the With the full width front wings So not only would the outer region of minimum pressure under trailing edge. The net result is that were mandated at the portions flex closer to the ground, the wing to the wing’s trailing that downforce reduces, and this start of 2009, this vortex ran but the rest of the span got edge, the velocity slows and the corresponds to the graph line around the outside of the tyres, closer to the ground too, which pressure rises again. This region to the left of the peak in the but it still gets drawn into the will have contributed to a more of rising pressure has what is Figure 1 diagram. referred to as an ‘adverse pressure Although the wing trial HOW DO FRONT WINGS FLEX? gradient’, for the simple reason shown here produced an that air much more naturally flows increase in downforce at the aking a front wing effectively flex. But the overall from high to low pressure and not lower ride height tested, it also flex under load isn’t aerodynamic force vector on the other way round. illustrated what happens as a Mcomplicated in principle, this outer section, which is the When a front wing is above wing gets closer to its minimum but the R&D effort required to combination of vertical and the critical height identified in critical height above the ground. enable it to do so predictably horizontal aerodynamic forces, Figure 1, the air is able to ‘climb’ Figure 4, the graph on the and controllably must be sets up a twisting load on this adverse pressure gradient bottom right is a ‘delta Cp-static’ considerable. As Frank Dernie the centre section that, were because it has enough energy to plot showing the difference commented: ‘Toyota ran with the structure not designed to do so and the pressure gradient in static pressure coefficients a flexible front wing all through resist it, would see the rear is not too steep. However, as on the wing’s suction surface 2009 and it took a long while to of the end-plate get nearer the wing is lowered towards the between the two cases. get the lay-up right.’ to the ground under load. This ground, the pressure underneath The blue shows where lower So it was about engineering would also decrease the angle gets lower and lower until the static pressure coefficients the composite lay-up of the of attack of the outer part critical low height for a given occurred at the lower ground wing to obtain the degree of of the wing, which is clearly wing is reached, at which point clearance; red shows where flex required, and to remain not the current aim. the adverse pressure gradient higher static pressure coefficients within the regulations – or to So the lay-up of the wing becomes too steep. occurred at the lower ground pass the scrutineering tests, must resist this torsional Not only that but, as we clearance. Clearly the mainplane if these requirements are load, but allow ‘beam’ flex see from the trial done on produced more suction at the thought to differ… across the span of the wing. the wing (Figure 2), by being lower ground clearance, but the Looking at an F1-style Altering the thickness and worked harder at a lower ground flap produced less suction. There wing, it’s clear that the the direction of the fibre clearance, the air adjacent to the was still a net overall gain in this aerodynamic load that is orientations in the reinforcing wing surface loses more energy, instance, but were the ground generated by the outer carbon fabrics – for example depicted as total pressure. clearance to be reduced still portions will be considerably to align at +/-45O relative to A steeper adverse pressure further, flow separation would greater than that generated the wingspan – are well-used gradient and less energy mean develop. This would then see a by the central portion, about methods in achieving the the air can no longer ‘make reduction in downforce. which the structure will desired structural properties.

www.racecar-engineering.com • Formula 1 supplement TRANSFERABLETRANSFERABLE SKILLS SKILLS IN IN ENGINEERINGENGINEERING AND AND MATHS MATHS PushingPushing the thelimit limit – racing – racing ahead ahead

MechanicalMechanical Engineering Engineering BEng/MEng/BScBEng/MEng/BSc with Oxford Brookes and computer facilities. Accredited by the Institution of Are Areyou youambitious? ambitious? Do Do with Oxford Brookes and computer facilities. Accredited by the Institution of you have an aptitude University at our Department We have a friendly, close MechanicalMechanical Engineers Engineers (IMechE) (IMechE) you have an aptitude University at our Department We have a friendly, close for engineering or of Mechanical Engineering knit community of staff and Automotive Engineering for engineering or of Mechanical Engineering knit community of staff and Automotive Engineering maths? Do you want a and Mathematical Sciences. students with excellent BEng/MEngBEng/MEng maths? Do you want a and Mathematical Sciences. students with excellent Accredited by the Institution of career where you can student support staff and Accredited by the Institution of career where you can student support staff and Mechanical Engineers (IMechE) Our purpose-built £9m Mechanical Engineers (IMechE) use your training? Our purpose-built £9m facilities close at hand. use your training? facility is well equipped with facilities close at hand. Motorsport Engineering facility is well equipped with Motorsport Engineering Step up to the challenge of modern, state-of-the-art Visit our website: BEng/MEng Step up to the challenge of modern, state-of-the-art Visit our website: BEng/MEngAccredited by the Institution of an undergraduate degree workshops, laboratories tde.bz/ug-rc AccreditedMechanical by the Institution Engineers of (IMechE) an undergraduate degree workshops, laboratories tde.bz/ug-rc Mechanical Engineers (IMechE) Motorsport Technology MotorsportBSc (Hons) Technology BSc (Hons)Accredited by the Institution of AccreditedMechanical by the Institution Engineers of (IMechE) Mechanical Engineers (IMechE) Mathematics BSc (Hons) – Mathematicssingle, BA BS (Hons)c (Hons) / BSc – (Hons) single, –BA combined (Hons) / BSc (Hons) – combinedRecognised by the Institute of RecognisedMathematics by the Institute and its Applications of (IMA) MathematicsMathematical and its Applications Sciences (IMA) MathematicalBSc (Hons) Sciences Recognised by the Institute of BSc (Hons) Mathematics and its Applications (IMA) Recognised by the Institute of Mathematics and its Applications (IMA)

SHD Composite Materials is a company working at the leading edge of advanced composites technology, specialising in the manufacture of composite material prepregs and resin films.

+44 (0) 1529 307629 [email protected] www.shdcomposites.com

SHD COMPOSITES.indd 1 04/04/2013 15:05 F1 FRONT WINGS 2010

significant gain in front end So, for those who got it downforce than flexing the tips right, how much lap time was it alone, according to Dernie. We still all worth? Published estimates wonder at just how this additional vary from an unlikely sounding forward-biased downforce will second per lap to a more have been balanced, but the Red realistic-sounding three-tenths Bulls (and Ferraris) certainly did per lap. The reality is probably not look unbalanced, which serves somewhere between the two. Red to illustrate how good those cars Bull’s lap time advantage at the were overall, notwithstanding any Hungaroring in 2010 was, if one front wing trickery. averages the two drivers’ times, Dernie observed that there almost exactly a second ahead of is one inherent disadvantage of the nearest competitor (Ferrari), using the aerodynamic forces to while the average of their fastest reduce the ground clearance over race laps was about seven some of, or the entire, front wing, Some sense of the complexities in the flows around the wing tips and the tenths faster than the nearest and that is that the maximum front wheels was derived using Ansys CFD-Flo on this F1-style front-end Ferrari. Dernie observed that ‘the effect is at the fastest speeds, model. The wing is coloured by pressure, the streamlines by velocity difference in the performance which are on the straights and of the Ferraris and McLarens is therefore the maximum benefit is corner and re-applying full separation at lower ground probably mostly due to the front not where it’s necessarily wanted. throttle at corner exit. clearances and lose downforce, wing, but the difference between However, total drag does Countering this point, another it will be the car that rises back the Red Bulls and the Ferraris is not increase with increased well-known former F1 designer, up on its suspension, rather more than just the front wing.’ front wing downforce so there Gary Anderson, suggested in than the wing, so causing the The best car will be the one was no penalty in that sense. Autosport that when a flexible car to bounce. that offers the best compromise And although braking at the front wing starts to generate According to Anderson then, between absolute downforce end of straights may possibly flow separation as it approaches a car with a flexible wing will be and consistent performance to have been enhanced (unless the ground, the loss of downforce more benign, the wing finding its provide the driver with not only the tyres are already ‘saturated’ will then regulate the wing own ‘happy medium’. Again, good grip but also good feel and with downforce, to use a Dernie height by allowing the wing to if this is the case, considerable confidence. And maintaining a expression), the maximum flex back up again. In contrast, R&D would be involved to front to rear balance is absolutely downforce benefit may not he surmised, a rigid front control the wing’s stiffness, or crucial. Flexing, moving wings have been available when it wing will compress the front lack thereof, in order to find must make this an even more was most needed – between suspension as it loads up, but the sweet spot between un- difficult goal to achieve. So the coming off the brakes into a then as it starts to see flow damped fluttering and excess Red Bull’s speed advantage in rigidity – a classic case for 2010 is unlikely to have been all HOW DO FRONT WINGS GET NEARER THE GROUND? fluid-structure interaction (FSI) about its clever front wing. analysis, no doubt. But, every little helps… llowing a car’s suspension Possible explanations to be compressed by that inevitably come to mind, THE FIA TESTS Aaerodynamic loads however fanciful, might be: enables dynamic ride height to IA Formula 1 race director in the wing mountings or the be lower than static ride height, • A floor passing the upward Charlie Whiting told nose. Measuring deflection but only up to the point where deflection test yet moving FRacecar that up to and relative to the reference plane the lowest part of the chassis up dynamically, enabling including the Hungarian GP in of the car’s underside, however, underside – usually the front greater compression of the 2010: ‘we have been measuring will take into account any of the consumable 10mm thick front suspension, and hence deflection at the outer ends deflections in the mounts or the ‘plank’ in the case of F1 cars – lower front wing height. of the front wing relative to nose (although it could still miss touches the ground. How close • A nose that droops, the nose. It will now be done more devious mechanisms). to the ground is the front of the Concorde-style, or deforms at relative to the reference plane. The current load/deflection plank? Frank Dernie: ‘You run the speed, allowing the wing to But the load/deflection criteria criteria stipulated in the car so that the plank stays just move closer to the ground. will not change – that is 10mm regulations involved a 500N within the 1mm wear you are • Wing mounts that lengthen of deflection will be permitted (approximately 50kg) load allowed throughout a race.’ or deform at speed yet under a 500N load. However, exerted vertically downwards So, the plank grounds allow static scrutineering we now reserve the right to on the outer end of the wing, periodically, but not continually, checks to be passed. increase the load to as high with a maximum permitted or wear will exceed this limit. • None of the other teams is as 1000N and expect to see deflection of 10mm. Given then that the rules able to run its cars nearly linear behaviour above the The threat of potentially require that the lowest point of as low as Red Bull Racing normal test load.’ having to pass a test where the front wing must be 85mm did, and the Red Bulls were The first part of this double that force is applied above the unworn plank, how running legally at all times. statement is an interesting and linear deflection (ie 20mm is it possible to get the central development because the maximum) is expected may have section seemingly much closer Pick one of the above or add way in which the test was meant the 2010 summer break to the ground that this when a your own theory to the list and previously carried out might was no holiday in the composites car is at speed? let us know about it! not have picked up compliance departments of some teams…

www.racecar-engineering.com • Formula 1 supplement High Tech | High Speed | High Quality

Pankl Engine Systems GmbH & Co KG A member of Pankl Racing Systems A-8600 Bruck/Mur, Kaltschmidstrasse 2-6 Phone: +43(0)3862 51 250-0 FAX: +43(0)3862 51 250-290 e-mail: [email protected] www.pankl.com SAVE MONEY ON THE RETAIL PRICE Subscribe & SAVE

30OVER % UK readers SAVE £20 per Year US readers SAVE $45 per Year off THe reTaiL price!

Receive 12 issues of racecar engineering for just £44.95 in the UK or $99.95 in the US, that’s a saving of more than a 30% off the newstand rate!

SPECIAL OFFER PRICES ON racecar engineering PLUS Subscribe for 2 or 3 years and SAVE EVEN MORE! FREE

UK USA REST OF THE WORLD POSTAGE ● Direct Debit 1 year just £44.95 ● 1 year just $99.95 (usually $162) ● 1 year just £65.95 (usually £84) to your home or ● 1 year just £49.95 (usually £66) ● 2 years just $189.95 (usually $324) ● 2 years just £127.95 (usually £168) ● 2 years just £94.95 (usually £132) workplace

DON’T MISS OUT! ORDER NOW Online www.chelseamagazines.com/Racecar-P210 Phone +44 (0) 1795 419837 quote code P210RE

DIGITAL SUBSCRIPTION

Racecar Engineering is also available to read on your iPad, computer or smartphone – giving fROm jUSt you instant delivery and easy access to the £3 fOR magazine wherever you are in the world. 3 iSSUES

For more information visit www.chelseamagazines.com/Racecar-P210 TECHNOLOGY - J DAMPERS Harmony restored The cloak of secrecy has been lifted from the inerter – but how does it really work and what can it be employed to do?

BY CHARLES ARMSTRONG-WILSON

he secret of mechanical That is, it has inertia, but that Also, the velocity of the To show how effective this grip is to reduce rapid inertia is relevant to its position rack is the velocity of one concept can be, if one was to load variations at the in space. In that sense it is like terminal minus the velocity of set both α1 and α2 at 3.0, then Ttyre contact patch. This a grounded capacitor whose the other, or: the inertance factor will be 81 simple truth has been known potential is relative to earth. times the mass of the flywheel. for years and is the objective What did not seem to exist v = v2 – v1 From this it is easy to see how of tuning suspension dampers. was a mechanical element that the actual inertia of the unit due To this end, teams all over the could be used like a capacitor in …then: to movement of its centre of world run thousands of hours isolation. In other words, with gravity is relatively insignificant of expensive rig testing time in two terminals and the behaviour α1 = γ/r3 compared to the energy that can order to better understand it. of which was dependent on the α2 = r2/r1 be captured and released by the More recently, mass dampers load across those two terminals device. In fact, one of Smith’s have been employed to achieve and not its movement relative to The resulting equation of motion: first prototypes had an inertance- the same aim, most notably by its position in space. to-mass ratio of about 300. Renault F1. But it also emerged Without this element, it would In order to use the inerter that the McLaren team had pre- not be possible to replicate to successfully damp cyclical empted their use with its subtle most electrical configurations and complex inerter. mechanically. PROFESSOR MALCOLM C SMITH The concept for the inerter originated through Cambridge ENERGY CAPTURE aving received a degree in mathematics from Cambridge University and Professor Malcolm It was while considering this University, Malcolm C Smith stayed on to complete an M Phil C Smith’s work on electrical that Smith came up with the Hdegree in control engineering and operational research, and then and mechanical systems. There idea of storing kinetic energy a PhD in control engineering. Equipped with such a hefty portfolio of has been a long-standing rotationally in flywheels. They qualification, he went on to become a research fellow at the German observation that most elements could capture and release large Aerospace Center, DRL, a visiting assistant professor and research fellow in an electrical circuit have amounts of mechanical energy, with the Department of Electrical Engineering at McGill University, a mechanical equivalent. By while having an insignificantly Montreal, Canada, and an assistant professor with the Department of viewing a mechanical system as small inertia relative to their Electrical Engineering at the Ohio State University, Columbus, USA. an equivalent of an electrical one, position. By gearing up the He is now a fellow of Gonville & Caius College and a professor in the a different perspective can be flywheels to increase their speed, Department of Engineering at the University of Cambridge. taken on how it works and how a greater amount of energy can His particular research interests are control system design, frequency the elements all interact. be captured without increasing response methods, H-infinity optimisation, non-linear systems, adaptive There are different views as the mass of the device and its control and active suspension. to how this equivalence should inertia in space. be defined, but for his work Smith As an attempt to create this has adopted the convention effect, Smith started with a PETER WRIGHT SAYS that force is the mechanical configuration as in Figure 1. equivalent of current and velocity One terminal is mounted on the he test for parts of the car that move and may have an equates to voltage. Likewise, casing that houses the gears. The incidental effect on aerodynamics was approved by the World certain electrical components other is on the end of a rack that TMotor Sport Council in 1993, and is that the aero effect must have mechanical counterparts. He spins a gear that, in turn, spins a not be significant. This then became the official interpretation of the equates the mechanical spring flywheel at high speed. ‘primary/secondary’ test that applied to things like fans. Something to the electrical inductor, the To consider how much like a piston – for example – moves, but the aero effect it has is damper to a resistor and a fixed energy is stored, we can derive judged insignificant. mechanical point to the electrical a simple formula. If we define In the Renault case, the Appeal Court found that the effect of the ground of a circuit. However, he the following: mass damper was significant, based on figures supplied by Renault, notes that up until now, within even if it was secondary. his preferred convention, there r1 = radius of the rack pinion The other important issue is whether the moving component has been no obvious direct γ = radius of gyration of in question is part of the suspension or not. The mass damper was mechanical counterpart to the the flywheel deemed not to be, while the J-damper undoubtedly is. This is why it electrical capacitor. r2 = radius of the gearwheel is permitted, whether it has a significant aerodynamic effect or not. That said, the mass of a body m = mass of the flywheel Peter Wright is a consultant to the FIA and technical consultant to can be equated to a capacitor r3 = radius of the Racecar Engineering under a special set of conditions. flywheel pinion

Formula 1 supplement • www.racecar-engineering.com 37 DESIGN AND INNOVATION DESIGN AND INNOVATION INERTERS this effect, Smith started with a configuration as in Figure 1. this effect, Smith started with INERTERSÓFigure 1 One terminal is mounted on the Mechanical interpretation of the principles of the inerter. One terminal is mounted on the casing, the other casinga thatconfiguration houses the as gears. in Figure The 1. ÓonFigure a rack 1 that drives a pinion as it moves in and out. The pinion drives a flywheel via a larger gear producing other Oneis on terminal the end ofis mounteda rack that on the Mechanicalhigh rotational interpretation speeds and of capturing the principles large amounts of the inerter. of inertial One energy terminal compared is mounted to the on mass the of casing, the whole the unitother spins casinga gear that,that housesin turn, spinsthe gears. a The flywheel at high speed. onTECHNOLOGY a rack that drives a pinion as it moves - J in DAMPERS and out. The pinion drives a flywheel via a larger gear producing other is on the end of a rack that high rotational speeds and capturing large amounts of inertial energy compared to the mass of the whole unit Tospins consider a gear how that, much in energy turn, spins a is stored,flywheel we can at derive high speed. a formula if we defineTo consider the following: how much energy INERTERS behaviouris stored, in a car’s we suspensioncan derive ait formula Rack Pinions r1 = radius of the rack is necessaryif we define to tune the the following: device pinion to the frequencies likely to be γ = radius of gyration of Rack Pinions encounteredr1 = in radius the system. of the In rack the flywheel Smith’s words, ‘We define the r2 = radiuspinion of the ideal inerter to be a mechanical, gearwheelγ = radius of gyration of one-port device such that the m = massthe flywheelof the flywheel equal and opposite force applied r3 = radiusr2 = radius of the offlywheel the at the nodes is proportional to piniongearwheel the relative acceleration between m = mass of the flywheel the nodes.’ The velocityr3 = of radius the rack of theis the flywheel Put mathematically: velocity ofpinion one terminal minus the velocity of the other or: The velocity of the rack is the v = v2 – v1 The constantvelocity b ofis theone inertance terminal minus measuredthe velocityin kg and ofequates the other to or: Then: McLaren’s ‘zogs’. This was all part of the team’sv = v2efforts – v1 to keep its 1 = /r3 newα technologyγ secret. Firstly, α2 = r2/r1 the teamThen: christened its inerter a J-damper, or jounce damper, as Terminal 2 Gear Flywheel Terminal 1 The resulting equation of motion: was revealedα1 =in γ the/r3 secrets to Renault case. Then, rather than α2 = r2/r1 using the term inertance – which would have been a big giveaway Terminal 2 Gear Flywheel Terminal 1 To showThe how resulting effective equation this of motion: in the pits if anyone overheard FIGURE 1 itconcept – the engineers can be, if came one wasup with to Mechanical interpretation of the principles of the inerter. One terminal is mounted on the theset termboth zog.α 1 and In pit α2 garage at 3.0, then Ócasing,Table 1 the other on a rack that drives a pinion as it moves in and out. The pinion drives a parlance,the inertance ‘can you factor change will beto a81 Theflywheel three main via electrical a larger components gear producing and their high mechanical rotational equivalents. speeds and Until capturing the invention large ofamounts the inerter of 50-zogtimesTo the J-damper.’ show mass how of The the effective actual flywheel. this thereinertial was energyno mechanical compared equivalent to the of mass the capacitor of the whole unit relationshipFrom conceptthis it betweenis easycan be, to zogs seeif one andhow was kg to isthe still actual setonly both knowninertia α1 withinof and the α theunit2 at key due3.0, then to movement of its centre of ÓTable 1 peoplethe at Woking.inertance factor will be 81 gravity is relatively insignificant MECHANICAL ELECTRICAL Gettingtimes this the relationship mass of the right, flywheel. The three main electrical components and their mechanical equivalents. Until the invention of the inerter compared to the energy that can however,From is critical,this it is not easy only to see how there was no mechanical equivalent of the capacitor be captured and released by the to makingthe actualthe J-damper inertia work of the unit due device. In fact, one of Smith’s effectively,to movement but also toof avoidits centre of hugefirst prototypesloads should had the an damper inertance- gravity is relatively insignificant MECHANICAL ELECTRICAL andto-mass the suspension ratio of about start 300. cycling compared to the energy that can together.In order In tothe use worst the caseinerter it be captured and released by the couldto successfully rip the damper damp and cyclical even thebehaviour suspensiondevice. in aIn car’s apart. fact, suspension oneIndeed, of Smith’s it someis necessary firstbelieve prototypes tothis tune was the thehad device cause an inertance- ofto Felipetheto-mass frequencies Massa’s ratio suspension likely of about to be 300. failureencountered at InMonza order in the in to 2007, system. use theas In inerter FerrariSmith’sto struggled words,successfully ‘We to definecome damp to the cyclical termsideal inerterbehaviourwith the to newbe in a a technology.mechanical, car’s suspension it one-portTheis storednecessary device energy such to thatintune the the the device inerterequalto and is the calculated opposite frequencies forceusing: appliedlikely to be at theencountered nodes is proportional in the system. to In the relative acceleration between Smith’s words, ‘We define the the nodes.’ ideal inerter to be a mechanical, Here,Put mathematically: b is the inertance and one-port device such that the would typically be given in kg. equal and opposite force applied This completes the battery at the nodes is proportional to of mechanical equivalents to TABLE 1 electricalthe componentsrelative acceleration as shown between 34 www.racecar-engineering.com • September 2008 The three main electrical components and their in Tablethe 1 nodes.’. mechanical equivalents. Until the invention Like a Putconventional mathematically: suspension of the inerter there was no mechanical damper, the ideal inerter for equivalent of the capacitor a suspension system can be approximated by calculation. 32_RE18N9_J damper-MPs.indd 34 18/7/08 16:35:13 Compared to the mass 34 www.racecar-engineering.com • September 2008 damper, the inerter is mounted differently within the suspension.

www.racecar-engineering.com • Formula 1 supplement

32_RE18N9_J damper-MPs.indd 34 18/7/08 16:35:13 TECHNOLOGY - J DAMPERS DESIGN AND INNOVATION

MASSMASS DAMPING DAMPING

ÓFigure 2 On the left is the normal arrangement of a mass damper (m) being used to stabilise m a larger sprung mass (M). In contrast, the M schematic on the right shows how an inerter is used to achieve the same effect

M

FIGURE 2 On the left is the normal arrangement of a mass damper (m) being used to stabilise a larger sprung mass (M). In contrast, the schematic on the right shows how an inerter Theis usedconstant to achieve b is the the inertancesame effect Here, b is the inertance and can only be considered as before they occur. Translate that measured in kg and equates would typical be given in kg. the mechanical equivalent of into the conditions at the contact to McLaren’s zogs. This was all This completes the battery grounded capacitors because patch of the tyre and it can be part of the team’s efforts to of mechanical equivalents to their acceleration is relative to seen how it will stabilise load In Figure 2, the mass damper can only be considered as can only act after the external was a movable aerodynamic keep(m) is itsattached new totechnology the sprung secret. the mechanicalelectrical equivalent components of as showninput has been aapplied. fixed However,inertial frame.device He and also illegal under variationsthe and allow the rubber to Firstly,mass (M) the and team uses its christened inertia its groundedin capacitorstable 1. because the inerter – byproposed operating an inerterFormula design 1 rules. But surelygenerate by maximum grip. inerterrelative toa J-damper,its position orin spacejounce to their accelerationMuch islike relative a conventional to in harmony withthat the naturalhas an insignificantreducing mass cyclical behaviour inGoing back to the mass damper,exert an opposing as was forcerevealed on the in the a fixedsuspension inertial frame. damper, He also the idealfrequencies of thecompared suspension to the energythe suspension, it is couldn’tdamper, the this was banned on the main mass to calm its motion. proposed an inerter design system – can anticipate the input. inerter also have an influence secrets to Renault case last inerter for a suspension system capable of storing. grounds that it had an influence In contrast, the inerter in that has an insignificant mass That way movements and load on the attitude of the car and, year.Figure Then, 3 between rather the than mass using comparedcan to be the approximated energy it is by variations can be cancelledHis design out is a simpletherefore the aerodynamics?on the attitude of the sprung theand termthe exciting inertance, force can which absorb would capable calculation. of storing. before they occur.mechanical Translate that system The that answer can beis certainly partyes, yet of the car. As this is, in itself, haveand return been mechanical a big giveaway energy in the His designCompared is a simple to the massinto damper the conditions constructed at the contact in a numberthe device of ways,has not beenan deemed aerodynamic device, it was pitsin harmony if anyone with overheardand opposing it, the mechanicalthe systeminerter that is mounted can be differentlypatch of the tyreeither and it drivingcan be the massesillegal by withthe FIA. a decreed that the mass damper its movement. constructed in a number of ways, seen how it will stabilise load All this demonstrates that engineers came up with the term within the suspension. rack or a spiral, and a mechanical was a moveable aerodynamic So, to recap, what Smith has driving the masses with a rack variations and allow the rubber to the real reason for outlawing zog.devised In pitis an garage ideal mechanical parlance, ‘can or a spiral, andIn figure a mechanical 2, the mass generate maximum grip. mass dampers was the safety device and illegal under youinerter change with two to terminalsa 50-zog and J-damper.’ advantage damper can be (m) built is in attached that Going back to the mass concerns of having several kilos the Formula 1 rules. Thethe relative actual acceleration relationship of betweencreates tovery the high sprung rotational mass damper, this wasmovements banned on the mounted on springsand in the nose, But surely by reducing zogsthose andterminals kg is is still proportional only known energy.(M) Its keyand advantage uses its isinertia grounds that it had an influence a part of the car that often cyclical behaviour in the to the force on them. Crucially, that it acts very differently to on loadthe attitude ofvariations the sprung becomes detached.can The be inerter, within the key people at Woking. relative to its position suspension, couldn’t it behaves like a normal two- springs and dampers. These partcancelled of the car. As this is, in itself, outmounted before on the main part terminalGetting capacitor. this relationship In contrast, right,act afterin the space event to in exert that they an an aerodynamic device, it was of the car and weighing the inerter also have however,conventional is masscritical, dampers not only need movementopposing to forceoperate, on so the decreedthey that the massoccur damper comparatively little, was not an influence on the to making the J-damper work main mass to calm its attitude of the car and, effectively, but also to avoid motion. In contrast, the inerter in advantage can be built in that therefore the aerodynamics? hugeProfessor loads should the Smith damper devisedfigure 3 anbetween mechanical the mass and intertercreates very with high rotational two terminals, The answer is certainly yes and andthe suspension their startrelative cycling accelerationthe exciting force canis absorbproportional energy. toIts key the advantage force is on themyet the device has not been together. In the worst case it and return mechanical energy in that it acts very differently to deemed illegal by the FIA. All could rip the damper and even harmony with and opposing its springsFormula and dampers. 1 supplement These • www.racecar-engineering.com this demonstrates was the the suspension apart. Indeed, movement. act after the event in that they real reason for outlawing mass some believe this was the cause To recap, what Smith has need movement to operate so dampers was the safety concerns of Fillipe Massa’s suspension devised is an ideal mechanical can only act after the external of having several kilos mounted failure at Monza last year, as inerter with two terminals and input has been applied. The on springs in the nose, a part Ferrari struggled to come to the relative acceleration of inerter, however, by operating of the car that often becomes terms with the new technology. those terminals is proportional in harmony with the natural detached in an accident. The The stored energy in the to the force on them. Crucially, frequencies of the suspension inerter, mounted on the main inerter is calculated using: it behaves like a normal two- system, can anticipate the input. part of the car and weighing terminal capacitor. In contrast, That way movements and load comparatively little, was not conventional mass dampers variations can be cancelled out perceived as a problem.

September 2008 • www.racecar-engineering.com 37

32_RE18N9_J damper-MPs.indd 37 18/7/08 16:35:15 • 20 % lighter composite products • Improved mechanical performance

• Superior surface smoothness

TeXtreme® is the market leader in Spread Tow carbon reinforcements. The thin Spread Tow Tapes are used to weave fabrics with virtually no crimp to realize mechanical properties similar to a cross ply of UD. Compared to use of conventional fabrics, TeXtreme® Spread Tow Fabrics enable weight reductions of 20 % of the composite without compromising the performance.

Sales contact: Karin Widman, Application Specialist Racing, [email protected] www.textreme.com

Oxeon full page print ad F1 speical.indd 1 2012-11-27 10:48:37