Re: Cornering - road car v F1 car
- From: "Dave Baker" <Null@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 1 May 2008 06:01:54 +0100
"David W. James" <unend@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:unend-3A80B6.00231201052008@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
An interesting exercise, but I am not sure how useful it really is.
Skidpad g-numbers are good for comparing tires if you use the same
care, or cars if you use the same tires, or even the same car and tires
with different suspension settings. How usefully the numbers translate
to use on a track is another question.
Case in point: for a few years I autocrossed a BMW M-Coupe. At SCCA
and some other events I used various R-compound, DOT certified tires
(Yokohama A032rs, Kumho 700 and 710s and Hoosiers), while at BMW club
events I used the street tires (Sumitomo HZRs and some Michelins, if I
recall correctly.) I also ran a G-Cube, so I got readouts on my
cornering forces, both peak and sustained.
All four of the various R-compound tires produced sustained lateral G
forces of around 1.35G. The G-Cube software defines 'sustained' as over
.1 second in duration. Race cars, or even autocross cars, seldom do 100
foot circles, and even if you do a perfect circle isn't likely to be the
fastest way around it.
Whatever the fastest way is round a given corner, which may indeed not be to
maximise the bend radius in all cases, the analysis shows what the two types
of car will do in the radius actually chosen in that corner. The reason why
it might not be fastest to maximise the bend radius depends on the
acceleration capability of the vehicle. Very fast vehicles can gain slightly
from using a tighter corner radius so they straighten up quicker and get
back on the throttle. Slow vehicles just have to minimise the speed
reduction by maximising the corner radius because they can't build that lost
speed back again quickly. The late entry, tight turn and early corner exit
strategy was first exploited by bikes maybe 30 or 40 years ago but of course
cars, such as F1 cars, can generate similar acceleration nowadays. Whatever,
it really doesn't have much to do with my general analysis to give people an
idea of how the two types of car compare.
The street tires varied more, but the various Max Performance street
tires all produces about 1.15G sustained.
By comparison, I recall a friend's M-Coupe (set up for One Lap Of
America with a *much* better than stock suspension) "only" pulled about
1G on the skid pad at Tire Rack.
I think you've answered your own question. The G Cube isn't giving an
accurate representation of truly sustained, by which I mean a lot longer
than 0.1 seconds, cornering forces. Devices which rely on an inertia
mechanism to estimate cornering forces can be caught out by short duration
pulses and also by lean of the vehicle which they interpret as additional G
force.
At the end of the day if you have a vehicle pulling an accurately timed
speed round a corner of accurately measured radius the G force isn't in
dispute. It's a function of very simple maths. What an electronic gadget
says about that same measure is very open to doubt. If you think your car
could pull 1.15g on road tyres when every other measure says it can't you
have to look more carefully at your data.
--
Dave Baker
Puma Race Engines
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Cornering - road car v F1 car
- From: Dave Baker
- Re: Cornering - road car v F1 car
- References:
- Re: Cornering - road car v F1 car
- From: David W. James
- Re: Cornering - road car v F1 car
- Prev by Date: Re: Engine freeze questions
- Next by Date: Re: Cornering - road car v F1 car
- Previous by thread: Re: Cornering - road car v F1 car
- Next by thread: Re: Cornering - road car v F1 car
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|