A question to the technical guys on here: Can parts be tested on their own

[steelstallions]

We know our exhaust cannot be fully assessed in a wind tunnel or CFD, its main testing is when its on the car during a race or the brief allocated test times? So the question is, we cannot test the whole car because of testing limitations but just how many of the parts can we test on their own to see if they do what was intended? Or is it an absolute ban, i.e. if a pump is not strong enough, tough you find out on race day. If you can test some parts on their own, could the exhaust have been put on an old F1 car to gain some useful data from it? Would the data be of any use?

[Hornet]

Well, the testing limitations is on track time, so even if you put the exhaust on older car, you cannot run the car outside of the testing days.

But anyway, the aerodynamic of the car is design to work together from the front wing to the rear wing. Many times you may hear the commentators saying that even by putting on a wet tire will spoil your aero testing because the wet tires have grooves on them and so it affects the air passing through the wheel differently. So if you take a new aero part and put it in a different car, it may not work effectively.

I believe other parts can be tested in the factory freely, stuff like engine dyno test and so on that don't require you to drive the car at a circuit. You're free to test the engine and other parts back at the factory.

[zakfourie]

And as for wind tunnel testing?

[Hornet]

And as for wind tunnel testing?

I'm not sure if there's a limit in how many wind tunnel test we can do, but there's at least these limits:

22.9 With the exception of the full scale testing permitted in 22.4(c)(iii) above, no wind tunnel testing may be carried out using a scale model which is greater than 60% of full size.
22.10 No wind tunnel testing may be carried out at a speed exceeding 50 metres/second.

This is what I can find online at the official site. No mention of testing time.

Horner did mention that exhaust plume is not simulated in CFD or wind tunnel.

[FrankAlfa]

All Parts are tested for Structural capacity (Stress / Strain / Torsion / Aero Drag / Tension / Compression / Etc.) on static loading. The Wind tunnel is the area to test the assembled parts to measure downforce and drag. CFD modeling will give a conceptual design and allow load and forces to imposed on the part in a virtual enviroment. Actual testing in a load machine can test for flexual limits and Stree / Strain & Bending.

Ciao.

Forza Ferrari!!!!

[korpithas]

Good thread and a very good and interesting question.
But it has 2 aspects, one regarding the regulations of testing in f1 (which is an aspect I don’t know) and an other one, regarding if it make sense to test spare parts alone or on other car i.e an older formula for instance.

First of all, I want to make it clear that I am not highly technically developed regarding F1 tuning.

But apart from that my answer is clear and guaranteed
You can do estimations, but if you don’t do combined test of the spare parts on track in most cases you get nowhere. You can do estimations but track is the moment of truth.
So although you can do some test on spare parts on their own and start getting the idea of them, the final combination of them all together is so complicated, that is not sure you will get yourself were you had predicted, and is almost impossible to simulate them, because of all these side effects that cant be calculated and the real conditions cant be evaluated.


For example:

I believe other parts can be tested in the factory freely, stuff like engine dyno test and so on that don't require you to drive the car at a circuit. You're free to test the engine and other parts back at the factory.

Even engines, require track days to be sure they are really how you expect them to be. For example, having test an engine on dyno and having seen that its quite good you can never trust and rest on it.

For example,
You can never simulate the exact air flow in the intake manifold while the car is moving.
If you also consider that this airflow is completely different for every specific degree regarding the longitudinal and
If you also consider that when there is another car in front it changes again, then you realize that dyno day is just the basic step at the development and nothing more.
The same things apply to the exhaust gases when air flow from your own car might bother them and you start creating backpressure to your engine while you try to take advantage of them.
Again, is almost impossible during dyno test, to provide your engine the exact load/heat that this engine will face on track. So the heat impact the remapping and thousands of adjustments should be different on track.

So although in your dyno you may have 2 engines A and B with A having 800Hp@18.000rpm and B having 760Hp@18.000rpm so the logical choice would be the A engine, in reality it is not impossible for B engine to be much faster than A on track.
But it is not impossible again this ‘’slow’’ A engine to be more effective on an other chassis, or to the same chassis on an other track.

So you see, your question is very interesting and important but also too much complicated.

There are 2 golden rules in races:

1. tests tests test
2. One component test each time. (for not get lost, but this is almost impossible to follow thats why good engineers make huge differnece)


But what is very funny is that even threw test in the end you can’t be sure for a specific component.
What you are sure about is that:
A specific test, a specific day, on a specific car, on specific driver a specific component worked well (or not).
But this doesn’t necessarily means that this component is a good one or a bad one.

That’s why when I commented on the 2012 development thread, I said don’t wish and be happy with many updates.
The more the updates the bigger the problem we are in.
The more the updates the harder it will be to make them work together.
But extreme circumstances unfortunately sometimes require extreme measures.

Sorry for long post but interesting and important thread.

[FrankAlfa]

Well Korpithas, I don't agree with your position on testing of new part and the development process of a race car. New parts are introduced to inprove and correct short comings of the original design. With each step in development, it is hoped that there is improvement otherwise nothing would ever move forward and nothing would improve. Measuring things like Drag, Downforce, Flexure, etc. all contribute to a set goal of desired parameters. This is the process and the criteria of testing and development away from the race track. Certainly, the waters can be mudded when clear goals are not firmly established and the direction of the development goes awry. Yes, I agree in that instance, new parts are more a problem then a help but that is why teams are careful to introduce new parts until they have proofed them and the benefits of there use.

Ciao.

Forza Ferrari!!!!

[korpithas]

To be honest i am not quite sure at which exact point you disagree.

Giving it a second try to make my point, by commenting your post i would just mention the followings

With each step in development, it is hoped that there is improvement....

I agree!
And exactly this is the point where track days must come to finaly reveal the truth and final to show if there is indeed an imporvment or not. Threw design and meeting predifined parametres you can always have a general idea, goals to go after and hopes but never final results.
Final results almost always come threew track days.

Look ferrari for instance. They were ready with the car. They never said we run out of time. But when the car entered the track they then clearly realized problems that could not be in advanced explored or revealed (without the car entering the track).

Its obvious that they couldn't in advance simulate the problems because if they could they would have already solved them, not to mention also that their estimations (driven threw labs) were so wrong that they thought that they had a very strong car this year. But in reality the car strugles for performance.

Keep also in mind that even with so many adjustments they couldn't get even close to desired tyre usage for instance.
So despite they thought they were ready after track days they realized what kind of development they should start again and now the are giving a strong fight in labs.

Measuring things like Drag, Downforce, Flexure, etc. all contribute to a set goal of desired parameters. This is the process and the criteria of testing and development away from the race track.

I agree again!
I would also add that developent always come threw labs. But on track you reveal if your lab is on a correct path. Its like the old ''fight'' between theory and practice. You use your theory to design, but then after design you use practice to redesign and fill the gaps to your theory. After tests you come out with a better knowledge on theory and this is improvment.
This is moving forward.