[WEC] LMP Future Regulations (was Le Mans EVO rules - now hypercar rules)

[Flat12-Aircool]

Originally Posted by Ultimo

Mike, do you believe that the fin was a major factor for McNish's car not flipping during the crash?

http://tentenths.com/forum/showthread.php?t=128759

[Ultimo]

Originally Posted by Flat12-Aircool

http://tentenths.com/forum/showthread.php?t=128759

Sorry about that! I feared that Mike had already chimed in. I saw this thread days ago but forgot to check it.

Thanks for the link!

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by JAG

TBH, after Le Mans I just want to see safe cars, with sensible updates, so we can enjoy the racing.

What's the aim of larger louvers?

Louvers are found to help in yaw situations. Louvers were tested in Delta Motorsport's simulations back in 2009 so were always in the back pocket. Though note, this list being shopped are just proposals.

[fiend540]

So is the new fin sizes similar to what Audi is currently running then?

[Pandamasque]

Originally Posted by fiend540

So is the new fin sizes similar to what Audi is currently running then?

I thought they were all the same. Audi pin-stripe makes theirs look way too tall, in the same way that 908's chrome stripe makes theirs look lower than it is.

[chernaudi]

Mike has said that Audi designed the fin on the R18, espeically from the Sebring test onwards, to be larger than required, while the Peugeot is the minimum size required. He says that with the Pug accidents, that there may be some colloraltion/cause and effect with the fin sizes, as the Audis when the spun at LM they didn't flip over just because of the spin--only reason why McNish flipped over was his Audi bounced off of a tire wall after it hit in just the right way to cause a roll.

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by fiend540

So is the new fin sizes similar to what Audi is currently running then?

No, believe they will be bigger than that. Though for all I know the proposed wording mandates the current maximum size.

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by Pandamasque

I thought they were all the same. Audi pin-stripe makes theirs look way too tall, in the same way that 908's chrome stripe makes theirs look lower than it is.

No, there's a minimum height and a maximum height. The 908's is near or at the minimum height.

[Audi Racer]

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

No, believe they will be bigger than that. Though for all I know the proposed wording mandates the current maximum size.

I know this has been talked about a little bit but does the fin provide any kind of aerodynamic benefit at all. I mean surely it must since fins are all the rage in F1 aerodynamics....How could it benefit the F1 cars but hurt the Lemans cars to the point that Peugeot felt the need to run the smallest fin the regulations allow.

[Audi Racer]

In addition after seeing the terrifying crashes of Rockenfeller and McNish and how the fin prevented those crashes from being much worse. What manufacturer in their right mind,(namely Oreca and HPD), wouldnt rush to get the fins put on their cars. Its only an engine cover after all.....Hopefully we'll see them implement this at Imola.

[gwyllion]

The fin will only be "mandatory for all cars as from 01/01/2013" (see rule 3.6.4.a).

[Audi Racer]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

The fin will only be "mandatory for all cars as from 01/01/2013" (see rule 3.6.4.a).

Yeah i dont mean the ACO making them.......I mean the manufactureres taking their own initiative. Its common sense that you want the fin on your car from a safety standpoint regardless of what the regulations stipulate.....It's seems like sheer stupidity that Oreca, HPD,and Zytek haven't got it on their cars. But i won't judge them yet. We'll seewhat happens at Imola and by the end of the year.


After the McNish and Rockenfeller crashes only a fool wouldn't put the fin on their car.

[Flat12-Aircool]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Mike has said that Audi designed the fin on the R18, espeically from the Sebring test onwards, to be larger than required, while the Peugeot is the minimum size required.

Secondary quotes from Audi have established that this was purely for better Aero performance, not some "Holier than thine competitors" attempt at safety One-upmanship.

[CTD]

Originally Posted by Audi Racer

Yeah i dont mean the ACO making them.......I mean the manufactureres taking their own initiative. Its common sense that you want the fin on your car from a safety standpoint regardless of what the regulations stipulate.....It's seems like sheer stupidity that Oreca, HPD,and Zytek haven't got it on their cars. But i won't judge them yet. We'll seewhat happens at Imola and by the end of the year.


After the McNish and Rockenfeller crashes only a fool wouldn't put the fin on their car.

If the teams running the cars doesn't want to pay for the development, unless they are forced to (by rules), then it's simple.

[Mal]

Originally Posted by Flat12-Aircool

Secondary quotes from Audi have established that this was purely for better Aero performance, not some "Holier than thine competitors" attempt at safety One-upmanship.

At the Audi pit visit I asked whether the fin had any additional benefits to the design other than safety and was told that it didnt.

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by Flat12-Aircool

Secondary quotes from Audi have established that this was purely for better Aero performance, not some "Holier than thine competitors" attempt at safety One-upmanship.

Quite the contrary. Audi's execution is an attempt to mitigate the negative impact of the fin in "normal" (cornering) yaw situations. The vortex that sheds off the top of the fin can have a disruptive impact on the wing. Conversely, with the fin in the low position coupled with the rear wing in the highest legal position, you can have a positive performance gain. As Audi's rear wing is well below the top of the fin there is little to no interaction. Consider the height of the 908's fin relative to it's rear wing...that's for performance gain. Audi is mitigating the effects, Peugeot is looking for aero enhancement.

It's my guess the ACO is shoring up the fin regulations for 2012 so that performance can't be gained from the fin.

[Flat12-Aircool]

So are you saying Audi voluntarily gave up a performance advantage in favour of greater safety?

Because in my book, mitigating a negative impact sounds an awful lot like finding better (consistent?) performance.

[davehenrie]

Originally Posted by Flat12-Aircool

Secondary quotes from Audi have established that this was purely for better Aero performance, not some "Holier than thine competitors" attempt at safety One-upmanship.

Didn't the fin get adjusted after Sebring? This would suggest they compared their private test data with the performance of the 908 and found a possible area of improvement. Whether it was merely for safety or for performance, they had some data with which to compare.
dh

[AGD]

There's some interesting stuff in this interview Dagys had with Lola's Robin Brundle. It's worth checking out.

[Audi Racer]

Originally Posted by AGD

There's some interesting stuff in this interview Dagys had with Lola's Robin Brundle. It's worth checking out.

Yeah thats really interesting. Listen to this from brundle:

It’s not easily or affordably possible to make the petrol engines, under the current spirit and current regulations, actually achieve those types of performances over a 24-hour race period.

Same can be said for Audi and Peugeot. Does he think that it was easy for Audi and Peugeot to make their diesel engines. He should reconize how hard Audi an dPeugeot are pushing seeing the Peugeot engine failures from last year.


If you want to win that what you have do. Arguably Audi and Peugeot ha the tougher task in developing racing diesel engines.

The Audi and Peugeot engines arent that affordable either.....They;ve had to spend the big bucks.


He says " under the spirit" what does that mean? As far as im concerned if you are slow you need to take advantage of all the regulations and be clever or your not doing your job

[Audi Racer]

Mentions hybrid systems being readily available.

[Spyderman]

Originally Posted by Audi Racer

The Audi and Peugeot engines arent that affordable either.....They;ve had to spend the big bucks.

Much easier to spend big bucks when the backdrop against which you are spending is favorable.

[Audi Racer]

Originally Posted by Spyderman

Much easier to spend big bucks when the backdrop against which you are spending is favorable.

could you explain this further. Im misunderstanding this.

[MitchZ06]

Originally Posted by Audi Racer

could you explain this further. Im misunderstanding this.

Its easier to spend lots of money developing the racing diesel engine when a large automaker thats promoting diesel engines in its road cars is behind the program.

[arakis]

I have to disagree with this, I am pretty sure if Porsche came in with a petrol engine it would have been verry close to deisels