Group Admins

  • Profile picture of Keith Collantine

Group Mods

  • Profile picture of damonsmedley
  • Profile picture of Bradley Downton

F1

Public Group active 54 minutes ago

F1 discussion

Changes to Interlagos for 2012

This topic contains 14 replies, has 10 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of Fer no.65 Fer no.65 1 year, 11 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #132331
    Profile photo of Roald
    Roald
    Participant

    Not much of a surprise I guess, more tarmac! According to RTL GP (RTL has the television rights to Formula 1 in the Netherlands) they removed the grass at the Senna S and replaced it with tarmac to increase safety… Among other changes they made, together with a drainage system at the entire circuit and some fake grass at the back straight to prevent drivers from gaining speed by cutting a corner (that’s what it says, not sure of where the grass is supposed to be) they spent 22 million… didn’t see it mentioned anywhere else on this site yet, so here you go…

    source (Dutch): http://www.rtl.nl/%28/sport/rtl_gp/formule1/nieuws/%29/sport/rtl_gp/components/formule1/nieuws/2012/11_november/121108_asfalt_in_senna_s.xml

    #214456
    Profile photo of Guilherme
    Guilherme
    Participant

    Here’s a source in Portuguese, with some pictures: http://globoesporte.globo.com/motor/formula-1/noticia/2012/11/interlagos-ganha-area-de-escape-no-s-do-senna-para-gp-do-brasil-de-f-1.html

    The article in Portuguese says the drainage system is around the Senna S though, and it looks like the astroturf was installed at Descida do Lago. Also, I’d like to clarify that that they spent R$ 22 million… which is about £6.5 million or US$11 million.

    I don’t like the trend of asphalt run offs, but Interlagos is by far the poorest circuit on the calendar (in terms of facilities of course, the track itself in my top 5), and as a Brazilian I’m happy they are trying to improve it, it would be a crying shame if it lost it’s place on the calendar because of its unsuitable facilities.

    #214457
    Profile photo of Atticus
    Atticus
    Participant

    As long as the layout remains the same, I’m OK with with every changes, especially those which increase safety.

    #214458
    Profile photo of andae23
    andae23
    Participant

    I really dislike these tarmac run-off areas – especially at the first turn. Just like Circuit Catalunya, Monza, Singapore and to some extent Monaco, drivers will cut the corner on lap 1. It takes away some of the excitement of the first corner. This in contrast to Albert-Park and Montreal where the drivers are force to stay on the track, often causing chaos in the midfield.

    #214459
    Profile photo of Fer no.65
    Fer no.65
    Participant

    Baaaaaaah ! Come ooon !

    What’s wrong with grass and gravel ?! really… we’ll end up watching cars going round on a massive tarmac field with white lines painted to delimit the track…

    #214460
    Profile photo of Atticus
    Atticus
    Participant

    Someone once said that tarmac run-offs actually reverse the driver’s learning process to find the maximum grip at each corner of each track.

    I. e. before tarmac run-offs became the norm, one would converge to the quickest way through a corner from ‘below’, i. e. slowly building up speed in the corner. While, of course, nowadays it’s still the predominant approach and sensible thing to do, there is – I think – less in the way of doing the opposite – take a bit too much and see if that’s enough. If not, back off a bit. But increasingly try to nail it from ‘above’.

    Of course, limited tyre availability curbs this possibility back somewhat; it’s not so fun finishing a set of tyres trying to nail it from ‘above’ and flat spotting one by braking too late… But then again, precisely that’s what tarmac run-off is good for. Late on the breaks? No issues, don’t flat spot it, run wide instead, you will have no problems. So it’s controversial a bit.

    Another thing: it does encourage overtakes, I think. While playing with the abrasiveness of tarmac run-offs could cut this back, I think it is a way higher incentive to try a risky pass. The worse you could end up with is a little tour on the run-off, but no gravel, sand or grass will mess up your tyres, aero elements, radiator, etc.

    Of course the main argument is always safety, but that needs no explanation – barring brake failures, where one could argue that a gravel trap would be more effective in slowing the car down.

    #214462
    Profile photo of the_sigman
    the_sigman
    Participant

    @atticus-2 The job of the grass is to limit the track, because tarmac doesn’t limit the track, because a driver doesn’t care too much about going off-track.

    #214463
    Profile photo of raymondu999
    raymondu999
    Participant

    Bring in the Paul Ricard stripes, at least.

    #214464
    Profile photo of Guilherme
    Guilherme
    Participant

    @raymondu999 aren’t they made of tungsten powder? As a Brazilian taxpayer, I’d say “hell no”. If that cost us 22 million, just imagine how much those run offs would cost.

    #214465
    Profile photo of raymondu999
    raymondu999
    Participant

    @guilherme No idea, road design isn’t my area. I could ask a friend though, who does design roads for a living

    #214466
    Profile photo of Fer no.65
    Fer no.65
    Participant

    @atticus-2 I don’t think such thing “encourages” overtaking.

    #214467
    Profile photo of Bob
    Bob
    Participant

    @raymondu999 – I started a thread on Paul Ricard’s abrasive run-off areas a while ago, and found out that they really were expensive.

    The material used is a tungsten-asphalt mixture, which is very, very, very costly to obtain. Moreover, tungsten is apparently the only material that achieves the desired effect – other industrial-grade abrasives like ceramic aluminium oxide are either too expensive, or alter the chemical properties of the tarmac in an undesirable fashion – so there are no cheaper alternatives to consider (at least, until engineers come up with a suitable substitute).

    For now, if track designers want a runoff surface that stops cars effectively in case of an accident, penalizes driver mistakes, and is cost effective, the tried and tested gravel/sand trap is, in my opinion, still the way to go.

    #214468
    Profile photo of Gabriel Fernando
    Gabriel Fernando
    Participant

    It is safer, so it is good.

    #214469
    Profile photo of MuzzleFlash
    MuzzleFlash
    Participant

    Looks like they’ve still left a strip of grass between the exit kerb and the tarmac expanse, which I think is the best compromise.

    Anyone who blows a braking zone will meet it head on, go straight over grass and have the tarmac to stop them. Anyone who tries to get greedy will dip a wheel onto the grass and spin.

    #214470
    Profile photo of Fer no.65
    Fer no.65
    Participant

    @muzzleflash it’s that astroturf thing… better than tarmac, but not as punishing. And it rubbers up too, unlike grass or gravel.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.