Grooved planks

Ferrari have investigated the use of grooved underbody planks in an attempt to reduce aqua-planing.

All very good, but surely it doesn't have to be a plank. If this causes aqua-planing, there are other ways.
Why couldn't the teams use a small titanium skid at the lowest point of the car? This would serve two purposes; Not only would the metal serve to indicate the ride height, but we could also see when the cars are running too low: the shower of sparks would show an indescretion.
It seems to me that the current regs allow teams to rely on the plank for an indication when they are running too low. If the titanium skids were used, the onus would be placed on the race engineer and the driver to come up with a setting that would deny the team the chance of running right on the edge of the regs regarding ride height.

What do you think?

[This message has been edited by Sparky (edited 05 May 2000).]

I think that the real issue here is that it is not the plank, but the flat bottom of the car that causes the aqua-planing. All cars have flat bottoms because of the aero effects they create.
The current plank has several uses:
It helps enforce the ride height rule because the wear has to remain within certain limits.
It stops the bottom of a very expensive car having a hole worn in it by bottoming on the track.
It adds ballast to the very bottom of the car, legally.
Using a skid plate instead. The degree of wear could not really be measured. Maybe the rules could be changed so that no marks were allowed on the skid plate. Watching for sparks would be very dodgy.
Ok, so the onus could be placed on the teams to make sure that the car did not bottom, but that would be virtually impossible to ensure under all circumstances unless the ride height was greatly increased.
The only real ways to stop aqua-planing are to increase the ride height and sacrifice the aero effects or alter the structure of the bottom of the car. Maybe add a specified number of ridges running along the underside of the car to reduce aqua-planing without losing too much aero effect.

I believe that all cars should run at 100mm (4") like the rest of us and that the F1 plank should be replace by two parallel lengths of 4x2!

That would keep Adrian Newey busy!

:-)
IanC

PS I also think they should conform to a 120dB limit measured off the pit wall!

Ian, make that 150db and I'm with you!

Sparky,
150dB ... Only if my RX7 racer is allowed the same, else these bu66ers can be constrained like the rest of us!

It's like certifying an airfield for use with Concorde, but restricting Cessna 150s because of noise pollution!

IanC

sound is one of the most fun bits about cars!
loud is best if its faster tho.
but if some old farts want it quiet, cos 3 days a year a few miles away a hillclimb is held, then that seems to have to be the way! bu66ers! miserable old farts.
spoiling our fun!!

and.
planks i think dont realy alter the aquaplaning effects, reduce it a bit tho i suppose. less area.
but if u have anything close to the ground u will get aquaplaning.
40mm of the floor would do. like hillclimb cars.

Thanks THR! That's what I meant. The teams rely on the plank as an indicator of when they are already running too low. The small skid would serve to show the 'ride height' and would wear significantly quicker, so engineers would not be able to run 'on the edge'.

If this skid was titanium, as the BTTC teams used last year at Snetterton night races, we' would all see which teams were close to the mark!

I've always chuckled at the though of using a lump of shuttering ply in the underside of a million pound car! You can just imagine the guy at the builders merchants being handed his jobsheets for the day - the new Sainsburys on the outskirts of town, the council depot, the Barretts Homes site, and McLarens! :p