Function following form: The struggle to adapt performance to a traditional aesthetic
The much-publicized growing pains of the Dallara DW12 "next-generation" IndyCar should not surprise anyone.
Marshall Pruett over at SPEED has all of the nitty-gritty details about why the car is having its developmental issues, and his piece is definitely worth the read.
But if you want to know why I think the engineers working on the DW12 are going to take every minute of the extended off-season before they can have the car ready to hit the track in anger, the main thing you need to understand is that its advent onto the INDYCAR scene is not quite the natural evolutionary process that has historically occurred with high-performance racing machines.
Over the century-plus history of people making combustion-engine automobiles go fast, the most adhered-to aphorism for people building and developing race cars has been form follows function. Oversimplifying things as only a blogger can, I will describe this as engineers pursuing speed goals and constructing machines to achieve them; the aesthetics of the machine itself end up being completely secondary to the primary goal of going as bat-out-of-hell fast as possible.
The exception to this rule is "spec" racing (stock car racing, sports car GT-class racing, V8 Supercar racing, and so forth), where constraints such as stock bodies and manufacturer components create the necessity of having to live with performance compromises. For instance, in the old days of NASCAR when the sanction required the stock cars to at least have stock-appearing bodies based on production silhouettes, one manufacturer or another would have to suffer through a season or two of poor results until the production car design could change to make the race car more competitive (viz., the famous Monte Carlo Aerocoupe from the 1980s, built specifically to counter the Ford Thunderbird on larger speedways).
These constraints historically have not applied to purpose-built race cars like IndyCars or Formula 1 machines, however. Abandoning the need to conform to production designs after the first couple of decades of the 20th Century, the form follows function maxim dictated the evolution of these cars over time. The process largely occurred incrementally over the course of years except for the rare but significant giant leaps forward (the rear-engine revolution that quickly killed the front-engined roadster for good, for instance).
This evolutionary process - for IndyCars, at least - hit a giant bottleneck in the mid-1990s with the advent of the CART/Indy Racing League split. While CART continued to develop its cars for a few years after the schism, the Indy Racing League - laboring under the administration-mandated constraints of reducing speeds and increasing downforce using a low-cost engine formula - was faced with its first function follows form quandary. The 1997-vintage Indy Racing League cars were supposed to look like IndyCars, and the technical aims for the cars had to fit those constraints. The function follows form was in part a concession to the series' fans and their comfort level - to the point that, eventually, the series even mandated a change in engine specifications specifically because the existing IRL powerplants sounded too much like stock cars and not enough like IndyCars.
CART was able to delay resorting to this function follows form paradigm because their cars were not yet limited either by the series' rulebook or its financial state. But as the Split continued to wreak its devastating political and financial effects on both series, even CART (and later, Champ Car) was forced to bring their evolutionary process to a standstill.
In its final year, Champ Car elected to build a new car, the Panoz DP-01, which incorporated new advances in car-building theory achieved in the years after CART/Champ Car froze their chassis development. But the DP-01, as beloved as it eventually became by the series' fans, was a function follows form project - a car that was meant to retain the "classic" Indy car/Champ Car look.
On the INDYCAR side, chassis development virtually ended eight years ago with the Dallara IR03. In truth, if it had not been for the Chip Ganassi-and-Ben Bowlby-backed Delta Wing project, there is no reason to believe that the IZOD IndyCar Series would have seen a significant technological change in its cars for at least another half-decade. The stasis was created by a myriad of factors - a lack of competition, financial hardships on the ownership side, and, not insignificantly, the gun-shy attitudes of ex-Champ Car owners who came over in the series' merger who had nearly lost their shirts on the DP-01. But the most critical element was that there was no real impetus to evolve the existing spec - no speed goals, no critical performance goals, no function that required a change to the form.
Bowlby's Delta Wing changed everything. A classic example of form follows function, the tricyclic Delta Wing looked almost nothing like a conventional IndyCar because it was designed to meet certain speed, weight, and performance goals. It was revolutionary and breathtaking in many ways and it served to convince the INDYCAR world that the status quo was no longer acceptable.
What it was not was acceptable to traditionalists. The INDYCAR world by this point had been stuck in the function follows form rut for so long that nobody could quite wrap their minds around the idea of what was essentially a three-wheeled race car turning laps in the Indianapolis 500. So, when the series decided that a new car made marketing sense, it tended to side with concepts from aspiring manufacturers that adhered most closely to the form with which the INDYCAR community was comfortable. The new car became an aesthetic exercise instead of a technical one.
The Dallara design that would eventually become the DW12 was one of the least revolutionary of the submitted proposals. And because the car was designed and built to adhere to a certain form, it stands to reason that the function would require significant time to be tweaked and massaged before the car's performance would become ideal - or, at least, acceptable.
As the off-season progresses, we will see the DW12 evolve under the ministrations of engineers who will be required to act within a somewhat strange corollary to the classic maxim - a form follows function following form dictum, if you will. There will be months of adaptation, adjustment, and amendment before the car is fine-tuned enough to see action.
Perhaps someday, if the economy improves and technology advances sufficiently, INDYCAR may yet return to an environment where form will follow function in a more pure sense. Optimists hope that aero kit developers will adhere to that classic formula - but that presupposes that there will be aero kit builders of sufficient enterprising spirit to attempt the feat, as well as a willingness from INDYCAR to let the aero kits be built at all.
For now, the engineers working on the DW12 will do the best they can to make the new car perform its function as well as it can in its current form.
3 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Taking issue with a few points
The Dallara design that would eventually become the DW12 was one of the least revolutionary of the submitted proposals.
Less revolutionary than the Delta Wing and Swift proposals, yes, but I would challenge that Dallara’s was no less innovative than Lola’s Champ Car Part II: Even Champier and even BAT’s absurdly swoopy but still clearly a formula car concepts. At least Dallara’s gives some hope of people evolving it when the aero kits arrive in 2013.
Beyond that, to my mind aesthetics do matter, and to blame the new car’s teething problems on it looking too conventional is a hell of a leap. To the first item, so many people complained about the ugliness of the DP07 that the new car looking good was a must to keep IndyCar’s fanbase happy. Obviously people (cough*carthardcores*cough) still are finding issues with the DW12, but it’s an improvement, it’s different, and it’s going to be easy to market.
To the second item, reading Marshall’s article, to me it sounds like the issues with the car are Dallara’s overreliance on the CFD numbers and unrealistic weight estimates, not the fact that the car is too traditional looking. If anything, doing something like the removing the rear bumper would lead the car to appear even more conventional and would fix a lot of the handling issues as well, though correctly no one is going to advocate for that now.
I think everyone agrees that IndyCar’s goal should be removing the restrictions and getting away from a spec formula in the next few years – then the form-follows-function will happen and the sport will get back to true innovation. But the timing would have really sucked had they tried to do something radical for next season.
In Memoriam: Dan Wheldon 1978-2011
Some responses
- Dallara and Lola were both very traditional aesthetic designs. Swift was the only designer who really went off the grid aesthetically. None of them, though, were on the level of Delta Wing because none of them had done nearly the amount of engineering design as DW.
- My point is not that the car’s having issues because it looks too conventional – it’s that the car is having issues because the engineering is being shoehorned into an aesthetic constraint instead of vice versa.
- I agree that the timing of the new car could not be helped because it was grudgingly adopted because DW forced everyone’s hand. Ideally, a new car would be developed and engineered organically instead of, “How can we get this awesome 3D render into a rolling stage?”
You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers.
Pop Off Valve - A greasy hot tenderloin of IndyCar goodness!
In just my 2 sense...
I have to say that the new car looks should come behind handling/aerodynamics and safety. The current look of the new car looks rather bland and not all too impressive in an aerodynamic sense, but again I do not have numbers to go by and is strictly an opinion.
I think the problem with this series is rather very simple. Arenacale touched on it in his post and this has been my biggest beef with Indy car these days. The simple fact that there is no manufacturer competition. This is what generates advancement in the world of motorsports and also its the main point of this sport as well. With out competition there is no sport and more of a business of service/entertainment. We need to see this series get back to its roots of fielding cars of different suppliers (aka chassis and engines). The early 90’s, this series was well followed and obviously the split killed open wheel racing here in the states, but the unpredictability of each race with everyone strategizing to the specific chassis/engine combination they had. This made things exciting as some tracks favored others but yet that could swap the next time or both would be competitive. There is too many “spec” series in this world and to be honest there is only a few I can think of that allow for creativity do to competition between manufacturers: F1, Lemans (prototypes), rally, and motorcycle racing.
In short Indy car is the same year after year after year. It becomes hard to follow like NASCAR.

by 














