65 replies to this topic

[PLAYLIFE]

http://www.fia.com/s...cembre 2013.pdf

 

Article 7 onwards seems the relevant bit.

 

 

Thanks for the link.

 

 

1. The start/finish straight of a GP circuit should have a slope of no more than 2%.

2. It is preferable to have at least 250m from the start line to the first corner.

3. The first corner (a turn of more than 45 degrees) should have an apex speed not exceeding 125kph.

4. Off-camber corners are to be avoided if at all possible, and if unavoidable, can have an apex speed of no more than 125kph.
5. Corner banking may be no more than 10 degrees without specific FIA approval.
6. It is preferable that corners NOT include elevation changes.
7. Decreasing radius corners should be avoided, but if present, should have an apex speed of no more than 75kph.

8. The track width foreseen should be at least 12 m.

9. Where the track width changes, the transition should be made as gradually as possible, at a rate not greater than 1 m in 20 m total width. 

 

 

1)  I assume it means where the grid slots are.  Clearly COTA start/finish straight gradient is far more than 2%...

Ref Article 7.4

 

2) 'Preferable'.  Moot point.

Ref Article 7.7

 

3) Incorrect.  The only mention of a 125km/hr is in Ref Article 7.5  "In curves, the banking (downwards from the outside to the inside of the track) should not exceed 10% (with possible exceptions in special cases, such as speedways). An adverse incline is not generally acceptable unless dictated by special circumstances, in which case the entry speed should not exceed 125 kph."

 

4) Incorrect.  The only mention of camber in the document is in Ref Article 7.5 "Along straights, the transversal incline, for drainage purposes,between the two edges of the track or between the centreline and the edge (camber), should not exceed 3%, or be less than 1.5%."

 

5) Correct, see 3)

Ref Article 7.5

 

6) Incorrect.  I did not read anything of that nature in the document.

 

7) Incorrect.  I did not read anything of that nature in the document.

 

8) Correct, however only for new circuits.  "When planning new permanent circuits, the track width foreseen should be at least 12 m."

Ref Article 7.3

 

9) Correct, word for word.  "Where the track width changes, the transition should be made as gradually as possible, at a rate not greater than 1 m in 20 m total width."

Ref Article 7.3

 

 

 

Lots of misinformation in the original post.

Edited by PLAYLIFE, 26 February 2014 - 12:21.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Technically a track like Suzuka doesn't have decreasing radius corners. 1 and 2 are separate. So are the Degners. Spoon would be considered two corners, etc.

[PLAYLIFE]

Brooklands at Silverstone dramatically decreases radius.

It's relatively new since the profile was changed for the latest Silverstone configuration.

 

Turn 5 at Singapore is another one that immediately comes to mind.

 

I'm sure there's plenty more if you analysed the circuits in detail.

Edited by PLAYLIFE, 26 February 2014 - 12:50.

[Tenmantaylor]

Technically a track like Suzuka doesn't have decreasing radius corners. 1 and 2 are separate. So are the Degners. Spoon would be considered two corners, etc.

 

Corners of varying radii, elevation and camber (like Spoon and Paddock Hill Bend) are the ones that sort good drivers from the great. They should be encouraged.

[JeePee]

Brooklands at Silverstone dramatically decreases radius.

It's relatively new since the profile was changed for the latest Silverstone configuration.

 

Turn 5 at Singapore is another one that immediately comes to mind.

 

I'm sure there's plenty more if you analysed the circuits in detail.

 

Most extreme one is the 1st corner in Shanghai.

Edited by JeePee, 26 February 2014 - 13:23.

[froggy22]

With the amount of run off areas new circuits have these days, you'd think they didn't need these set of rules anyway

[HP]

yes.

 

Suzuka Circuit;

 

1. The start/finish straight of a GP circuit should have a slope of no more than 2%.

> 2.8%

 

3. The first corner (a turn of more than 45 degrees) should have an apex speed not exceeding 125kph.

> technically T1 angle is around 50 degrees with apex speed of more than 260km/h

 

4. Off-camber corners are to be avoided if at all possible, and if unavoidable, can have an apex speed of no more than 125kph.

> Spoon is off-camber corner(s), with apex speed of at least 180km/h

 

6. It is preferable that corners NOT include elevation changes.

> Almost all corners is consisted of elevation change.

 

7. Decreasing radius corners should be avoided, but if present, should have an apex speed of no more than 75kph.

> Does that mean a corner or corner complex sharpening? If so, Spoon complex, T1-2 complex, Degner complex, and S complex possibly conflict with it. Also slowest apex speed at any point is way more than 75kmph.

 

8. The track width foreseen should be at least 12 m.

> minimum track width at Suzuka is 10m

 

9. Where the track width changes, the transition should be made as gradually as possible, at a rate not greater than 1 m in 20 m total width.

> I'm not so sure about this but the track narrowing down at T1 looks sudden and abrupt, rate greater than 1m per 20m.

That's why Suzuka is such an awesome race circuit. Long may it last.

[R Soul]

"3. The first corner (a turn of more than 45 degrees) should have an apex speed not exceeding 125kph."

Presumably that speed applies to the fastest car, otherwise the Caterhams and Marussias might be the only cars for which a track is legal, and then what would happen? Would everyone else have to go home on safety grounds? Can't be too careful.

[V8 Fireworks]

Every corner at Bathurst! 

[Nemo1965]

"3. The first corner (a turn of more than 45 degrees) should have an apex speed not exceeding 125kph."

Presumably that speed applies to the fastest car, otherwise the Caterhams and Marussias might be the only cars for which a track is legal, and then what would happen? Would everyone else have to go home on safety grounds? Can't be too careful.

 

Strange. The first corner of Suzuka is way faster than that. In games, you take the first part almost full out, then brake, go back two gears and into the next one.

[froggy22]

the 1st corners of a few tracks are flat out/slight lift, Hockenheim, Sliverstone, Suzuka even the brand new Sochi track. Which makes me think that rule No. 3 hasn't been interpreted correctly.

[PayasYouRace]

I've done what PLAYLIFE did and actually read the document and I have to agree. Half of what is in the OP is actually bollocks, presumably a mistake from his own source.

[Atreiu]

Fk the rules.

I still think Tilke makes crap circuits over near unlimited budgets.

[redreni]

I think it's understandable that there should be restrictions on what you can and can't do when you build a new track - you don't want circuits that are death traps - but at the same time these guidelines seem overly restrictive. I think the sport would lose something if it couldn't go to crazy places like Macau or Suzuka or Pau or Monaco. On the other hand, it's probably for the best that drivers no longer have to risk their necks at totally bonkers places like AVUS. The problem is, although existing circuits appear to be more or less immune to rules like this, these rules do place obstacles in the way of potential new tracks that couldn't meet these requirements e.g. a central London street circuit.

 

New tracks shouldn't be designed with fatal accident blackspots in them, of course, but at the same time the designer should not be going out of his way to make it easy for the cars and drivers to cope with the track layout. There has to be a challenge. What the hell is wrong, for example, with designing in a bit of adverse camber? Circuits should be challenging and there should be variety in circuit characteristics. I'm not sure these rules help in that regard.

[f1RacingForever]

The wording makes these "rules" seem more like guidelines than mandatory.  I can think of many corners that do not conform. Ex) Turn one at Spain 2. Turn one at Suzuka. 3. Turn one at Austin (for many reasons) yet they are still allowed to be raced on. If they were mandatory, i wouldn't expect any leniency.

[Gilles4Ever]

As said previously, these are guidelines for new tracks. Explains why new tracks are all more or less the same, these guidelines/rules and a flat piece of land (cheap to build on).