5446 replies to this topic

[Loosenut]

That all depends on how much you love your dad or how much you have his life insured for......

Well, there are times when I could be tempted! If he had any insurance tho, I'm sure my mum would have beaten me to it long ago

[Scotracer]

You may get more deceleration initially from very high speed but I would imagine as the downforce disappears you will be locking the wheels unless you release the brake pressure. I'm not sure how close to the limit of traction at full speed they currently are when they step on the pedal.

Yup. The system at the minute is designed so that they're limited by driver leg strength, not the tyres at high speeds. By allowing a bigger disc, they could get more brake torque.

[nonobaddog]

Yup. The system at the minute is designed so that they're limited by driver leg strength, not the tyres at high speeds. By allowing a bigger disc, they could get more brake torque.

 

They are not limited by leg strength.  It does take a lot of pressure on the brake pedal but that is not the limiting factor.  The drivers can lock up the tires at high speed if they want to but for obvious reasons they don't want to very often.

Typically they exert about 200 pounds force on the pedal at speed.  That is like standing on one leg and bouncing a little.

In the European Gran Prix, when Mark Webber went airborne, he pushed between 550 and 650 pounds force and broke the brake pedal.

If the limiting factor was leg strength, the engineers would fix that problem in a hurry.

[Loosenut]

Hands up if you just stood on one leg and bounced a little!

[nonobaddog]

     

[Myrvold]

I tend to stay away from these kind of techy discussions, as my knowledge is quite basic. However.

 

 

As part of the new technical regulations in 2021, there is a plan to move the car's weight distribution rearward by around 3%. That's why the front tyre is going to be narrower. This will also have a major aerodynamic effect, and because of the narrower front tyre there will be an increase in overall downforce.

 

Doesn't the bold part mean that some of the 'easier to follow' in the rule changes will be negated? That means that narrower tyres means that they will get to use more air from the front, and over the car to produce downforce, and that in turn means it's more sensitive to dirty air, and will be harder to follow close, as opposed to the wider tyres?

Edited by Myrvold, 24 July 2018 - 19:00.

[GrumpyYoungMan]

I don’t think so, as there will less of a wake - and that would be steered back into the car as oppose to the outside of the car?

[nonobaddog]

I tend to stay away from these kind of techy discussions, as my knowledge is quite basic. However.

 

Doesn't the bold part mean that some of the 'easier to follow' in the rule changes will be negated? That means that narrower tyres means that they will get to use more air from the front, and over the car to produce downforce, and that in turn means it's more sensitive to dirty air, and will be harder to follow close, as opposed to the wider tyres?

 

I think you are right.  "Increased down force" means more wake and more disturbance to the car behind.

 

Of course this depends on where that quote you quoted came from and if it is accurate about increased down force.

[FPV GTHO]

I tend to stay away from these kind of techy discussions, as my knowledge is quite basic. However.

Doesn't the bold part mean that some of the 'easier to follow' in the rule changes will be negated? That means that narrower tyres means that they will get to use more air from the front, and over the car to produce downforce, and that in turn means it's more sensitive to dirty air, and will be harder to follow close, as opposed to the wider tyres?

Having more doenforce from smaller tyres is a case of if everything else stays the same, which its not expected to.

[MatsNorway]

More downforce and less rubber is never a good thing. What are they doing. Trim the wings in width and height and reduce the weight once the MGUH is out. Add dash more fuel flow to compensate.

[Wuzak]

More downforce and less rubber is never a good thing. What are they doing. Trim the wings in width and height and reduce the weight once the MGUH is out. Add dash more fuel flow to compensate.

 

Apparently they will be changing the CoG by around 3% - rearwards. That fits with narrowing the front tyres and keeping the rear tyre widths the same.

 

This could mean shorter cars.

 

From Gary Anderson:

 

 

As part of the new technical regulations in 2021, there is a plan to move the car's weight distribution rearward by around 3%. That's why the front tyre is going to be narrower. This will also have a major aerodynamic effect, and because of the narrower front tyre there will be an increase in overall downforce.

https://www.autospor...d-make-for-2019

[OO7]

I said back in 2016 that with the new technical regulations (2017) they should keep the same front tyre dimensions as in 2010 to 2016.  I hope they're going back to that.

[FPV GTHO]

I said back in 2016 that with the new technical regulations (2017) they should keep the same front tyre dimensions as in 2010 to 2016. I hope they're going back to that.

270mm is going to put them about halfway between the 2016 and 2017 front tyres

[MatsNorway]

Apparently they will be changing the CoG by around 3% - rearwards. That fits with narrowing the front tyres and keeping the rear tyre widths the same.

 

This could mean shorter cars.

 

From Gary Anderson:

 

https://www.autospor...d-make-for-2019

 

I am aware. I think its the wrong move, it is also wrong to have rules on CoG and i also think they should stop trying to dictate how the long the cars should be. A longer car will happen for every kg they add to the formula.

[SenorSjon]

And the insanely wide front wings will look even wider with smaller tires.

[FPV GTHO]

And the insanely wide front wings will look even wider with smaller tires.

But we dont know how wide the 2021 front wings will be

[ArrowsLivery]

I almost forgot about the wider front wings for 2019. What a disaster. It’s like FIA is competing with itself on making ugly cars between FE and now this.

[MatsNorway]

I can not read the article but the wheels also go up in dia. I guess that provides somewhat more rubber available. More in dia. allows the tyre to cool down a bit better. Which in turn could give options in a open tyre supplier scenario.

 

I am not against 18" either. Just a big jump. Would have gone for the safer 16" myself but whatever.

Edited by MatsNorway, 25 July 2018 - 17:59.

[PayasYouRace]

I almost forgot about the wider front wings for 2019. What a disaster. It’s like FIA is competing with itself on making ugly cars between FE and now this.

 

They won't be wider. They'll just have simpler endplates.

[ArrowsLivery]

They won't be wider. They'll just have simpler endplates.

 

I am pretty sure they are going back to the 2009-2013 width, but I am happy to be wrong. 

[Ivanhoe]

They won't be wider. They'll just have simpler endplates.

AFAIK span will be increased from 1800 to 2000

Edit: frontwing will be wider. From the FIA website:

The changes, approved by e-vote, are as follows:
- Simplified front wing, with a larger span, and low outwash potential

https://www.fia.com/...dynamic-changes

Edited by Ivanhoe, 25 July 2018 - 18:23.

[PayasYouRace]

You're right. I was mistaken.

 

https://www.autospor...r-final-signoff

[Wuzak]

I am aware. I think its the wrong move, it is also wrong to have rules on CoG and i also think they should stop trying to dictate how the long the cars should be. A longer car will happen for every kg they add to the formula.

 

If there wasn't a rule on CoG, the tyre sizes would effectively dictate it. That's not to say that there will be a rule on CoG in 2021, but the tyre size choices point in that direction.

 

The longer the wheelbase, the big masses in the centre of the car (power unit, energy store, fuel cell, driver) will effectively move the CoG forward, as the extra length is, usually, added behind them. With the wider front tyres this is desireable, less so with the 2021 front tyre sizes.

[MatsNorway]

Sure you get some practical limits. But still more room to play with for the engineers and occationally you get the car tailored perfectly to the drivers.

 

As for wheelbase. Might be. I think they will stretch the cars every chance they get to gain downforce.

[SophieB]

Tobi Grüner  ‏Verified account @tgruener 14m14 minutes ago

More

A little treat for all our F1 tech friends out there. We've got an exclusive first pic of a frontwing in new 2019 dimensions! AMuS story & gallery: http://ams.to/f1-frontwing-2019 …

[Ivanhoe]

Like the simple look of that.

[Boing Ball]

I still don't get why the wing needs to be 2 meters wide if it is supposed to direct air under the car. The floor is 160 cm. 

[Ivanhoe]

I still don't get why the wing needs to be 2 meters wide if it is supposed to direct air under the car. The floor is 160 cm.

Probably to decrease the wake of the front tyres.

[f1paul]

So Force India's new name will be Magnesium Water????

[statman]

 

Tobi Grüner  ‏Verified account @tgruener 14m14 minutes ago

More

A little treat for all our F1 tech friends out there. We've got an exclusive first pic of a frontwing in new 2019 dimensions! AMuS story & gallery: http://ams.to/f1-frontwing-2019 …

 

 

plus article through translation:

 

Thanks to new aerodynamic rules, the cars will no longer react so sensitively to the so-called "Dirty Air" - so at least the hope of the technicians and the driver. The most important element in the package of measures is the new front wing.

 

It is intended to minimize the disadvantage of the driver in two ways: Due to the simpler design, the front wing produces a comparable contact pressure under all conditions. The vehicle in front does not benefit so much from an undisturbed flow. Second, the new front wing to help reduce the harmful air vortex backwards.

 

So far, the engineers have always tried to direct the turbulent air around the outside of the car. Research has shown that the two major air vortexes rejoin behind the car. Ironically, exactly at a height where the front wing of the car behind needed urgently clean air.

 

The endplates for the new front wing for 2019 are heavily regulated. The vertical termination elements must not be more than 15 degrees outwards. Slots and winglets that could also divert the air to the outside are prohibited. Also, the misuse of stabilizers between the wing columns is on the index. There should be nothing left, which generates artificial vortex.

 

Also the dimension of the wing area was changed. To absorb the loss of output a bit, the tail unit increases in width from 1.80 to 2.00 meters. The wing also gets 2.5 centimeters more depth and now starts 122.5 instead of 120 centimeters off the center line of the front axle.

 

So that the wing reacts less sensitively to a disturbed flow, the structure is significantly simplified. The elements must have only five different profiles (main sheet + flaps) and not stacked on top of each other. This prohibits the extremely nested forms in several floors. In addition, under the wing in the future only two vertical flow aligners per side are allowed.

[CountDooku]

I think this change will really hurt RBR, Ferrari and the other teams with high rake concepts who use the Y2K vortex to seal the floor.

[Vettelari]

If it was that big of a deal where RBR and Ferrari felt they were going to be disadvantaged more-so than Mercedes, they would be fighting this tooth and nail. Since we aren't hearing a peep out of anyone, I doubt that this front wing change will have much effect on the big 3 teams. I hope that I am wrong, but history shows that when there's a change in the works that will hurt them, they will make a big scene in an effort to stop or modify the regs.

[Kalmake]

If it was that big of a deal where RBR and Ferrari felt they were going to be disadvantaged more-so than Mercedes, they would be fighting this tooth and nail. Since we aren't hearing a peep out of anyone, I doubt that this front wing change will have much effect on the big 3 teams. I hope that I am wrong, but history shows that when there's a change in the works that will hurt them, they will make a big scene in an effort to stop or modify the regs.

Some peeps were heard back when this was being decided. RBR was clearly and openly against.

[GrumpyYoungMan]

Like the simple look of that.

Looks like we have gone back in time to a 1980 wing!

😂😂

Red Bull must hate that!

Edited by GrumpyYoungMan, 30 July 2018 - 19:31.

[SenorSjon]

The darn thing is way too wide. Will be a lot of carbon fibre flying around next year.

[pdac]

Be interesting seeing drivers try to weave that thing between the rapidly closing gaps in front of them at the start of the race.

[PedroDiCasttro]

Looks like we have gone back in time to a 1980 wing!



Red Bull must hate that!

Adrian Newey didn't seem to mind simpler wings in the past. It won't make any difference for them, I'd wager.

 

It doesn't matter the rules, Newey nearly always managed to shine with his aero concepts.

[Clatter]

Tobi Grüner ‏Verified account @tgruener 14m14 minutes ago


More

A little treat for all our F1 tech friends out there. We've got an exclusive first pic of a frontwing in new 2019 dimensions! AMuS story & gallery: http://ams.to/f1-frontwing-2019…

Seems somewhat ironic that its from the team that has just gone into administration.

[Fatgadget]

After all said implementations are drafted in...I frankly dont give a flying fukk.. Then everything will be hunky dory? ..Whatever far as I'm concerned.

[Pete_f1]

Maybe the 2021 regs will do what the 2017 regs were supposed to do - reduce the reliance on above car downforce and get more from below. If that means a standard floor then so be it

[AustinF1]

FML...

 

F1 planning return to 2011-style high tyre degradation https://www.racefans...re-degradation/

Edited by AustinF1, 06 August 2018 - 08:34.

[OO7]

FML...

 

F1 planning return to 2011-style high tyre degradation https://www.racefans...re-degradation/

Fix the bloody cars first!

[Loosenut]

FML...

F1 planning return to 2011-style high tyre degradation https://www.racefans...re-degradation/

Oh great, let's put a soggy old plaster over a new wound..

[OO7]

They haven't got a clue.  First high deg, then lower deg and now they want high deg again.  With aero it was reduced downforce (2009), then for 2017 increased aero and downforce and for next year reduced/simplified aero and downforce.  You're witnessing the pinnacle of muppetry.

[Kalmake]

2011 tyres "cliffed". 2020 target is linear deg. Very different.

[GrumpyYoungMan]

2011 tyres "cliffed". 2020 target is linear deg. Very different.

 

I'm with the others, they have no clue!

[FPV GTHO]

They didnt want to get rid of degredation for 2017 though, they just wanted them not to overheat. But the way Pirelli have designed their tyres, they degrade through overheating.

[MatsNorway]

Tyre degradation is stupid. It got nothing to do with racing. Make good tires and let them race as hard as they can. If they had real tires when that was a thing Schumacher and Hamilton would have been battling at every race, sliding, oversteering and driving hard like they did on monaco and in the rain, and it would have been glorious.

 

I do like the no glassing temp stuff tho. At least it will be interesting to see how it works out.

Edited by MatsNorway, 06 August 2018 - 10:45.

[SenorSjon]

Tyre degradation is stupid. It got nothing to do with racing. Make good tires and let them race as hard as they can. If they had real tires when that was a thing Schumacher and Hamilton would have been battling at every race, sliding, oversteering and driving hard like they did on monaco and in the rain, and it would have been glorious.

I do like the no glassing temp stuff tho. At least it will be interesting to see how it works out.

Indeed.

Prevent tires from suffering in dirty air and make tires a virtue again instead of competitive element.

Next will be refueling with different fuels per pitstop. Slower burning, better mpg, but heavier and less power against fast burning fuel for faster stints. Funny enough, fuel manufacturers don't do such thing, but tire builders are sucked into it.

I wonder what will happen if Pirelli quits. Would another tire manufacturer sign on to those ludicrous specs instead of building the best tire they can.

[MatsNorway]

I am not against making stuff simpler so banning tire warmers is ok by me. Same with the fuel. If you can race on one tank from the start why not.

 

Same with tires. Why have a mandatory tire chance. are we not trying to make tires last? tire degratation is not green either. Make up your mind FIA.

Edited by MatsNorway, 06 August 2018 - 12:08.