560 replies to this topic

[Peat]

2019 Aero regs change in the offing: https://www.motorspo...o-better-racing

The teams will vote NO, for sure. The whole car is driven by the wide outwash front wing and they won't want to change that incase they were to get it wrong. I'm not an aerodynamicist by any means, but I would think that a less sensitive front wing would reduce the impact of dirty air overall. 

[PistolPete]

2019 Aero regs change in the offing: https://www.motorspo...o-better-racing

The teams will vote NO, for sure. The whole car is driven by the wide outwash front wing and they won't want to change that incase they were to get it wrong. I'm not an aerodynamicist by any means, but I would think that a less sensitive front wing would reduce the impact of dirty air overall. 

 

I assume the teams with less good aerodynamic and limited resources would like this. And there are quite a few. 

[PayasYouRace]

2019 Aero regs change in the offing: https://www.motorspo...o-better-racing

The teams will vote NO, for sure. The whole car is driven by the wide outwash front wing and they won't want to change that incase they were to get it wrong. I'm not an aerodynamicist by any means, but I would think that a less sensitive front wing would reduce the impact of dirty air overall.

In general, simpler front wings should be better for racing.

Hughes is a bit off when he talks about the inwash and outwash designs because those are heavily dependent on the relationship between the positions of the wing tip and front wheel.

If the front wings are made narrower, then inwash designs will be preferred and wouldn’t need to be enforced.

My concern is that the best regulations for cars that follow well that we’ve seen in F1 were the not very popular combination of wide front and narrow rear wings. Still, it could well be that the real benefit of those 2009 regulations were the cleaning up of the bodywork rather than the odd wing proportions.

If we look at the current Indycar aero, the front wings are outwash designs, as wide as the front track, with a neutral centre section, essentially the equivalent of F1 regs post 2009. They're just simpler.

[F1Lurker]

Interesting info from Mark Hughes in an article today.

 

"these plans – proposed by the FIA, with the guidance of the body’s aerodynamic specialist Nikolas Tombazis – centre around a narrower front wing and wider rear in an attempt at improving the ability of the cars to race wheel-to-wheel. The governing body proposed them at the Liberty presentation to the teams in Bahrain, where they are understood to have received a less than enthusiastic reaction. But with the FIA keen to press ahead, the teams were given an amnesty on the regulation CFD limitations between the Bahrain meeting and the vote next week, in order to help better inform them of how they might design their cars should the changes come into force."

 

"The proposed front wing would not only be narrower but considerably simplified, with standardised endplates and none of the vortex generators seen on the incredibly sophisticated current wings. The aim of this would be to discourage the ‘outwash’ aerodynamics that have prevailed in F1 since around 2009, whereby the wing directs a greater proportion of the airflow to the outer bodywork rather than underfloor. "

 

"The idea behind a wider rear wing is that it would take the rooster-tail wake coming off it higher into the air and thereby create a bigger ‘smooth’ area directly behind the car. The area of turbulence would be moved further back, so that a car entering the turn already past that choppy air would then find a smooth region where its aerodynamics were not so adversely affected."

 

Apparently, these changes will be up for a vote next week. The FIA and Liberty have enough votes to push these changes through. I truly hope that they stand firm and implement these regulation changes. No reason to wait until 2021.

[noikeee]

 

Apparently, these changes will be up for a vote next week. The FIA and Liberty have enough votes to push these changes through. I truly hope that they stand firm and implement these regulation changes. No reason to wait until 2021.

 

Same article says Liberty are not keen on introducing this in 2019 already, and would prefer to wait for more research to be sure then introduce it in 2021. So I don't know if they'll vote in favour of the changes.

[CPR]

Quoting from the end of the article:

The impetus for the 2019 change is the FIA’s, not Liberty’s. The FIA position is, ‘Let’s not wait for two years with something that doesn’t work well,’ whereas Liberty’s is, ‘Why risk introducing something that may not work ahead of a properly researched 2021 solution?’ The F1 Commission will vote on it at the end of next week and from there, any decision would normally be rubber-stamped by the FIA World Council the following day.

 

I know there is a lot of demand for more overtaking friendly aero but it could be harmful to rush through regulation changes. I can understand both sides but it does feel to me that the FIA are jumping the gun here.

[F1Lurker]

Same article says Liberty are not keen on introducing this in 2019 already, and would prefer to wait for more research to be sure then introduce it in 2021. So I don't know if they'll vote in favour of the changes.

I saw that, but Liberty would be silly to break with the FIA. Even if they have reservations they will go along with the FIA. Without the FIA's support for their 2021 changes (budget cap etc), Liberty would be dead in the water. They would get nowhere.

If the FIA wants these changes for 2019 I expect them to happen.

I suspect that Ross is cautious about making changes that "are good enough". Just imagine, if overtaking gets much better, there will be huge resistance to any substantial changes to the aero regulations. I think that Liberty wants large aesthetic changes to the cars for 2021 and they are partially justifying those changes to solve the overtaking problem.

Edited by F1Lurker, 25 April 2018 - 13:57.

[maverick69]

The Silver Donkey rides again!

 

At least they're having a proper go at it.

 

As Sir Patrick Head said: If you think that the current rules will make for better racing - then you have rocks in your head........

[ArrowsLivery]

I say go for the big changes for 2019. NOTHING can be worse than the 2017-2018 cars. If these work they won’t even have to change the regs again for 2021.

[Galoredk]

Is this Silly Season or Aero Regs thread?

[CountDooku]

As long as the floor remains taboo for generating huge downforce in F1 we won't get anywhere.

[F1Lurker]

As long as the floor remains taboo for generating huge downforce in F1 we won't get anywhere.

i'm curious about whether the floor is the direction that Ross is planning on going for 2021.

[PayasYouRace]

Is this Silly Season or Aero Regs thread?

Quite right. I’ll get the posts moved.

Edit: Topic split.

[GrumpyYoungMan]

Aero - Red Bull will object...

[Afterburner]

If they don’t force this through, they’re fools. I think they have a lot less time to fix this disaster than they realise. Clearly they can tell the teams to STFU and deal with something they propose (HALO). Time to stop revelling in the corruption driven by the engine manufacturers and put that power to use where it’s actually needed: overriding the teams’ selfishness and forcing them to do what’s best for the sport rather than what’s best for them.

[GrumpyYoungMan]

If they don’t force this through, they’re fools. I think they have a lot less time to fix this disaster than they realise. Clearly they can tell the teams to STFU and deal with something they propose (HALO). Time to stop revelling in the corruption driven by the engine manufacturers and put that power to use where it’s actually needed: overriding the teams’ selfishness and forcing them to do what’s best for the sport rather than what’s best for them.

Halo was safety wasn’t it?

How aero can be classed as safety is anyone’s guess?

I can bet Red Bull is dead against this.

[Afterburner]

Halo was safety wasn’t it?

How aero can be classed as safety is anyone’s guess?

I can bet Red Bull is dead against this.

If they can prove the new aero makes the cars 11% safer it should dead simple.

[Retrofly]

Do it, it can't be any worse. Its about time they had an overhaul of aero instead of fannying about for a decade.

[OO7]

I don't have a problem with teams voting against this at all.  We've just had a pretty substantial aero change and now teams are being asked to re-design their cars again for 2019, just two years later!  I say they should conduct a thorough investigation and save any changes for 2021.

[CPR]

I think the teams would be more likely to vote for this if they believed the following two points: that it would make a real and positive difference to the racing and that it would be a long term solution (ie won't change again in a few years).

 

A change to the FW specifications alone might sound simple but it affects the airflow across the rest of the car. In other words, you have to re-optimise your entire aero design, pretty much. This makes it very expensive and basically makes life harder for the smaller teams. If they have to re-design the aero again in 2021 then that makes it even more annoying.

 

With regards to how much difference it will really make, it sounds like the teams haven't had much time to investigate it. It might be possible to get a rough idea of how much difference the FW change makes in isolation but since in practice the teams would have to re-optimise their aero design the actual differences could be significantly different (maybe bigger, maybe smaller).

 

Basically, if you want the teams to "invest" in this idea then you have to reduce uncertainty. From the outside looking in, it doesn't really feel like the FIA has done enough to reduce this uncertainty. The idea might in fact be a good one and might make a nice difference but it feels a bit knee-jerk to me. If it doesn't work then it could vastly reduce any confidence in future aero regs to deliver on what was promised. Given that the FIA couldn't even get Liberty on board with this I don't see many teams agreeing to it either.

[Kalmake]

This is not "rushed". Brawn and friends have been at it for about a year.

 

Deadline for 2019 is now. Later it would need unanimous decision which will not happen.

 

The cars have to be redesigned anyway if you want to compete at all. I don't think there is a risk of big spending war because tunnel and CFD time is regulated.

[CPR]

This is not "rushed". Brawn and friends have been at it for about a year.

 

So why aren't they backing the proposal?

[ArrowsLivery]

It’s simple for me. Dumb down the front wing, make it as wide as the inside edge of the tires and move the rear wing back to its previous higher location. Cars will look so much better and the dirty air effect will be decreased by at least half.

[Clatter]

Same article says Liberty are not keen on introducing this in 2019 already, and would prefer to wait for more research to be sure then introduce it in 2021. So I don't know if they'll vote in favour of the changes.

 

As much as the sport needs this it does make sense to be sure it will actually work. We have seen numerous quick fix attempts over the years that have all failed to do what they were supposed to.

[F1Lurker]

I think the teams would be more likely to vote for this if they believed the following two points: that it would make a real and positive difference to the racing and that it would be a long term solution (ie won't change again in a few years).

 

A change to the FW specifications alone might sound simple but it affects the airflow across the rest of the car. In other words, you have to re-optimise your entire aero design, pretty much. This makes it very expensive and basically makes life harder for the smaller teams. If they have to re-design the aero again in 2021 then that makes it even more annoying.

 

With regards to how much difference it will really make, it sounds like the teams haven't had much time to investigate it. It might be possible to get a rough idea of how much difference the FW change makes in isolation but since in practice the teams would have to re-optimise their aero design the actual differences could be significantly different (maybe bigger, maybe smaller).

 

Basically, if you want the teams to "invest" in this idea then you have to reduce uncertainty. From the outside looking in, it doesn't really feel like the FIA has done enough to reduce this uncertainty. The idea might in fact be a good one and might make a nice difference but it feels a bit knee-jerk to me. If it doesn't work then it could vastly reduce any confidence in future aero regs to deliver on what was promised. Given that the FIA couldn't even get Liberty on board with this I don't see many teams agreeing to it either.

So what if teams can't optimize the changes right off the bat? Some will get it right and some will get it wrong. big deal.

Edited by F1Lurker, 25 April 2018 - 17:48.

[GrumpyYoungMan]

I think the teams would be more likely to vote for this if they believed the following two points: that it would make a real and positive difference to the racing and that it would be a long term solution (ie won't change again in a few years).

A change to the FW specifications alone might sound simple but it affects the airflow across the rest of the car. In other words, you have to re-optimise your entire aero design, pretty much. This makes it very expensive and basically makes life harder for the smaller teams. If they have to re-design the aero again in 2021 then that makes it even more annoying.

With regards to how much difference it will really make, it sounds like the teams haven't had much time to investigate it. It might be possible to get a rough idea of how much difference the FW change makes in isolation but since in practice the teams would have to re-optimise their aero design the actual differences could be significantly different (maybe bigger, maybe smaller).

Basically, if you want the teams to "invest" in this idea then you have to reduce uncertainty. From the outside looking in, it doesn't really feel like the FIA has done enough to reduce this uncertainty. The idea might in fact be a good one and might make a nice difference but it feels a bit knee-jerk to me. If it doesn't work then it could vastly reduce any confidence in future aero regs to deliver on what was promised. Given that the FIA couldn't even get Liberty on board with this I don't see many teams agreeing to it either.

Surely the only difference they want to make is to the wake, not to the overall level of downforce, but maybe this isn’t achievable with a simpliar front wing!

[Scotracer]

As much as the sport needs this it does make sense to be sure it will actually work. We have seen numerous quick fix attempts over the years that have all failed to do what they were supposed to.

 

F1 likes to pretend it's at the bleeding edge of engineering but flip flops around making decisions made on next-to-no data, or no data entirely. 

 

Do the research, analyse and plan around the results with a medium term future in mind and implement.

 

Front wings were narrowed in 2014 by 150mm. Outwash was more difficult as a result - did we see an improvement overall in cars following? Along with all the other changes done that year it's hard to say...

[juicy sushi]

It's not hard to put 2 cars in a wind tunnel or on a track together, and then start looking at the wake and its effect, and how taking parts on or off, or changing their position would affect that (this is literally what Indycar did to figure out the changes they needed to make).  But that would take the teams allowing that kind of testing to be done, which some won't.  As a result, they'll keep their heads buried in the sand and claim there's no data. 

 

So, short of the FIA suddenly ramming these changes through regardless of team opposition, nothing will really change.

Edited by juicy sushi, 25 April 2018 - 19:11.

[Fastcake]

As much as the sport needs this it does make sense to be sure it will actually work. We have seen numerous quick fix attempts over the years that have all failed to do what they were supposed to.

 

Some should have learnt that lesson from the 2017 rule changes. These were cooked up quickly in a panic, rather than sensibly thought through and properly developed over a period of time, and turned out to be a failure. And just like some posters here have already done, they were blindly cheered on by some fans and the media, who wanted to support anything that might beat Mercedes, or engaged in fantasies of the new rules incorporating their own ideas for the sport, even as people who had actually studied the rules were pointing out they could be a large step back.

[Atreiu]

I'd like to see changes out of spite. Team/manufacturers are to blame, so change the rules only to upset them. Worse case scenario is just what we have now, but with beefed up DRS zones.

[Jerem]

We don't particularly need narrower front wings. We need simpler front wings and barge board areas. All the vanes and spikes and tiny bits are impressive pieces of engineering, but they hurt the racing and cost millions. For what worth of lap time? One, two seconds at most?

 

The only thing is, if you make it more or less spec, they'll keep spending the same money for even more marginal gains.

[Afterburner]

Some should have learnt that lesson from the 2017 rule changes. These were cooked up quickly in a panic, rather than sensibly thought through and properly developed over a period of time, and turned out to be a failure. And just like some posters here have already done, they were blindly cheered on by some fans and the media, who wanted to support anything that might beat Mercedes, or engaged in fantasies of the new rules incorporating their own ideas for the sport, even as people who had actually studied the rules were pointing out they could be a large step back.

The new rules were intended to make the cars faster. That’s what many people in favor of them–including me–wanted. And as I’ve had to mention many times before, the promise of the racing still being good was unfulfilled because of Pirelli’s incompetence, swinging the balance more toward aero grip than mechanical grip. And believe me, they showed up a year or two too late.

This proposal is designed to address the issue of aero being too powerful. The teams bleat all the time about costs but have done jack all to vote for anything that would bring them down. The worst that could happen is another 2014 and we’ve had four years of that already anyway. Time to try something different–like incrementally introducing overhauls to the rules year-on-year rather than waiting for multi-year periods of an established hierarchy to end before barfing out a collection of changes all at once. Leadership sitting on its hands for another three years to please the engine manufacturers while viewership tumbles in its two-tier series would be a drastic mistake. It’s time to show the teams who really owns this series and force them to cooperate or get out.

[juicy sushi]

I don't think Pirelli has been incompetent.  They've been asked multiple times for ridiculous tires in order to satisfy vague directives and stupid rules structures. 

 

The mess is entirely on the FIA and the teams, as they're the ones who cannot get their acts together.

[Afterburner]

I don't think Pirelli has been incompetent. They've been asked multiple times for ridiculous tires in order to satisfy vague directives and stupid rules structures.

The mess is entirely on the FIA and the teams, as they're the ones who cannot get their acts together.

I do. I think Bridgestone or Michelin would wallop them badly given that they have already produced tyres capable of racing at similar lap times 12 years ago and probably haven’t been sitting on their thumbs in the interim, but then again you do address the elephant in the room with the FIA and the teams pursuing asinine solutions to problems which should’ve been fixed years ago with all the money involved. Meanwhile, buttmonkey Indycar has notched up 999 passes in four races...

Edited by Afterburner, 25 April 2018 - 20:58.

[TomNokoe]

Just copy Indycar

[maverick69]

Just copy Indycar

Indeed. The current F1 cars look and are proper quick. But those front wings and barge boards. What a massive expenditure and a detriment to racing.

 

I mean, they extended the diffuser - but then allowed everything upstream to be more complicated. Only in F1..........

[juicy sushi]

I do. I think Bridgestone or Michelin would wallop them badly given that they have already produced tyres capable of racing at similar lap times 12 years ago and probably haven’t been sitting on their thumbs in the interim, but then again you do address the elephant in the room with the FIA and the teams pursuing asinine solutions to problems which should’ve been fixed years ago with all the money involved. Meanwhile, buttmonkey Indycar has notched up 999 passes in four races...

Bridgestone and Michelin also weren't asked to produce tires that deliberately degrade. Well, Bridgestone was, but quit because of it.

The FIA and teams keep trying to engineer in the randomness that they simultaneously don't want. Which is an impossible situation.

[Scotracer]

It's not hard to put 2 cars in a wind tunnel or on a track together, and then start looking at the wake and its effect, and how taking parts on or off, or changing their position would affect that (this is literally what Indycar did to figure out the changes they needed to make).  But that would take the teams allowing that kind of testing to be done, which some won't.  As a result, they'll keep their heads buried in the sand and claim there's no data. 

 

So, short of the FIA suddenly ramming these changes through regardless of team opposition, nothing will really change.

 

That is what the aero team Brawn has put together is looking at. However just as single-car aerodynamics are complicated enough, multiple car even more so. That's a hell of a DoE to complete.

[RacingGreen]

If they can prove the new aero makes the cars 11% safer it should dead simple.

 

Slower is safer - case closed.

 

Seriously....

 

Smaller, simpler front wings with standard end plates are very unlikely to make the racing worse.

 

The real difficulty however is at the back of the car, the current rear wings create a huge volume of dirty air. Indeed some of the cuts in the sides and other features have as much to do with messing up the air behind so you can't be overtaken as increasing your own down force. Making the rear wing higher and wider may help the problem to a degree but there needs to be a major rear simplification process to clean up the air coming off the back of the car. 

 

These FIA changes could be a start to the process but I'd like to hear what Ross's plans are too.

[Fastcake]

The new rules were intended to make the cars faster. That’s what many people in favor of them–including me–wanted. And as I’ve had to mention many times before, the promise of the racing still being good was unfulfilled because of Pirelli’s incompetence, swinging the balance more toward aero grip than mechanical grip. And believe me, they showed up a year or two too late.

This proposal is designed to address the issue of aero being too powerful. The teams bleat all the time about costs but have done jack all to vote for anything that would bring them down. The worst that could happen is another 2014 and we’ve had four years of that already anyway. Time to try something different–like incrementally introducing overhauls to the rules year-on-year rather than waiting for multi-year periods of an established hierarchy to end before barfing out a collection of changes all at once. Leadership sitting on its hands for another three years to please the engine manufacturers while viewership tumbles in its two-tier series would be a drastic mistake. It’s time to show the teams who really owns this series and force them to cooperate or get out.

 

They made the cars faster at the expense of the racing. Which was exactly what was predicted by those who knew the new aero rules. If people such as yourself still wanted the cars faster in full knowledge of that, for whatever reason as faster cars rarely make for better racing, then fair enough, but those who were surprised last year met my description of those wanting any change and ignoring the naysayers on the new rules.

 

Trying something different in this case isn't actually very different - it's just a small evolution of the type we have had multiple times since 2009, none of which have made much, if any, difference to improving the racing. The current aero rules are not producing great racing, but there is not much yet that suggests this idea is any good either, and if it isn't, we've just wasted a load of time and money.

 

I do fundamentally disagree with the idea that we should do anything because we need to do something, which is exactly how I would describe Formula One rulemaking for the past four years.

[juicy sushi]

That is what the aero team Brawn has put together is looking at. However just as single-car aerodynamics are complicated enough, multiple car even more so. That's a hell of a DoE to complete.

I don't think it's that hard. If other series with a lot less cash can do it, F1 can. At this point, the problem is will power(pun intended).

Edited by juicy sushi, 25 April 2018 - 23:07.

[ArrowsLivery]

Still baffles me why people care so much for laptime numbers. In the scheme of things it makes zero difference. Are these cars more spectacular? Harder to drive? No, they are not. All that happened is that the laptime difference between the big teams and the small ones increased significantly as well as the return of terrible processional races.

[kumo7]

2019 Aero regs change in the offing: https://www.motorspo...o-better-racing

The teams will vote NO, for sure. The whole car is driven by the wide outwash front wing and they won't want to change that incase they were to get it wrong. I'm not an aerodynamicist by any means, but I would think that a less sensitive front wing would reduce the impact of dirty air overall. 

 

Interesting, but the car will end up like Senna's McLaren. 

Repeating car design is something designer do not want.

 

I say get rid of both front and rear wing.

for some time the car will be slower, but then we will see the driver's race.

 

 

I saw overtaking maneuver of Nelson on other thread where he controlled his car that is totally in the side winder move. 

It was thrilling and I want to see that move more often. 

 

I kind of bord the cars with big rear wings and wider front wings. 

How many years are we doing the same, .... YAWN!    

Edited by kumo7, 26 April 2018 - 05:40.

[PayasYouRace]

Interesting, but the car will end up like Senna's McLaren. 
Repeating car design is something designer do not want.
 
I say get rid of both front and rear wing.
for some time the car will be slower, but then we will see the driver's race.
 
 
I saw overtaking maneuver of Nelson on other thread where he controlled his car that is totally in the side winder move. 
It was thrilling and I want to see that move more often. 
 
I kind of bord the cars with big rear wings and wider front wings. 
How many years are we doing the same, .... YAWN!    

So you don’t want Senna’s McLaren but you want Clark’s Lotus?

[SenorSjon]

We don't particularly need narrower front wings. We need simpler front wings and barge board areas. All the vanes and spikes and tiny bits are impressive pieces of engineering, but they hurt the racing and cost millions. For what worth of lap time? One, two seconds at most?

 

The only thing is, if you make it more or less spec, they'll keep spending the same money for even more marginal gains.

 

Yes we do. Tires get cut almost instantly with current front wings, drivers can't see where the car ends and it leaves a lot of debris on track. See the picture below for a wing between the wheels. Yes, the rules for wingend plates have changed to make them less sharp, but Pirelli could also do something about strengthening the sidewalls.

 

 

Interesting, but the car will end up like Senna's McLaren. 

Repeating car design is something designer do not want.

 

I say get rid of both front and rear wing.

for some time the car will be slower, but then we will see the driver's race.

 

 

I saw overtaking maneuver of Nelson on other thread where he controlled his car that is totally in the side winder move. 

It was thrilling and I want to see that move more often. 

 

I kind of bord the cars with big rear wings and wider front wings. 

How many years are we doing the same, .... YAWN!    

 

Yes, we all would hate a field with cars looking like this.

[Jerem]

Yes we do. Tires get cut almost instantly with current front wings, drivers can't see where the car ends and it leaves a lot of debris on track. See the picture below for a wing between the wheels. Yes, the rules for wingend plates have changed to make them less sharp, but Pirelli could also do something about strengthening the sidewalls.

 

 

 

Yes, we all would hate a field with cars looking like this.

 

Tyres being cut by front wing enplates is not a technical aspect, it's a sporting aspect. These drivers know perfectly well how to position their cars. It they want to risk getting their tyre cut or they front wing broken, it's up to them.

Beautiful pic though!

[Okyo]

Though i understand the complex aero makes it difficult to overtake, but am i the only one that doesn't want the cars looking like basic kids toys with cheap smooth surfaces? 

There has to be middle ground on this that shows that the sport is the pinnacle of autosport tech wise, which includes aerodynamics.

[Retrofly]

There has to be middle ground on this that shows that the sport is the pinnacle of autosport tech wise, which includes aerodynamics.

We currently are at the middle ground.

[kumo7]

So you don’t want Senna’s McLaren but you want Clark’s Lotus?

 

Clark's?

 

I do not make such a car out my statement!

 

I actually do not know how a car can look a like ! 

 

Simple description would be that keep the current reg on floor and remove front and rear wings...

[kumo7]

Yes we do. Tires get cut almost instantly with current front wings, drivers can't see where the car ends and it leaves a lot of debris on track. See the picture below for a wing between the wheels. Yes, the rules for wingend plates have changed to make them less sharp, but Pirelli could also do something about strengthening the sidewalls.

 

 

 

Yes, we all would hate a field with cars looking like this.

 

It is too predictable and therefore .... no...