Technical Regulations for 2009-2015

[Bazza]

That's like saying a dwarf loses less height than a regular sized person when you cut their legs off.

True, yes.

But they're both going to then be unstable, which is the problem F1 cars face when racing.

Now you can start with both the dwarf and the other person without any legs to begin with, but I still think that doesn't actually solve anything.

[MIKEY_!]

And this is what makes the centre section so important! Thus increasing it's contribution allows closer following and more exciting racing.

[Bazza]

No, it just means the dwarf doesn't break his nose as bad as the other guy WHEN he falls over.

The solution is to make it so that they lose a lot of drag, but keep downforce high, rather than keeping downforce low on the assumption that something that's bad can only get a little bit worse.

[MIKEY_!]

I'm not proposing lowing DF (thus creating the dwarf you mention). I'm adding a pillow for the tall guy to land on

Ok it does lower DF at the front to some extent but they are going to have real problems balancing the cars without the EBD anyway so they won't be running as much front wing next year.

I imagine the way to regulate this is to show that flow underneath the main wing profile/s (front and rear) is attached at maybe 80km/h.

It's attached at that speed now...

Do you have an alternative proposal?

P.S I'm no Eco-warrior but that bigger engine thing is not going to happen for a while yet (politics to blame again ). Perhaps if they unlimited KERS or a few seasons? A 200+hp KERS would make the racing interesting!

[Bazza]

Make sure the flow is attached at 40km/h. Force them to run the wings beyond their most efficient angle of attack. That way, when beyond that point, they're making (and will therefore lose) more drag than downforce.

This is VERY ROUGHLY what the current cars seem to have

And this is equally roughly what I think would work.


What people are proposing, a wider center section, will just be the current graph, except downforce is lowered everywhere.

[Just_a_fan]

Reducing the amount of downforce produced by the front end of the car will *always* make following closely less of a penalty.

Except where the following car starts to make lift at the front end as a result of following closely, of course

And not all front end downforce producing designs have to reduce downforce whilst following. It's just that current wings (designed in free-stream conditions) do.

If F1 allowed active front aero, the wing could be deigned to compensate for the loss of downforce to a certain degree. Indeed, if full active aero were allowed then the car could be designed to maintain balance when following another car. It should be noted that balance is much more important than total downforce levels for the driver. If the car loses 10% of its downforce whilst following closely, but does it such that the balance of the downforce distribution doesn't change, the driver can deal with that. The problem with the current designs is that the front tends to lose more than the rear and the car begins to understeer heavily. This reduces driver confidence and that results in the inability to follow. The best overtakers tend to be the guys with most confidence. Even in the bad days of seriously difficult overtaking, some drivers still managed it because they were confident in their ability to manage the situation.

[MIKEY_!]

Bazza you see to misunderstand what function the centre section performs. At speed it acts against the rest of the wing, reducing DF as you say. When following another car this section is most affected by the dirty air. The outer parts of the wing are still generating DF more efficiently than the inner parts of the wing. A really large centre section under the right conditions could (in theory) result in a car that doesn't change balance when following another car.

Hope that makes it more clear. Have a look around for articles describing the process from around the time it was suggested or implemented.

[Bazza]

I don't see that the outer sections are still generating downforce all that well though, even with the center section doing its best to mess things up.

A larger center section would just mean that under normal circumstances, the wing has less downforce, and in a slipstream, you've only got tiny sections right at the ends that are making downforce.

Of course balance wouldn't be affected as much, because it really wouldn't be there to begin with (compared to current cars).

[godlameroso]

The center section is supposed to be neutral, but the pylons that are attached to the central section actually further condition air, when combined with the nose and central section. The reason that downforce is lost by a following car has more to do with the upwash created by the interaction of the rear aerodynamic elements. By their very nature, there will always be upwash, it was thought however that by separating these elements the upwash would be lessened, which indeed did happen.

Also by narrowing the rear wing, and widening the front wing, the upwash and the area of the following car that is affected by said upwash is minimized. In 2008 the rear wing was wider, and there was no central section at the front, so in reality the cars lost a greater proportion of downforce while following, than cars designed under the current regulations.

[MIKEY_!]

The technical working group came up with the centre section if I recall correctly, anyone remember if that's right?

Of course balance wouldn't be affected as much, because it really wouldn't be there to begin with (compared to current cars).

What do you mean by that? The current cars are a little light on DF at the rear, hence the high noses we have seen in recent years. And that's with these centre sections! Next year the high nose is restricted (ok only a bit) and the exhaust can't be used for extra DF. That means the cars could be really unbalanced next year (especially as flexy wings get more advanced) they will have the potential to have WAY more front DF than rear. Teams will be forced to run front wings that create less DF than this year by some margin. Adding a larger centre section will alleviate this to some extent at speed. While following closely it is most affected by the dirty air so while the rest of the wing is also being affected the result is a less aggressive drop in front DF, just what is needed for overtaking confidence.

I don't think the current version does enough however, that's why I want to see it enlarged.

[Bazza]

The center section is supposed to be neutral, but the pylons that are attached to the central section actually further condition air, when combined with the nose and central section. The reason that downforce is lost by a following car has more to do with the upwash created by the interaction of the rear aerodynamic elements. By their very nature, there will always be upwash, it was thought however that by separating these elements the upwash would be lessened, which indeed did happen.

Also by narrowing the rear wing, and widening the front wing, the upwash and the area of the following car that is affected by said upwash is minimized. In 2008 the rear wing was wider, and there was no central section at the front, so in reality the cars lost a greater proportion of downforce while following, than cars designed under the current regulations.

And what about the rear tyre aero? For all the cleaning the FIA tried on the rear wing, both rear wheels are more exposed than ever, and the endplate now is possibly worse than before. It now extends downward, with the bottom 'vents' (spikes? rudders?). You've seen them on the TF110, the McLaren, I think the RB7 had them. Pulling air sideways from the diffuser was great for rear DF, but firing it out sideways behind the rears isn't much good for the following car.

Admittedly I've not seen much from the 2011 cars in relation to rear wheel wake, but with a nice tall low-pressure zone right down the middle (now not even reaching the inside of the rear tyres) and the front of the rear tyres being the most exposed in a decade, it's got to be a problem.


I understand the points made in favor of the center section, but I still think it's a poor solution.

[lebesset]

latest tweaks to the regulations from the FIA for 2012

there seems to be some confusion about 9.8.2 which some seem to read as first gear having to be used off the start until 100kph , but I read as only 2 gears can be used with a proviso

[lebesset]

have only just got round to having a look at the 2014 regs

http://www.scribd.com/doc/77436750/2014 ... d-on-20-07

the reduction of front bodywork height from 625mm to 550mm for 2012 will make a small difference , but as I read article 3 for 2014 there will be a dramatic difference from several standpoints eg visibility , damage caused to tyres , debris on track

big thread here to read back through ...has this been discussed here before, and am I misinterpreting the import of these changes ?

[strad]

Well WB and other people doubted me...

Holm86 wrote:4 bars at idle? dont believe that....

Ok it wasn't 4 Bar,,it was only 3..I found the tape..
click photo for video

[WhiteBlue]

Thanks for sharing the regulations, actually i am new to this forum that's why i didn't know about the rules and regulations.

You better mark the FiA page. http://www.fia.com/en-GB/sport/regulati ... nship.aspx

You will always find the new regulations there.