Is the Aerodynamic dependence in Formula One too high?

[MIKEY_!]

They'd have to go for turbos to do that, not in a technical sense but in a political sense. To add to what ringo says (although I don't agree 100%): Limit the fuel flow (and thus the amount of fuel used) and use turbos and such to add POWER!!!!!!!!!!

[WhiteBlue]

You guys are overlooking a very simple solution.

You leave the down force as it is now. That remains the same, the F1 cars need to be able to stay at that level to corner like they do....

F1 is set on a path of higher efficiency. This will certainly be true for the engine and energy recovery. If there is more money or resources for better ER systems the power from the available fuel will increase.

I'm convinced that ultimately the aero will follow this route. Cars will have less drag per given downforce. Technologies like active suspension (without traction control) and tunnels will see to that.

There will always be performance but in the future the challenge will be getting this performance with less energy and power. The times of brute power are gone. What will count in the future is sophistication.

[xpensive]

I still believe that the solution as as simple as eliminating "ground effect", something discovered by Tony Rudd already in the sixties, but through Chapman's genius became something that we wish we could have un-invented.

Over the years, many attempts have been made to reduce the influence of this hideous thing, no sliding skirts, minimum ground clearance, max diffuser height and so on.

Escaping the obvious solution, a flat bottom as long as theere is car to measure.

[WhiteBlue]

Why should ground effect be something bad? Most people agree that F1 needs some downforce to stay at the performance pinnacle. Ground effect is likely to produce downforce with a minimum of drag. As long as you effectively avoid excessive downforce and a race for more you can as well use the ground effect IMO.

[xpensive]

Because ground effects will always find F1 in a hazy-shady zone of DDDs or blown, or not so blown diffusers.

A simple flat bottom rule would be the end of that.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

A simple flat bottom rule would be the end of that.

Is this something on the cards for 2014? And is it really as simple as that?

I could see real opposition to this from Red Bull who seem to have mastered floor aero.

[ringo]

There will always be performance but in the future the challenge will be getting this performance with less energy and power. The times of brute power are gone. What will count in the future is sophistication.

Nope, that wont count.
You want to know why?
Because sophistication cannot be seen or heard by spectators. The sport will simply be dead.

[ringo]

Because ground effects will always find F1 in a hazy-shady zone of DDDs or blown, or not so blown diffusers.

A simple flat bottom rule would be the end of that.

I am not too keen on it, but to prevent the haziness there can be a standard section for the floor.
A standard curve just like the standard section in the middle of the front wing.

This curve can be inspected with a jig for conformity.
In fact to make things a little free, there can be limitations on curvature instead, similar to the sidepods. This way all ground effect floors will be similar.

Any how, ground effect is not free downforce and it definitely wont eleminate the problem of following another car without bad air.

So yes ground effect with front spoiler and rear spoiler could work.
Coupled with a turbocharged 2.0 lt engine making 1000 hp.

Fuel efficiency is a moot point. It's a hopeless goal, and it does nothing for the entertainment or the experience. Fans can't see or hear it, sponsors have no use for it and neither do manufacturers. Lemans is a better playground for those things.
F1 should be about inspiration for road cars, not necessarily a test bed for technology.

[WhiteBlue]

Because ground effects will always find F1 in a hazy-shady zone of DDDs or blown, or not so blown diffusers.

A simple flat bottom rule would be the end of that.

A flat bottom is dangerous and will make cars take off more than a stepped bottom. Tunnels are probably the way to generate downforce near the centre of the car. This is a very stable force distribution.

There will always be performance but in the future the challenge will be getting this performance with less energy and power. The times of brute power are gone. What will count in the future is sophistication.

Nope, that wont count.
You want to know why?
Because sophistication cannot be seen or heard by spectators. The sport will simply be dead.

I do not think so. F1 has always been about sophistication and less about sheer power. The engines have become smaller and smaller every generation and that has not stopped the fascination. Sophistication is in the F1 genes.

[xpensive]

A simple flat bottom rule would be the end of that.

Is this something on the cards for 2014? And is it really as simple as that?

It is indeed JET, A flat bottom rule as long as there is car to measure would once and for all put an end to the Newegic rein.

[WhiteBlue]

Newey knows a lot more than just designing diffusors and exhausts. His tubs and front ends are equally clever if you look at stuff he did over the years. Just have a look at the 1996 cars from Newey and Barnard.

[DaveW]

I still believe that the solution as as simple as eliminating "ground effect", something discovered by Tony Rudd...

But I think it was Peter Wright... The problem with ground effect is that down force is available with almost no drag. If it is desired to reduce (or adjust) the dependence on aero, then it must come with a drag penalty. How that is achieved is open for discussion, but eliminating ground effect would be a good objective, I think. Note, I'm not proposing a limit on down force, just a way of making a fuel limit an effective control over down force. Then, perhaps, it would not be necessary to machine tracks flat all the time....

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Note, I'm not proposing a limit on down force, just a way of making a fuel limit an effective control over down force. Then, perhaps, it would not be necessary to machine tracks flat all the time....

My line of thinking.

An affirmative +1

Force them into using less downforce through means other than a stick...its F1 after all.

[f1aussie]

Is the Aerodynamic dependence in Formula One too high?
Yes it is.
Fascinating thread.

F1 is about a Drivers & Manufacturers Championship.
Manufacturers = cars
Drivers = driving/controlling the cars.

What about fixed designs for spoilers front and rear???
And possibly floors too.
I don't see a big issue with ground effect coming back.

Can we bring DRIVING back into the equation?
Why not make drivers DRIVE by changing gears again via a gearshift knob, not paddles....and bring back a clutch peddle...
ESP made some great points earlier.

We forget some of the best racing came from Mansel/Prost/Senna era, then the electronics took over.

Then aero took over completely.
Let us simplifiy F1 but still keep the progress (read purity of F1 being the development of the cars).

And Ringo there is right, there is nothing wrong with 1,200 hp (remember the Williams Honda), you are right more POWER, more driving will seperate the boyz from the girlz.

So how do we get more grunt? More RPM, and more Kers (and this has to have some relevance to road cars, just like disc barkes, ecu, variable valve timing etc.

The fixed design spoilers front and rear will reduce the spend on aero, fixed manual gearboxes with clutches will reduce spending on gearboxes, and allow development of suspension & engines.

[xpensive]

An image of Barnard's true and only lemon won't change my mind WB, but thanks for the effort.

I'd rather consider a Ferrari racing a BRM at Monza with what was effectively an aerodynamic lift, gaawd how they slipstreamed.

As for the concept of a compass-flat floor eliminating ground-effects, you better beleive it, it would overnite make the Newey's of this world yielding some of their precious importance to the Costas', Bells' and Gascoynes' of the same.

While I humbly wait to see that happening in my lfietime, the return of Gustav Brunner...naah?

Otherwise, the sport will forever be lost to Bernoulli, who for such a long time was just as misunderstood as Ockney.