2017-2020 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

[gdogg371]

Just realised that the rear wings are getting taller as well as wider next year. From a purely aesthetic point of view that is great news. Now if only we could get the pre 1993 tyres back as well...

[roon]

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/why- ... r-1041188/

[gdogg371]

Looking progressively more beefy every season...

[djos]

Just realised that the rear wings are getting taller as well as wider next year. From a purely aesthetic point of view that is great news. Now if only we could get the pre 1993 tyres back as well...

We already have wider tires than in 92.

[roon]

We already have wider tires than in 92.

Gonna need more.



This will guarantee lots of wheel-to-wheel action.

[godlameroso]

Lint roller GP. That's a lot of grip.

[Zynerji]

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/why- ... r-1041188/

I don't understand how they are able to outlaw outwash with those regs... I can see 2 ways to get the outwash back pretty quickly..

Will the stewards be able to not allow a design based upon its belief of creating outwash?

[godlameroso]

Purpose vs function. You can claim any type of purpose, but you cannot deny the function of something. I can claim the purpose of such and such device does such and such so it's compliant, but it's function can skirt around that purpose.

When reading the regulations it's important to note the difference between function and purpose. For example the function of a gun is to shoot bullets, whether it's used for defense or attack(it's purpose) does not change it's function. When Charlie decides the purpose of some suspension part is to affect aero he drops the ban hammer, but platform control functions to affect aero anyway so we agree that it's a stupid rule and we bitch about it here for not being technically correct. The most bestest type of correct.

[Zynerji]

I get that, but the optimum solution is going to still generate out wash.

The regulations need to be solid, and mathematical. If not, you end up with the BS that we have seen with TMD, FRIC, ETC.

Nothing makes me want to shut off this sport more than these things, regardless of what tream gets the ban hammer...

[godlameroso]

I get that, but the optimum solution is going to still generate out wash.

The regulations need to be solid, and mathematical. If not, you end up with the BS that we have seen with TMD, FRIC, ETC.

Nothing makes me want to shut off this sport more than these things, regardless of what tream gets the ban hammer...

I agree, in fact my whole point is that the regulations seem a bit half assed because they're focused on the purpose of something rather than its function. You can't argue with function any more than you can argue with physical dimensions, but you can argue purpose until the cows come home. Perhaps it was done this way on purpose(pun intended) to maintain a political element to the rule making.

[Zynerji]

Subjectivness of any kind should be the first thing that is avoided in any regulation. If not, it's like lawyers in a courtroom arguing on shaky logic bridges.

[1158]

Could it be it's a half assed approach because the FIA can't redo the regulations the way they want and are trying some experiments in 2019 so they can make adjusts come 2021 to get the results they want? Didn't the FIA want more but the teams balked?

Maybe I'm too optimistic but I'm willing to give Brawn a go at a clean set of regulations before I throw my hands up in disgust.

[Zynerji]

Could it be it's a half assed approach because the FIA can't redo the regulations the way they want and are trying some experiments in 2019 so they can make adjusts come 2021 to get the results they want? Didn't the FIA want more but the teams balked?

Maybe I'm too optimistic but I'm willing to give Brawn a go at a clean set of regulations before I throw my hands up in disgust.

I don't care who makes them, it's the subjective interpretation that is my issue..

The engineers will always drive towards the optimum within the letter of the rules.

Changing what the rules "mean" is my only issue in this case.

[godlameroso]

Subjectivness of any kind should be the first thing that is avoided in any regulation. If not, it's like lawyers in a courtroom arguing on shaky logic bridges.

Exactly, you get what I'm saying, also, that perhaps it's that way intentionally to a certain extent. It's hard to avoid politics, especially in dealing with such a monstrous edifice as the F1 circus has become. To wield influence in such a circle knowing what's involved has to be motivational for certain personalities, to say the least.

[thisisatest]

Am I the only one that thinks the front wings should be narrower, not wider? Racers clip each others wings all the time and it's annoying. If they're not going to make them out of a super tough thermoplastic that doesn't splinter, they should be so narrow that outwash generation is impossible. Then the teams will try to funnel air inward instead, for other benefits.