Technical Regulations for 2009-2015

[Ogami musashi]

did you actually read the 2008 concord agreement?

[WhiteBlue]

did you actually read the 2008 concord agreement?

I am quite sure that there is no such thing. There are probably a dozen drafts. The rules refer to the 1998 version. That I have read.

[Ogami musashi]

yes, i wanted to say 1998.

So i don't understand where we disagree..

in it is stipulated that any changes to the regulations:

-if proposed by the teams (via TWG) will have to be adopted by WMSC
-if proposed by FIA has to have unanimous agreement from the teams.

Do you agree that and the fact that the TWG require a 80% majority vote?

[Ogami musashi]

The budget cap idea in its original form has been canceled but a new form could show up soon.

As for the information on Ross brawn being the technical director of FOTA, brawn declared it was not still the case but he would like to take the role, it will take a lot of time though according to him.

[timbo]

brawn declared it was not still the case but he would like to take the role

Sure, he has something to do about Honda=)
Just a joke...

[Ogami musashi]

Still bugging on the front wing regs.

Despite re-reading it many things appear not so clear:

-3.7.2, we thought it defines the pillar to connect the nose to the central part, but things are strange. First since the central part position is mandatory, why is that the section defined in 3.7.2 stop at 125mm above the Reference plane?

Why the reference section is an "horizontal section"?

It is strange also that those closed sections "must project vertically" to join the standard central part "below 125mm".

-From 250mm to 400mm from the center line, the chord will be limited

-It appears that between 400mm to 750mm from the center line no bodywork is concerned by the regulations

-The number of elements of the outer parts of the wing is not restricted as it seems.

-The end plates can't be higher than 100cm above the reference plane.

-3.7.2 and 3.7.8 seem to contradict a bit?

Considering the endplates can't be higher than 100Cm above the RP and that the standard part will be less than 125mm, but that 3.7.2 sections will be 125mm above i have difficulties to imagine the arrangement of the front wing.


any suggestions ?

[Scotracer]

Still bugging on the front wing regs.

Despite re-reading it many things appear not so clear:

-3.7.2, we thought it defines the pillar to connect the nose to the central part, but things are strange. First since the central part position is mandatory, why is that the section defined in 3.7.2 stop at 125mm above the Reference plane?

Why the reference section is an "horizontal section"?

It is strange also that those closed sections "must project vertically" to join the standard central part "below 125mm".

-From 250mm to 400mm from the center line, the chord will be limited

-It appears that between 400mm to 750mm from the center line no bodywork is concerned by the regulations

-The number of elements of the outer parts of the wing is not restricted as it seems.

-The end plates can't be higher than 100cm above the reference plane.

-3.7.2 and 3.7.8 seem to contradict a bit?

Considering the endplates can't be higher than 100Cm above the RP and that the standard part will be less than 125mm, but that 3.7.2 sections will be 125mm above i have difficulties to imagine the arrangement of the front wing.


any suggestions ?

Those two I've highlighted confuse me. I thought the front-wing would be limited to a maximum of 2 elements? Also, the 2nd highlighted point is that are you sure you mean 100cm? That's 1m above the reference plane!

[Ogami musashi]

Lol again i mess with Cm!

Sorry, that was 10cm of course.

About the front wing elements, well maybe i miss something but i don't find any paragraph mentioning a number of max element for the front wing, except of course the central part.

I really really wonder what the 3.7.2 is all about..

[scarbs]

3.7.2 is for the front wing support pylons, there must be two of a limited area and thickness. I guess this is to prevent the front wing mounts becoming overgrown into turning vanes.

[Ogami musashi]

3.7.2 is for the front wing support pylons, there must be two of a limited area and thickness. I guess this is to prevent the front wing mounts becoming overgrown into turning vanes.

That's what i think but why are they only defined till 125mm above RP?

[Scotracer]

3.7.2 is for the front wing support pylons, there must be two of a limited area and thickness. I guess this is to prevent the front wing mounts becoming overgrown into turning vanes.

That's what i think but why are they only defined till 125mm above RP?

Well I'm guessing after that the FIA allows teams to have their own designs. So that's roughly 60mm of homologated pylon and then the rest is down to how high the teams what the nose.

Well, that's how I read into it.

[scarbs]

?? I guess to allow the teams to have a choice in nose cone height, also their effect as a turning vane would be more pronounced on their bottoms rahter than tops, thus the top can be less regulated.

Just a thought, does this rule effectively bans very low noses, such as McLarens MP4-18 ?

[Ogami musashi]

It seems so.

[scarbs]

I have been looking at the new diffuser regs and compared them to the current ones. With the lower height (175mm) the diffuser exit area will be reduced some 20%. While the shorter length (330mm) reduces plan area by some 30% and volume by well over 60%.

What predictons can we make on this potential loss in area?

[Ogami musashi]

I have been looking at the new diffuser regs and compared them to the current ones. With the lower height (175mm) the diffuser exit area will be reduced some 20%. While the shorter length (330mm) reduces plan area by some 30% and volume by well over 60%.

What predictons can we make on this potential loss in area?

The diffuser has a Greater height (175mm vs 125mm). The length is also the same as now (330mm) it is simply moved aft (from wheel center line to 330mm aft) and the whole width of the diffuser is now allowed to be below 50mm above the RP.

So the diffuser is actually larger and will be more efficient i think.