2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

[Capharol]

The way i read it (and interpret it)
these 6 Teams, Mercedes, Ferrari, Red Bull like these changes but know there are many loopholes to take advantage of and this is why they say "we don't like it"
but as stated in the article aswell, they have little change of success, because they have to bring something really good to the table to get it approved .....

so for now i say it's a small sturm in a teacup or tempest in a teapot..... (what ever you like to call it)

[izzy]

The way i read it (and interpret it)
these 6 Teams, Mercedes, Ferrari, Red Bull like these changes but know there are many loopholes to take advantage of and this is why they say "we don't like it"
but as stated in the article aswell, they have little change of success, because they have to bring something really good to the table to get it approved .....

so for now i say it's a small sturm in a teacup or tempest in a teapot..... (what ever you like to call it)

i think it's more that teams would like MORE loopholes please

The questionnaire asked about 10 questions, including whether teams preferred to press ahead with the proposed 2021 rules or stick with the existing regulations. In the case of the new rules, it also asked whether there should be more design freedom, and what teams felt about standardisation of parts.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/50027293

[Capharol]

The way i read it (and interpret it)
these 6 Teams, Mercedes, Ferrari, Red Bull like these changes but know there are many loopholes to take advantage of and this is why they say "we don't like it"
but as stated in the article aswell, they have little change of success, because they have to bring something really good to the table to get it approved .....

so for now i say it's a small sturm in a teacup or tempest in a teapot..... (what ever you like to call it)

i think it's more that teams would like MORE loopholes please

The questionnaire asked about 10 questions, including whether teams preferred to press ahead with the proposed 2021 rules or stick with the existing regulations. In the case of the new rules, it also asked whether there should be more design freedom, and what teams felt about standardisation of parts.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/50027293

that is the way i meant it, my bad way of expression

[izzy]

that is the way i meant it, my bad way of expression

cool yes the teams hopefully are going to save Liberty from themselves

[jjn9128]

I don't think "loopholes" are really what they're after. More a worry the rules as written will create a field of homogeneous cars.

e.g. this is the bodywork rules as existed in 2006

whereas this is how it appears in 2019/20


The way the rules are now worded virtually forces a shape for the car. That's before the convoluted articles on minimum convex radii or tangent normals for wing surfaces.

[Holm86]

How many believe theres a chance these regulations will be postponed to 2022???
Feels like they arent really ready yet, and if it needs to be in effect by 2021 they need to have a clear set of regulations soon, so teams can start designing the cars

[jjn9128]

With the 18" wheels from 2021? I think IF the top 3 can prove their ideas aren't harmful to the 2021 car Brawn and his team designed then it's likely this will all be voted through. I imagine they've had simulations running non-stop to prove their case otherwise more fool them. If they can't prove their changes then we'll have the same split where the top 3 and their B-teams are against... in which case the 2020 rules probably carry on another year. It's all gone a bit Brexit.

[izzy]

With the 18" wheels from 2021? I think IF the top 3 can prove their ideas aren't harmful to the 2021 car Brawn and his team designed then it's likely this will all be voted through. I imagine they've had simulations running non-stop to prove their case otherwise more fool them. If they can't prove their changes then we'll have the same split where the top 3 and their B-teams are against... in which case the 2020 rules probably carry on another year. It's all gone a bit Brexit.

yes I get the impression they're all fine with the basic aero concept and the argument is about how much it's defined in every little detail versus how much teams can do their own designing

But teams are all out of contract after 2020 so Formula1 will cease to exist unless they compromise. Ferrari, Mercedes, Renault, Honda and Red Bull can all just go and do other things, whereas Liberty would be ruined and FIA would take a massive hit too, so I feel pretty sure the oem's will get their way, in the end. Just as well, afaic, Liberty are far too spec for F1, even Ross has this weird idea that if we can't see something we don't care about it

[jjn9128]

They've already cancelled the spec brakes/uprights/fuel pumps/gearing...etc so I think that side of things is sorted - they've got a discussion about how their open-source parts might happen. It is all detail - but the FIA/FOM are wary of some loophole being inserted like double diffusers, which wrecked the last overtaking oriented rule change.

[Just_a_fan]

I don't see why they can't spec the floor shape and allow the teams to play with the VGs to some extent - that prevents double diffuser-style loop holes but allows some inter-team differentiation. The front wing probably needs to be nearly spec, although I wonder if the proposed floor basically makes the whole outwash front wing redundant. Yes, I know that they want clean air to the floor, but that should be achievable without the wide car wakes that caused the problems previously.

[jjn9128]

But the floor is a key performance differentiator. Teams are arguing about a spec fuel pump they'd not accept a spec floor.

[Holm86]

They've already cancelled the spec brakes/uprights/fuel pumps/gearing...etc so I think that side of things is sorted - they've got a discussion about how their open-source parts might happen. It is all detail - but the FIA/FOM are wary of some loophole being inserted like double diffusers, which wrecked the last overtaking oriented rule change.

I don't think the double diffuser wrecked the last rule change, I actually think it would have given better racing if they kept it as it was, as it shifted the aero balance to the underfloor. But FIA got afraid that the cars would get too fast.
What wrecked the last regulation change was the shift to outwash philosophy.

But maybe they will get to an agreement, as far as I know there's a meeting in Paris tomorrow, Wednesday.

[jjn9128]

The idea of the shorter diffuser/narrow rear wing was to create an up-draft which pulled the worst of the wake away from the ground. The increased underbody performance counteracted that as ground-effect reduces wake up-wash. It's very simplistic and IMO inaccurate to just say underbody aero = good racing, the 2021 draft won't significantly increase the underfloor downforce % compared to now (~60-70% of total). The rear wing plays a vital role in how the wake develops and impacts another car.

[Just_a_fan]

But the floor is a key performance differentiator. Teams are arguing about a spec fuel pump they'd not accept a spec floor.

Hence why allowing them to position their own under-floor devices (within limits), as now, would allow them to be team-dependant. The current floor is effectively spec - the rules define the important bits such as diffuser max height, length, width.

[izzy]

They've already cancelled the spec brakes/uprights/fuel pumps/gearing...etc so I think that side of things is sorted - they've got a discussion about how their open-source parts might happen. It is all detail - but the FIA/FOM are wary of some loophole being inserted like double diffusers, which wrecked the last overtaking oriented rule change.

i don't suppose they'll be satisfied with designing the brakes and a few other bits and pieces. I read, probably on AMuS, that atm there are 50 boxes defining the body/aero! 50!!

There's a whole philosophy divide, with Liberty trying to bring the field together by preventing the big dogs designing faster cars, while the big dogs obviously want the exact opposite and to be known as the best designers not get steered towards Indycars. Then there's as you say open-source which I think they're basically okay with? But I don't think it's really about loopholes. The more they make it spec, the more of a difference any even small loophole will make, i mean in order to have a loophole you have to have a rule first, and it's about one team spotting it while the others follow the letter of the rule

The whole thing about F1.5 is it's the consistency of the gap, when in percentage terms it's very small. They already have all these aero limits, 25 hours etc, and they don't work, because the gap is consistent