2017-2020 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

[trinidefender]

Apologies if this has been done to death but are we going to be faced with a situation this year where drivers are having to really watch fuel saving because of the aerodynamic changes?

Last year there didn't seem to be any fuel saving and cars weren't topped up to the max to save weight. With the extra drag I presume that they're going to be on the straights for longer and braking a shorter distance. Will this increase in time on throttle on the straights be nullified by the fact that the cars are completing the race in a shorter overall time or will be back to lift and coast scenario?

The new 2017 regs specify that a car may use 105kg of fuel for a race distance compared to the 2014 to 2016 regs that allowed 100kgs.

The 5% increase in fuel as well as more efficient power units should provide a nice buffer to balance any increase in drag.

[mclaren111]

Like those "fins" by the Airbox.

Would something like that be legal today / 2017 ??

[turbof1]

Apologies if this has been done to death but are we going to be faced with a situation this year where drivers are having to really watch fuel saving because of the aerodynamic changes?

Last year there didn't seem to be any fuel saving and cars weren't topped up to the max to save weight. With the extra drag I presume that they're going to be on the straights for longer and braking a shorter distance. Will this increase in time on throttle on the straights be nullified by the fact that the cars are completing the race in a shorter overall time or will be back to lift and coast scenario?

The new 2017 regs specify that a car may use 105kg of fuel for a race distance compared to the 2014 to 2016 regs that allowed 100kgs.

The 5% increase in fuel as well as more efficient power units should provide a nice buffer to balance any increase in drag.

They are probably not going to use the full downforce potential (and therefore the full drag associated with it) at most venues anyway. Rather, you will see wings with less AoA, increasing l/d of the aero package by a lot compared to this year, which will have a positive effect on the fuel consumption.

The biggest issue are the tyres. That's where the biggest increase in fuel consumption lies.

[RicME85]

Is there a reason for this cradle between the engine and gearbox(Section in green housing the turbo)?

Is it not possible to locate the turbo within the gearbox housing in the space seen in the FW33 gearbox?

Wasn't there a rule about shielding of the turbo in case of failure?

[Blackout]

"Is it not possible to locate the turbo within the gearbox housing in the space seen in the FW33 gearbox"

All teams already do that. AFAIK Caterham simply opted to construct a separated metallic bellhousing (whil the rest came from RedBull AFAIK) maybe because it was easier to manufacture and to make it resistant enough whereas most teams use an all in one gearbox (bell housing an Gbox in a single block).
The turbo being huge and the single entry layout for the turbine + compressor + the wastegate design + the heat shielding etc, all that make the turbo look even largeer and seem to be placed high behind the engine...

[Blackout]

So the turbo is actually placed quite low, most of it lie below the top engine/Gbox mounting points and only a small part protrude (in 2014)

[Callum]

Blackout and FW17; where did the CAD images come from? I've never seen them before.

[RicME85]

From the guy that bought a load of Caterham stuff at the auction. He has a Twitter account and website for the rebuilding of his Caterham and posts pics like those from to time to time

[RicME85]

@KevTs

[turbof1]

Changed the topic title as we are long beyond any proposals for the 2017 tech rule book.

[ciro95]

Mercedes AMG shared new video on the web talking about new rules
https://www.webmagazine24.it/news/sport ... i-f1-2017/

[RicME85]

Very underwhelmed by the Williams and Sauber, not enough difference to the 2016 cars considering all the hype about aggressive looking new cars.

What has happened to the forward slanting sidepod turning vane? Is that not a thing? Both cars shown so far have normal looking vanes.

[bauc]

Very underwhelmed by the Williams and Sauber, not enough difference to the 2016 cars considering all the hype about aggressive looking new cars.

What has happened to the forward slanting sidepod turning vane? Is that not a thing? Both cars shown so far have normal looking vanes.

Agreed, so far we have almost the same cars, so I really don't see any of the desired effect (aesthetically) from all 3 teams
Manor (okey a model only) + Williams and Sauber

[Holm86]

Very underwhelmed by the Williams and Sauber, not enough difference to the 2016 cars considering all the hype about aggressive looking new cars.

What has happened to the forward slanting sidepod turning vane? Is that not a thing? Both cars shown so far have normal looking vanes.

Agreed, so far we have almost the same cars, so I really don't see any of the desired effect (aesthetically) from all 3 teams
Manor (okey a model only) + Williams and Sauber

I don't understand why you are underwhelmed? Did you even read and understand the new regulations??
It was not a complete overhaul, just minor tweaks making the cars wider, slanted front wings and sidepods, and a lower wider rear wing, plus bigger diffuser. This will not make the cars look completely different, like from 08 to 09.
I do agree that these cars are becoming way way too long, but other than that, I think they look good.
Someone posted a picture of the FW40 against the FW39 and i think the new one looks much better with the swept back FW.

[RicME85]

Very underwhelmed by the Williams and Sauber, not enough difference to the 2016 cars considering all the hype about aggressive looking new cars.

What has happened to the forward slanting sidepod turning vane? Is that not a thing? Both cars shown so far have normal looking vanes.

Agreed, so far we have almost the same cars, so I really don't see any of the desired effect (aesthetically) from all 3 teams
Manor (okey a model only) + Williams and Sauber

I don't understand why you are underwhelmed? Did you even read and understand the new regulations??
It was not a complete overhaul, just minor tweaks making the cars wider, slanted front wings and sidepods, and a lower wider rear wing, plus bigger diffuser. This will not make the cars look completely different, like from 08 to 09.
I do agree that these cars are becoming way way too long, but other than that, I think they look good.
Someone posted a picture of the FW40 against the FW39 and i think the new one looks much better with the swept back FW.

I've read everything about the regs, just not the actual regs as I have more to do in my life than try to decipher them.
I knew they weren't comprehensive changes but expected a bit more from the cars than 2016 cars that have had a few meetings with an overweight person.