Ideas on 2011 Formula One innovations

[riff_raff]

My guess for 2011's most effective F1 innovation will involve composite material developments. While the improvement won't be outwardly visible, it will provide much better structural performance in the composite chassis components. There are many recent composite innovations in terms of 3D fiber weaves, high strength thermoplastic resins, unidirectional pulltrusions, and nano material fillers/reinforcements (nanotubes, fullerenes, graphene, etc.). These materials are expensive, but they will be selectively applied to produce lighter, stiffer, safer composite tubs.

riff_raff

[machin]

How about flexible sidepod bodywork which opens up the cooling apertures when unloaded (i.e low speeds), but closes them up at high speed (where because the airspeed is higher u don't need as much open area to get enough flow through the rads) thereby reducing drag and/or improving air flow to the back of the car...

[bidong]

I think what Mercedes has done can be looked into.

The engine air box split in the middle should have a lot of influence on the airflow on the rear wing.
What about engine intakes on top of the side pods to redirect air flow which should go to the rear wheels to under the car or rear wing or and earlier diffuser from above.

i dunno what im talking about. but aerodynamics is everything today in f1. if they can think out of the box. they can do it.

oh !#@$ i just remembered body work is limited but... yeah ill post it anyway.

[Belatti]

Can anybody tell me how many flap moves per lap are the drivers allowed to?

I am expecting to see an innovation in front and rear wing designs to take better advantage of that.

[747heavy]

the way I understood it so far (which is maybe wrong) is that the driver would not have direct control about the rear flap adjustment.
I think there was talk, that it would be controled by the SECU and only allowed the "low drag" position if the car is in close enough proximity to the car in front, as an "over take boost" like "push to pass".
But I´m not sure, what the latest news on this item is.

[Giblet]

Can anybody tell me how many flap moves per lap are the drivers allowed to?

I am expecting to see an innovation in front and rear wing designs to take better advantage of that.

No front flap next year from what I gather.

[Formula None]

Composite leaf springs in the contol arms? I wondered this about the RB5/6, the top rear control arms seeming to be one piece. Could their pullrods be acting only on dampers and heave spring?

Come to think of it, and reminded by riffraff's thoughts on composites, why not ditch the susp rods and actuate a torsion spring and rotary damper directly at the base of a (and here's the compromise) thickened lower wishbone/control arm?

[Blackout]

Interesting ideas...

I wonder why they never place the radiators more verticaly (but a bit angled) and almost parallel to the fuel tank/air's direction, fed with tighter air boxes ? this could make the sidepods much tighter...

Somewhat like this:

[machin]

@Formula None: never good to use pure bending... Especially on a long element such as this...

@Blackout: turning the air through 90 degrees introduces large pressure losses... And where does the air go after its been through the rads -it appears blocked by the fuel tank?

[machin]

The more I think about it; the rules regarding flexible bodywork are quite lax... Only the wings and floor are covered by static flexibility tests... So to my earlier suggestion of flexible sidepods how about flexible engine air intake and diffuser? Also, whilst driver activated fluid switches are banned next year I don't think passive switches are banned (controlled again by flexible pieces of bodywork which move due to pressure on them (i.e. Speed activated). So again, these could allow much greater bodywork movement that is otherwise 'rigid' during scrutineering. (i'm thinking about fluid switches withdrawing a small dowel pin which normally restrains a wing element for example...)

[machin]

... Imagine a small flap in front of McLaren's F-duct intake on the nose which bends under air pressure (i.e intake is covered at low speed, but uncovered at high speed as it is bent out of the way...).

[raymondu999]

Is it true the sharkfin is also not allowed to connect to the rear wing anymore next year?

[andrew]

I think so.

[Richard]

Has anyone seen the wording for the F-duct ban? It was mentioned in a WMSC press release:

http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/pr ... 30610.aspx

Aerodynamic influence
With the exception of the parts necessary for the driver adjustable bodywork, any car system, device or procedure which uses driver movement as a means of altering the aerodynamic characteristics of the car is prohibited from 2011.

I can't find it in the rules published on the same day ie 23 June 2010 - http://www.fia.com/sport/Regulations/f1regs.html

The wording of the press release makes me think that teams will use passive stall devices, which is why Merc continued developing their system to the end of this season. Talking of Merc, I wonder if they'll stick with their novel airbox blade?

[Richard]

The post below is based on the change tracking in the FIA tech regs document. The previous regs are on another laptop so I've not done a side by side check - apologies if I've got this wrong!

Just seen this pre-emptive move in the tech regs ...

5.6 Exhaust systems :
Engine exhaust systems may incorporate no more than two exits.5.6 Exhaust systems :

They've also updated the rules about aperture sizes to prevent those long slits for the shark gill openings. The underlined words are new:

3.8.5 Once the relevant bodywork surfaces are defined in accordance with Article 3.8.4, apertures, any of which may adjoin or overlap each other, may be added for the following purposes only :

- single apertures either side of the car centre line for the purpose of exhaust exits. These apertures may have a combined area of no more than 50,000mm2 when projected onto the surface itself. No point on an aperture may be more than 350mm from any other point on the aperture.

- apertures either side of the car centre line for the purpose of allowing suspension members and drive shafts to protrude through the bodywork. No such aperture may have an area greater than 12,000 mm2 when projected onto the surface itself. No point on an aperture may be more than 200mm from any other point on the aperture.