Post new topic Reply to topic
User avatar
 
 21.12.2010 at 17:10
 More new technical regulations proposed for 2013
 
This is a report on the BBC F1 site, but not (yet) on Autosport or F1.com, so for now I suggest we take it with a pinch of salt.

"F1 cars set for major changes inspired by Head & Byrne" http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsp ... 307861.stm

Quote:
Formula 1 cars are set for more radical changes in time for 2013 as bosses look to make the sport more efficient and potentially more exciting.

Cars will have much smaller wings and specially-shaped underfloors designed to generate downforce differently.

They will use 35% less fuel and be a little slower but more challenging to drive, although passing may be easier.

Drawn up by respected engineers Patrick Head and Rory Byrne, the rules would be the biggest design change since 1983.

The draft regulations, which were requested by governing body the FIA, are to be sent to teams this week ahead of a meeting in January of F1's Technical Working Group (TWG), which scopes out rule changes.

The TWG, which includes the design heads of each team, will discuss the proposals and suggest any changes they feel might need to be made.

But the fundamental philosophy that has been created is expected to remain intact.

The major changes will be:

* Much smaller front and rear wings;

* A far greater proportion of the total downforce of the cars will be created by the underfloor, compared to the wings;

* A major reduction in the amount of total downforce created by the car;

* To achieve this, the underfloor of the cars will be shaped along its length to generate downforce for the first time since the 1982 season - currently cars have bottoms that are flat between the wheels;

* The average proportion of a lap that a driver is able to spend on full throttle to be cut from 70% in 2010 to 50% in 2013;

* Tyres will remain large and chunky to ensure cornering speeds remain high.

Head, director of engineering for Williams, and Byrne, a former chief designer for Ferrari, have between them been involved in the design of cars that have won 17 constructors' titles for Williams, Benetton and Ferrari.

The pair started work on the new rules in March and have now presented a set of draft regulations to FIA race director Charlie Whiting, who will finalise them before sending them off to the teams.

"We are only going to have roughly 65% of the amount of fuel and a [limited] fuel [flow] rate - that was a given," said Head, talking exclusively to BBC Sport.

"We were just told 'That's what it will be, you've got to come up with a car spec that is not going to be more than five seconds a lap slower than a current F1 car'.

"So some circuit simulation was done by Rory at Ferrari and when we'd come up with some numbers in terms of drag and downforce it was then to try to come up with a geometry of a car that could try to achieve that."

Head and Byrne were charged with ensuring the new rules did not make overtaking any harder and, as it turns out, they could actually make passing easier.

That is because a car should lose less downforce when it is following another car if more of its total downforce is created by its underfloor rather than its wings.

This makes it easier for drivers to follow closely behind cars they are racing and therefore easier to pass.

Shaped undersides were banned in F1 at the end of the 1982 season because it was felt cornering speeds had got too fast and the cars too dangerous.

But back then they were used with skirts that touched the ground and sealed the low-pressure area, vastly increasing its efficiency.

This will be made impossible in 2013 by making the centre of the car lower than the sides.


Andrew Benson's Blog carries more information:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson ... _quie.html

_________________
"He's a pain in the arse, but he's a quick pain in the arse." - Williams on Mansell


  
 
      


User avatar
 
 22.12.2010 at 19:07
 Re: More new technical regulations proposed for 2013
 
Maverick said:
Much of this unrestricted technology would be irrelevant to road users as the speeds necessary are incomparable - if it's not producing racing and entertainment, what is it producing?


To answer that you must go back to basics. What is F1 circa 1950?

_________________
"Kimi is one of the greatest" - Martin Whitmarsh 14/05/13


  
 
    
User avatar
 
 22.12.2010 at 19:51
 Re: More new technical regulations proposed for 2013
 
kimster said:
Maverick said:
Much of this unrestricted technology would be irrelevant to road users as the speeds necessary are incomparable - if it's not producing racing and entertainment, what is it producing?


To answer that you must go back to basics. What is F1 circa 1950?

motor racing has always had to generate technology (well, showcase) and entertainment. The balance has fluctuated as first manufacturers, then privateers, then manufacturers again dominated but they've both had to be there as one justifies the other

_________________
Yossarian Lives


  
 
    
User avatar
 
 22.12.2010 at 21:41
 Re: More new technical regulations proposed for 2013
 
Maverick said:
motor racing has always had to generate technology (well, showcase) and entertainment. The balance has fluctuated as first manufacturers, then privateers, then manufacturers again dominated but they've both had to be there as one justifies the other


Now entertainment can classify different things to different people. What F1 is trying to provide is an overtake fest full of close racing and the potential of a demolition derby. NASCAR or Moto GP basically. No strategic element and definitely not a team sport once the lights go out. That is what the "people" want.

Now I'd argue a completely different side to this. I consider a good race a thought provoking race, not some demolition where everything gets broken and Kobayashi passes by jumping over the rear wings of every driver. I was an F1 fan in the Schumacher era when every race was "boring". And as a 10 year old with no-one in my family watching F1 (A time of someone's life when you wouldn't put "good attention span" as a key feature about them) I loved the strategic element of the race and that has gone in 2010. The racing may have been good at times but for me it missed something. F1 for me is about the danger, the brute strength of the cars and the wit of the drivers. Everything else follows in the pursuit of that.

_________________
"Kimi is one of the greatest" - Martin Whitmarsh 14/05/13


  
 
    
User avatar
 
 23.12.2010 at 00:04
 Re: More new technical regulations proposed for 2013
 
Parading around with the most advanced, technologically brilliant cars at the front from start to finish is not entertaining by any means.

Nor is NASCAR.


As fun as a bit of controversy is, or no matter how brilliant an innovation is, shouldn't we be talking about what great racing there was at the weekend?

_________________
Yossarian Lives


  
 
    
User avatar
 
 23.12.2010 at 00:06
 Re: More new technical regulations proposed for 2013
 
kimster said:
I loved the strategic element of the race and that has gone in 2010.

That has nothing to do with the technical side. Having the universe's most technically advanced vehicle isn't going to bring it back.

_________________
Yossarian Lives


  
 
    
User avatar
 
 23.12.2010 at 02:12
 Re: More new technical regulations proposed for 2013
 
Maverick said:
kimster said:
I loved the strategic element of the race and that has gone in 2010.

That has nothing to do with the technical side. Having the universe's most technically advanced vehicle isn't going to bring it back.


I am talking about the sport in general.

_________________
"Kimi is one of the greatest" - Martin Whitmarsh 14/05/13


  
 
    
 
 23.12.2010 at 12:24
 Re: More new technical regulations proposed for 2013
 
kimster said:
I loved the strategic element of the race and that has gone in 2010.


Well I thought 2010 was a nice balance between on track action and strategic manoeuvring. To say that the strategic element has gone just isn't true. Look at how Jenson Button won his two races, for example, or his bold decision to run the f-duct wing at Monza. Timing of pit stops ultimately scuppered Mark Webber and Fernando Alonso's championship hopes as well, and cheeky moves such as taking the mandatory stop to change to the other tyre compound on only the final lap helped Seb Vettel.

I think one of the major disappointments this year was how little difference there often was between the two tyre compounds in terms of both performance and durability. There definitely should not have been any occasion where running the harder compound in Q3 got you in to the top three rows of the grid, yet that happened a few times. Similarly you should not have been able to do half of any race on the soft compound, but yet again we saw people doing that. Had we seen super-grippy tyres that would do only 20 laps running against harder tyres that would be good for 50-60 then we might have had some interesting strategy options. I'm with Jacques Villeneuve on this (and many other things) and I think we need a proper tyre war to spice things up. Dropping spec tyres would be a good step in the right direction.


  
 
    
User avatar
 
 23.12.2010 at 14:49
 Re: More new technical regulations proposed for 2013
 
Dropping the "you must use both compounds" rule would achieve your goal Pyrope, and Kimster's. It would allow drivers to use one set of harder tyres for the whole race -v- two or even three sets of the softer tyres. Don't pit at all -v- pit once or twice. Not that different to the one-stop or two-stop fuel strategies.

At the moment everyone is forced to use the same tyre strategy (apart from which actual lap they pit on) which is pointless.

_________________
"He's a pain in the arse, but he's a quick pain in the arse." - Williams on Mansell


  
 
    
User avatar
 
 23.12.2010 at 15:09
 Re: More new technical regulations proposed for 2013
 
But then everyone is running the same tyre because its the best tyre what does that achieve. A tyre war is the best way but that will never happen.

_________________
"Kimi is one of the greatest" - Martin Whitmarsh 14/05/13


  
 
    
User avatar
 
 23.12.2010 at 15:25
 Re: More new technical regulations proposed for 2013
 
The tyre compounds are all too closely matched - you should be able to be running second, take a gamble on a late stop for soft compounds and be able to make up the time lost and challenge the leader - that was never close to happening in recent years except when it's been a question of dry or wet (and the exceptional Bridgestone intermediate even limited that!)

_________________
Yossarian Lives


  
 
    
 
 23.12.2010 at 15:31
 Re: More new technical regulations proposed for 2013
 
If they increased the ratio between mechanical grip and aero grip then that would probably solve some of that, as ruining your tyres would have a much more noticable effect.


  
 
    
User avatar
 
 23.12.2010 at 15:39
 Re: More new technical regulations proposed for 2013
 
Maverick said:
(and the exceptional Bridgestone intermediate even limited that!)


Talking about wet tyres. Are the teams going to have a wet tyre test? Or are they banking on the actual tests being wet (Which they are likely to be). Remember when Michelin returned to F1 in 2001. Their wet tyre was useless in comparison to the Bridgestone. Maybe the Pirelli won't be as useful in the wet as the Bridgestone.

_________________
"Kimi is one of the greatest" - Martin Whitmarsh 14/05/13


  
 
    
 
 23.12.2010 at 17:30
 Re: More new technical regulations proposed for 2013
 
Geppeto said:
If they increased the ratio between mechanical grip and aero grip then that would probably solve some of that, as ruining your tyres would have a much more noticable effect.


Not really true, that. Aero grip is best thought of as a multiplication factor for the mechanical grip, not as some magical property in and of itself. A big-winged car running on ice would still have less grip than a no-winged car with studded tyres, for an extreme and improbable example. The big problem at the moment is that when running in dirty air that multiplication factor is reduced, knackering your tyres (as Lewis Hamilton found out a couple of years ago) still means that you slide off... say, when you are trying to enter the pits!

Maverick's point is exactly where I was going with my above comment. A soft tyre should be 1-2 seconds per lap faster than the hard option. This year we were seeing differences of only a few tenths; nowhere near enough to offset the penalty in having to take a second pit stop if you wanted to run two sets during a race. Only once did this get even close to happening this year and a fantastic race was had partly as a result.

During a tyre war often one company will optimise durability and another grip, meaning that the 'right' tyre to have varies from track to track and between drivers with different styles. The classic example of this in recent years was Damon Hill's more durable Bridgestones almost allowing him to take Arrows' first victory during the 1997 Hungarian Grand Prix. I lost count of the number of times this year that Martin Brundle speculated about JB's driving style possibly allowing him to stay on soft tyres longer, only for it to turn out that (a) softs weren't that much faster anyway and (b) other drivers with more lurid driving styles could make them last pretty much as long as he did anyway.


  
 
    
 
 23.12.2010 at 19:45
 Re: More new technical regulations proposed for 2013
 
But if you reduce that multiplication factor a lot, then the basic mechanical grip becomes the dominant factor, which is then related to the state of the tyres.

Surely if tyre wear is increased by running in dirty air, then reducing the disruption to the air flow, by reducing the downforce would be reduced as well?

I agree on the tyres. My preference would be for basic set of limits on: size of car (i.e. it has to fit into a box Xm wide, Xm long and Xm high), have single element wings with maximum wing angles, a minimum weight, be able to run on a set amount of fuel etc and then let the designers have free reign on far more than they do at the moment (including tyres), only then would radical/innovative designs by smaller teams (for example as tyrell etc used to come up with). Whether this would produce closer racing, is debatable.


  
 
    
User avatar
 
 23.12.2010 at 20:09
 Re: More new technical regulations proposed for 2013
 
kimster said:
But then everyone is running the same tyre because its the best tyre what does that achieve. A tyre war is the best way but that will never happen.

Not true, it used to happen all the time when Good Year was the sole tyre supplier - you don't need a tyre war to have teams making a choice between hard and soft compounds (and therefore having different pitstop strategies), especially if they have to stick with one compound for the duration of the race.

_________________
"He's a pain in the arse, but he's a quick pain in the arse." - Williams on Mansell


  
 
    
User avatar
 
 23.12.2010 at 20:15
 Re: More new technical regulations proposed for 2013
 
Pitmonster said:
Not true, it used to happen all the time when Good Year was the sole tyre supplier - you don't need a tyre war to have teams making a choice between hard and soft compounds (and therefore having different pitstop strategies), especially if they have to stick with one compound for the duration of the race.


Fair enough and I did think of that whilst posting, but these are the days of 4 compounds to run the season. They must be very versatile. A conservative long lasting tyre is better for marketing anyway, but interestingly not for the fans... tough balance.

_________________
"Kimi is one of the greatest" - Martin Whitmarsh 14/05/13


  
 
    
Bookmark and Share   Post new topic Reply to topic
 
    



Who is online

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Goggles, Sayhoo


Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum