Formula One Car For 2008 ? [Archive]

AndyC

24th October 2005, 12:58

http://home.skysports.com/list.asp?hlid=319330&cpid=&CLID=&lid=2579&title=FIA+plans+radical+change&channel=formula_one

What do you think about this?

Surely better areodynamics for everyone means better racing for the viewers?

Better Picture >> http://www.formula1.com/news/3764.html

xaotik

24th October 2005, 13:21

Slick tyres too... time for some wacky 70s-like ideas it seems.
Can't wait for the return of turbo-charged engines... :)

Which reminds me - all those wishes for an F1-like car in LFS seem to be (approximately) coming true with next year's engine regulation changes.

Hyperactive

24th October 2005, 13:31

The Centreline Downwash Generating (CDG) Wing is effectively two small rear wings - one over each wheel - with a clear gap in between. This gap would create a wake in which a following car would generate more downforce, allowing them to run much closer to the car in front through corners, hence making passing easier.

Well the car is ugly, but there is no talk about the dirty air effect. I would assume that most of the dirty air is caused by the diffusor (the back of the car...whatevah it is called in english) and the rear wheels plus the rear wing. I just can't believe that they are offering this. Make the transmissions manual, no need to have clutch imho and get rid of the traction control. And there you go. 2.4L V8s are OK, 3litre v12s are ok too. But GP2 has 4litre engines :lovies3d:

Blackout

24th October 2005, 15:35

Thats hidious. But it has a point though, more clean air to car driving behind therefore there should be more passes. But thats not a good looking car in any way... seems that FIA is just randomly doing stuff to F1, not cool :(

Tweaker

24th October 2005, 15:39

That is one whacky looking wing.... Now it looks like someone went and bought an import wing from Need for Speed :doh:

Qurpiz

24th October 2005, 16:04

Jesus Tapdancing Christ that's ugly!!
Dunno if I really want to see cars that ugly to race, no matter how close it would be...

keiran

24th October 2005, 16:25

I bet the FIA go ahead with this idea to find out they've made matters worse just like this year :Looking_a All cars will have these rear wings mounted in the same place so surely the air being blowen over these two rear wings will disturbe the air flow to the following car :schwitz:

Why don't the FIA let them use the under of the car and less of the top minimizing the dirty air effect :shrug:

Keiran

MAGGOT

24th October 2005, 16:37

All cars will have these rear wings mounted in the same place so surely the air being blowen over these two rear wings will disturbe the air flow to the following car...

Thats what I thought at first, then I started to really think about air flow. Look at the rainspray off of the cars. The rain comes off of the back of the car, but as you go further from the back of the car, the spray is more closesly concentrated towards the centre of the car. The airflow works the same way, so if most of the dirty air is focused in the centre, having the wings mounted on either side of the 'spray' will maximize downforce for a following car. At least, thats how I look at it. Seems logical to me, but admitedly I'm no physics expert.

I think that this is one of those things thats so ugly its cool. Like the Williams nose in 2003 or 2004... Plus, I'd imagine it would look significantly beter IRL.

MAGGOT

xaotik

24th October 2005, 16:59

Well, here's a link to a graph (http://f1.racing-live.com/f1/photos/imgactu/zoom05/fia-cdg-z-01_241005.jpg) comparing the airflow of the current design and the new concept one.

Michael Miskella

24th October 2005, 17:05

I say its great, love seeing how the teams handle the restrictions the FIA put on them and how long it takes for them to gain back the lost speed....real problem is the teams getting different ammounts of money to spend, should all get the same and see which is more efficient in how they use it.

looking at that graph i wonder if the speed they catch up on the straights from drafting will be gone since they should have more downforce following. ofcourse that might just mean every race the fastest cars are shuffled to the front and the slowers behind.

JJ72

24th October 2005, 17:28

I am sure the sponsors won't like it.

Blackout

24th October 2005, 18:22

Heh...just saw sport news on TV, they said that in next season quali is in 3 parts, somekind of dropping system, and tire changes are coming back! Tire changes are good I think, not sure about that qualify changing again...FIA just cant deside what to do and they try everything...

AndyC

24th October 2005, 18:48

ye, I read that a few hours ago. The first round the five slowest drivers are knocked out, then the second round some more are knocked out. Then the final round is a 20 min stint where the remaining drivers try to get the fastest lap for pole

ajp71

24th October 2005, 18:56

Why on earth do the FIA feel they should be designing F1 cars? That job should be down to the teams, wing shapes should not be laid down by regulation, there's no room for innovation in F1 now.

Tweaker

24th October 2005, 19:02

Haven't most of the wing shapes and designs always been regulated by the FIA? (in the past couple of years I think?)

xaotik

24th October 2005, 19:05

Why on earth do the FIA feel they should be designing F1 cars? That job should be down to the teams, wing shapes should not be laid down by regulation, there's no room for innovation in F1 now.

Uh... because the FIA is the governing body which lays down the design guidelines that are to be followed (after a voting) by the constructors? :)

Not only the wings but everything (tyres, engine, other aero stuff, height, weight) are strictly regulated by these design guidelines.

Hyperactive

24th October 2005, 19:19

Changing the tire changing system again is just ridiculous. And changing the qualification again - can't they make up their minds? I guess it's cheaper to change the rules all the time than just have one set of them for a longer time :D

Luckily the man in charge of FIA, Max Mosley, is super talented smart F1 engineering specialist who know everything about everything. He even has a computer program for simulating passing! I wouldn't be even slightly suprized if we had 3litre engines back in 2009 :razz:

LOL, they are even changing to wider slicks in 2008 :ices_rofl

Eldanor

24th October 2005, 19:30

I don't see it that bad... maybe strange, but not bad. F1 cars have changed a lot in the past, and I think they should keep evolving, specially if it allows closer racing, I don't agree with other FIA new rules, but this seems good, IMHO.

Bob Smith

24th October 2005, 19:59

I think the general idea is to maximise mechanical grip and minimise aero grip, therefore as a percentage you must lose less grip when in dirty air.

I don't think the design is that air, and it will certainly make the cars look distinctive!

Well, here's a link to a graph (http://f1.racing-live.com/f1/photos/imgactu/zoom05/fia-cdg-z-01_241005.jpg) comparing the airflow of the current design and the new concept one.
Interesting. The only downside I can see is that if you get really close behind a car you're front wing is in the blue zone, so surely you're going to run wide? Better than spinning I suppose.

xaotik

24th October 2005, 20:07

Interesting. The only downside I can see is that if you get really close behind a car you're front wing is in the blue zone, so surely you're going to run wide? Better than spinning I suppose.

Well what puzzles me is that they don't mention any significant change of the front wing... I'd think it would need some extra changes as well (apart from the already introduced lower midsection) - the "clean air" will most likely be in the center of the leading car's wake and not behind the areas following the wings. I also think there might be extra tweaks to get the airflow coming over the tyres to be smoother because that's quite turbulent as well from what i've read. I think that design is more like a brainstorm idea that was jotted down on a napkin during a coffee break or something for the time being and released as a "teaser" or to get reactions.

Blackout

24th October 2005, 20:48

When FIA launched the 1 tire set rule before previous season Max Mosley (the mastermind allknowing engineer man) said, if I remember right, that the rule was made to cut down costs. And now they get rid of it...when tires have been developed with big money, insane. Well, reason may be safety, Indianapolis ooor is it just that that pit crew looks a bit silly just refueling the car. Yeaa...and slicks are coming back, they were banned bacause safety issues to reduce corner speeds, and tires must be redone...again. FIA is like a teenage dictator with multiple personalities.

Think that :D

ajp71

24th October 2005, 21:39

Not only the wings but everything (tyres, engine, other aero stuff, height, weight) are strictly regulated by these design guidelines.

That's my point the FIA should not lay down such a precise formula, why force a V10 engine and the dimensions of the car so tightly. F1 should not be a single make formula, there are plenty of these which act as good feeder formulae.

The FIA hasn't always had this much control over the cars and I see no reason why it should do now, if F1 is to survive it needs variety. This define everything policy does not keep cost down because the big teams simply refine everything to a much finer detail.

Bob Smith

24th October 2005, 21:45

Isn't the over-regulating of the cars an attempt to make them more similar in performance, so that we get closer racing? That, and to make sure nobody does anything silly.

ajp71

24th October 2005, 21:56

Isn't the over-regulating of the cars an attempt to make them more similar in performance, so that we get closer racing? That, and to make sure nobody does anything silly.

That was the idea, but you can have cars with very different characteristics racing competitivly against each other, also it is in an attempt to make it all about the drivers not the cars, which should not be the case, F1 should be as much about the teams as it is the drivers.

Michael Miskella

24th October 2005, 22:34

btw the rear wing was accepted by the teams so it will be 2007 instead of 2008

ajp71

24th October 2005, 22:51

I would like to say I am in no way opposed to it as a design and I think it's a rather clever piece of engineering that would certainly be at home in GP2 or A1GP.

Michael Miskella

24th October 2005, 23:03

ive always loved the look of F1 cars since they are pure funtion. doubt they will look exactly like that though, running that in real life and you'd have 2 flat tires on the rear since the wings are only supported on the inside :P

this years unvailing was fantastic seeing how the teams dealth with the lose of downforce and it looks like next year and 2007 will be even more interesting.

MR_B

24th October 2005, 23:05

great idea, hope it works.....flippin ugly to look at though isn't it?.......:really:

Tweaker

24th October 2005, 23:11

I'm trying to imagine how the car would feel without one of those two wings... like if someone hit one... how would the car perform?

ajp71

24th October 2005, 23:24

I'm trying to imagine how the car would feel without one of those two wings... like if someone hit one... how would the car perform?

It would be totally undrivable, just like loosing your wing atm, a wing failure at speed would still result in a total loss of control just like it does now, but I don't really think there is an added safety issue.

Bob Smith

24th October 2005, 23:25

Probably better than if you only had one big wing and lost that.

StewartFisher

25th October 2005, 00:17

This wing works because in a finite-span wing there are vortices shed at the tips of the wing in counter-rotating directions. Have a look at the rear wing tips on F1 cars in damp conditions and you'll see condensation in the vortices. These vortices rotate to cause an upwash at the centre of the wing and a downwash outboard of the wing tips. By splitting the wing in two you create a downwash in the centre, hence the 'centreline downwash generating wing' name.

However, there will now be two upwash zones at the centre of each of the smaller wings. Since the aspect ratio of the wing will be reduced (shorter span for the same chord) the upwash will be a lot stronger than that currently seen in F1. So the whole picture has a downwash along the car centreline then two strong upwash zones directly behind each wing then a downwash zone outboard of each wing. This would seem to me to be a much worse aerodynamic condition than having a single rear wing. Especially when you consider that, according to those crude diagrams, only the centre section of the front wing will benefit from the downwash. The outboard thirds will be in the upwash from the two rear wings. I'd really like to see a more complete CFD analysis of the new wing before I said I'd be happy with it. A single stagnation pressure distribution along the centreline really doesn't show much. Especially since it looks to me to be a highly sanitised 'show them the benefits but none of the drawbacks' diagram.

detail

25th October 2005, 08:25

Why don't they just rise the bloody rear wing, even higher than in A1GP?

MR_B

25th October 2005, 09:43

i think, if you lost one of the two wings it may not be as disasterous as losing the whole thing because, I was a formula3 video (1999 i think? had sato and pizzonia in it)ANYWAYS. and one car lost half a front wing, but managed to carry on and finish the race.....he was pretty darn slow, but not as bad as if he lost the whole wing....

phew that was long winded:melting:

MR_B

25th October 2005, 09:45

Why don't they just rise the bloody rear wing, even higher than in A1GP?

1968 graham hill style:D

ajp71

25th October 2005, 11:50

The dangers involved in loosing a wing are when there is a load on it, driving down a straight you should be alright (maybe worse with the imbalance of two wings), but if a wing fails under load there is nothing the driver can do about it. Most small single seaters (be they F3, Formula Renault etc.) can race without wings. Look at Formula Ford 1800 add wings to them and it will completely change the car. In practice at Brands Hatch for a Formula 4 (club racing with a mixture of Zetec, CVH and bike engined single seaters running wings and slicks) a car crashed damaging the rear wing. The rear wing could not be repaired in time so both wings were sawn off to keep the car balanced and it raced without problems.

The reasoning against high wings would be on safety grounds, even with lenient 1960s safety standards they only lasted a year.

sinbad

25th October 2005, 20:34

The dangers involved in loosing a wing are when there is a load on it, driving down a straight you should be alright (maybe worse with the imbalance of two wings), but if a wing fails under load there is nothing the driver can do about it.

The wings are never under more load than at the end of a fast straight. That's why if they fail, they usually fail when the car is doing some serious speed, just before the braking area for the next turn.

Michael Miskella

25th October 2005, 23:02

at high speed i'd say it will be just like a normal wing failure (maybe a bit less dramatic)
at low speed they could limp back to the pits as usual

i'm sure the dual wings will be pretty pointless to replace as the single ones where before and will be next year. from what i've seen they are attached to the chassis and the new ones will be aswell.

Stellios

26th October 2005, 00:51

Remove the back wing and they will just do what was done this year, add more little aero parts all over the car to regain downforce. Unless they address that issue too. Although obviously the aero parts wouldnt be able to go directly above the rear tires.

ajp71

26th October 2005, 16:45

The wings are never under more load than at the end of a fast straight. That's why if they fail, they usually fail when the car is doing some serious speed, just before the braking area for the next turn.

I was talking about the lateral load on the car, if a wing fails down the straight (where the wing produces the most downforce but there is no lateral load) the car may spin out of control but it will generally bounce off the wall with less of an impact than flying off on a corner which is where the real danger is.

Hyperactive

26th October 2005, 17:04

Also notice that without rear wing the rear tires lock always when braking. Without nosewing the car must be quite pushy, or the nose just jumps up and the whole car is upsidedown after some air time :). Was it JJ Lehto who has done that?

PLAYLIFE

26th October 2005, 18:30

ajp71

26th October 2005, 21:17

lol, think again - FIa is regulating everything very well already - you cannot be very innovative

My point is not that by redesigning the wing they are taking any pre-existing chances of innovation away from the teams, more that they shouldn't have this much control in the first place. If electric trickery is the way to go, so be it I don't like it but if thats the way to make your car fastest then why shouldn't you be allowed to do it? With the current system the teams with the most money should always be the fastest because they have now been honing the same basic design for the last 10 years. A single tire maker would level the playing field hugely (remember F1 cars are so stiff they run high profile tires where most of the suspension is in the sidewall).

IMO the best thing F1 can do is force a single tire supplier and derestrict a lot of other things, frankly why you can't have a 3L single seater championship beats me, somethings may be banned either for safety or to keep the costs down but if F1 car design was governed by a looser set of rules then an underbudgeted team could still keep the bigger teams on their toes.

Tweaker

26th October 2005, 21:53

Michael Miskella

26th October 2005, 22:11

Hmmm If we wan't overtaking to be better, forget about asking AMD for tech help, they should call this guy!

http://www.negative-camber.org/jam149/images/events/gd_07_13-14_2002/super_formula1.jpg
http://www.negative-camber.org/jam149/images/events/gd_07_13-14_2002/super_formula2.jpgthat a home built single seater?......see now thats what f1 would look like if there wasent design restrictions, everyone sincerely repeat after me "THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH MR MOSELY!"

ajp71

27th October 2005, 11:31

What a wing :D

xaotik

27th October 2005, 11:55

Woah - that's more like a car attached to a wing than a wing attached to a car...

skiingman

28th October 2005, 11:44

ive always loved the look of F1 cars since they are pure funtion. doubt they will look exactly like that though, running that in real life and you'd have 2 flat tires on the rear since the wings are only supported on the inside :P

F1 cars (unfortunately) haven't been close to pure function for thirty years, and haven't been pure function for more than fifty.

You want to talk about function over form, then you'd attach the wings directly to the suspension uprights rather than the body. This was how it was originally done, but it was soon thereafter legislated out of existence. Thus the compromise aero/mechanical grip setups of today.

Also...purely functional race cars don't have open wheels....;)

Bob Smith

28th October 2005, 14:07

This was how it was originally done, but it was soon thereafter legislated out of existence.
Why was that?

skiingman

28th October 2005, 22:18

Why was that?

I don't know the exact rationale, but it probably had something to do with the governing bodies being able to more easily check the safety of the wing-mounts, as well as desire to reduce the benefit provided by the wings. Wing mounted to back of body is a little easier to inspect for safety than a wing mounted through the body directly to the suspension uprights I would suppose.

Think about how great that would be today though....you can set the car up for nearly optimum mechanical grip, and the thousands of pounds of downforce you create are fed directly into the tires, not through the springs and dampers.

Michael Miskella

29th October 2005, 09:14

I ment within the confines of the rules the teams have worked to extract maximium effiency in incredible details. If they did away with such strict rules you wouldnt be seeing such beautiful minute refinements that add so little but together can be the difference between winning a race or being out of the points which makes it such a great team sport.

ajp71

29th October 2005, 18:37

But if you removed the strictness of the rules then you'd get room for innovation.

colcob

30th October 2005, 05:07

I don't know the exact rationale, but it probably had something to do with the governing bodies being able to more easily check the safety of the wing-mounts, as well as desire to reduce the benefit provided by the wings. Wing mounted to back of body is a little easier to inspect for safety than a wing mounted through the body directly to the suspension uprights I would suppose.

Think about how great that would be today though....you can set the car up for nearly optimum mechanical grip, and the thousands of pounds of downforce you create are fed directly into the tires, not through the springs and dampers.

I think safety was another big factor. The amount of g-loadings and vibrations that would go into a wing structure directly from the wheels gave everybody the willies.

Michael Miskella

30th October 2005, 05:35

Well if schumacher can lap everyone but his teammate in a race with strict rules imagine how much performance difference they would gain with more room to innovate. the less we see of a driver winning because he's cars a quantum leap above others (which some would say about jacque villeneuve's career) the better, atleast now race stratagies can make up for performance differences.

btw did anyone see the 2.4litre v8 cosworth engine redbull and williams (if i remember correctly) should be using next year 20,002rpm (http://www.autocar.co.uk/popups/video.asp?AR=216402)
some teams might be using rev limited 3litre v10's because they cant afford to develope a v8, ofcourse if the v10 still proves quicker the teams will be using them instead. FIA seems to have already lost the plot on trying to cut costs :P

ajp71

30th October 2005, 16:07

Well if schumacher can lap everyone but his teammate in a race with strict rules imagine how much performance difference they would gain with more room to innovate.

Formula 1 should be the pinacle of motorsport, there are plenty of single make driver focused championships (A1GP, GP2, Renault World Series etc.) but F1 is not just about drivers it's about teams and cars as well. If you set every tiny dimension in a F1 car it's just a case of fine tuning, using the best materials, to do this you need money. If you allow room for innovation then you need imagination, which is free, therefore a team with a good designer and a fraction of the budget can put up a real headache to the top teams (think ground effects, fan cars, turbos, active suspension and a load of other brainwaves most of which have been banned).