Future F1 Regulations (Ideas)

[MIKEY_!]

I've been thinking about ways to make F1 racing more interesting for a long time (while addressing safety and 'the spectacle') and I think it's time to post them here, to get some feedback and improve them. I'm open to anyone building on these ideas, constructive criticism or reasons why a suggestion wouldn't work or be acceptable in F1. These aren't just technical regulations, there will be some stuff about tracks and maybe sporting regs later but for now here's some of what I have got...

Double deck diffuser with small lower channel (same height as we have now but narrower) and large constant volume upper channel (gives impression of large aggressive diffuser without much extra downforce)
Narrower front wing with less angle of attack (older style wing shape)
Rear wing with less angle of attack (old style or low downforce wing shape)
No DRS (no longer needed)
Re-fueling is back or wider fuel tanks (you'll see why later)
Tires that degrade chemically rather than wearing (less marbles, not sure if this is actually possible)
Brake duct fins banned (simplifies aerodynamics, reduces drag)
Balistic windscreens, would resemble late 1980's screens (better driver protection obviously)
Automatic tire deflation upon upright's separtaion from the car (safety)
Low noses (more to come on this)

It seems like a huge reduction in downforce but the idea is to reduce the dependency on clean air for good performance. Downforce will be recovered without the need for clean air by fitting a pair of (petrol fueled) turbines in the sidepods, they would not contribute to propelling the car. The exits for these turbines would be near the centre of the wheelbase (aimed vertically), and produce constant downforce, the idea being to allow cars to follow closer and go faster through very slow corners. Of course these would use a lot of fuel which is why i mentioned re-fueling or wider tanks.This is a key part of the idea so would making constant downforce in this way be against the spirit of F1, would it be too much of a change?

[bhallg2k]

So you want to see a sort of reverse Harrier?

[wesley123]

1. A fan to create downforce? Remembered what happened with the fan car? The thing sucked all kinds of things from the surface, great to have all these rocks and marbles thrown at you in the slipstream.
2. A fan driven by the engine increasing fuel consumption? Are you actually following current things in the world? Not only on rules basis but also on political and ethical basis that is just a stupid idea.

Sorry, but NO.

[Kiril Varbanov]

Automatic tire deflation upon upright's separtaion from the car (safety)

Voting yes for this, excellent idea, but there has to be a clear distinction between incident - tire flying away and pit stop.

[xpensive]

What do you know, a thread about the F1 regulations, just what this forum needs!

[SeijaKessen]

1. A fan to create downforce? Remembered what happened with the fan car? The thing sucked all kinds of things from the surface, great to have all these rocks and marbles thrown at you in the slipstream.

I do recall Gordon Murray who designed the Brabham BT46, saying that wasn't accurate because the fan sent things sideways not straight back, and the exit speed of the fan was not fast enough to do such things.

[astracrazy]

you don't want re-fuelling back, it just wasn't safe and we've had to great seasons since the ban (2010 and this year)

the idea about the deflating tyre is a good one, but again what about a pitstop? I guess the option of the tyre deflating once taken off the car wouldn't be a bad option any way. But why not stop the problem of loose wheels from the start. What if the jacks were mechanical i.e the men put them under the car and then lift them up, but they only release (drop down) when both wheels (front or back) are tightened to a set torque? Then the jack drops the car and the man can pull the jack away.

Improvement to the drs (discussed in other threads). Easily avoid it being too easy by the drs deactivating once the front wheel passes the rear wheel or something (it puts you there but doesn't do the dirty work for you)

Perhaps allow venturi tunnels?

[Callum]

Personally, I love the idea that has been taken up by the WEC that you get a fuel limit to use every lap. You can do whatever the heck you want with the fuel. I would also free up the energy limitations of KERS type systems and allow unlimited use of it.

[wesley123]

1. A fan to create downforce? Remembered what happened with the fan car? The thing sucked all kinds of things from the surface, great to have all these rocks and marbles thrown at you in the slipstream.

I do recall Gordon Murray who designed the Brabham BT46, saying that wasn't accurate because the fan sent things sideways not straight back, and the exit speed of the fan was not fast enough to do such things.

You are driving into marbles etc. at around 300kph or more when it is thrown out of the car. sorry but no.

[thearmofbarlow]

1. A fan to create downforce? Remembered what happened with the fan car? The thing sucked all kinds of things from the surface, great to have all these rocks and marbles thrown at you in the slipstream.

I do recall Gordon Murray who designed the Brabham BT46, saying that wasn't accurate because the fan sent things sideways not straight back, and the exit speed of the fan was not fast enough to do such things.

You are driving into marbles etc. at around 300kph or more when it is thrown out of the car. sorry but no.

I love out of hand dismissal of a technology ignoring the fact that 35 years later we may have made a couple of advancements in the areas of, for example, little bits of screen to put over an outlet or what have you. It would be trivial to route the exhaust from such a system in a manner where it never directly sees the light of day.

[wesley123]

I love out of hand dismissal of a technology ignoring the fact that 35 years later we may have made a couple of advancements in the areas of, for example, little bits of screen to put over an outlet or what have you.

No indeed they did not have that technology 35 years ago. Outside of the fact that filter will get filled with the debris reducing the effect of the fan.

It would be trivial to route the exhaust from such a system in a manner where it never directly sees the light of day.

Might also need a device that makes sure the debris will be thrown into another dimension

[Websta]

Some nice ideas, I think reintroducing the fan car would give F1 the performance upgrade it needs without hampering overtaking. The cars should only get faster each year IMO

[matt21]

Why not have something like this? I think the performance then was right what we would need today.

More width = more drag
Wide tires = more mechanical grip + more drag
High 3-element rear wing without beam wing = downforce more or less equal to today + more drag + more slipstream
Wide frontwing with only two elements = downforce more or less equal to today
low nose = less downforce from the underbody + better safety and visibility
underfloor + diffusor of today (unblown) = downforce less than to today with low nose

... and it looks better than today´s cars

[MIKEY_!]

1. A fan to create downforce? Remembered what happened with the fan car? The thing sucked all kinds of things from the surface, great to have all these rocks and marbles thrown at you in the slipstream.
2. A fan driven by the engine increasing fuel consumption? Are you actually following current things in the world? Not only on rules basis but also on political and ethical basis that is just a stupid idea.

Sorry, but NO.

Lets clear this up. There is NO fan! The system i described uses the exhaust of the turbines to generate downforce, there is no air being sucked from under the floor. And the exit points upwards so no debris could be 'fired' at other cars. Remember the huge loss of drag by removing wings i described? That will offset the extra fuel consumption to some extent. Now imagine the air for the turbine flows over the radiators first, smaller rads = less drag = better fuel efficiency. Most importantly, by shifting the primary method of downforce generation away from wings, the cars will slipstream properly and not lose grip when following closely.

To clarify the automatic tire deflation thing (i really should have explained this properly ): the tire could have a small explosive in it which detonates when the upright separates from the chassis. If a tire was incorrectly fitted and fell off, the driver might have time to trigger a secondary explosive from the cockpit, not great but otherwise removing tires in a pitstop could also result in potentially dangerous detonation. (if anyone can see a good way around this problem please post it)

[beelsebob]

Why not have something like this? I think the performance then was right what we would need today.

More width = more drag
Wide tires = more mechanical grip + more drag
High 3-element rear wing without beam wing = downforce more or less equal to today + more drag + more slipstream
Wide frontwing with only two elements = downforce more or less equal to today
low nose = less downforce from the underbody + better safety and visibility
underfloor + diffusor of today (unblown) = downforce less than to today with low nose

... and it looks better than today´s cars

Because if a car were designed to those regs with modern knowledge it would not look like that, and would go significantly quicker.