2011 vs 2013 Tech Regs

[adrianjordan]

So in relation to the FiA summons of Ferrari over the whole Pirelli tyre testing issue, it was highlighted on another site that Article 22.1 stipulates:

“Track testing shall be considered any track running time not part of an Event undertaken by a competitor entered in the Championship, using cars which conform substantially with the current Formula One Technical Regulations in addition to those from the previous or subsequent year.”

So given that Ferrari used a 2011 car for their tests it raised a question which I was hoping might be answered here:

How close would the 2011 Ferrari come to meeting the 2013 Technical Regulations?

The only thing that springs to my mind as not conforming is the EBD...anything else I'm missing?

[McMrocks]

It didn't change alot:
-increased front wing flexing tests
- lower nose (althought the 2011car didn't have a very high nose)
- and as you said EBD


this is all which comes to my mind, sorry. But these things are only minor changes

[bhall]

Here's a decent summary of the changes between 2011 and 2012, and here's one of the changes between 2012 and 2013.

[adrianjordan]

Thanks guys, I'd forgotten about the nose height changes (probably my mind blanking out all those ugly noses last year!!).

Okay, so a more pointed question:

Do you think that Ferrari's 2011 car would still "conform substantially with the current Formula One Technical Regulations" and so not be permitted for track testing under the FiA Sporting Regulations?

[McMrocks]

Do you think that Ferrari's 2011 car would still "conform substantially with the current Formula One Technical Regulations" and so not be permitted for track testing under the FiA Sporting Regulations?

This is a tough question. First we need the FiA to clarify the term substantially.
the car is would not be permitted to race in a 2013 race due to the nose height and exhaust position. But is this really substantially?

[ESPImperium]

The way i define it, 2011 to 2013 regs are substantially similar, however the nose and EBD are the major changes i see.

Firstly the EBD is still more powerful than the present coanda and semi coanda exhausts, the present exhausts are giving about 60% to 75% of the effect of the EBD to some estimates, however the fact the EBD gave much more downforce in the downshifting phase and also the fact it could be directed into the area it was needed was much more advantageous to the cars rear end.

Secondly, the AA/BB line would make the cars illegal now, but with the advent of the vanity panel the cars this year look to have gone with a higher nose again, and taken the advantages it gives as well, the higher nose i feel is about where some noses are for 2013.

However the 150 Italia is about 3 to 4 seconds a lap slower than the F138, however the fact that the grid is covered by about 4 seconds now i can see a point where the 150 Italia is relevant, however the fact that it isnt current Ferrari tech is also another point.

Im not completely sold on the fact that a 2 year old car is not current tech, but im not sold on the fact that it isn't as the tech from 2 years ago is still being used by many of the mid pack to lower end teams. Im unsure where to go, but id be on the side that a 2 year old car is okay to be tested, as long as its by a TD/RD/DD and not a present race driver.

[amouzouris]

The 150 Italia had pushrods front and back...and a very clever anti-roll bar. The F138 has pullrods front and back..and we have no idea if they are using a similar anti-roll bar....
So...they would learn about the tires..which Pirelli suggests that they used future development tires..and whatever they learned about setup, would be very very very hard to translate to this year's car

Also, the exhaust was MUCH closer to the tires than what they are now, which would affect the temps

[Tim.Wright]

The 150 Italia had pushrods front and back...and a very clever anti-roll bar. The F138 has pullrods front and back..and we have no idea if they are using a similar anti-roll bar....

One thing to clarify... From a suspension point of view, and certainly from the point of view of tyre loads, there is no difference between a pull rod and a push rod suspension. If you design a suspension with say a 100N/mm wheel rate, the tyre doesn't care if its done with a push rod or pull rod.

The main difference in the push vs pull rod is packaging and aero.

[amouzouris]

The 150 Italia had pushrods front and back...and a very clever anti-roll bar. The F138 has pullrods front and back..and we have no idea if they are using a similar anti-roll bar....

One thing to clarify... From a suspension point of view, and certainly from the point of view of tyre loads, there is no difference between a pull rod and a push rod suspension. If you design a suspension with say a 100N/mm wheel rate, the tyre doesn't care if its done with a push rod or pull rod.

The main difference in the push vs pull rod is packaging and aero.

Yes, I don't disagree but the geometry has changed a lot, wishbones have changed a lot since 2011 thus the camper change during suspension travel has changed..IIRC ferrari experimented with a shorter upper rear wishbone during 2011 for more camper change.

Also, i'm not really sure as Ferrari was so slow at the beginning of last year due to the pitch sensitivity and the lack of downforce, BUT i think they were experiencing suspension problems as well..they had to approach a different way of setting up the car with the front pullrods..i also read somewhere that the front pullrods give less travel than the pushrods

EDIT: I guess I should have worded it more correctly at the beginning! thanx Tim!

[Cam]

One good test IMO, would be a copyright test. If I built a replica 2011 car, would it be substantially similar enough to a 2013 car to be in breach. Would a team sue? Obviously this is hypothetical, but the principal should be sound. If you take the car as a whole, it's also worse than if you break it down to parts. Which do you test?

http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Substantial_similarity

[Slife]

Maybe Ferrari didn't do anything wrong ? Maybe the FIA want to find a good example of how to do the test, to make Mercedes look bad.

[Richard]

The rules say that a 2 year old design is allowed, end of argument.

I guess there is a hypothetical situation that a team could test an 2013 aero package on test mule that did not comply with the 2013 mechanical rules. Would that be substantially the same as a 2013 car? Considering the importance of aero, I'd say yes.

Anyway, this is heading into an angels-on-a-pin debate. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_many_a ... f_a_pin%3F

The pragmatic answer is that teams wouldn't bother because the FIA would change the rules to ban it. It also opens up an unaffordable arms race.

Realpolitik enforces this rule, just like most of the sporting regs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realpolitik

[beelsebob]

Hypothetically… I don't see anything in the rules banning (for example) Mercedes, selling a 2013 F1 car to Daimler, who then run it for thousands and thousands of laps (admittedly not on Pirelli's tyres), and then sell the data back to Mercedes. Is there something in the rules that bans this?

[adrianjordan]

Hypothetically… I don't see anything in the rules banning (for example) Mercedes, selling a 2013 F1 car to Daimler, who then run it for thousands and thousands of laps (admittedly not on Pirelli's tyres), and then sell the data back to Mercedes. Is there something in the rules that bans this?

I posed a similar question in another thread: Is there anything banning McLaren from building an additional MP4-29 and handing it to Honda to test the new V6 engine in..??

[Cold Fussion]

Hypothetically… I don't see anything in the rules banning (for example) Mercedes, selling a 2013 F1 car to Daimler, who then run it for thousands and thousands of laps (admittedly not on Pirelli's tyres), and then sell the data back to Mercedes. Is there something in the rules that bans this?

I posed a similar question in another thread: Is there anything banning McLaren from building an additional MP4-29 and handing it to Honda to test the new V6 engine in..??

Because once everyone else found out what they were doing, and they were hauled before an FIA tribunal, they would have a very hard, if not impossible time of trying to justify such a horrendous 'breach' of the rules. It may be technically a gray area, but you still have to be able to argue your case.