What about imposing a drag limit in aero rules?

[bhall II]

Or in other words, poor example, wich is weird coming from you I must say

Then find a better one.

Red Bull have a team budget of $468m, the single largest budget in F1, and they do not build engines, currently.
http://www.crash.net/f1/news/221835/1/f ... -most.html

In context, that figure is misleading.

This info is as recent as I could find...

This year [2014], Red Bull will spend a record A$360 million on its F1 program.

[...]

“Their biggest cost was research and development spending, which came to £83m and was up by 10 per cent.”

And from the source I cited...

Costs vary greatly from team to team. Honda, Toyota, McLaren-Mercedes, and Ferrari are estimated to have spent approximately $200 million on engines in 2006, Renault spent approximately $125 million and Cosworth's 2006 V8 was developed for $15 million.

It's Christian Sylt. (It's always Chrstian Sylt.)

Beyond that, we should all know by now that restrictions don't reduce costs as much as they just force teams to reallocate funds to other areas of development. There are no real savings to any of it, which is what I was trying to get across here.

The price to play is established by the biggest spender's desire to win, and I doubt that will ever change.

And with that, I'm crawling out of the rabbit hole. I should have known better.

It's repeatedly said that current aero development is against overtaking opportunities. And to improve in this area cars should rely more on mechanical grip than on aero grip.

I've pulled the following from a recent conversation that concerned roughly the same subject. If something about it doesn't make sense, or seems out of context, just let me know, and I'll try to clarify it.

Quick and dirty: there isn't necessarily an answer to the overtaking problem.

Down-force only improves overtaking, if it's not sensitive to turbulent flow. Over the last 2 decades, the rules have pushed the teams into using increasingly more sensitive methodologies. This is the reason you hear drivers complaining about it being hard to pass even though they are faster.

And also why going down the mechanical grip route is a no-brainer for me.

Ya know, a not-unreasonable argument can be made that mechanical grip is bad for overtaking.



Red: Massive aero dumbdown, slick tires, no change in overtaking
Yellow: Refueling ban, less mechanical grip due to narrower front tires, sizable jump in overtaking
Green: DRS, Pirellotteri-style grip, obscene jump in overtaking
Orange: Sharpest decline in overtaking in 30 years despite DRS and continued refueling ban [and further aero reductions], pit stops fall from 1,111 to ~725
Blue lines: 2016's likely overtaking range, aka "Holy hell, I can't wait for the shitstorm of complaints after the sport's ill-informed opinion-makers blame 2017's inevitable high-speed funeral processions on increased downforce."

Makes sense if you think about it: everyone loves wet races (when mechanical grip is at a premium).

Over the last several years, teams have have adopted methodologies that are increasingly more sensitive to the wake of the car in-front of them.

It's not necessarily a recent phenomenon. These (wiiiide) cars (with wiiiide rear tires) from 1991 overtook one another less frequently than this year's cars.



If we go by Mercedes' claim that 45.1% of overtaking in 2011 was due to DRS, it was apparently more difficult for cars to pass one another in 1991 - 30.94 overtakes per GP - than it was for cars from 2011 to do so without DRS - roughly 33 per GP (with the caveat that 2011 featured Pirellotteri tires, but I don't know how to parse Pirellotteri overtakes).

If it's about aero, this shouldn't be possible.

Overtaking in 2008: ~14.5 per GP

Overtaking in 1996: ~14.5 per GP

If it's about mechanical grip, this shouldn't be possible.

Non-DRS overtaking in 2011: ~33 per GP

Overtaking in 1991: ~31 per GP

Ultimately, overtaking is concerned with neither downforce nor mechanical grip individually; it's about total performance differentiation. The kind of performance differentiation required for semi-routine (?) overtaking on circuits that have but a single racing line - 1s to 1.5s - is also the kind of performance differentiation that results in processions, because cars capable of such overtaking inevitably begin races well ahead of the cars they can overtake. The mechanics of turbulence and tire degradation are both subservient to this reality, and trying to overcome it is the Sisyphean job I referenced earlier.

Apologies if this is too much. Trying to make sense of the overtaking dilemma seems to have become my Sisyphean task.

[rgava]

Ultimately, overtaking is concerned with neither downforce nor mechanical grip individually; it's about total performance differentiation. The kind of performance differentiation required for semi-routine (?) overtaking on circuits that have but a single racing line - 1s to 1.5s - is also the kind of performance differentiation that results in processions, because cars capable of such overtaking inevitably begin races well ahead of the cars they can overtake. The mechanics of turbulence and tire degradation are both subservient to this reality, and trying to overcome it is the Sisyphean job I referenced earlier.

If overtaking it's all about performance difierentiation, how do you explain overtaking manoeuvres between teammates?

Or how do you explain the amount of overtaking that goes on on spec categories?

[bhall II]

Neither happens as frequently as you might think.

Teammate battles are often decided by team orders, because the lack of performance differentiation can cause the marginally quicker driver to get stuck and lose time, e.g. Bottas v Massa at Silverstone this year, and it heightens the risk of something going terribly wrong if the drivers are left to fend for themselves...




Also bear in mind that performance differentiation can come from anywhere. For instance, identical cars with different tires have different capabilities. That's why Pirellotteries were so "entertaining": hardly anyone had the same tires in the same condition at the same time.

As for spec series...

Much like F1, IndyCar features many laps of drivers holding station until pit stops shuffle the order. (Click each to show full lap chart.)


First race of the 2015 IndyCar season


Last race of the 2015 IndyCar season

To put it all more succinctly: aerodynamic changes have aerodynamic consequences. Whether or not they have any effect on overtaking is unrelated (see: Overtaking Working Group).

EDIT: grahammar

[toraabe]

Well Introduce groundeffect, and permit having different compound tyres on the car simuntanesly

[rgava]

Interesting ESPN article on the subject being discused in the last posts: 2017 regulations could result in less overtaking

http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/144 ... overtaking

"I think that what we were asked to do was to make the cars look more aggressive, make the cars a lot faster -- the fastest F1 cars ever -- and to make them physically more tough to drive, not more difficult, but more physically arduous simply because the G-forces will be higher in the fast corners," Ferrari technical director James Allison told ESPN. "I think the rules will deliver on all three of those, but we will need to make sure we are keeping the level of overtaking in the sport more or less where it is now or at a level which is judged to be correct.

"There are devices to do that. The two main things that top happen are tyre degradation, making sure the tyres are not too uniform in their behaviour through the race, and judging and tuning the size of the DRS correctly so an overtake is possible if you screw your courage up and do a good job."

Williams technical director Pat Symonds also believes overtaking will be more difficult with the addition of more downforce, but is wary of relying too much on degrading tyres and overtaking aids to make racing exciting.

"My belief is that the more downforce you have on a car, the harder it is to follow," Symonds said. "The 2017 car has more downforce, so therefore irrespective of any niceties the Overtaking Working Group may have come up with and irrespective of whether one believes in them or not -- as a member of that group I know the shortcuts that were taken against the true scientific process -- the fact is that if you have got more downforce it is going to be harder to follow. That's a little bit simplistic, but nevertheless quite true."

Pirelli motorsport boss Paul Hembery says a significant amount of the five-second target will be found from the wider tyre dimensions for 2017, but he is also wary of the sport going in the wrong direction by chasing more downforce.

"Just by increasing the current loads with the wider tyres it gives you such a big footprint that you are going to get three seconds a lap without doing much more," he said. "It's not going to take a lot to achieve the five seconds that has been requested.

"I guess there are some people that will question whether it's the right direction to go; will it still be possible to overtake? Will it improve overtaking or make it worse? We can't even get a consensus on that. I hope we are not making a wrong decision that doesn't actually solve what we were trying to solve in the first place."

[George-Jung]

This is one of those reasons I am here on this forum, lots of discussion, pictures etc..
I am here sitting and reading, looking etc.. and I think it is great! could you even imagine if I could actually understand it.

[bhall II]

Interesting ESPN article on the subject being discused in the last posts: 2017 regulations could result in less overtaking

If the current trend holds, overtaking in 2017 will be abysmal no matter what happens to the regulations...


(Click to enlarge)

Generally speaking, I think they're (still) barking up the wrong tree here. From my perspective, it's not coincidental that the steady decline in overtaking from the mid-'80s to the late-'90s occurred as the sport became more and more homogeneous, especially with regard to the engines.

At one point, there were as many as five different powertrains on the grid. With five different powertrains came five different fuel loads. And with five different powertrain/fuel load combinations came five different levels of performance possibilities.

Overtaking was facilitated as the balance of power shifted throughout the race from cars that were less powerful, but more efficient (lighter), to cars with superior power whose performance characteristics could only be fully exploited toward the latter half of the race after they'd burned off enough fuel.

The competitive environment at the time was analogous to the Pirellotteries of 2011 and 2012. But, instead of a field comprised of cars that were rarely on the same tires in the same condition at the same time, there was a field of cars that were rarely within their optimal performance windows at the same time.

Overtaking declined toward the end of the first turbo era as NA engines became less competitive and teams converged upon roughly the same turbocharged solutions. Then, after a one-year "spike" in overtaking following the ban on turbo engines in 1989, overtaking again declined as V12s and V8s became less competitive and teams converged upon V10s as the optimal solution. From 1996, at which point every team at the sharp end of the grid was running a V10, overtaking virtually flatlined until 2010 (and the 2009 aero overhaul did nothing to turn the tide).

For whatever reasons, folks blamed the "procession era" on refueling and aerodynamics, despite the complete nonexistence of hard evidence to support such a case. Overtaking via pit strategy and the futility of running in "dirty air" are both symptoms of the problem; they're not problems in and of themselves. This is because teams will always choose the quickest strategy, regardless of any other factors. If that includes overtaking, there will be overtaking. If not, there won't be overtaking. It's as simple as that.

...McLaren managing director Jonathan Neale points out the paradox which appears central to the problem: that overtaking has diminished as the field has grown more competitive. "People talk quite fondly and with dewy eyes about motor racing during the 1970s and even earlier and they forget that in those days the difference between first and second could be up to a second," Neale told skysports.com. "Some of the grid never qualified. So when you have cars that are that far apart, cars coming through from the back, mistakes being made...that produced a lot of overtaking. This year [2009], front to back of the grid, on some occasions if you look at the race paces from recent races, it's probably only a second and a half. And when you've got that level of closeness between the cars it is more difficult, more challenging."

[Andres125sx]

Or in other words, poor example, wich is weird coming from you I must say

Then find a better one.

For a theory I disagree with? No thanks

Neither happens as frequently as you might think.

Teammate battles are often decided by team orders, because the lack of performance differentiation can cause the marginally quicker driver to get stuck and lose time, e.g. Bottas v Massa at Silverstone this year,

IMHO you´re ignoring an important point. It´s not all about perfomance differentiation, but perfomance differentiation needed to overtake, wich is different.

In FE or any other spec series perfomance differentiation is non-existant compared to those we see in F1, but even so there are more overtakings than in F1 (at least before DRS wich is the fair comparison). Perfomance differentiation is very important obviously, but it can´t help overtaking if perfomance differentiation needed to overtake is 2s.

On any spec series we see overtakings with a perfomance differentiation of only some tenths, while on F1 we see cars more than a full second faster who can´t overtake. The main difference is not perfomance differentitation because that´s much bigger on F1, but even so overtaking is much more complicated. Main difference is perfomance differentiation needed to overtake.

With wings this is extremely big, way too much if you ask me. I don´t think a drag limit is doable, but they could re-write aero rules to reduce perfomance differentitation needed to overtake.

Fan cars are just an example and could solve two problems in a row (get rid of crappy tires wich wouldn´t be needed if overtaking are easier), or cars without wings but with big venturi tunnels, they would be less sensitive to wake turbulence so perfomance differentiation needed to overtake would be reduced.

I strongly disagree with you (bhall) when you say there is not necessarily an answer to the overtaking problem. There will always be solutions, but you need to re-write aero rules obviously

[rgava]

Performance differentiation for overtaking is a chimera as long as the rules are so restrictive that all participants end designing slight variations of the same solution.
That's why I thought about give a lot more freedom for aero innovation but with a clever way to limit DF through an imposed drag limit that can be adjusted periodically according to the progress of the state of the art on creating DF within such a constrained drag.
If designers are free to put a wing or not, to make a big or small ground effect venturi or whathever they want to create DF we can see different performances due to the different approaches taken by the teams.
But, for the sake of safety, some limit has to be imposed by the rules. Why not the drag?
Just because it's difficult to be checked by the marshals?
I'm talking about a paradigm change for the most technologically advanced car racing series.
Why not to make a step ahead of others and be innovative also in the rules?

[bhall II]

IMHO you´re ignoring an important point. It´s not all about perfomance differentiation, but perfomance differentiation needed to overtake, wich is different.

Two things:

1. Read through the thread, because I've already addressed the issues you raised.

2. Try to offer something more than a thesis statement to support your point of view, something like the following excerpts I've taken from an article that details how the Overtaking Working Group devised the 2009 aero overhual. (The whole thing is a bit long, but well worth the read if you're interested.)

...it was determined that in order to overtake going into Turn 1 [at Circuit de Barcelona-Catalunya] he would need to have a car that was two seconds a lap quicker than the one in front. [Rory Byrne, Paddy Lowe, and Pat Symonds] paid great attention to de la Rosa's comments. He would try each configuration [in McLaren's simulator] and report on whether the resulting set-up would allow him to attempt to pass or not. Halving the downforce meant that the necessary 'overtaking advantage' figure could be reduced to 1.5s a lap and the work then moved on to finding ways to balance the following car to reduce the necessary 'overtaking advantage' to [one] second. The three engineers all agreed that this was a realistic figure, rather than trying to make it even easier to overtake.

I was actually somewhat surprised by this next one (unless it's just a different way of describing diffuser vortices)...

One of the most significant findings was that the rear wing is a very important device in characterising the wake that a car generates.

"You would think that upwash from the rear wing is bad," Lowe said. "The upwash is strong, but a very strong inwash at ground level is also driven by the rear wing. That inwash brings new high-energy air in at ground level. If you took the rear wing off altogether you would lose that effect and the wake would be a lot worse."

Not this one, though...

Having determined the best possible rear wing configuration to generate the least damaging wake, the OWG moved on to determine the optimum front wing and floor for the following car. Lots of different floor shapes were tried, including underbody tunnels and other radical ideas, but the OWG found that the best solution was similar to that on the current cars, but with the diffuser section mounted further back to use more of the benefit of the inwash air.

The final configuration pretty much hit its targets though baseline drag fell by 10 per cent.

And it failed.

[bhall II]

Performance differentiation for overtaking is a chimera as long as the rules are so restrictive that all participants end designing slight variations of the same solution.

Performance-driven design convergence is inevitable, even when there are no rules...



It's simply the nature of the beast.

[FoxHound]

Performance-driven design convergence is inevitable, even when there are no rules...



It's simply the nature of the beast.

Hmmmm, I'm not making a habit of disagreeing Ben, but.....






Mid engined cars will invariably look similar.

What is interesting is that the rear engined porker, looks very similar from the A pillar rearwards to the front mounted(mid engined as behind the front axle) AMG GT. By design from AMG I'd assume.

[bhall II]

Mid engined cars will invariably look similar.

Yep. And the cars below have front mid-engine layouts with rearward cabins for the same reason: it's currently the optimal solution for the application.



Don't get me wrong; I'd love to see more variety in the sport. But, it wouldn't last if it happened.

[Andres125sx]

2. Try to offer something more than a thesis statement to support your point of view

Sorry but for me it´s difficult to design, manufacture and test a F1 car with new ideas to see how it works, so I can only offer some thesis


I still think fan cars could solve the problem, togheter with hard tires so track debris is drastically reduced. With current tires it would be useless obviously as the filter would get cogged (?) too fast with all that marbles all around



But I still have more ideas . With active suspensions rules could limit ride height to an artificial too high height, wich could be reduced when behind a car so DF increases. With too high height DF would be reduced, but since DF is so limited by rules, it would only need some changes to keep current DF levels with higher cars. So same DF as today when in normal setup (high car), and increased DF when within 1 second of the car in front (low car)

Opinions?

edit: btw, bhall, thanks for your efforts posting all that valuable info tirelessly =D> . I know some of us (me!) can be very stubborn when trying to find solutions to the ovetaking problem, but with current technology development I can´t accept there´s no solution for the problem.

[PlatinumZealot]

You know what?

I agree with you Andreas. Fan cars will increase overtaking but only if the tyres can be pushed to sustain it. Another thing to note is that Dirty air will still be created from the fan. Only by having sort of diffuser after the fan can the stream be recovered.

Here have a look at my proposed fan-boost:

http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... =1&t=22583