2017-2020 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.
bigpat
19
Joined: 29 Mar 2012, 01:50

Re: Proposed 2017 F1 Aerodynamic Changes

Post

It will be interesting to if Mercedes does indeed do this.
The way I see it, the problem with stalling the diffuser is the lack of downforce causing instability under initial braking, as well as instability ( especially center of pressure) when the downforce suddenly comes back when the rear rises as the speed drops through the stop.

The active Williams of 1992 & 1993 could do the same, but you were allowed to actively control when it happened. Even then, both Nigel Mansell & Adrian Newey both said that the car did suffer from momentary diffuser stall in corners, and the car would step out on occasion. Nigel trusted that the car would still corner, where as Ricardo Patrese was less accommodating to it, and more cautious, which is where he sometimes lost out in terms of lap time.....

In my opinion, the sidepods will be as far back as they can be, but to still be able to pass side impact tests. This would be to allow for maximum area for the air coming off the wider tyres, an easier time to be diverted around them, with the bargeboards. You can't really push all the radiators and coolers forward anyway, as the cars have a strictly controlled front/rear weight distribution.....
I think that the sidepod undercuts will stay, as they help to get the mass of air around the sides easier, and feed into the coke bottle area. I doubt that the flow will detach over such a large radius that the pods have back there. In most cases, the flow back there would more than likely be turbulent anyway.

User avatar
lio007
314
Joined: 28 Jan 2013, 23:03
Location: Austria

Re: Proposed 2017 F1 Aerodynamic Changes

Post


bonjon1979
30
Joined: 11 Feb 2009, 17:16

Re: Proposed 2017 F1 Aerodynamic Changes

Post

There's some big differences there. Just wonder if it might be in some teams interests to exaggerate their performance to encourage Pirelli to make harder tyres. It'd be great if Honda do manage to improve their engine by 22% (if that is them) but somehow I doubt it.

Without question it'll be one of the most interesting pre-season tests for a long time. Tempted to go out there!

User avatar
Juzh
161
Joined: 06 Oct 2012, 08:45

Re: Proposed 2017 F1 Aerodynamic Changes

Post

Short translation:
These are all simulator values from the teams for Pirelli, compared to end 2015 for 6 tracks. Pirelli showed this to all teams in order to persuade them to test at Bahrain, that's why other teams can "judge" them, but not automatically say which team is which, because they changed the team names to "team 1, team 2" etc. Though basic logic can give you an idea which team is which (Honda has the most hp gains, RBR's Aero values.) Values include Output, Power, top speeds, lap times. They get updated every few months and get more and more realistic.
Teams gave their views on the leaks: Horner : No one is showing their cards Bouillier : Some fantasy values Symonds : most of this data can be thrown out of the window, unrealistic
2 Teams expect 130% output, 2 teams aim for 105%, Red Bull for 115% one team 128%. FIA expects more teams to achieve the higher number (~30%), some teams achieved this already because of their early focus on 2017.
Honda expects 22% (200hp) more power for 2017, most teams are aiming for 10-17% more power. putting all engines well over 1000hp (ICE+ERS) (mercedes was "well over" 900 hp at the end of 2015 according to an Andy Cowell interview, which would put a "worst case" scenario Mercedes engine at 900hp+10% = 990hp, but realistically a 950 HP number would put it around 1045hp for 2017.
Top speeds: Most teams expect drastically lower top speeds (92% of current speeds estimated by one team) because of the increased aero drag and larger tyres. Only one team expects to be 13% quicker, "If this is true, we messed up" according to Pat Symonds. Could either be Sauber with massive Aero gains, or the AMuS fabled long-wheelbase RBR contender.
Barcelona lap times in the simulator are between 1:17.3 and 1:18.5 for all teams, except for "Team 3" (RBR) which is currently achieving 1:16.4 in the sims and the slowest team (team 9), targeting 1:21.8. "If this is true, they're (RBR) the next CWC" - Mercedes. lap times are about 5 seconds quicker than this year's Pole lap. 2015 FL was 1:25.3. WEB's 2010 lap record is 1:19.99

User avatar
godlameroso
309
Joined: 16 Jan 2010, 21:27
Location: Miami FL

Re: Proposed 2017 F1 Aerodynamic Changes

Post

I think we'll see 2010 race pace numbers, with qualifying being faster than it's ever been before. As the teams develop we could see 2006 levels of race pace, but it will be done without having to re-fuel.

I hate sounding like a broken record, but there it is.
Saishū kōnā

stevesingo
42
Joined: 07 Sep 2014, 00:28

Re: Proposed 2017 F1 Aerodynamic Changes

Post

I think there will be a big reduction in qualifying lap times, but race pace not so much due to the increased drag effecting fuel usage over a race distance.

flickerf1
7
Joined: 29 Feb 2016, 00:52

Re: Proposed 2017 F1 Aerodynamic Changes

Post

Does anyone know why the cars don't have a lower weight?
The Wicked + The Divine.

User avatar
Holm86
244
Joined: 10 Feb 2010, 03:37
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Re: Proposed 2017 F1 Aerodynamic Changes

Post

bonjon1979 wrote:There's some big differences there. Just wonder if it might be in some teams interests to exaggerate their performance to encourage Pirelli to make harder tyres. It'd be great if Honda do manage to improve their engine by 22% (if that is them) but somehow I doubt it.

Without question it'll be one of the most interesting pre-season tests for a long time. Tempted to go out there!
It's compared to 2015 engine, not this years engine. So to me its very plausible ...

User avatar
godlameroso
309
Joined: 16 Jan 2010, 21:27
Location: Miami FL

Re: Proposed 2017 F1 Aerodynamic Changes

Post

stevesingo wrote:I think there will be a big reduction in qualifying lap times, but race pace not so much due to the increased drag effecting fuel usage over a race distance.
Fuel usage isn't an issue at most tracks, it's not straight line speed that holds them back it's grip around the turns. That's where the gain is coming from, tires that don't disintegrate, and 30% more aero than we have now.
Saishū kōnā

stevesingo
42
Joined: 07 Sep 2014, 00:28

Re: Proposed 2017 F1 Aerodynamic Changes

Post

Larger tyres=more drag and more grip
Larger wings=more drag and more grip

more grip = shorter brake distances (less MGU-K recovery) and higher apex speeds=higher average speed

higher average speed=more time at higher throttle openings=more fuel use.

User avatar
Nuvolari
3
Joined: 07 Apr 2016, 14:10

Re: Proposed 2017 F1 Aerodynamic Changes

Post

Don't they get extra 5 kg of fuel?

User avatar
godlameroso
309
Joined: 16 Jan 2010, 21:27
Location: Miami FL

Re: Proposed 2017 F1 Aerodynamic Changes

Post

stevesingo wrote:Larger tyres=more drag and more grip
Larger wings=more drag and more grip

more grip = shorter brake distances (less MGU-K recovery) and higher apex speeds=higher average speed

higher average speed=more time at higher throttle openings=more fuel use.
More chance to recover from the turbine.
Saishū kōnā

stevesingo
42
Joined: 07 Sep 2014, 00:28

Re: Proposed 2017 F1 Aerodynamic Changes

Post

I think the waste heat produced by these engines is reducing all the time due to the ICE combustion technology improvements.

User avatar
Formula Wrong
13
Joined: 17 May 2016, 18:14
Contact:

Re: Proposed 2017 F1 Aerodynamic Changes

Post

flickerf1 wrote:Does anyone know why the cars don't have a lower weight?
Wider tyres; more fuel and wider wings/body already add a lot of weight.
If you no longer go for the space someone always has to leave, you're no longer a racing driver

User avatar
Formula Wrong
13
Joined: 17 May 2016, 18:14
Contact:

Re: Proposed 2017 F1 Aerodynamic Changes

Post

lio007 wrote:Pretty interesting: by AMuS

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 79894.html
As mentioned in that article, a lot of those numbers are probably made up, and there often is a huge difference between the numbers. One team saying they'll be 8% slower on the straights while another claims they'll be 13% faster - that sounds very much impossible to me (unless one of the engine manufacturers performs a miracle and creates a monster-engine that's even more powerful than the Mercedes-PU).
If you no longer go for the space someone always has to leave, you're no longer a racing driver

Post Reply