2014 Design

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.
Just_a_fan
Just_a_fan
639
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:37 pm

Re: 2014 Design

Post

raymondu999 wrote:Throttle control I'd imagine will be a lot more crucial in 2014. With peakier (I think?) power thanks to the turbo, and with less downforce.

I'm all for better car/throttle control, but I'm not crazy of laptimes going slower
I wonder whether the better drivers will use the KERS to help offset the peakier output i.e. turbo lag. I can see someone using the KERS early in a corner to start accelerating whilst the turbo is spooling up. Not sure how effective it would be but I bet the likes of Alonso, Hamilton, Vettel will be trying every trick they can...
Turbo says "Dumpster sounds so much more classy. It's the diamond of the cesspools." oh, and "The Dutch fans are drunk. Maybe"

User avatar
FW17
232
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:56 am

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Just_a_fan wrote:
raymondu999 wrote:Throttle control I'd imagine will be a lot more crucial in 2014. With peakier (I think?) power thanks to the turbo, and with less downforce.

I'm all for better car/throttle control, but I'm not crazy of laptimes going slower
I wonder whether the better drivers will use the KERS to help offset the peakier output i.e. turbo lag. I can see someone using the KERS early in a corner to start accelerating whilst the turbo is spooling up. Not sure how effective it would be but I bet the likes of Alonso, Hamilton, Vettel will be trying every trick they can...


There are many pages in the 2014 engine thread where it has been explained that there is no KERS button in 2014. The entire ERS (thermal and kinetic) are linked to the throttle map, driver has no specific control of it other than selection of the preset throttle maps.
Huntresa wrote:
WilliamsF1 wrote:The resent WMSC ruling was for the same chassis/aero configuration as this year with a lower nose. Everything else is to remain same.
And still every designer they have interviewed so far is saying next years caars will be totally different, and not just cause the new engines.
Fitting a turbo engine and components within the current shape of the the car is the challenge they are talking about.

User avatar
raymondu999
156
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 6:31 am

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Going off memory - the new 2014 regs for front and rear wings still stand.
失败者找理由,成功者找方法

User avatar
Joie de vivre
1
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 9:12 am

Re: 2014 Design

Post

What was that "going back to 2012 regs" story about? Can someone explain what was that about and if is it still remaining?

Also did anyone draw yet how next years cars will look like?

TryHard
TryHard
9
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 10:46 am

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Having been looking over the current 2014 regs posted on the FIA site.... the front wings will be narrower, and the chassis height lowered as well
3.4.1 Bodywork width between the front and the rear wheel centre lines must not exceed 1400mm.
Bodywork width ahead of the front wheel centre line must not exceed 1650mm.
Currently, width ahead of front wheel centreline is the same as the overall car width (1800mm). This will mean some interesting thoughts about which way to direct flow off of the front wing... inside or outside (as the moment) the front tyres
15.4.4 (end of..) - The maximum height of the survival cell between the lines A-A and B-B is 625mm above the reference plane.
No part of sections taken at the lines A-A and B-B may lie more than 525mm and 625mm respectively above the reference plane.
The minimum height of the survival cell between the lines B-B and C-C is 550mm.
The chassis height change is in there, with the rules now defining that the section at the front of the survival cell (A-A) can be a maximum of 550mm above ref plane. Previously, it was 625mm, and then they brought in the rule to lower the noses at 550mm, and thats what caused the stepped nose (with the bumps being allowed in the gap between the A-A section, and a point 1950mm ahead of the rear face of the cockpit entry template... rule 3.7.9).
Consequently, that has a knock on effect on the underside of the car, as the survival cell templates require a certain height below... effectively shutting off space under the chassis for airflow...

Add in the removal of the beam wing(haven't got that far through the regs yet :p ), and other changes... some pretty big aero questions to figure out, even if I don't think the cars will look radically different to this year...

User avatar
matt21
102
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:17 pm

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Just_a_fan wrote:I can see the roll hoop intake remaining even if the rules don't require the triangular side profile for advertising (haven't checked the 2014 bodywork rules to see). A periscope intake somewhere else will create drag / turbulence that is less easy to deal with.
The regs demand that the air intakes are located in the pods.
FIA wrote:5.14.1
With the exception of incidental leakage through joints in the inlet system (either into or out of the system), all air entering the engine must enter the bodywork through a maximum of two inlets which are located:
a) Between the front of the cockpit entry template and a point 500mm forward of the rear wheel centre line longitudinally.
b) No less than 200mm above the reference plane vertically.

Blanchimont
Blanchimont
309
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 10:47 pm

Re: 2014 Design

Post

I think "no less than 200mm" means more than 200mm and therefore it is not mandatory to place the air intake in the pods.
Today's position over/behind the drivers head should still be fine!
Dear FIA, if you read this, please pm me for a redesign of the Technical Regulations to avoid finger nose shapes for 2016! :-)

User avatar
turbof1
Moderator
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 8:36 pm
Location: MountDoom CFD Matrix

Re: 2014 Design

Post

The cars will roughly look like 2008 spec without the numerous aero appendages, and the wings will look different.

Cars will go much slower, people speak of 5 seconds. That is just cruel. If I were a f1 engineer and tried every day my utter best to squeeze every bit of downforce out of aero, and then just see it swept away just like it was nothing, I would cry. Seriously.
#AeroFrodo

Nando
Nando
12
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 1:30 am

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Less downforce is a good thing imo. More emphasis on drivers rather then who has the best aerodynamicist.
"Il Phenomeno" - The one they fear the most!

"2% of the world's population own 50% of the world's wealth."

wesley123
wesley123
231
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 4:55 pm

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Nando wrote:Less downforce is a good thing imo. More emphasis on drivers rather then who has the best aerodynamicist.
Yeah they said the same about the switch to 2009 rules, we all know how that worked out.
"Bite my shiny metal ass" - Bender

User avatar
Holm86
228
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:37 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Nando wrote:Less downforce is a good thing imo. More emphasis on drivers rather then who has the best aerodynamicist.
I think its somehow quite the opposite. The harder the regulations makes it to get downforce the bigger advantage to those who can find it.

User avatar
raymondu999
156
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 6:31 am

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Holm86 wrote:
Nando wrote:Less downforce is a good thing imo. More emphasis on drivers rather then who has the best aerodynamicist.
I think its somehow quite the opposite. The harder the regulations makes it to get downforce the bigger advantage to those who can find it.
Agreed. In a world where 1000points of downforce is the norm, 1 point of downforce is nothing but 0.1%… but in a world where 100points of downforce is the norm, every point of downforce is 1%.
失败者找理由,成功者找方法

TryHard
TryHard
9
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 10:46 am

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Thinking more on the chassis regs, particularly the height.... I've got a feeling we'll see cars looking a lot like last years McLaren, in terms of nose treatment, with a flat top nose leading to a slopped chassis.
One thing I have noticed looking more closely at the rules tonight, whilst they have lowered the front chassis (down to 525mm above the ref plane), the nose height remains at 550... so there is possibility for the tip of the nose to be higher than the front of the chassis!
The image below shows a (very rough) sketch out of a side on view..
Blue line = 2014 chassis dimensions
White = 2013 Chassis dimensions
Red line is a literal interpretation of 2014 nose rules... hence the step up to the max height
Black line is a smoothed out nose idea...
Image
The hatched green area is the zone where any bodywork is available (it's where the current 'steps' sit)... could this have be a development area for 2014, with nose 'scoop' vents (like the redbull and sauber) popping up? Maybe a neat way to circumnavigate the 25mm difference in nose-to-chassis height.

Blanchimont
Blanchimont
309
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 10:47 pm

Re: 2014 Design

Post

The 2014 nose sketch isn't correct as article 15.4.3 will also limit the nose height.
15.4.3
An impact absorbing structure must be fitted in front of the survival cell. This structure need not be an integral part of the survival cell but must be solidly attached to it. It must have a minimum external cross section, in horizontal projection, of 9000mm² at apoint 50mm behind its forward-most point.

Furthermore :
a) No part of this cross-section may lie more than 500mm above the reference plane.
b) The centre of area of this section must be no more than 185mm above the reference plane.
c) No part of this section may be more than 50mm below its centre of area.
Dear FIA, if you read this, please pm me for a redesign of the Technical Regulations to avoid finger nose shapes for 2016! :-)

User avatar
WhiteBlue
124
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 7:58 pm
Location: WhiteBlue Country

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Yep, low noses will surely come with nose centre 185 mm maximum above the reference plane. Combine that with a shorter engine, no beam wing, a big hump of the MGUH and turbo above the gearbox and bulkier radiators for the inter coolers plus a central exhaust pipe and you have a totally different aero config. Nothing will carry over.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best .............................. organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)