I might have a small question for now (there will probably a huge washlist once the regulations have been gone through). There seems to be a whole new approach to regulations through Virtual Surfaces, which the 2021 technical regulations make extensively use of. Was this inspired by the 2019 front wing regulations, or was the usage of virtual surfaces already thoroughly thought about before the 2019 regulations?InsideF1 wrote: ↑31 Oct 2019, 23:01Hi all,
I'm new to forums like this as my previous 15 years of employment prevented me talking much about what I did. However, for the past two years I've been part of the aerodynamic team working within F1 on the 2021 rule set. Today these rules, following consultation with the teams and then unanimous approval by the WMSC, have been released to the wider public and where possible I'd be happy to try and answer any questions you might have about them.
There will always be differences of opinions, especially around something as subjective as aerodynamics but whilst you might not agree with some of what we have done or tried to achieve I won't continue to participate in the face of outright negativity.
In the meantime, ask away...
I think this is one of those times where I can say that I am glad its my job to do the CAD-prep, mesh, and CFD
Thanks for the answer. I hope we can keep you very busy the next few weeks with questions as we will start to plough through the regulations at our community .InsideF1 wrote: ↑31 Oct 2019, 23:17Hi,
Virtual surfaces as you point out were first introduced in 2019 for the FW regulations. The writing of the regulations is very much a collaborative process undertaken with the FiA whereby we agree what we are trying to achieve (and prevent) and from there discuss the best way of regulating it. Given that the virtual surface approach has worked well for achieving what was required in 2019 it was felt that in the appropriate areas it could continue to be utilised in 2021. Whilst it has not been without it's critics it offers a convenient method of trying to more tightly prescribe certain features (for example limiting level of curvature in the 2019 FWEP) whilst not completely prescribing a surface. Alternative approaches that were tested internally could often be circumvented where as thus far this approach seems to be working.
Thanks.
How do we access the FIA CAD portal to access the bits not defined in the rules
This will be a vaguely related question: in quite a few cases in the past the community had trouble to understand a few things when things came down to technical directives, which the public is not privy to. Is there a possibility these technical directives, whenever possible, could be made public? We as technical community would sherish having clarity in that.
That sucks. Means we can't design cars ourselves.
29.3 An extrusion of sections defined in §28.1 (b) and (c) along Y to Y=800.
The bodywork regulations were originally more tightly regulated from an aesthetics point of view the separate boxes were present to try force a certain top deck slope. Over time it was noted that (a) the bodywork shape (in general) is not influential in the car's wake and (b) too tightly imposing bodywork shape would reduce visual differentiation (even if we couldn't guarantee the end solution would look nice!) as such the boxes were made larger.