2014 Design

[Steven]

As in my article, it is to prevent circumventing the maximum nose height rule by using a clever modesty panel

http://www.f1technical.net/news/18526

[Huntresa]

But how would a stepped nose in 2014 be allowed when the regs specifiy a low nose ala Brawn 2009 or close to ?

[Blanchimont]

I just made this simple sketch where i think a step could be placed, even with a low nose.
If the nose passes all the crash test demands and if the FIA didn't add any further limitations for the nose, i don't see why such a design should be illegal next year.

[WhiteBlue]

I don't know the exact rules but I think that a stepped nose may give you problems to pass the crash test. That could be an additional hurdle. It should be clear that any loop hole to the low nose regulation will be quickly closed by the FiA. They are determined to have the low nose for safety purposes and that allows them to outlaw designs that circumvent the regulations. The teams are told about the safety aspect. It would be dumb to waste money for something that will be atken away the moment you show it.

[Neno]

I don't know the exact rules but I think that a stepped nose may give you problems to pass the crash test. That could be an additional hurdle. It should be clear that any loop hole to the low nose regulation will be quickly closed by the FiA. They are determined to have the low nose for safety purposes and that allows them to outlaw designs that circumvent the regulations. The teams are told about the safety aspect. It would be dumb to waste money for something that will be atken away the moment you show it.

they are determined to have most ugly cars in f1 ever (2009 cars) what safety reasons? i would rather have step who looks agressive like lotus e21 then ugly 2009 brawn car.

[Huntresa]

Sry but i still dont see how a step would circumevent the low nose rules since the tip will be low and the rest under it aswell, so no more air would go under if you have step or not, or am i totally misunderstanding ?

[Blanchimont]

Sry but i still dont see how a step would circumevent the low nose rules since the tip will be low and the rest under it aswell, so no more air would go under if you have step or not, or am i totally misunderstanding ?

Well, i just designed a sketch to show where a step could be possible. If the teams will really use one next year will be up to their CFD and wind tunnel studies. I didn't think about getting more air under the nose, just about the step.

In the next picture i thought about getting some air under the nose and this nose looks really awful.
But is it legal? The crosssection 50mm behind the tip is large enough, the cross section A-A also.
Article 3.8 which demands "only a single section, which must be open" should also be fulfilled.

What do you think about the nose?

[WhiteBlue]

Sry but i still dont see how a step would circumevent the low nose rules since the tip will be low and the rest under it aswell, so no more air would go under if you have step or not, or am i totally misunderstanding ?

The FiA have communicated it very clearly that they will not allow any wriggle room to avoid making the driver compartment and the nose as low as required by the regulations. Steps will always aim at such a strategy. The teams naturally want the front end as high as possible to get more air to the diffusor. But this design concept results to higher risk for the driver to get injuries in T-boning and in accidents where two cars get launched atop each other. The FiA will not tolerate steps in either the tub or the nose cone to bypass that regulation. They have the authority to ban anything that contradicts the driver safety at the first test and even in season. I thought that is understood by all.

[Just_a_fan]

The regulations are written by lawyers based on technical input from engineers. There are, therefore, a huge number of loop holes and "interpretations" available to the teams. This is the problem with how the FIA runs the sport.

I've spent over 20 years working with similar types of legislation in the construction industry. Unless the words say "X is absolutely not allowed at all, ever, never, and we really mean it" then it is open to interpretation. And if it gives a performance benefit then the teams will interpret it accordingly and argue afterwards.

The only way the FIA can enforce a given nose shape is to define it in the way they have with the front wing central "neutral" section. Anything else will result in arguments. If the nose shape is fundamental to driver safety then it should be defined by the FIA in the way that the new side impact systems will be defined - an absolute shape and manufacture specification that may not, in any way at all, be deviated from.

Anything else is just political window dressing...

[Huntresa]

Sry but i still dont see how a step would circumevent the low nose rules since the tip will be low and the rest under it aswell, so no more air would go under if you have step or not, or am i totally misunderstanding ?

The FiA have communicated it very clearly that they will not allow any wriggle room to avoid making the driver compartment and the nose as low as required by the regulations. Steps will always aim at such a strategy. The teams naturally want the front end as high as possible to get more air to the diffusor. But this design concept results to higher risk for the driver to get injuries in T-boning and in accidents where two cars get launched atop each other. The FiA will not tolerate steps in either the tub or the nose cone to bypass that regulation. They have the authority to ban anything that contradicts the driver safety at the first test and even in season. I thought that is understood by all.

Yeah but thats what i dont get by the message, a step at the joint with the bulkhead wouldnt make the nose higher, it wouldt just make the angle more steep more so then just corved like lets say 2009 Brawn compared to Toro Rosso 2009, with toro having kinda a step but more steep angle going downwards, but not as far down but if we had 2014 regs the Toro Rosso 2009 would be very steep very long way down.

[Steven]

But how would a stepped nose in 2014 be allowed when the regs specifiy a low nose ala Brawn 2009 or close to ?

It seems like everybody forgot this, but the final WMSC meeting of 2012 decided to revert these aerodynamic regulations to the 2012 specification for cost reduction.

This means the noses are still allowed to be like this year, the front bulkhead can remain as high as it is now, and the beam wing will remain in place.

[Huntresa]

But how would a stepped nose in 2014 be allowed when the regs specifiy a low nose ala Brawn 2009 or close to ?

It seems like everybody forgot this, but the final WMSC meeting of 2012 decided to revert these aerodynamic regulations to the 2012 specification for cost reduction.

This means the noses are still allowed to be like this year, the front bulkhead can remain as high as it is now, and the beam wing will remain in place.

Eh no, the regs that have been published have been with shorter fw and low nose and no beamwing. What they meant by the revert it was that they weren't going with the ground effect stuff, the rest is still there.

This has been discussed in the other thread, http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... =6&t=14389 the last few pages.

And this http://somersf1.blogspot.se/2013/01/201 ... anges.html minus what they decided yesterday with going again with single exhaust.

[Steven]

Euh yes indeed, not sure where my head was this morning. Mustn't post when only just awake

[WhiteBlue]

Source

I think lap times will probably be two to three seconds slower than they are currently. I think the efficiency is the key thing. We’ve got the new power train coming: a 1.6-litre V6 with all sorts of energy saving and energy converting devices which will, I think, bring the power to a little over what we have right now. ..There are significant changes to the wing designs in order to reduce the drag. The drag is the thing that had to be reduced to make the fuel consumption work and as you know the cornerstone for this new power unit is only using 100 kilos of fuel for the race.

That seems to be an important piece of information. I believe that by wing design Charlie talks about aerodynamic downforce in general. We know that the lower noses will effect the diffusor and the exhaust restrictions will also affect downforce. There are some changes to the front wing which becomes smaller and the beam wing that is cancelled. So that 2.5 s lap time increase should tell us what to expect. Cars will loose some cornering performance because there will be this big cut in downforce. Charlie is only talking about the drag but you get that only by also cutting the downforce. The top speed on the straight are likelyto become higher because they increase the power and cut the drag. Pirelli have estimated 30 kph more straight line speed and spinning the tyres in 3 rd gear might be possible.

[Blackout]

Why don't they lower that damned minimum weight they could add some more restrictions to the 'materials' chapter in order to limit costs a bit and they could easily help the heavier drivers with different rules on the 'ballast' chapter... don't they want advanced, fast and efficient F1 cars ?