2021 Aero Thread

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.
ENGINE TUNER
2
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 5:07 pm

Re: 2021 Aero Thread

Post by ENGINE TUNER » Sun Jun 09, 2019 2:08 pm

MatsNorway wrote:
Sun Jun 09, 2019 12:44 pm
How heavy is the tub then? it is clean carbon. 100kg?

bigger wheels ++ add extra torque to the tub. Tub needs to be stiffer/stronger but yet they make them longer and longer. Because they can. They are still below the weight limit with the giant cars they have. Once they actually struggle to make the weight they will make them shorter. including gearboxes. Mercedes had the most efficient engine and probably still do.. so it is no surprise that they had or perhaps still have the longest car. Their radiators are smaller, fuel tank is smaller, probably have some of the best electrical components too so naturally they can squeeze out a longer car within the weight limit.
They are not making the tub longer, the tub ends where it mates to the front of the PU. Like I just explained, pretty much every car on the grid has the same length tub. The biggest weight increase to the tub is from the increased load requirements required from the halo. Yes the tub weight has also increased because of the increased mass and forces from the heavier tires and increased g forces, but that is minimal in comparison.

I'm not sure if any of the cars are under weight, but lowering the weight limit will not force them to get shorter because the extra length of the cars does not make them heavier. The cars are longer to increase the surface area of the floor for increased downforce. The only real way to shorten the cars is to limit the wheelbase and overhangs, unfortunately.

JordanMugen
7
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2018 12:36 pm

Re: 2021 Aero Thread

Post by JordanMugen » Sun Jun 09, 2019 6:04 pm

MatsNorway wrote:
Sun Jun 09, 2019 12:44 pm
How heavy is the tub then? it is clean carbon. 100kg?
Tub is about 60 kg.

What do you mean clean carbon? :wink: The tub is a sandwich construction of various materials with a honeycomb core.

MatsNorway
0
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2016 10:24 pm

Re: 2021 Aero Thread

Post by MatsNorway » Mon Jun 10, 2019 10:30 am

ENGINE TUNER wrote:
Sun Jun 09, 2019 2:08 pm

I'm not sure if any of the cars are under weight, but lowering the weight limit will not force them to get shorter because the extra length of the cars does not make them heavier. The cars are longer to increase the surface area of the floor for increased downforce. The only real way to shorten the cars is to limit the wheelbase and overhangs, unfortunately.
I believe they will get shorter if you do drop the weight. Shorter gearboxes and a tiny bit lighter tubs. And yes, they get that long for aero purposes. And they will continue to get longer and longer each year until new rules comes in. If you limit the length they will just use thinner but stronger materials to get the cars coke bottle thinner. And other tricks. I would also then expect more complicated systems to be made. I Really want F1 to shrink in weight/systems as there is only so much you can do if your vehicle is 4-500kg. It simplifies things a great deal and by saving 250-300kg you obviously save a dollar here and there. But reaching such a weight means you need to rethink a lot of things. Hybrid is out for instance. Weight limit should really be lower either way. Not a fan of MGUH either. I think reducing weight would have trown alot of those systems out and allthough some teams might have made them work others race with far cheaper cars thus keeping the sport a bit more healthy for the mid and backfield.

The goals should be to get the weight to a point where the mechanical grip is good with just the floor and then nearly removing wings so cars can follow through the corners.
je suis charlie

A touch of genius is the simplest thing.


DRS is like supports on a bicycle[/size]

ENGINE TUNER
2
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 5:07 pm

Re: 2021 Aero Thread

Post by ENGINE TUNER » Tue Jun 11, 2019 6:48 pm

MatsNorway wrote:
Mon Jun 10, 2019 10:30 am
...
You are clueless

Maplesoup
12
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2019 6:25 pm

Re: 2021 Aero Thread

Post by Maplesoup » Tue Jun 11, 2019 7:02 pm

ENGINE TUNER wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 6:48 pm
MatsNorway wrote:
Mon Jun 10, 2019 10:30 am
...
You are clueless
I'd agree, lowering the weight limit will push costs up. The teams won't compromise on their aero concepts just because of the weight limit. Only way to make the cars shorter is to put a change the limit in the rules.

MatsNorway
0
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2016 10:24 pm

Re: 2021 Aero Thread

Post by MatsNorway » Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:33 pm

Pff.. nice arguments. What is the generally the most expensive? 5 tons of custom made parts in carbon and alu? or 100kg of custom made parts in carbon and alu? same applies for 700kg vs 500kg.

Strip the cars down to the essentials and they become cheaper. The closer you get to a Go cart the cheaper they can get. Drop the MUGH, KERS, batteries and remove a gear or two from the eight speed gearbox. Drop DRS too. They are bicycle support wheels. As weight goes down you can keep the pace without the same need for aero.. (assuming tires are the same) And then shrink or simplify the formula for aero. Brawn is allready considering adding a minimum radius for certain areas. Supposedly it has been used in the past.
je suis charlie

A touch of genius is the simplest thing.


DRS is like supports on a bicycle[/size]

AMG.Tzan
12
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 12:35 am

Re: 2021 Aero Thread

Post by AMG.Tzan » Sun Jun 16, 2019 4:38 pm

Giving more freedom in terms of both aero and engine design while implementing a downforce and a maximum horse power figure...wouldn't be a good idea to get the field closer together??

Something like Le Mans 2021 but without the lap time BS
This of course would work only if they implemented a downforce figure close to that of the midfield teams and not that of the top 3 teams! Same goes for engine...something around Honda-Renault hp figures!

Also a standard Active Suspension system but with freedom of programming of course sounds like a good idea to reduce the amount of clever suspensions teams can produce!

What do you think?? :)

hollus
Moderator
User avatar
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 12:21 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Re: 2021 Aero Thread

Post by hollus » Sun Jun 16, 2019 5:03 pm

Regarding the possibility of specifying a maximum car length:

The current rules specify the maximum (and minimum?) car width, for very good reasons.
The current rules specify a maximum (and minimum?) car height, for... for some reason.
The current rules leave the car length completely free, because... :-k

It would of course have quite an effect on the aero, but, IMO, probably also on the car's weight.
Why is it suddenly a right to carry a clean pool table along with your car, holes and all?
It is not white, it is not black, it is probably gray.

FPV GTHO
6
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 4:57 am

Re: 2021 Aero Thread

Post by FPV GTHO » Wed Jun 19, 2019 5:35 am

hollus wrote:
Sun Jun 16, 2019 5:03 pm
Regarding the possibility of specifying a maximum car length:

The current rules specify the maximum (and minimum?) car width, for very good reasons.
The current rules specify a maximum (and minimum?) car height, for... for some reason.
The current rules leave the car length completely free, because... :-k

It would of course have quite an effect on the aero, but, IMO, probably also on the car's weight.
Why is it suddenly a right to carry a clean pool table along with your car, holes and all?
I think for most the argument against bodywork limits is the cars all start to look identical, so I guess then how do you limit them organically? They've gotten this long partly because of how forward the weight distribution is. Although that too is another fixed dimension. The smaller 2021 front tyres should bring a slightly more rearward bias and with it an inclination to shorter cars naturally.

I do wonder as well, whilst I still don't like the look of long cars personally, if the cars could improve their low speed manouvreability without shedding length, would the general opinion differ? Mercedes has done so this year with their rear suspension apparently inducing rear wheel steer. Perhaps the FIA should just outright allow rear wheel steering. It's something that genuinely would be road relevant with so many sports cars now adopting it.

Xwang
5
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 10:12 am

Re: 2021 Aero Thread

Post by Xwang » Tue Jun 25, 2019 6:28 pm

FPV GTHO wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 5:35 am
hollus wrote:
Sun Jun 16, 2019 5:03 pm
Regarding the possibility of specifying a maximum car length:

The current rules specify the maximum (and minimum?) car width, for very good reasons.
The current rules specify a maximum (and minimum?) car height, for... for some reason.
The current rules leave the car length completely free, because... :-k

It would of course have quite an effect on the aero, but, IMO, probably also on the car's weight.
Why is it suddenly a right to carry a clean pool table along with your car, holes and all?
I think for most the argument against bodywork limits is the cars all start to look identical, so I guess then how do you limit them organically? They've gotten this long partly because of how forward the weight distribution is. Although that too is another fixed dimension. The smaller 2021 front tyres should bring a slightly more rearward bias and with it an inclination to shorter cars naturally.

I do wonder as well, whilst I still don't like the look of long cars personally, if the cars could improve their low speed manouvreability without shedding length, would the general opinion differ? Mercedes has done so this year with their rear suspension apparently inducing rear wheel steer. Perhaps the FIA should just outright allow rear wheel steering. It's something that genuinely would be road relevant with so many sports cars now adopting it.
I wonder if limiting the maximum car length will create a situation in which not all the teams use the same front and rear overhang (meaning that maybe they could prefer to have a longer wheelbase but with some compromise on front or rear overhang. Is it possible or the overhang lengths are contribute too much to the performance to foresee in any case the use of the maximum values?

Just_a_fan
438
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:37 pm

Re: 2021 Aero Thread

Post by Just_a_fan » Tue Jun 25, 2019 6:32 pm

Limiting the overhangs would mean limiting the wing sizes, so it's unlikely any team would do that.
Turbo says "Dumpster sounds so much more classy. It's the diamond of the cesspools."

Xwang
5
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 10:12 am

Re: 2021 Aero Thread

Post by Xwang » Tue Jun 25, 2019 6:55 pm

Just_a_fan wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 6:32 pm
Limiting the overhangs would mean limiting the wing sizes, so it's unlikely any team would do that.
Right, but maybe a different definition of wing sizes in the rules could permit to go back to 70s solutions where the rear wing was pretty on the rear axle.
With actual rules which define wing size from the front and rear axle upward and downward of course there is no scope for overhang reduction.