2014 Design

[Holm86]

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 ?

As I understand the minimum weight is increased to help the minor teams. The big teams could probably reduce the weight a lot without compromising safety. I don't think the lesser teams could do so. It would cost too much.

[WhiteBlue]

It clearly says in the FiA communication that the whole drive train with the recovery system got more weight than they thought before. So teams would have very little influence on it. You would have to make expensive changes to the engine and recovery design with the cost of the power train already high. There would also be the option to do a less rigid engine, but that has other negative implications. I think they gave away a big chance to improve the power to weight ratio when they shot down the I4 engine. That would have been more powerful for less weight and the engines would be running by now. We are probably talking 40 bhp plus and 30 kg less. It would make the power to weight ratio go up from 1.174 to 1.288. The current cars have 1.184.

It gets even more interesting if you compare P/W ratio for cars with a full race fuel load:
2013 V8, 642 kg +150 kg, 760 bhp -> 0.960 P/W
2013 I4T, 660 kg + 100 kg, 850 bhp -> 1.118 P/W
2014 V6T, 690 kg + 100 kg, 810 bhp -> 1.025 P/W

You see the I4 would have beaten them all. The 2014 turbo is at least better in race trim with fuel than the current V8.

[-Tifosi_dude-]

I've been through this thread before and I haven't found this picture anywhere. I think this is what the 2014 cars are supposed to look like. I found this while browsing Reddit F1 http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1. If I recall correctly, the side deflectors and bargeboards are on the 2014 cars, unlike what is shown in the picture. Also, I believe that the exhaust will actually have one exit, although I'm not entirely certain if that is true or not.

[WhiteBlue]

Yes, the exhaust has to be one exit only according to the latest communication by the FiA.

[Pierce89]

It clearly says in the FiA communication that the whole drive train with the recovery system got more weight than they thought before. So teams would have very little influence on it. You would have to make expensive changes to the engine and recovery design with the cost of the power train already high. There would also be the option to do a less rigid engine, but that has other negative implications. I think they gave away a big chance to improve the power to weight ratio when they shot down the I4 engine. That would have been more powerful for less weight and the engines would be running by now. We are probably talking 40 bhp plus and 30 kg less. It would make the power to weight ratio go up from 1.174 to 1.288. The current cars have 1.184.

It gets even more interesting if you compare P/W ratio for cars with a full race fuel load:
2013 V8, 642 kg +150 kg, 760 bhp -> 0.960 P/W
2013 I4T, 660 kg + 100 kg, 850 bhp -> 1.118 P/W
2014 V6T, 690 kg + 100 kg, 810 bhp -> 1.025 P/W

You see the I4 would have beaten them all. The 2014 turbo is at least better in race trim with fuel than the current V8.

Any calculations behind your figures? They seem fairly arbitrary to me. I don't believe that the I4 would have as large an advantage as you claim in either category.

[turbof1]

I've been through this thread before and I haven't found this picture anywhere. I think this is what the 2014 cars are supposed to look like. http://i.imgur.com/VhQJkCS.jpg I found this while browsing Reddit F1 http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1. If I recall correctly, the side deflectors and bargeboards are on the 2014 cars, unlike what is shown in the picture. Also, I believe that the exhaust will actually have one exit, although I'm not entirely certain if that is true or not.

Yes, it will be roughly just like that. Perhaps a little bit bulkier sidepods. Also, they forgot aero wise perhaps the most important thing: the monkey seat right behind the exhaust. That'll add some downforce back to it.

Bargeboards and sidepod-turning vanes will also be kept.

[WhiteBlue]

I've been through this thread before and I haven't found this picture anywhere. I think this is what the 2014 cars are supposed to look like. http://i.imgur.com/VhQJkCS.jpg I found this while browsing Reddit F1 http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1. If I recall correctly, the side deflectors and bargeboards are on the 2014 cars, unlike what is shown in the picture. Also, I believe that the exhaust will actually have one exit, although I'm not entirely certain if that is true or not.

Yes, it will be roughly just like that. Perhaps a little bit bulkier sidepods. Also, they forgot aero wise perhaps the most important thing: the monkey seat right behind the exhaust. That'll add some downforce back to it.

Bargeboards and sidepod-turning vanes will also be kept.

There will be no monkey seat behind the exhaust. The exhaust has to be so far behind the rear axle that nothing else will be behind it except crash protection. Also behind exhaust is a bodywork exclusion zone.

[WhiteBlue]

It clearly says in the FiA communication that the whole drive train with the recovery system got more weight than they thought before. So teams would have very little influence on it. You would have to make expensive changes to the engine and recovery design with the cost of the power train already high. There would also be the option to do a less rigid engine, but that has other negative implications. I think they gave away a big chance to improve the power to weight ratio when they shot down the I4 engine. That would have been more powerful for less weight and the engines would be running by now. We are probably talking 40 bhp plus and 30 kg less. It would make the power to weight ratio go up from 1.174 to 1.288. The current cars have 1.184.

It gets even more interesting if you compare P/W ratio for cars with a full race fuel load:
2013 V8, 642 kg +150 kg, 760 bhp -> 0.960 P/W
2013 I4T, 660 kg + 100 kg, 850 bhp -> 1.118 P/W
2014 V6T, 690 kg + 100 kg, 810 bhp -> 1.025 P/W

You see the I4 would have beaten them all. The 2014 turbo is at least better in race trim with fuel than the current V8.

Any calculations behind your figures? They seem fairly arbitrary to me. I don't believe that the I4 would have as large an advantage as you claim in either category.

Weight is my personal estimate. Power was discussed some years ago on this board and Autosport forum. What are your personal estimates? I reckon we will still see a reasonable P/W ratio whatever you come up with, particularly with fuel included. One thing they need to change due to the higher weight is the tyres though.

[turbof1]

I've been through this thread before and I haven't found this picture anywhere. I think this is what the 2014 cars are supposed to look like. http://i.imgur.com/VhQJkCS.jpg I found this while browsing Reddit F1 http://www.reddit.com/r/formula1. If I recall correctly, the side deflectors and bargeboards are on the 2014 cars, unlike what is shown in the picture. Also, I believe that the exhaust will actually have one exit, although I'm not entirely certain if that is true or not.

Yes, it will be roughly just like that. Perhaps a little bit bulkier sidepods. Also, they forgot aero wise perhaps the most important thing: the monkey seat right behind the exhaust. That'll add some downforce back to it.

Bargeboards and sidepod-turning vanes will also be kept.

There will be no monkey seat behind the exhaust. The exhaust has to be so far behind the rear axle that nothing else will be behind it except crash protection. Also behind exhaust is a bodywork exclusion zone.

Yes, but the 15cm in the centre is still an exception to the exclusion zone. I do believe teams can exploid that area, although admittingly I could be marginally wrong about it. Here is a reference image (Somers F1):

The latter 150mm of the exhaust has to start in the yellow area (only 20mm in width). I don't know how much freedom teams exactly have concerning the monkey seat, but if they are allowed to pull it a couple of cm's back it would certainly fit. Else it would just do/just not do case.

Also, Somers reported this:

The original 2014 regulations called for a singular exhaust outlet but the 2014 regulations now permit 2:

5.8.2 Engine exhaust systems may incorporate no more than two exits, both of which must be rearward facing tailpipes, through which all exhaust gases must pass.

EDIT: the latest regulations (published today?) effectively state 1 exhaust. Also, 5.8.5 excludes my idea .

.8.5
There must be no bodywork lying within a right circular cylinder which :
a)
Shares a common axis with that of the last 150mm of the tailpipe.
b)
Has a diameter 30mm greater than the tailpipe.
c)
Starts at the exit of the tailpipe and extends rearwards as far as a point 600mm behind the rear wheel centre line.

[Blanchimont]

2014 Technical Regulations of July 8th 2013

2014 Sporting Regulations of July 8th 2013

The parts marked in pink, and that's quite a lot, show what has changed.

[Huntresa]

Yeah and teams can do monkey seats, exhausts will exit right in front of that, looking above the pipes will exit just before the RW, just like the yellow area shows on the pic above in this thread.

On that Ferrari 2014 pic i think a big change will be how the rear end and sidepod package will look. Also the FW eventho it says its shorter doesnt look shorter, or are my eyes deciving me ? Also they have done an outwash wing ( Ferraris 2010 wing ? ) we dont know that will be the case.

Also are that correct that they will remove bargeboards ?

[WhiteBlue]

Also, 5.8.5 excludes my idea .

.8.5
There must be no bodywork lying within a right circular cylinder which :
a)
Shares a common axis with that of the last 150mm of the tailpipe.
b)
Has a diameter 30mm greater than the tailpipe.
c)
Starts at the exit of the tailpipe and extends rearwards as far as a point 600mm behind the rear wheel centre line.

I told you so.

[turbof1]

Yeah I understood that as the bodywork restriction zone which removed the beam wing, not as the exclusion zone coupled to the exhaust. In hindsight I went too quick over that phrase, so my bad .

My second thought was they could use a (semi-)Coanda/downwash effect on it to bend the exhaust gasses back down on a lower, out of the "exhaust-cone" area, placed monkey seat, but that looks difficult. Perhaps possible though. The maximum height is 550mm from the baseline. Coanda might be impossible due no bodywork allowed within 15mm off the exhaust for the last 150mm of the exhaust. Downwash still pretty much possible. The last 150mm is allowed to start as forward as 185mm from the rear wheel line, giving 35mm of space towards the centre rear wheel line, though the rear wing, and monkey seat is further back then that.

[hollus]

EDIT: the latest regulations (published today?) effectively state 1 exhaust. Also, 5.8.5 excludes my idea .

.8.5
There must be no bodywork lying within a right circular cylinder which :
a)
Shares a common axis with that of the last 150mm of the tailpipe.
b)
Has a diameter 30mm greater than the tailpipe.
c)
Starts at the exit of the tailpipe and extends rearwards as far as a point 600mm behind the rear wheel centre line.

Those restrictions are not any tighter that the ones we have now and that supposedly made the current Coanda exhaust ramps impossible. They forget, again, that the exhaust gas pushes the gas around it via entrainment, and that very shortly after the exhaust outlet, the effective exhaust gas diameter increases significantly as it starts to slow down. A 1.5cm exclusion zone is not enough to prevent this. Then add to that the the lower profile of an F1 wing (thinking monkey seat here) is the most effective to produce downforce when blown...
Expect the current "mostly for attachment" monkey seats to turn into an all out war of direct downforce (plus attachment). They have just put a large part of the energy still in the exhaust gases, which was supposed to be harvested as much as possible, at the direct service of downforce.

Edit: Is there a limit in the vertical direction that prevents the monkey seat from reaching above the exhaust pipe?

[Huntresa]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/108682


Im qouting the biggies from the article for those who cant read it cause they have read all their articles this month alrdy.

ARTICLE 5.8.2: EXHAUST POSITIONING

The new regulations for the 1.6-litre turbocharged V6 engine era mandate a single tailpipe of fixed dimensions, which must exit 170-185mm behind the rear axle line and 350-500mm above the floor.

With the circular end of the final 150mm of tailpipe having to point upwards at an angle of five degrees, any aero effect from the exhaust will be hugely restricted.

Bodywork is also banned in the area behind the tailpipe's axis, preventing vanes or winglets from diverting the plume towards the rear wing or diffuser.

One dispensation is that the exhaust can be offset from the car's centre-line by 100mm, which could allow the retention of the monkey seat winglet.

While current exhaust positioning rules, introduced at the start of last year, are strict, teams still gain a huge amount of downforce from the blowing effect.

With both the Coanda and downwash effects, the diffuser is effectively sealed at its sides by the exhaust, giving around two seconds per lap in performance.

ARTICLE 3.7.9/15.4.3: NOSE SHAPE

As the second phase of the FIA's move to lower the nose tip to prevent disastrous t-bone or nose-to-wheel crashes, the whole nose box will now be bound by the restricted height rules of 2014.

This year, the nose tip can be 550mm high and the chassis 625mm high, with a vanity panel allowed to hide the unsightly bump created by the step.

Romain Grosjean Lotus F1 2013Under the new rules, the nose tip must be centred at 185mm, which is not much higher than the front wing, so noses will be very low.

This will impact aerodynamics as the flow under the nose and chassis will be obstructed.

The regulations also prevent the nose structure arching up too high and although vanity panels will be permitted, it is possible some very odd shapes will be created to maintain the highest possible chassis/nose combination.

ARTICLE 11.7: REAR BRAKE CONTROL

As part of the new powertrain regulations, a large part of the cars' power will be provided by energy recovery systems.

What was termed KERS is now ERS-K and has effectively double the power output, for five times longer, than current systems.

Harvesting this much energy under braking will affect the braking effect at the rear wheels, so an electronic rear brake control system will be allowed.

This will be used to offset the ERS-K effect by aiding the braking effort at the rear, negating the need for the driver to constantly alter the brake bias.

Also

ARTICLE 4.1: WEIGHT

As the weight of the new powertrain is greater than expected, the minimum weight has been further increased to 690kg, up from 642kg this year and the original 2014 mark of 685kg.