F1technical.net

Holm86 wrote: Can you mention anything about the nose design??

Its similar to my Autosport design, more shapely, but not as sculpted as Smirkoffs design. I'm calling this a finger nose, as its more polite than the other terms used by the teams!

Scarbs, I know you are a bit bound by confidentiality, but do you perhaps know how many teams are planning to use this nose design? Or how many are confirmed to?

scarbs wrote:

Holm86 wrote: Can you mention anything about the nose design??

Its similar to my Autosport design, more shapely, but not as sculpted as Smirkoffs design. I'm calling this a finger nose, as its more polite than the other terms used by the teams!

Super. Thank you

turbof1 wrote:Scarbs, I know you are a bit bound by confidentiality, but do you perhaps know how many teams are planning to use this nose design? Or how many are confirmed to?

In the racers edge as I have linked to a few pages back he mentions that at least one team have made a carbon fibre version of such a nose design.

EDIT: added link.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEza9TSq4IY[/youtube]

turbof1 wrote:Scarbs, I know you are a bit bound by confidentiality, but do you perhaps know how many teams are planning to use this nose design? Or how many are confirmed to?

I’ve been told by several teams they have a design like that as an option. I know of one or two other variations to meet the minimum x-section rules. I’ve also heard one team will not go this route.

The challenge for the designers is to balance aero against crash test performance, thus DF for weight.

Their ability to meet the crash test with a slender structure, may mean a full anteater design might be possible (unlikely). It’s more likely that they will need a lot more structure to meet the test, how well they balance this off against aero is the key to an attractive nose. With more structure (crash resistance) comes more weight.

For some teams there will be a range of noses to be tried. It might be that a less aerodynamically effective nose is used as it’s a lighter option, as the whole car weight is a tough target for next year. That is assuming

Teams did manage to get a longitudinal flat nose through in the last couple of years. As this nose is latidudinal flat, I do believe that atleast the top teams will manage to get a "finger nose" through with a minimal weight penalty.

It'll be interesting to see how the individual teams will judge it though. When faced with the vanity panel this season, a lot of teams choosed for a full cover due the aero gain being slightly bigger then the weight penalty (we are speaking of very small differences anyway), but interestingly Sauber and Red Bull only used a very minimal coverage, rating the weight penalty of a full vanity panel too high. That might hint at how they think about this year's noses.

I could imagine that the finger will only contribute very little in absorbing the crash energy and therefore could be built as weak as possible to only withstand the aerodynamic and gravitational forces.

The real crash structure then could begin where the "real nose" begins!

According to the rules it needs to form part of the crash structure, but as you say it will not do a lot to suppress the impact test.

That would raise the CoG. Another element to make matters more complicated: do you add less weight higher or more weight lower? The benefits of it all are probably marginal at best.

Omnicorse.it is reporting the 2014 cars will be at least 6 seconds slower per lap than 2013 cars. According to Omnicorse, there will be a 30% reduction of downforce with next years cars due to the regulation changes. The 2013 car produces roughly 1,700 kg of downforce at 250 km/h. The 30% reduction would equate to over 500 kg of downforce lost, which puts the cars at 1,200 kg of DF. Omnicorse says 80kg of DF is worth almost a second per lap.


Here is the link where they discuss the new regulations. They also state the need for more cooling will hurt aerodynamic efficiency, and other things. Enrique Scalabroni seems to have consulted and is the basis for the information within the article.

Problem is....30% of downforce reduction is a guess.

From 2008 to 2009 it was supposed to be 50% downforce drop...was never the case.

it makes no sense teams, who pushed for 2012 style 2014 regs on the basis it would have made cars too slow (5 sec/lap slower with previous 2014 draft regs) would end up with a car slower than a car in confirmity with the previous 2014 regs.

They won't be much slower, if it all I think

Crucial_Xtreme wrote:Omnicorse.it is reporting the 2014 cars will be at least 6 seconds slower per lap than 2013 cars. According to Omnicorse, there will be a 30% reduction of downforce with next years cars due to the regulation changes. The 2013 car produces roughly 1,700 kg of downforce at 250 km/h. The 30% reduction would equate to over 500 kg of downforce lost, which puts the cars at 1,200 kg of DF. Omnicorse says 80kg of DF is worth almost a second per lap.


Here is the link where they discuss the new regulations. They also state the need for more cooling will hurt aerodynamic efficiency, and other things. Enrique Scalabroni seems to have consulted and is the basis for the information within the article.

Earlier this year when I said that a lot of downforce would be lost in 2014 not many believed me. Removing the beam wing harms both the diffuser and the rear wing. The beam wing may not induce a lot of downforce on itself but it helps extraction from the diffuser increasing its efficiency and the up draft of air it creates also helps the boundary layer stay attached to the underside of the rear wing.

There is a lot of downforce lost next year with the removal of the beam wing, shallower rear wing and no exhaust sealing of the diffuser. And the only way to balance this out is to remove downforce at the front as well. Even though the only regulation changes at the front wing is that it becomes a bit narrower. But teams will run less AoA on the front wings and divert more air outside and inside the tire to get more DF at the rear. So I do believe that the total DF level next year is much lower than today. Add the increased weight, larger cooling requirements, lower HP figures and the fixed gear ratios to this and I recon the cars will be at least 3-4 sec slower. 6 sec is perhaps a bit too much I guess.

6 seconds a lap seems a bit steep but the figures don't lie, unless they find a way of retaining downforce. Although downforce will be reduced, drag is also being cut due to the reduction of the beam wing and shallower rear wing profile.

The power output from the engine will be more efficient as they aren't using throttle maps to blow the diffuser. I am going to say that lap times could be 4 seconds slower at first but that's only a gut feeling. I guess the main challenge will be putting the power down out of the corners. The 2013 cars, particularly the RB9, had monumental traction.

If the tires are goood and/or the 2014 cars manage to put the power down well on track, maybe Renault's Axel plasse's figures are realistic after all; he says the cars could gain 3 seconds per lap thanks to the new power units...

How about the floor ? if the 2014 car have long sidepods and very long gearboxes, their floor should be slightly bigger and their 'coke bottle shape' should be particulary thin... So maybe they can make up much DF in that area.

I think we'll see the cars considerably quicker in a straight line but suffer in the corners. They'll have to go for less draggy solutions for decent fuel economy. If these times turn out to be true, then we could be looking at cars that aren't that much quicker, if at all, then GP2.