2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.
lh13
lh13
1
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2019 2:32 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

f1jcw wrote:
Zynerji wrote:
Sun Jun 12, 2022 6:08 pm
mzso wrote:
Sun Jun 12, 2022 6:02 pm
So since at any given time half the field fails to do so, we should accept that drivers miss races due to injuries, or might even retire, instead of implementing something that completely prevents the problem?
The teams can solve it immediately by raising the rear ride height, and giving up performance.

The drivers only suffer because the teams choose it for laptimes.
So, you want a unlevel playing field.
Teams couldn’t compete with mercs frick, party modes, etc. they was removed, often in season
Multiple teams have solved the problem. McLaren are even giving up some performance to manage the situation, according to Norris, and they're happy with it. Its not a single team that has found a grey area to fix it. Mercedes has got it worst, so effectively their own problem, not regulations'.

Tommy Cookers
Tommy Cookers
581
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 3:55 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

mzso wrote:
Sun Jun 12, 2022 6:02 pm
JordanMugen wrote:
Sun Jun 12, 2022 5:47 pm
As Symonds says, the inerters are not necessary, the phenomenon is "fixable within the framework of the rules and the technology allowed on the cars now". The secret, as he says, is "to minimise the oscillation": i.e., like the Red Bull does, which can be done within the existing suspension regulations.
So since at any given time half the field fails to do so, we should accept that drivers miss races due to injuries, or might even retire, instead of implementing something that completely prevents the problem?
why complain about 6g (momentarily) in bump ? - the cars are made for almost 6g continuously in braking & cornering

User avatar
Zynerji
110
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

mzso wrote:
Sun Jun 12, 2022 6:13 pm
Zynerji wrote:
Sun Jun 12, 2022 6:08 pm
The teams can solve it immediately by raising the rear ride height, and giving up performance.

The drivers only suffer because the teams choose it for laptimes.
But they will never do that as long as it requires giving up performance.
Then it's not my problem, or anyone else's.

Cannot and will not are not the same thing.

User avatar
Zynerji
110
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

f1jcw wrote:
Sun Jun 12, 2022 6:30 pm
Zynerji wrote:
Sun Jun 12, 2022 6:08 pm
mzso wrote:
Sun Jun 12, 2022 6:02 pm

So since at any given time half the field fails to do so, we should accept that drivers miss races due to injuries, or might even retire, instead of implementing something that completely prevents the problem?
The teams can solve it immediately by raising the rear ride height, and giving up performance.

The drivers only suffer because the teams choose it for laptimes.
So, you want a unlevel playing field.
Teams couldn’t compete with mercs frick, party modes, etc. they was removed, often in season
Maybe if your team could reach other teams' level, it would be fine?🤔

User avatar
InsaneX_Badger
2
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2021 3:03 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

To anyone who understands these aero concepts better than I ever could. Is there a concept that will work much better at higher altitudes with air density being lower? Or will it just reduce each car equally?

Just_a_fan
Just_a_fan
554
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:37 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

lh13 wrote:
Sun Jun 12, 2022 6:47 pm
f1jcw wrote:
Zynerji wrote:
Sun Jun 12, 2022 6:08 pm

The teams can solve it immediately by raising the rear ride height, and giving up performance.

The drivers only suffer because the teams choose it for laptimes.
So, you want a unlevel playing field.
Teams couldn’t compete with mercs frick, party modes, etc. they was removed, often in season
Multiple teams have solved the problem. McLaren are even giving up some performance to manage the situation, according to Norris, and they're happy with it. Its not a single team that has found a grey area to fix it. Mercedes has got it worst, so effectively their own problem, not regulations'.
At least two teams are alleged to have solved it using a potentially illegal method. We'll have to see what comes of the floor rules "clarification" in the next week or two.

In Silverstone, at least, the Merc was certainly not being adversely affected - Hamilton was setting fastest lap after fastest lap at one point.
Turbo says "Dumpster sounds so much more classy. It's the diamond of the cesspools." oh, and "The Dutch fans are drunk. Maybe"

Just_a_fan
Just_a_fan
554
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:37 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

Zynerji wrote:
Sun Jun 12, 2022 8:33 pm
f1jcw wrote:
Sun Jun 12, 2022 6:30 pm
Zynerji wrote:
Sun Jun 12, 2022 6:08 pm

The teams can solve it immediately by raising the rear ride height, and giving up performance.

The drivers only suffer because the teams choose it for laptimes.
So, you want a unlevel playing field.
Teams couldn’t compete with mercs frick, party modes, etc. they was removed, often in season
Maybe if your team could reach other teams' level, it would be fine?🤔
Same could be said (and was by some) in previous years when Red Bull were crying foul at every race because their PU wasn't as good as the competition's. In the end, they got the rules changed to their benefit. :wink:
Turbo says "Dumpster sounds so much more classy. It's the diamond of the cesspools." oh, and "The Dutch fans are drunk. Maybe"

User avatar
chrisc90
8
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2022 8:22 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

Just_a_fan wrote:
Sun Jul 03, 2022 6:18 pm
lh13 wrote:
Sun Jun 12, 2022 6:47 pm
f1jcw wrote: So, you want a unlevel playing field.
Teams couldn’t compete with mercs frick, party modes, etc. they was removed, often in season
Multiple teams have solved the problem. McLaren are even giving up some performance to manage the situation, according to Norris, and they're happy with it. Its not a single team that has found a grey area to fix it. Mercedes has got it worst, so effectively their own problem, not regulations'.
At least two teams are alleged to have solved it using a potentially illegal method. We'll have to see what comes of the floor rules "clarification" in the next week or two.

In Silverstone, at least, the Merc was certainly not being adversely affected - Hamilton was setting fastest lap after fastest lap at one point.
I dont think the 'flexi floor' saga is a solution for the bouncing. There is still no confirmed stories that any team is using any 'illegal' floors, purely speculation because a few teams were not happy with discussions in a meeting. Mainly Ferrari and RB, but it was the same pre-TD when they both called for no change.

Ill be massively surprised if there is anything to come of this come Paul Ricard.
No Mikey Noo! No! Nooo Mikey! That was sooo not riiight!!

User avatar
Stu
Moderator
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 9:05 am
Location: Norfolk, UK

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

Just_a_fan wrote:
Sun Jul 03, 2022 6:19 pm
Zynerji wrote:
Sun Jun 12, 2022 8:33 pm
f1jcw wrote:
Sun Jun 12, 2022 6:30 pm

So, you want a unlevel playing field.
Teams couldn’t compete with mercs frick, party modes, etc. they was removed, often in season
Maybe if your team could reach other teams' level, it would be fine?🤔
Same could be said (and was by some) in previous years when Red Bull were crying foul at every race because their PU wasn't as good as the competition's. In the end, they got the rules changed to their benefit. :wink:
Are you talking about the floor cuts last year? I recall that pressure came from Pirelli because the teams didn’t want the tyres to be altered from 2019 (because they didn’t like them).
The more that I learn, the more I appreciate how much more there is to know….

Just_a_fan
Just_a_fan
554
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:37 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

Stu wrote:
Sun Jul 03, 2022 6:23 pm
Just_a_fan wrote:
Sun Jul 03, 2022 6:19 pm
Zynerji wrote:
Sun Jun 12, 2022 8:33 pm


Maybe if your team could reach other teams' level, it would be fine?🤔
Same could be said (and was by some) in previous years when Red Bull were crying foul at every race because their PU wasn't as good as the competition's. In the end, they got the rules changed to their benefit. :wink:
Are you talking about the floor cuts last year? I recall that pressure came from Pirelli because the teams didn’t want the tyres to be altered from 2019 (because they didn’t like them).
No, the killing of the qualifying modes mid season was the first thing that came to mind.
Turbo says "Dumpster sounds so much more classy. It's the diamond of the cesspools." oh, and "The Dutch fans are drunk. Maybe"

User avatar
Stu
Moderator
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 9:05 am
Location: Norfolk, UK

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

Just_a_fan wrote:
Sun Jul 03, 2022 6:24 pm
Stu wrote:
Sun Jul 03, 2022 6:23 pm
Just_a_fan wrote:
Sun Jul 03, 2022 6:19 pm

Same could be said (and was by some) in previous years when Red Bull were crying foul at every race because their PU wasn't as good as the competition's. In the end, they got the rules changed to their benefit. :wink:
Are you talking about the floor cuts last year? I recall that pressure came from Pirelli because the teams didn’t want the tyres to be altered from 2019 (because they didn’t like them).
No, the killing of the qualifying modes mid season was the first thing that came to mind.
That backfired really, didn’t it? The Mercedes PU was simply stronger (and/or their electrical systems were better?), probably a combination of both.
The more that I learn, the more I appreciate how much more there is to know….

Just_a_fan
Just_a_fan
554
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:37 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

chrisc90 wrote:
Sun Jul 03, 2022 6:22 pm
Just_a_fan wrote:
Sun Jul 03, 2022 6:18 pm
lh13 wrote:
Sun Jun 12, 2022 6:47 pm
Multiple teams have solved the problem. McLaren are even giving up some performance to manage the situation, according to Norris, and they're happy with it. Its not a single team that has found a grey area to fix it. Mercedes has got it worst, so effectively their own problem, not regulations'.
At least two teams are alleged to have solved it using a potentially illegal method. We'll have to see what comes of the floor rules "clarification" in the next week or two.

In Silverstone, at least, the Merc was certainly not being adversely affected - Hamilton was setting fastest lap after fastest lap at one point.
I dont think the 'flexi floor' saga is a solution for the bouncing. There is still no confirmed stories that any team is using any 'illegal' floors, purely speculation because a few teams were not happy with discussions in a meeting. Mainly Ferrari and RB, but it was the same pre-TD when they both called for no change.

Ill be massively surprised if there is anything to come of this come Paul Ricard.
I said "alleged" and "potentially" for a very good reason - there is no direct "he's been naughty" from anyone as yet. 8)

It will be interesting to see if any changes happen. Also if said changes bring a change in the pecking order. Any clever interpretations might only be worth a tenth or even just a half a tenth. Or they might be worth half a second. So we might never know or we might say "wow, they've been screwed by the new rules, they must have been naughty before".
Turbo says "Dumpster sounds so much more classy. It's the diamond of the cesspools." oh, and "The Dutch fans are drunk. Maybe"

Just_a_fan
Just_a_fan
554
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:37 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

Stu wrote:
Sun Jul 03, 2022 6:27 pm
Just_a_fan wrote:
Sun Jul 03, 2022 6:24 pm
Stu wrote:
Sun Jul 03, 2022 6:23 pm


Are you talking about the floor cuts last year? I recall that pressure came from Pirelli because the teams didn’t want the tyres to be altered from 2019 (because they didn’t like them).
No, the killing of the qualifying modes mid season was the first thing that came to mind.
That backfired really, didn’t it? The Mercedes PU was simply stronger (and/or their electrical systems were better?), probably a combination of both.
It certainly helped Red Bull in general in qualifying.
Turbo says "Dumpster sounds so much more classy. It's the diamond of the cesspools." oh, and "The Dutch fans are drunk. Maybe"

User avatar
JordanMugen
67
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2018 12:36 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

The current regulations stipulate a maximum deflection of 2mm at the two middle plank holes and no more than 2mm at its rearmost hole in a bid to ensure that the floor is stiff enough.

However, there were claims some teams have managed to cleverly flex the floors by as much as 6mm in total, which would allow them to run with higher rake and much closer to the ground for increased performance without the risk of suffering the ill effects of ground strikes.

Tombazis made clear that the FIA believed teams having 'excessive deformation' of the floor was being done: "to achieve significantly lower ride heights, and hence an indirect aerodynamic gain."

The 2mm tolerance will be rigorously enforced and the stiffness around the floor hole must now be uniform for a radial distance of 15mm outside the periphery – with a variance not exceeding 10 percent either way.

The FIA added: "Competitors will be required to demonstrate compliance with these provisions by way of a detailed inspection of both the CAD and the physical installation, as well as Finite Element analysis."
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-f ... /10332153/

What's all this about? :?:

Any truth to the rumours that the big springs, found on most of the cars, will also be banned? :?:

taperoo2k
taperoo2k
9
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 4:33 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

JordanMugen wrote:
Mon Jul 04, 2022 4:51 am
The current regulations stipulate a maximum deflection of 2mm at the two middle plank holes and no more than 2mm at its rearmost hole in a bid to ensure that the floor is stiff enough.

However, there were claims some teams have managed to cleverly flex the floors by as much as 6mm in total, which would allow them to run with higher rake and much closer to the ground for increased performance without the risk of suffering the ill effects of ground strikes.

Tombazis made clear that the FIA believed teams having 'excessive deformation' of the floor was being done: "to achieve significantly lower ride heights, and hence an indirect aerodynamic gain."

The 2mm tolerance will be rigorously enforced and the stiffness around the floor hole must now be uniform for a radial distance of 15mm outside the periphery – with a variance not exceeding 10 percent either way.

The FIA added: "Competitors will be required to demonstrate compliance with these provisions by way of a detailed inspection of both the CAD and the physical installation, as well as Finite Element analysis."
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-f ... /10332153/

What's all this about? :?:
Same thing it's always about in F1, teams bending the rules to gain a performance advantage, while it takes the FIA a while to cotton onto it. The assumption will be that Red Bull and maybe Ferrari have been doing this. But we'll find out soon enough if teams lose performance at the French Grand Prix. How much performance ? Hard to say at this stage, it could cost a couple of tenths or it could be bigger.
Any truth to the rumours that the big springs, found on most of the cars, will also be banned? :?:
Not heard anything about that, but it wouldn't surprise me if the FIA do decide to ban that. Though I guess the teams might argue they are needed to smooth out the bumps to protect drivers long term health.