Opinion on 2022 regulations

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
Just_a_fan
Just_a_fan
560
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:37 pm

Re: Opinion on 2022 regulations

Post

Zynerji wrote:
Wed Jul 06, 2022 12:48 am
Just_a_fan wrote:
Wed Jul 06, 2022 12:03 am
Zynerji wrote:
Tue Jul 05, 2022 10:53 pm


If it passes the test, it's good to race.

I wish some teams would just get better instead of complaining. 🙄
The ones that complain changes with the ones that are being "clever". Red Bull have done plenty of complaining about stuff over the years. None of them is better than any other in that regard.
I'm just saying in general. I hate it when any team complains about a competitors engineering solutions. If it passes scrutineering, it should be off limits from concern.
I think the issue these days is the teams effectively scrutineer themselves. The FIA might choose to check something at each race (and there are reports that show that they do this) but the teams basically say "my car's legal, honest guv'." and the FIA takes their word. I wonder how easy it is for the FIA to check e.g. floor flex at the track. If they have a rig, it'll be set up to do only the bits in the regs, so a team could make bits around that test point out of jelly and feathers and if the test passes, it's legal. It's been going on forever - think back to the days where teams like Brabham had suspension that passed the test in the paddock and then dropped once out on track. It's not a new thing.

There are only two ways to avoid this problem - a genuine free for all with just FIA-specified safety items or a spec series where everyone has the same kit and no alterations are allowed. Anything in between is going to be subject to gaming of the rules.
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
68
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2018 12:36 pm

Re: Opinion on 2022 regulations

Post

Vettel mentions a previously undiscussed aspect of the new cars, with the brake ducts exiting to the middle of the car (to reduce outwash), the brake dust is blown into the driver's face.

Vettel says it would be an "easy" fix, but I'm not so sure. To fix the issue would require a moderate change to the rules, for example requiring the brake duct outlet to exit below the front wheel centreline, which would require the teams to all redesign their brake ducts.

Certainly an easy fix for 2023, but it doesn't sound like something that could be cheaply and easily fixed between races with the cost cap constraints. I figure teams would complain about the cost, and below the front wheel centreline is probably a more aerodynamically sensitive area than above it, so the aerodynamicists would complain about the effect the rule change would have on flow around the strakes and around the floor.

User avatar
wogx
42
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2017 5:48 pm

Re: Opinion on 2022 regulations

Post

Image

People quickly noticed that Vettel was covered in black dust while doing his media pen interviews too. Rachel Brookes of Sky Sports F1 was quick to ask where it had come from, and it turns out it was from the car’s brake ducts!

“To be honest with you, that is something I think they need to work on because, you know, where the design of the brake ducts this year, the front axle, is blowing all the brake dust into our faces,” Seb reported back.

“It’s not good. Obviously, carbon dust is not really something healthy to breathe in, so I hope the FIA looks into this very soon because it’s pointless and easy to change.”
https://wtf1.com/post/vettel-wants-chan ... brake-dust

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

Re: Opinion on 2022 regulations

Post

Did he not have his race suit done up? If suits are to be done up to the collar, I cant see how brake dust will find its way onto his underalls.
No Mikey Noo! No! Nooo Mikey! That was sooo not riiight!!

mcdenife
mcdenife
0
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 12:21 pm
Location: Timbuck2

Re: Opinion on 2022 regulations

Post

chrisc90 wrote:
Sun Jul 10, 2022 10:13 pm
Did he not have his race suit done up? If suits are to be done up to the collar, I cant see how brake dust will find its way onto his underalls.
So his nose is below his collar & under his ‘underalls’?
Long experience has taught me this about the status of mankind with regards to matters requiring thought. The less people know and understand about them, the more positively they attempt to argue concerning them; while on the other hand, to know and understand a multitude of things renders men cautious in passing judgement upon anything new. - Galileo..

The noblest of dogs is the hot dog. It feeds the hand that bites it.

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

Re: Opinion on 2022 regulations

Post

mcdenife wrote:
Sun Jul 10, 2022 10:59 pm
chrisc90 wrote:
Sun Jul 10, 2022 10:13 pm
Did he not have his race suit done up? If suits are to be done up to the collar, I cant see how brake dust will find its way onto his underalls.
So his nose is below his collar & under his ‘underalls’?
How do you explain the black down from his neck to the Sentinal logo?
No Mikey Noo! No! Nooo Mikey! That was sooo not riiight!!

Just_a_fan
Just_a_fan
560
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:37 pm

Re: Opinion on 2022 regulations

Post

chrisc90 wrote:
Sun Jul 10, 2022 10:13 pm
Did he not have his race suit done up? If suits are to be done up to the collar, I cant see how brake dust will find its way onto his underalls.
The race suit isn't hermetically sealed so it's to be expected that dust with a very small particle size might find its way in through a velcro closure.

Somewhat surprising that the issue of brake dust wasn't considered when they moved to mandate inboard brake venting.

As Seb says, breathing in the brake dust will not be beneficial to drivers' health so it should probably be looked at to see if it can be improved.
Turbo says "Dumpster sounds so much more classy. It's the diamond of the cesspools." oh, and "The Dutch fans are drunk. Maybe"

mcdenife
mcdenife
0
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 12:21 pm
Location: Timbuck2

Re: Opinion on 2022 regulations

Post

chrisc90 wrote:
Sun Jul 10, 2022 11:24 pm
mcdenife wrote:
Sun Jul 10, 2022 10:59 pm
chrisc90 wrote:
Sun Jul 10, 2022 10:13 pm
Did he not have his race suit done up? If suits are to be done up to the collar, I cant see how brake dust will find its way onto his underalls.
So his nose is below his collar & under his ‘underalls’?
How do you explain the black down from his neck to the Sentinal logo?
How exactly does his race suit prevent him breathing in carbon brake dust?
Long experience has taught me this about the status of mankind with regards to matters requiring thought. The less people know and understand about them, the more positively they attempt to argue concerning them; while on the other hand, to know and understand a multitude of things renders men cautious in passing judgement upon anything new. - Galileo..

The noblest of dogs is the hot dog. It feeds the hand that bites it.

User avatar
Andres125sx
161
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:15 am
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: Opinion on 2022 regulations

Post

Wow didn´t know. Carbon dust is extremelly toxic, both for the eyes and lungs. Something to be adressed

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

Re: Opinion on 2022 regulations

Post

Getting off topic here, but if it has been a ‘thing’ since carbon/carbon brakes were introduced (across the whole grid) it is nothing new - although that doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be addressed.
Going way back (to the 50’s) the Vanwall exhausted it’s front brakes through the cockpit (check out pictures of Stirling Moss in period).
The answer is front axle ‘harvesting’ - which would make physical brakes almost redundant (really only required in pit stops).
The blackness isn’t just brake dust though…
The more that I learn, the more I appreciate how much more there is to know….

Tommy Cookers
Tommy Cookers
590
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 3:55 pm

Re: Opinion on 2022 regulations

Post

Stu wrote:
Tue Jul 12, 2022 7:55 am
Going way back (to the 50’s) the Vanwall exhausted it’s front brakes through the cockpit (check out pictures of Stirling Moss in period).
the rear brakes (because they're inboard)
and because the cockpit is the low-pressure zone
people might also look at the W196 Mercedes-Benz and 300 SLR

in F1 mechanical brakes will always be needed at high speed - where brake power approaches 10000 hp
unless all braking is forced to be regenerative for some efficiency-formula purpose

User avatar
JordanMugen
68
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2018 12:36 pm

Re: Opinion on 2022 regulations

Post

Stu wrote:
Tue Jul 12, 2022 7:55 am
The answer is front axle ‘harvesting’ - which would make physical brakes almost redundant (really only required in pit stops).
Would such equipment further increase car weight? :?: [And open the door to all-wheel-drive for that matter...]

I notice fans are already complaining about the weight of 2022 cars even before any further additional equipment is added to the vehicles.

User avatar
Big Tea
92
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2017 7:57 pm

Re: Opinion on 2022 regulations

Post

JordanMugen wrote:
Wed Jul 27, 2022 1:02 pm
Stu wrote:
Tue Jul 12, 2022 7:55 am
The answer is front axle ‘harvesting’ - which would make physical brakes almost redundant (really only required in pit stops).
Would such equipment further increase car weight? :?: [And open the door to all-wheel-drive for that matter...]

I notice fans are already complaining about the weight of 2022 cars even before any further additional equipment is added to the vehicles.
More harvesting could lead to smaller battery packs and reduced weight to offset it. It would require a re write of some regs, but as the MGH-H is being dumped, it would be needed anyway.
When arguing with a fool, be sure the other person is not doing the same thing.

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

Re: Opinion on 2022 regulations

Post

Big Tea wrote:
Wed Jul 27, 2022 2:23 pm
JordanMugen wrote:
Wed Jul 27, 2022 1:02 pm
Stu wrote:
Tue Jul 12, 2022 7:55 am
The answer is front axle ‘harvesting’ - which would make physical brakes almost redundant (really only required in pit stops).
Would such equipment further increase car weight? :?: [And open the door to all-wheel-drive for that matter...]

I notice fans are already complaining about the weight of 2022 cars even before any further additional equipment is added to the vehicles.
More harvesting could lead to smaller battery packs and reduced weight to offset it. It would require a re write of some regs, but as the MGH-H is being dumped, it would be needed anyway.
That was my line of thinking, smaller batteries (or super-capacitor storage), very high C-rating for fast charge and enough longevity to be considered a ‘boost’ that needs to be deployed strategically.
I won’t be sorry to see the MGU-H go, but would like to see these engines run as NA with a good electrical output.
The other option (if front axle harvesting doesn’t make it) could be to utilise a GU-H in the exhaust.
The more that I learn, the more I appreciate how much more there is to know….

User avatar
Big Tea
92
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2017 7:57 pm

Re: Opinion on 2022 regulations

Post

Stu wrote:
Wed Jul 27, 2022 6:05 pm
Big Tea wrote:
Wed Jul 27, 2022 2:23 pm
JordanMugen wrote:
Wed Jul 27, 2022 1:02 pm


Would such equipment further increase car weight? :?: [And open the door to all-wheel-drive for that matter...]

I notice fans are already complaining about the weight of 2022 cars even before any further additional equipment is added to the vehicles.
More harvesting could lead to smaller battery packs and reduced weight to offset it. It would require a re write of some regs, but as the MGH-H is being dumped, it would be needed anyway.
That was my line of thinking, smaller batteries (or super-capacitor storage), very high C-rating for fast charge and enough longevity to be considered a ‘boost’ that needs to be deployed strategically.
I won’t be sorry to see the MGU-H go, but would like to see these engines run as NA with a good electrical output.
The other option (if front axle harvesting doesn’t make it) could be to utilise a GU-H in the exhaust.
I doubt they would allow that, the sound is considered dim now, although I find it ideal. A little more 'rip' in it needed maybe, but it is plenty loud enough.
When arguing with a fool, be sure the other person is not doing the same thing.