Technical Content & Threads

[Carlos]

While pursuing internet searches on a wide variety of F1 related subjects I am gratified to discover that F1Technical always has entries that appear in the first 1>10 listings; often referencing Tomba's archival information.

I have also noted the Forum Topics have drifted away from technical subjects. Originally when I joined The Forum I was inspired by the level of members technical research and contributions ... but have noticed a drift from the core content ... and intent. as I interpet it ... Formula 1 technical research, information,references and discussion.

At this time I would like to ask for your opinions.

[DaveKillens]

Yes, most of the forum discussions are non-technical, instead dealing with the drivers and races, and politics. I am as guilty as anyone for drifting in that direction, and desire more technical discussions. I have my fields of expertise (electrical and engines) and take great pleasure by picking the brains and learning about the myriad technical aspects of Formula One.

[manchild]

I agree but I don't think that the problem is in what members write. Members write about things that are in focus. Since almost all technology is banned there's rarely a possibility to discuss about it. Remember, FIA unified engines, froze their development and introduced one tyre supplier. What is left to discuss? CF chassis is CF chassis, wishbone is a wishbone, brake disc is a brake disc... Get my point? Not much is changing in F1 because of the technology ban so we're left without technical subjects to discuss.

Imagine this forum in late '70s or '80s for example - turbos, normally aspirated, 4 in-line t, V6t, V8, V8t, V10, V12, six wheelers, fans, AVON, DUNLOP, PIRELLI, MICHELIN, GOOD/YEAR... skirts, ground effect... or in early '90s - V8, V10, V12, active suspension, sequential gearboxes, CVT...

What's left to talk about now? Tyre with white stripe and one without it? All engines rev the same, make same hp, have same capacity, angle, valves, COG... all gearboxes are almost the same, chassis are already cloned and in a year they'll be mass produced. F1 as we've known it is dying. Why? Ask Max.

[modbaraban]

I have also noted the Forum Topics have drifted away from technical subjects.

I joined not so long ago as you can see, but noticed that as well. I don't know if that's the reason (and if it was like that in previous years) but it looks like the eventful season (races, emotions, politics) is to blame for that 'drift'. Before the season started there wasn't much to talk about apart from the technical stuff as the teams unveiled their new cars.

Personally, I like to have some general discussion here rather than elsewhere because I find more reasonable, intelligent and less biased opinions here.

[checkered]

The 2011 suggestions are

a good technical subject, apart from the current details. Very complicated though and having been pressed for time, I haven't really wanted to venture into it as I'm not one to usually resort to half-measures. That's not to say I wouldn't value and respect any interest being shown in that subject.

Luckily there's still some time to go before the end of the year (the suggested deadline). Many teams, and the FIA appointed experts, are investing a lot in thinking about this currently - and interestingly many veteran designers have been weighing in, either in the media, or employed by the teams; Rory Byrne's current job description in Ferrari as I've understood it. Interestingly John Barnard said recently that he felt F1 shoud've "gone green" ten years ago already - even Arrows was looking into that with very limited resources at the time. That was a lost opportunity and I'm worried that the sort of micro management we've been experiencing recently could close many interesting possibilities. The devil is in the details, or the amount of those.

I thought of raising the issue of the direction and content of the conversations, too, of which especially longstanding members (in addition to Principessa and Tomba) could share some "quasi managerial" responsibility. My current lack of focus on technical matters, alas, depends almost solely on things that have next to nothing to do with F1T. So keep an eye out for technical content and don't be discouraged if it sometimes gets a little less attention. Usually the quality of the attention easily makes up for the quantity though.

... but you'll have to admit, it's been a bit crazy lately with all the other things.

[Tom]

I've noticed too that technical topics have been lacking since I got back, I haven't seen anything in aero or engine in the past 2 weeks!

This sport is losing its touch, I wonder how hard it would be for the fans to overthrow Mosley?

[Ciro Pabón]

I agree with Carlos and Tom (as usual! ). Maybe this is what happens when we "know everything". Few people are asking questions, everybody has an opinion.

This year's championship is not so different from last year's, or so I think, in terms of emotions, even if modbaraban has some reason in his argument. I think it's us who have changed: there are new persons in the forum, but we are not asking questions or giving answers to what other people says: we are merely repeating what we read in other forums or explaining how we feel about incidents. Too much arguing and little explaining?

The only questions I've been able to collaborate are about PCs... sigh.

I ask from you a "new deal": why don't you ask a question once in a while? I promess to do that.

Surely, there are a lot of things we don't know, even if the engines, etc. are similar. I believe that we, as a collective, lack some "brain power" in the aerodynamics department and as MC implies (or so it seems to me), this year's advances are in the aero side of the sport. I miss Reca and Scarbs, to be sincere. I've been unable to update my track's page since April... I promess I will put my best effort (given my workload) behind trying to find a good, free, aerodinamic package, something we have been unable to dig from the net.

In future years it might be different: we will have something to learn from regenerative power plants, for example, as checkered explains.

Or, perhaps, modbaraban could have something to say about simulations: I think we can learn a lot from him in that field, I've seen his posts elsewhere and I think he really knows about this subject.

[Carlos]

Thank you all for the thoughtful posts and ideas ...much to consider, many good suggestions ... hope other will weigh in with posts.

Aero is a very active area of developement and as Ciro suggested a CFD freeware program that the Forum could all be useful. I don't know anything about these programs but I found this link to CFD freeware codes that list mostly universities as sources; most of the programs are quite old but maybe someone might take a look and see if one of them might be useful ... run on most home computers and operating system:

http://www-berkeley.ansys.com/cfd/CFD_codes_p.html

[modbaraban]

Aero is a very active area of developement and as Ciro suggested a CFD freeware program that the Forum could all be useful.

Does anyone knows if 3ds Max or Zmodeler models can be imported into CFD applications (converted to that format somehow)?

I'm creating a fictional F1 car for 2007 season (Prodrive Aston Martin DBRF1). So I thought of checking it in CFD before putting it into the wind tunnel
I'll post some pics when/if I succeed.

[checkered]

Aero is a very active area of developement and as Ciro suggested a CFD freeware program that the Forum could all be useful.

I have accumulated a s***load of different

links about CFD and the physics of racing by now. The trouble is, I mostly don't follow up on those links since they're so many and, frankly, as I've already confessed to being an intellectually undisciplined person, they're befittingly in a great big mess. Perhaps I can find motivation to sort all that out. Just not today ...

There's a Yahoo! group for XFoil which seems to be fairly active, though. Perhaps worth a look for anyone interested, haven't joined myself though so don't hold me responsible if it's no good. For those having this particular discussion, the program itself is familiar on some basis, I'm sure.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/xfoil/
http://web.mit.edu/drela/Public/web/xfoil/

Of course there are also pioneers in online CFD, such as this guy Kevin D. Jones, research associate professor in the dept. of aeronautics and astronautics in Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA. He has written a range of rather simple tools (not really directly motorsport applicable, but anyway) that I've played with out of interest from time to time. Check under the "Online Tools" link:

http://aa.nps.edu/~jones/

[IMG:481:481]http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t217 ... _image.png[/img]

So, once resources become pooled on the subject, it might not be necessary to buy CFD software - instead it could be done (to a some degree, depending on the development of computing power etc.) online without that cumbersome licence hassle. At least on a general level, at first, so keep an eye out for that happening somewhere, soon.

[modbaraban]

I ask from you a "new deal": why don't you ask a question once in a while?

Seems to work well

[ss_collins]

I've decided to free up some more of the RCE content to improve the tech stuff - I suggest splitting non tech / strategy related stuff and putting it in a seperate throttle jockeys forum!

[Carlos]

Great! Thanks ss_collins.