F1 2021 Regulation changes

F1 2021 Regulation changes

Author
Discussion

London424

11,614 posts

120 months

Tuesday 30th April
quotequote all
thegreenhell said:
London424 said:
I think i heard on Ted's notebook that they want to limit the number of wing configurations to 2-3 options to prevent the big spending teams having loads of different options.

I'm not sure how that works with the evolution of a car over the course of the year or if that is in fact what they are wanting to stop.
If they want to do one thing to stop pointless spending and equalise performance it would be to introduce a standard front wing.
If they go too far then it just becomes a Spec series though with no/little innovation at all.

Welshbeef

37,559 posts

143 months

Tuesday 30th April
quotequote all
TheDeuce said:
I do agree that the cream always rises to the top, but also that cream moves upwards slowly... Will the current top teams find their way to the top after the shake up? Almost certainly. But if they were ever to falter for a season, the first season after such a big change is the one that's most likely - they are not infallible.

My point was, that the bigger the change in rules/regs, the more likely it is to see surprising shifts in how each team adopts to the new playing field.

As for DRS giving way to KERS, that makes sense. F1 has to navigate it's way to pure electric at some stage, so as with road cars, more reliance on electric power has to creep in. Also with the incoming shift to ground effect, DRS would be less of an advantage anyway.
Why pure electric?
We have formula E already


If F1 gives up ICE for EV it will be a travesty no one will watch it - spectators at scalextrix are non existent.

Roll on classic racing instead.

Imagine Funny Car or too fuel drag racing with EV? Reform me a massive part is the noice vibrations - and seeing 11’s down part of the track. Just watching ziiiiippp nah. It’s not entertainment - effective but not entertainment

thegreenhell

6,108 posts

164 months

Tuesday 30th April
quotequote all
TheDeuce said:
. And a return of ground effect... Suits me but didn't they regulate to reduce ground effect as the cars were getting too fast?
And then made the wings bigger because they were too slow. And then made the tyres narrower because they were too fast. And then banned turbos because they were too fast but made the engines bigger because they were also too slow. Then made the engines smaller again because they were too fast after all. Then put grooves in the tyres because they were too fast. Then made the cars narrower because they were still too fast. Then made the wings bigger because they were too slow. Then made the engines smaller because they were too fast. Then took the grooves out of the tyres again because they were too slow. Then made the cars a lot heavier because they were too fast. Then made the cars and the tyres wider again because they were too slow.

There's a pattern in there somewhere.

Kraken

1,109 posts

145 months

Tuesday 30th April
quotequote all
Welshbeef said:
If F1 gives up ICE for EV it will be a travesty no one will watch it - spectators at scalextrix are non existent.
Fastest growing motorsport? Online sim racing. Money isn't made from spectators anymore compared to alternative means.

HustleRussell

16,791 posts

105 months

Tuesday 30th April
quotequote all
rdjohn said:
London424 said:
I think i heard on Ted's notebook that they want to limit the number of wing configurations to 2-3 options to prevent the big spending teams having loads of different options.

I'm not sure how that works with the evolution of a car over the course of the year or if that is in fact what they are wanting to stop.
I think it is the evolution that they want to cut out. Using lots of standard bits is a significant start.
I think they want to limit in-season evolution but the main intention of the rules going in that direction is to eliminate the financial pissing contest between the big teams of bringing a package which is specific to the unique challenges of a particular circuit.

markcoznottz

5,211 posts

169 months

Wednesday 1st May
quotequote all
Anyone else sceptical?

HustleRussell

16,791 posts

105 months

Wednesday 1st May
quotequote all
I was expecting it to look more radical, like the 'leaked' concepts which emerged last year. Formula E Gen 2 did a better job of integrating the halo at first glance.

I imagine the technical content is very well conceived. I have no problem with the proposed spec parts.

One drawback is that the front wing is still very vulnerable to damage being that it is very low and spans the full width of the car. It is also very liable to cause damage to the tyres of other cars. I hope that enabling more central downforce from the floor will allow front wings to become smaller and less critical.

Now that a minimum driver + seat weight has been mandated I'd love to see the all-up weight of the car start to come down drastically. If this reduction could be done in such a way that it reduced the overall size and especially the length of the cars as a consequence that'd be better still.

2m maximum width looks great from most angles with the wider tyres however I wouldn't be adverse to undoing this and making the cars narrower again to increase the possibilities for overtaking.

I am not knowledgeable enough to understand the impact of allowing active suspension so I would be inclined to leave it out, however if an active system is on the horizon, 2021 would be a good time to implement it as the larger wheels are going to necessitate a complete suspension redesign for all teams.

rdjohn

Original Poster:

3,637 posts

140 months

Wednesday 17th July
quotequote all
A bit of speculation on Venturi side pods, but I feel certain it will be the direction the F1 will be headed in 2021.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/new-f1-car-desi...

TheDeuce

2,797 posts

11 months

Wednesday 17th July
quotequote all
thegreenhell said:
TheDeuce said:
. And a return of ground effect... Suits me but didn't they regulate to reduce ground effect as the cars were getting too fast?
And then made the wings bigger because they were too slow. And then made the tyres narrower because they were too fast. And then banned turbos because they were too fast but made the engines bigger because they were also too slow. Then made the engines smaller again because they were too fast after all. Then put grooves in the tyres because they were too fast. Then made the cars narrower because they were still too fast. Then made the wings bigger because they were too slow. Then made the engines smaller because they were too fast. Then took the grooves out of the tyres again because they were too slow. Then made the cars a lot heavier because they were too fast. Then made the cars and the tyres wider again because they were too slow.

There's a pattern in there somewhere.
Like aiming to hit a nail on the head but landing one side or the other each time - not least as the teams and engineers keep shifting the nail slightly..

It's interesting that they are now taking the approach of writing the rules, then putting their heads together with race engineers to see how exploit them, with a view to closing the gaps ahead of making the new rules final. One wonders why they haven't taken that fairly obvious approach before!!

Will it work? Well I'm sure if more than one person involved sees an exploit they will all agree it should be closed. If just one person sees an exploit .. maybe they keep quiet until they're back at their team hq.. as with tax rules and anti-virus software, the people writing them are no cleverer than the people seeking to undermine them. I do think this approach will limit the exploit potential and will as a result close up the racing. There will still be exploits though.

The biggest question which remains unanswered is a final cost cap figure and what exactly the exclusions are. To a lesser degree, also how they stop the Mercedes AG suspension department working on something that could prove coincidentally extremely valuable to the Mercedes F1 team. How this is all to be policed is key.

StephenP

1,584 posts

155 months

Wednesday 17th July
quotequote all
I'm guessing most of you will already have seen this.....

https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.2021-f1...

Interesting to see the following:

Formula 1 cars need to represent the pinnacle of single-seater engineering, but they also need to be something much more basic: they need to be sexy. And so, while lap time is key, making the 2021 F1 car deserving of a spot on a fan’s bedroom wall has been judged to be just as important.

“We do aim for the final product to be aesthetically pleasing,” says Tombazis. “To be a car that promotes a certain amount of passion and a certain ‘wow factor’, so we want that to be part of the new Formula 1.”

I rather like the "early concept of a what a 2021 car could look like" in the article however I somehow doubt it will end up looking that good! laugh Especially when you compare it to the sketch that is apparently "an interpretation of how a 2021 car could look, based on what we know so far"......



Edited by StephenP on Thursday 18th July 13:53

HustleRussell

16,791 posts

105 months

Wednesday 17th July
quotequote all
Concepts so far look good to me. The aero direction seems to make sense.

I haven't seen anything which will lead to a significant weight loss yet, apart from the suggestion of a return of refueling. Some key figures have suggested that extensive use of standard parts may even result in heavier cars.

I was pleased to read that Nikolas Tombazis thinks the front wings are too wide as I am of the same view.

I wonder how the tyre conundrum will be solved (we want more pitstops but we don't want sensitive tyres which suffer from thermal degradation?)

janesmith1950

3,687 posts

40 months

Wednesday 17th July
quotequote all
F1 goes around in circles, literally and figuratively. We'll see ground effect return, then there'll be some big crashes, and it'll be banned again...

markcoznottz

5,211 posts

169 months

Wednesday 17th July
quotequote all
HustleRussell said:
Concepts so far look good to me. The aero direction seems to make sense.

I haven't seen anything which will lead to a significant weight loss yet, apart from the suggestion of a return of refueling. Some key figures have suggested that extensive use of standard parts may even result in heavier cars.

I was pleased to read that Nikolas Tombazis thinks the front wings are too wide as I am of the same view.

I wonder how the tyre conundrum will be solved (we want more pitstops but we don't want sensitive tyres which suffer from thermal degradation?)
The outwash front wing didn't cause problems in 2009? Then again the cars weren't constantly exceeding track limits back then.

Vaud

33,183 posts

100 months

Wednesday 17th July
quotequote all
janesmith1950 said:
F1 goes around in circles, literally and figuratively. We'll see ground effect return, then there'll be some big crashes, and it'll be banned again...
I though that was more with skirts? Does regular aero ground effect give a more progressive failure?

REALIST123

11,799 posts

98 months

Wednesday 17th July
quotequote all
Vaud said:
janesmith1950 said:
F1 goes around in circles, literally and figuratively. We'll see ground effect return, then there'll be some big crashes, and it'll be banned again...
I though that was more with skirts? Does regular aero ground effect give a more progressive failure?
Not really. Running up over high kerbs can instantly shed downforce. Of course drivers can avoid that if they wish.

StephenP

1,584 posts

155 months

Thursday 18th July
quotequote all
Did anyone else notice the proposal to outlaw tyre blankets from 2021?

Does that mean the tyres will be cold when fitted? (Assuming the teams don't come up with another way of pre-heating them such as heat lamps!)

TheDeuce

2,797 posts

11 months

Thursday 18th July
quotequote all
StephenP said:
Did anyone else notice the proposal to outlaw tyre blankets from 2021?

Does that mean the tyres will be cold when fitted? (Assuming the teams don't come up with another way of pre-heating them such as heat lamps!)
I'm sure they will outlaw any other method of heating the tyres.

They tyres are larger so the contact patch per corner is greater, more traction even if the tyre is cold. Also the compounds are being changed entirely, they can easily make tyres that heat up with use extremely quickly - at least to the point they can take the first couple of corners after pitting at a respectable if slightly cautious speed without having too much risk of falling off the track.

//j17

3,282 posts

168 months

Thursday 18th July
quotequote all
Banning tyre warming seemed to work OK in DTM.

Basially you negate the undercut option, as your first lap out of the pits you have less grip rather than more than a competitor on X lap old tyres. Yes, they does take away one chance for cars to swap position, but it also takes away the scenario where everyone pits earlier than necessary to avoid being undercut by the car behind pitting one lap earlier...then everyone spend the rest of the race nursing their tyres home.

geeks

4,536 posts

84 months

Thursday 18th July
quotequote all
Plenty of other formulas manage just fine without tyre warmers, I am sure F1 will be the same!

TheDeuce

2,797 posts

11 months

Thursday 18th July
quotequote all
Exactly. Not warming the current spec tyres would be disastrous. But Pirelli can make a tyre that performs however it needs too - all spec motorsport tyres are engineered to do what the series managers think is best for their plan for their series.

If Pirelli are asked to produce a new tyre that will last an entire race and switch on with a little wheelspin and a couple of med-fast turns then they can. Perhaps that seems a little artificial to some, but personally I take the 'same for everyone' stance and don't really worry about the tyres to much wink