CAD software used in F1
Discussion
designforlife said:
More than likely Solidworks, but i'm sure someone who knows for sure will confirm.
For forming almost certainly solidworks. But then the 3D models will go in to various other software - most crucially whatever CFD software each team uses in order to 'test' the design ahead and then feed back to the design team.Worth pointing out that whatever shapes the CFD team receive, they'll pretty much have to re-form in their CFD software to break each form into its continuant material parts and apply properties to each material.
There will be a lot of back and fourth up and down the line between software. But the initial drawing of a car for illustrative and discussion purposes is very likely to be in solidworks - it's the natural choice.
I don’t know...
...but I would guess that they use a suite of programs dependent if they are designing mechanical components, like engine and gearbox linked to CAM suites, structural components like tub and suspension, or aero surfaces linked directly to CFD. In the background sub routines will be calculating overall weight and dynamic corner loads which are then overlaid with aero loadings. Electrical systems is likely to be another system that needs careful integration.
Overarching design software probably brings all the bits together, for graphical marketing renderings etc. etc. I imagine a lot of their stuff is bespoke, rather than off-the-shelf.
It’s now a long way away from how Gordon Murray did it, or even how we are led to believe how Adrian Newey does it using pencil and draughting machine. It’s easy to understand why each team has hundreds of engineers and spend big budgets. They are bigger than many specialised design consultancies.
...but I would guess that they use a suite of programs dependent if they are designing mechanical components, like engine and gearbox linked to CAM suites, structural components like tub and suspension, or aero surfaces linked directly to CFD. In the background sub routines will be calculating overall weight and dynamic corner loads which are then overlaid with aero loadings. Electrical systems is likely to be another system that needs careful integration.
Overarching design software probably brings all the bits together, for graphical marketing renderings etc. etc. I imagine a lot of their stuff is bespoke, rather than off-the-shelf.
It’s now a long way away from how Gordon Murray did it, or even how we are led to believe how Adrian Newey does it using pencil and draughting machine. It’s easy to understand why each team has hundreds of engineers and spend big budgets. They are bigger than many specialised design consultancies.
Edited by rdjohn on Thursday 30th July 15:24
Thanks for this. Seems the most popular are Solidworks and Catia with Catia being more powerfull for asset tracking/life cycle design etc - Solidworks much more knock up a part/assembly.
Be interesting to hear if they have all standardised (informally) on the same software. Easier for espionage work saves cursing as they try to open others files!
I'm guessing they will have their own specalist modeling software for analysis and be interesting if there is a workflow from design to some kind of simulator.
Be interesting to hear if they have all standardised (informally) on the same software. Easier for espionage work saves cursing as they try to open others files!
I'm guessing they will have their own specalist modeling software for analysis and be interesting if there is a workflow from design to some kind of simulator.
I doubt they've standardised, I'm sure some teams have formed partnerships to share and co-fund their CFD efforts. Also CFD as shareable software isn't really a thing... The feedback from testing the car refines and evolves the CFD so they're basically re-writing the software as they go to bring it ever closer to matching reality. I can't see any team putting that effort directly back in to the public domain, available for just anyone (or any other team..) to use.
Software use and development is a silent but huge battleground since wind tunnel and testing time was limited.
NB: Newey does still use a pencil and paper but has aknowledged his work then goes to CAD draughtsmen before future development and refinements are made.
Software use and development is a silent but huge battleground since wind tunnel and testing time was limited.
NB: Newey does still use a pencil and paper but has aknowledged his work then goes to CAD draughtsmen before future development and refinements are made.
TheDeuce said:
designforlife said:
More than likely Solidworks, but i'm sure someone who knows for sure will confirm.
For forming almost certainly solidworks. But then the 3D models will go in to various other software - most crucially whatever CFD software each team uses in order to 'test' the design ahead and then feed back to the design team.Worth pointing out that whatever shapes the CFD team receive, they'll pretty much have to re-form in their CFD software to break each form into its continuant material parts and apply properties to each material.
There will be a lot of back and fourth up and down the line between software. But the initial drawing of a car for illustrative and discussion purposes is very likely to be in solidworks - it's the natural choice.
egomeister said:
Complete nonsense. Solidworks isn't powerful enough for this kind of work - as far as I know all teams are using either Catia or Siemens NX, and the interactions between CAD and other analysis processes are pretty efficient and direct these days.
It's the obvious choice to start and end with due to compatibility. I didn't say it was powerful enough to do anymore than the equivalent of what used to be done on a drawing board. As I did say, the initial drawing must move through various softwares as it develops. But whatever it develops in to... It needs to return to a format most people can work with - such as the guys that work out the geometry of the livery revisions etc.
TheDeuce said:
It's the obvious choice to start and end with due to compatibility. I didn't say it was powerful enough to do anymore than the equivalent of what used to be done on a drawing board.
As I did say, the initial drawing must move through various softwares as it develops. But whatever it develops in to... It needs to return to a format most people can work with - such as the guys that work out the geometry of the livery revisions etc.
Solidworks is a lot more powerful than a drawing board, but only a sadist would use it as part of the workflow when designing an F1 car. I can also say with some certainty that the updating the stickers isn't going to be a driving factor when it comes to a team selecting a CAD package.As I did say, the initial drawing must move through various softwares as it develops. But whatever it develops in to... It needs to return to a format most people can work with - such as the guys that work out the geometry of the livery revisions etc.
egomeister said:
Complete nonsense. Solidworks isn't powerful enough for this kind of work - as far as I know all teams are using either Catia or Siemens NX, and the interactions between CAD and other analysis processes are pretty efficient and direct these days.
This. Siemens NX suite of packages, coupled with Teamcenter / PLM are used quite widely. Red Bull for example certainly used to, although I’m not certain they still do.
I can comment on engineering/design.
The majority of the F1 teams especially the big ones, use Catia. It’s considered the industry standard.
A handful use Siemens NX.
There might be some back marker stragglers using other lesser programs for cost reasons.
This distribution mirrors the rest of serious motorsport & road OEM.
The majority of the F1 teams especially the big ones, use Catia. It’s considered the industry standard.
A handful use Siemens NX.
There might be some back marker stragglers using other lesser programs for cost reasons.
This distribution mirrors the rest of serious motorsport & road OEM.
faa77 said:
So the one piece of software (Catia or Siemens NX) is for both designing and the Computational Fluid Dynamics?
Nope, these will be used to create the geometry (and subsequent manufacturing info etc), but analysis will be done in separate software with potentially different software used for pre-processing, solving and post-processing.The CAD tools used that end of market are fully modular so you license the modules for what particular role(s) each user is going to do.
Concept designers would only have concept related roles, whilst the electrical team electrical roles etc. If the CAD systems vendor's module for a particular function doesn't do what you want/need then its likely that a third party module is available that integrates back with the primary PLM.
NX has IIRC 50+ modules and Catia over a 100 to choose from.
Say Ansys Fluent was your CFD weapon of choice the integration between NX or Catia is pretty well seamless in getting the geometry out for processing.
When the software costs as much a decent car per seat then it just works and works well with the vendors and resellers have large armies of consultants to sort out the workflow.
Concept designers would only have concept related roles, whilst the electrical team electrical roles etc. If the CAD systems vendor's module for a particular function doesn't do what you want/need then its likely that a third party module is available that integrates back with the primary PLM.
NX has IIRC 50+ modules and Catia over a 100 to choose from.
Say Ansys Fluent was your CFD weapon of choice the integration between NX or Catia is pretty well seamless in getting the geometry out for processing.
When the software costs as much a decent car per seat then it just works and works well with the vendors and resellers have large armies of consultants to sort out the workflow.
b0rk said:
When the software costs as much a decent car per seat then it just works and works well with the vendors and resellers have large armies of consultants to sort out the workflow.
If only! 
The cost of the software licence looks like a bargain when you start paying consultancies to impliment something like a new PLM system!egomeister said:
b0rk said:
When the software costs as much a decent car per seat then it just works and works well with the vendors and resellers have large armies of consultants to sort out the workflow.
If only! The cost of the software licence looks like a bargain when you start paying consultancies to impliment something like a new PLM system!And once you are in, it’s a viscous circle. Costs to stay “up to date” once fully integrated into the ecosystem escalate enormously, but it becomes harder to consider bailing out and into another system once the business is so dependent on it.
Industry’s own class A drug!
egomeister said:
faa77 said:
So the one piece of software (Catia or Siemens NX) is for both designing and the Computational Fluid Dynamics?
Nope, these will be used to create the geometry (and subsequent manufacturing info etc), but analysis will be done in separate software with potentially different software used for pre-processing, solving and post-processing.With Siemens under the SimCenter branding you have NX Nastran and a host of other Nastran solvers which includes a Thermal-Flow capability. Siemens also bought CD-Adaptco (now rebranded to Star-CCM+) a few years back which used to be very widely used CFD solver in F1. This hasn't been fully integrated under the SC banner and is still very much a standalone product. SimCenter can also be used as a pre-processor for many of the other commercial solvers and write out input decks.
Simulia bought Abaqus many years ago which is one of the main solver environments out there and includes industry leading FEA and CFD capability.
Other analysis codes will also be used, so packages such as Altair's Hyperworks Suite will be used for pre/post and solve depending on capability required.
On the CFD front, as the teams are limited to the number of CPU hours that they can burn in a year many have gone down the research route with universities to develop more efficient solvers that allow fewer elements to be used in their models, but still providing the same quality of answers. This speeds up the solution times allowing more analysis to be done.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff