Everything Technical in F1 • Hacker News Board

Re: Everything Technical in F1

#11

Post by grotos » Wed, Nov 21, 2012, 2:55 PM UTC

MindTwister wrote: post #6

I sometimes have a hard time trying to fathom all the regulations imposed on the teams. Can anyone shed some light on eg. the dangers of wing design?

I don't know it this is what you need to know, but:

As far as the front wing is concerned: - the bigger, the more complicated means more downforce thus enabling drivers to go faster in a corner but such wing leads to more dangerous situations, such as puncturing oponent's tires. The bigger wings were introduced in 2009 when many parts of the cars were streamlined in order to improve overtaking and reduce dependency on aerodynamics.

The rear wing: - DRS was introduced 2 years ago. It stands for Drag Reduction System - driver can "open" rear wing to reduce drag (downforce is reduced). Basically means that rear wing is split horizontally into two smaller wings. This system improves top speed so it can be only used on straight lines. The failure of this system can lead to lost of control of the car in non-straight parts of the circuit. The usage of this system is heavily reduced by regulations.

Re: Everything Technical in F1

#12

Post by grotos » Wed, Nov 21, 2012, 3:02 PM UTC

Swizec wrote: post #4

brunorsini wrote: post #2

I could never get interested in F1 again after Senna's tragic death.

He was the last driver to die in an F1 crash. Unfortunately not the last person, but I think the road-side crews haven't seen a fatality in years. My interest in F1 stopped a few years ago when they downgraded the engines and made things all weird for a while. I hear it's getting back to awesome nowadays.

2014 regulations introduce even more downgraded engines. New ones will be 1.6 litre V6 turbo (now it is 2.4, V8, but not turbo), revs will be limited to 15k rpm (now 18k).

Re: Everything Technical in F1

#13

Post by BryanB55 » Wed, Nov 21, 2012, 3:06 PM UTC

ImprovedSilence wrote: post #10

If you ever have a chance to go to an F1 race, do it. You might have a terrible view of the race, but it is the greatest sound you will ever hear. It's like the sky is getting ripped apart by a million banshees.

Very true. I was able to attend the inaugural F1 event in Austin last weekend and it was a great experience. Although not the same as in person here's a video to give you an idea: http://f.cl.ly/items/2e3T093G2Z1N3A3Z1m1n/F1.MOV

Re: Everything Technical in F1

#14

Post by wmeredith » Wed, Nov 21, 2012, 3:09 PM UTC

ImprovedSilence wrote: post #9

MindTwister wrote: post #6

I sometimes have a hard time trying to fathom all the regulations imposed on the teams. Can anyone shed some light on eg. the dangers of wing design?

If not done right, it will not make enough downforce to corner properly. The cars are designed to have no air underneath them, so as to create a vacuum to the track. If air does get underneath them, the car becomes (briefly) an airplane... edit: A lot of the regulations are also based around making the cars somewhat slower(safer), so they dis-allow massive wings so you can't fly around corners at 200per... And then e…

There are some really crazy stories around bending the rules. Or pushing human technologies to the limit to achieve the smallest advantages.

Here is one of my favorites:

I read a really interesting print article a few years ago about one of the big F-1 teams (McLaren?) creating the first carbon fiber transmission housing. This was a HUGE deal at the time because in F-1, the transmissions are structural component of the cars. They bear huge stresses for extended periods of time.

The team spent a couple years and tens of millions of dollars reinventing the way carbon fiber is manufactured. It was all very hush, hush. In the article itself, the picture of the transmission was taken from about 20 feet away, because that's as close as the team would let anyone from the magazine get to it. It looked like the made the camera man stand across the shop from the thing and take his pic with a portrait lens.

The big take away at the end of the article was that they saved 50 lbs or so off the weight of the transmission... but the car was already under weight regulations. So they were adding 50lbs to the lead plate that was already on the bottom of the car so it makes weight. The net benefit of all the money and time spent on the CF transmission was to lower the center of gravity of the car 3/4 of an inch and that was considered a huge advantage until the other teams do likewise.

Re: Everything Technical in F1

#15

Post by chrisboesing » Wed, Nov 21, 2012, 3:12 PM UTC

brunorsini wrote: post #2

I could never get interested in F1 again after Senna's tragic death.

I can totally understand that.

What I don't get is why the F1 officials haven't learned more out of that tragic accident. Sure the cars are much safer than they were when Senna died, but why do they have to at more and more races in city centers? Sure, I can understand that they want to keep Monaco for historic reason, but there isn't a good reason to have races in the city centers of Valencia, Singapore, and soon New Jersey.

Driving that close to walls at the speeds they do, will sooner or later lead to another tragic accident.

For everyone who isn't a F1 fan check out this video from the race in Singapore to see what I'm talking about: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qYwC2qov44

Re: Everything Technical in F1

#16

Post by marklabedz » Wed, Nov 21, 2012, 3:15 PM UTC

grotos wrote: post #11

MindTwister wrote: post #6

I sometimes have a hard time trying to fathom all the regulations imposed on the teams. Can anyone shed some light on eg. the dangers of wing design?

I don't know it this is what you need to know, but: As far as the front wing is concerned: - the bigger, the more complicated means more downforce thus enabling drivers to go faster in a corner but such wing leads to more dangerous situations, such as puncturing oponent's tires. The bigger wings were introduced in 2009 when many parts of the cars were streamlined in order to improve overtaking and reduce dependency o…

A brief aside into the history of aerodynamic advances in auto racing....Chaparral Cars were some of the first race cars to be designed with a focus on the aerodynamic forces at play. While primarily competing in Can-Am instead of F1, they introduced cars with movable aerodynamic surfaces (Chaparrel 2E) and even a partial vacuum (Chaparrel 2J) to increase downforce.

Re: Everything Technical in F1

#17

Post by tomthorns » Wed, Nov 21, 2012, 3:17 PM UTC

I've been reading this blog for over a year now and the detail and knowledge Craig has is incredible. Understanding the technical characteristics of the cars has really deepened my love for the sport.

On a side note, I saw on Twitter this weekend that Craig/ScarbsF1 has been ill recently. He's actually due to go for a tripple heart bypass tomorrow, so I'd like to wish him well and hope he makes a speedy recovery.

Re: Everything Technical in F1

#18

Post by tomthorns » Wed, Nov 21, 2012, 3:18 PM UTC

ImprovedSilence wrote: post #10

If you ever have a chance to go to an F1 race, do it. You might have a terrible view of the race, but it is the greatest sound you will ever hear. It's like the sky is getting ripped apart by a million banshees.

I'll second this. If we get close to trackside without ear plugs in it actually hurts your inner ear, I've never experienced anything like it.

Re: Everything Technical in F1

#19

Post by sterwill » Wed, Nov 21, 2012, 3:22 PM UTC

tomthorns wrote: post #18

ImprovedSilence wrote: post #10

If you ever have a chance to go to an F1 race, do it. You might have a terrible view of the race, but it is the greatest sound you will ever hear. It's like the sky is getting ripped apart by a million banshees.

I'll second this. If we get close to trackside without ear plugs in it actually hurts your inner ear, I've never experienced anything like it.

It's probably hard to believe, but the V10s sounded even better than the V8s. Even louder, higher pitch at higher revs, and traction control out of the corners sounded like a fully automatic shotgun.

Re: Everything Technical in F1

#20

Post by paddy_m » Wed, Nov 21, 2012, 3:24 PM UTC

wmeredith wrote: post #14

ImprovedSilence wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If not done right, it will not make enough downforce to corner properly. The cars are designed to have no air underneath them, so as to create a vacuum to the track. If air does get underneath them, the car becomes (briefly) an airplane... edit: A lot of the regulations are also based around making the cars somewhat slower(safer), so they dis-allow massive wings so you can't fly around corners at 200per... And then e…

There are some really crazy stories around bending the rules. Or pushing human technologies to the limit to achieve the smallest advantages. Here is one of my favorites: I read a really interesting print article a few years ago about one of the big F-1 teams (McLaren?) creating the first carbon fiber transmission housing. This was a HUGE deal at the time because in F-1, the transmissions are structural component of t…

The rulebook specifically forbids the teams from using depleted uranium for ballast. I think most of the teams use tungsten, it's more dense than lead. http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=tungsten+density+vs+lea...

A carbon fiber transmission, properly constructed would allow for tighter aerodynamic packaging. Adrian Newey (the current Red Bull designer) is famous for making cars fragile and very aerodynamic. Sometimes his tight packaging causes his cars to overheat.