Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

F1 2014: All aboard the 'power train' - new rules explained

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 197 posts

Re: F1 2014: All aboard the 'power train' - new rules explained

#141

Post by ericcumbee »

protomyth wrote: post #97
sanoli wrote: post #5

There are so many rules dictating the design of an F1 chassis/engine that I wonder how much faster a "anything goes" car would go.

Well, even Indy had to tone down the cars for places like Texas Motor Speedway because the drivers were passing out in the corners. Daytona and Talladega are run with restrictor plates in NASCAR for much the same reason. The cars have been able to go faster than drivers can handle for a long time.

Nascar put restrictors on the car because they were hitting 212 average laps. And Nascar was not comfortable pushing the cars or tires (Nascar had open tire competition back then) farther than they wanted. so the solution was limit the amount of air an engine could take in. which created massive packs that cause 30 car wrecks. In my opinion it's probably killed more people than the cars running at 212 would have.

Re: F1 2014: All aboard the 'power train' - new rules explained

#142

Post by jdietrich »

sanoli wrote: post #5

There are so many rules dictating the design of an F1 chassis/engine that I wonder how much faster a "anything goes" car would go.

There's a reason for those rules - F1 is a sport haunted by the memory of dozens of dead drivers. The only way to ensure driver safety is to keep cornering speeds manageable and restrict the use of high-risk technologies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8t_QzZJn7M

Re: F1 2014: All aboard the 'power train' - new rules explained

#143

Post by mbell »

bliti wrote: post #52

The interesting bit here is the development of the turbochargers. This is an area that has been slow to change over the years, due to the small amount of turbocharged vehicles available new[1]. Most turbos are used in heavy machinery (garbage trucks, big rigs, etc.), a slowly changing industry. They do not face the same regulations as regular autos. Seems they are doing away with the wastegate and replacing it with a…

> Not to mention it would increase the possibility of the fuel pre-igniting inside the combustion chamber.

Detonation isn't all that much of a concern with F1 engines. When running at 15,000-18,000rpm there just isn't enough time for pre-ignition to occur.

Re: F1 2014: All aboard the 'power train' - new rules explained

#144

Post by zdrummond »

pbo wrote: post #65

I wrote firmware (~20kLocs) for a power (electrical) supply that's part of one such power train. This kind of development is very demanding, because you can't afford to leave any bugs in your program but at the same time you're always shipping late because of tight schedules and often blurry specifications. On top of that hardware and software development cycles are concurrent, so no target hardware available when yo…

Can you do an AMA? I would love to hear more!

Re: F1 2014: All aboard the 'power train' - new rules explained

#146

Post by chaz »

Spearchucker wrote: post #61

I stopped watching F1 about 10 years ago, and these new changes just reaffirm that decision. It's no longer about best car + best driver. It's about mixing it up, making it random, to maximise viewer numbers. Not the kind of racing I go for.

Just about every pro sports league needs to manage its rules to ensure that the playing field gets leveled every season. For example, NFL draft picks are in reverse order of season success. If last year's Super Bowl winner was able to choose their next team on a completely free market, they would simply use their boosted revenue and pay the most for the best players, thus making it much more likely that they'll increase their domination. No one wants to watch a dominating team shut out clearly inferior teams game after game.

F1 needs rules to tighten gaps between the team and to prevent one team from spending their way to success. I think we can argue about whether the new power units, DRS, and tire management are the right way to do this, but I'm glad they're trying something.

Re: F1 2014: All aboard the 'power train' - new rules explained

#148

Post by pavanred »

pbo wrote: post #65

I wrote firmware (~20kLocs) for a power (electrical) supply that's part of one such power train. This kind of development is very demanding, because you can't afford to leave any bugs in your program but at the same time you're always shipping late because of tight schedules and often blurry specifications. On top of that hardware and software development cycles are concurrent, so no target hardware available when yo…

I love F1 and am really interested to know more. But, as kayoone mentioned there probably would be a NDA.

If you have a blog, you should put your url out here.

Re: F1 2014: All aboard the 'power train' - new rules explained

#149

Post by protomyth »

ericcumbee wrote: post #141
protomyth wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, even Indy had to tone down the cars for places like Texas Motor Speedway because the drivers were passing out in the corners. Daytona and Talladega are run with restrictor plates in NASCAR for much the same reason. The cars have been able to go faster than drivers can handle for a long time.

Nascar put restrictors on the car because they were hitting 212 average laps. And Nascar was not comfortable pushing the cars or tires (Nascar had open tire competition back then) farther than they wanted. so the solution was limit the amount of air an engine could take in. which created massive packs that cause 30 car wrecks. In my opinion it's probably killed more people than the cars running at 212 would have.

Rusty Wallace did 228 mph at Talladega Superspeedway without a restrictor plate in 2004. The new car probably could do a bit more than that. Racing at that speed would be insane and all the safety advances since wouldn't be effective. Further, they were implemented because Bobby Allison crashed into a retaining fence at around 210 mph. This is big no-no in NASCAR because fan's shouldn't be in danger[1]. Looking at what has happened in other series to fans at high speed needs to be a consideration.

I don't think a race at 228 mph would be safer than a restrictor plate race and I am pretty sure it would kill more people.

1) look at all the attention to the Nationwide Race where the catch fence failed

Re: F1 2014: All aboard the 'power train' - new rules explained

#150

Post by thrownaway2424 »

gambiting wrote: post #140
thrownaway2424 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Come now. American impressions of diesel cars were formed by the ghastly Mercedes cars of the 80s and the Volvo DL, both smokey and pokey and unreliable. It's taken many years to shake that reputation. It doesn't help that the manufacturers refuse to market the cars here. VW is really the only mark with good success selling diesel cars in the USA. It makes sense that diesel costs more because it contains more energy…

But then on the other hand, diesel requires less work to be done to get it than petrol(gasoline) does. Both arguments are perfectly valid. And most EU countries(with the stark exception of UK) have diesel a lot cheaper than petrol.

Define "a lot"? Here in Switzerland at least diesel is more (by about 7%, not a lot). Since most of the cost of fuel here is taxes, I assume the difference between petrol and diesel is also due to differential taxation.

One of the things that has kept diesel out of the USA until recently is the diesel fuel was good enough for heavy trucks to meet truck emissions standards but wasn't good enough for diesel cars to meet car emissions standards. This wasn't the case in the EU for some years because truck emissions standards in EU are more strict and car emissions standards were less strict compared to California. Now that you can get ultra-low sulfur diesel in all 50 US states it is becoming easier to market diesel cars in the USA. But the new fuel standards (since 2010) also make diesel cost more.

Post reply on HN