6 ms·
2014 regulations: F1's engine revolution
- justinph 13y agoI don't follow F1, but this sounds pretty exciting. Hopefully the multiple variables introduced here will produce innovation that will flow down into normal production hybrid vehicles.
- flyinglizard 13y agoThe new regulations certainly step up the engineering game, going into uncharted territories. I'm not sure that as a motorsport spectator I like these changes, though; there's something about the sound of the V8s or their predecessor V10s, revving at 20k RPM. It's a large part of what makes motorsport exciting. Compared to that, a 15k RPM 1.6L V6 seems pretty dull, regardless to how well it performs.
- TylerE 13y agoI wish they got away from such tight regulation of the technology, and let the teams really experiment. I'd like to see the F1 engine rules shortened to two rules. 1. Competitors have a total of XX GGE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline_gallon_equivalent http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline_gallon_equivalent) of fuel per 100km of race distance. 2. Competitors may not use a device that prevents unusual risks to other drivers, spectators, or race officials. Done. End of rule book. The fuel mileage limit will encourage teams to optimize for effciency...beyond that let them have at it.
- ericcumbee 13y agoYou would like the Le Mans Prototype Rules. they are using something similar, except they are limited to how much fuel can be used over one lap.
- TylerE 13y agoYes, essentially...even Le Mans is a bit too restricted for my tastes.
- ericcumbee 13y agoThe main problem with that is building something that is sustainable. They tried a formula similar to yours back in late 80s called Group C. It was incredible cars and incredible racing but became so absurdly expensive no one could afford it. I would like the rules to be more open as well. The Hybrid Systems for LMPs have to be homologated at the start of the year which prevents development of them during the year. Also the Hybrid systems are limited to only being able to collect certain amount of energy. The problem is the people paying the bills on LMP projects are the ones that have the say on the rules. And the people paying the bills dont want the costs to get out of hand. Which admittedly if they went to a more unlimited rules package could happen.
- TylerE 13y agoYou could easily keep costs under control by adding a claiming rule - e.g. allow the team that comes last to buy the winner's car for some fixed price, $500k, say.
- ericcumbee 13y agoThey do have a cost capped formula intended for Privateers called LMP2. its cost capped where the manufacturer can only sell the car for a certain price.
- jsmeaton 13y agoIncluding spare parts (engines, wings, whatever), expertise, manuals, design documents? Or just the car? I can't possibly see how this could work.
- ericcumbee 13y ago
- nabla9 13y agoIt's called formula 1 for a reason. No rules would lead to dull competitions and bankruptcies. There has been times with less rules and it does not work. 1. Cars would be clued to the road with massive downforce and it would look like they are on track in turns. Very boring races without overtakes. Races would be determined in time trials. 2. Building competitive car would be even more expensive than it is now. There would be only few competitive teams, some years maybe only one. 3. Several teams would eventually drop out because racing would be too expensive.
- TylerE 13y agoI'm not sure if your response is serious or sarcasm. Your points 1 & 3 encapsulate everything wrong with present day Formula 1.
- nabla9 13y agoThis is not sarcasm. These are still problems with F1. The reason why these rules are needed is because F1 racing has been in the constant "getting out of hand" state since 80's. Some races from the ground effect era 1977 to 1982 were ridiculous. Wing-profiled sidepods sealed to the ground by sliding lexan skirts. It took gigantic amount of rules changes to cover all loopholes.
- jdietrich 13y agoThen you don't have a motor racing formula, just a spending contest. If you look at the technical regulations in F1, they have two main aims - ensuring driver and spectator safety, and controlling costs to maintain competitive racing. Most of the current technical regulations are just special cases of your rule 2. Moveable aerodynamic devices are banned to prevent sudden loss of mid-corner traction (causing the car to violently roll off into the grandstands). Many of the dimensional restrictions are there to prevent the use of ground effect, for similar reasons. Wheel tethers reduce the chance of a wheel flying off and killing a spectator (something that has happened in several motorsport formulae). Restrictions on fuel composition prevent teams from using explosive fuels or oxidizers. Limits on wing sizes and aspect ratios restrict downforce, to ensure that the drivers aren't subject to intolerable g-forces. The culture of F1 is based around a belief that there is no such thing as the spirit of the law, only the letter. Devious loopholes are applauded for their ingenuity and characterise most development in the modern sport. On the other hand, many people in the sport remember the dark days, when driver fatalities were just part of the sport. Teams and drivers understand that in the absence of regulation, the Nash equilibrium inevitably entails dead drivers and dead spectators. The F1 rulebook isn't an external imposition on the sport, it is a document that is designed by mutual agreement between Bernie, FOTA, the FIA and the GPDA. Every word of it has been hard fought and represents the least-worst compromise between those various interests. Unrestricted racing is a trope that is often raised by outsiders to motorsport, but the reality is that without the technical regulations, there is no racing at all, just a contest to see who can spend the most, with a mortuary full of charred and mangled drivers as collateral damage.
- TylerE 13y agoYes, because of course the current regulations are doing SO well at keeping the cost of F1 down. I should point out that there was a time (not, coincidentally, imo, arguable the greatest period in F1 history) when the constructors were given substantially more leeway - look at the golden age when some builds came out with mid-engined vehicles for instance, real innovation at the time, or other innovative layouts like the Tyrell P34 6-wheeler, or the fan cars, or the turbine cars that ran at Indianapolis (not F1, but close, and many F1 cars were entered at Indy in those days).
- 13y ago
- ericcumbee 13y agoI think the innovation is going to come from the Sports Car Racing side. The engines are more or less unrestricted, the only limit on them is fuel consumption per lap. I've always liked the Prototypes more than F1 though. It seems like all the F1 teams more or less converge on how to design a car and they all look more or less alike. Whereas with LMPs there are multiple answers to the question of how to build a car and make it go fast and be efficient and last for 24 hours.
- robryan 13y agoI think it is more that the regulations are so tight that the differences in designs between teams aren't immediately noticeable unless they are explained in depth.
- Brakenshire 13y agoGood to see F1 fulfilling some real purpose, rather than just entertainment.
- aunty_helen 13y agoIndeed. All that stuff they've done in the past is just rubbish on modern vehicles. Who needs more that 2 valves per cyclinder anyway or disc brakes or...
- Brakenshire 13y agoNo need to be sarky. Okay, well, good to see F1 directly optimizing towards something of real value, rather than relying on incidental outcomes.
- sanoli 13y agoWell, I recall an interview with a Williams engineer saying that (in the mid 2000's, I think) the state of Formula-1 technology was so advanced and geared to its own brand of racing that, by the time it would eventually get to road vehicles, it would be too late, there would be other stuff outside of F-1 developed already.
- fsck--off 13y agoActually, normal production hybrid vehicles have innovations that are banned in F1. Specifically, continuously variable transmissions. F1 rules that specify 8 forward gears and 1 reverse gear are written to make sure that CVTs can't be used.
- alexeisadeski3 13y agoF1 is going the wrong direction.
- iaw 13y agoWhy do you feel that way?
- alexeisadeski3 13y agoI, at least, want to see fast cars. I don't care about any of the green stuff. It's a sport.
- NDizzle 13y agoThey are still going to be ridiculously fast cars.
- NDizzle 13y agoFurther on this, most people who don't really keep up with racing don't realize just how fast F1 cars. Here's[1] a fantastic overlay of a very famous corner at Spa. FIA GT cars are not slow cars[2] but the differences are tremendous. [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ex5dhhpSHCw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ex5dhhpSHCw [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIA_GT_Championship http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIA_GT_Championship [BONUS IN CAR FOOTAGE] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2cNqaPSHv0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2cNqaPSHv0
- ericcumbee 13y agoI'd like to see that comparison between a F1 car and LMP1 car. considering that the LMP1 actually produces more downforce than a F1 car it should be interesting.
- robryan 13y agoIs it really about green? I thought it was more about enforcing cars that cost less to maintain throughout the course of a season. They have been heading that way for a long time, restricting teams to a set number of engines and gear boxes per season.
- tambourine_man 13y agoWhy not bite the bullet and go electric only? They can be really fast, money is not a problem and it's where we need inovation the most.
- losl 13y agohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIA_Formula_E_Championship http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIA_Formula_E_Championship
- thomseddon 13y agoWay ahead of you: Formula E (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIA_Formula_E_Championship http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIA_Formula_E_Championship) 2014-15 will be the inaugural season
- ericcumbee 13y agoI do not think Formula E will ever amount to much more than an interesting side show. As soon as the technology in Formula E is mature enough, I fully expect it to be folded into F1. Where they will go all Electric, or balance of performance rules will be put in place to allow electric and internal combustion will compete against each other.
- zobzu 13y agoyep formula e may with some luck become a great tech challenge.
- colletedavis 13y agoGreat to see teams like Andretti Autosport at the forefront of the series reppin' USA!
- fotbr 13y agoSo they'll be a mid-pack team with an owner that goes whining to the officials anytime something doesn't work to his benefit? Not exactly the "reppin'" I'd like to see for the USA in world motorsport.
- TwoBit 13y agoCan somebody explain how these 1.6L V6 engines have far more power than my 3.0L V6 car, and as much as many V10 and V12 super cars? All I can figure from the article is the high RPM and the turbo.
- TylerE 13y agoInsanely high RPM (18k+), crazy turbos, innovative valves, super high compression ratios. Plus each motor only had to last maybe 1000 miles, and they get essentially rebuilt every time they run.
- fotbr 13y agoActually, the engines (and gearboxes, for that matter) don't get rebuilt. Breaking the FIA seal means they might as well replace the engine with a fresh one, since the same penalties apply.
- stevenrace 13y agoCompression ratio and operating RPM mostly. Compression ratio (the 'squish' in an engine's 'suck,squish,bang,blow' cycle) is >~14:1. Dynamic compression (once you factor in the compression of air caused by the turbo) is much higher. This is largely due to running a higher octane fuel which keeps preignition at bay. Your typical road car has around a 9:1 compression ratio. Secondly, peak operating RPM is triple the average road car. Horsepower is '(torque * RPM) / 5252'. With the engine spinning at nearly 21,000 RPM, the neglible torque from the small displacement starts to add up. Again, your average road car sees about 6,500 RPM. Lastly, for comparison, the best road cars rarely see over 120hp/liter in normally aspirated form. And 250hp/liter on 93 octane is about the limit on well tuned turbo cars. This is largely simplified, as quite a bit of engineering is needed to get even above road car values.
- bri3d 13y agoYou answered your own question. Even without exotic engineering highly-boosted turbocharged 2.0L street-car I4s can put out upwards of 500 horsepower at 7-8000 RPM. Formula One builders take things to the next level by building more advanced rotating parts and using pneumatic valve springs to allow the engine to spin all the way up to 15,000RPM with an almost linear increase in horsepower as they travel up the powerband.
- gil 13y agoAnd the fact that the engine development freeze has been lifted (for a few years anyway) is equally exciting.
- erikig 13y agoI really hope this opens up the competition. The last couple of years have been a little one-sided given Red Bull's dominance and while this has not been strictly due to engines (Red Bull uses the same Renault engines as many of the other F1 teams) it would be nice to make them work just a little harder to win the title.
- colletedavis 13y agoI probably found a good portion of the gear heads like myself on here -- I wanted to reach out for your support in my campaign! I'm the ONLY female racing driver in the world in pro development for INDYCAR -- I'm signing with a top team in 2014, and recently launched my CHASING INDY campaign, and would love your support! www.ChasingIndy.com Thank you!
- fotbr 13y agoYou're not the first. There have been several women in indy before you, and there is at least one, Simona Di-something-or-other, who is already in the series. Coming on a tech website with your blatantly false spam isn't the way to make fans.
- x0054 13y agoI find it sad that people are so obsessed right now with small engines. Small engine does not necessarily mean good efficiency. For instance, I have a C5 Corvette with a 5.7L V8 engine. It gets 29-30MPG on the freeway, and I usually get combined rating for about 27MPG. My friend had an M3 with a much smaller engine but same HP. It was getting maybe 16MPG combined, on a good day. Large engine does not necessarily equal good efficiency. That's why I find all these rules idiotic. I personally would like to see a rule where each car gets X amount of fuel (adjusted in BTUs) per race. So say you can get 100 liters of gas or 85 liters of diesel, because diesel has more BTU/liter. That's all. Leave the rest up to the teams, let them figure out the most efficient way to spend their fuel. For instance, maybe hydraulic or nematic energy systems are better than electric. Let them try that. Maybe someone want's to do an all electric car with a diesel generator onboard for power, let them try that. Maybe someone want's to try going at it with hydrogen generator / electric combo. Let them try that too. Millions of dollars are spent on F1, and all that money is being wasted on fiddling with exhaust positioning, rather then trying new and innovative technologies. The "Prius" layout is old news, there are better solutions to efficiency. You can reword the most efficient cars by allocating an artificially low amount of fuel per race, and then holding cars in the pits for additional "penalty" time for each liter of fuel they take in over the baseline. That way the most competitive car would be the fastest car with the best fuel economy.
- coherentpony 13y ago> My friend had an M3 with a much smaller engine but same HP. That'll do it.
- quacker 13y agoI personally would like to see a rule where each car gets X amount of fuel (adjusted in BTUs) per race. I think the article mentioned exactly that: To enforce this focus, the 2014 regulations limit the total fuel consumption for an entire race at 100kg with a maximum fuel flow limit of 100kg/h. This means that for a 90 minute race, the average fuel flow can only average around 66kg/h, while at the Singaporean GP, which often lasts close to two hours, it will have to be around 50kg/h.
- stellar678 13y ago
- plainOldText 13y agoSo many regulations. You can't have that, and that. No, you can't have that either. I wonder what kind of engines the F1 engineers could come up with if they would enjoy the freedom to pursue more exotic designs.
- chaz 13y agoYou'd probably have a car that is so incredibly fast that a driver could stay conscious driving it, and so expensive that no team could afford to build it, and a league so lopsided that no viewers would watch it. At the end of the day, F1 is in the entertainment business and they want to build a league of competitive teams so that viewers will keep their advertising dollars flowing. The best way to keep them competitive is with rules that ensure they stay within touch of one another. That being said, I think F1 still has a lot of work to do.
- grmarcil 13y agoThey would come up with this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Bull_X2010 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Bull_X2010 Adrian Newey (needs no introduction if you are an F1 fan, look up his accomplishments if you are not) did exactly what you are talking about with the RB X2010 and the car is incredible to say the least. Much like my sibling comment says, a no-regulations formula league would be financially un-viable for all but a few teams. As it is, F1 is struggling considerably to balance development and testing costs with keeping the smaller teams in business. And those back-half teams are still driving very uncompetitive cars compared to the big 3 or 4 teams - we're talking 2+ seconds off the pace per lap.
- bliti 13y agoI'm hoping that the turbocharging system makes it into production vehicles. Being able to utilize the energy wasted by the exhaust system is a big boost (pun very intended) in efficiency. If the turbine is able to always spin at a given RPM, then it can generate enough electricity to forgo the alternator, maybe the mechanical water pump and A/C compressor (replaced by electric ones), and power an electric power steering motor. This would also help in packaging.
- WalterBright 13y agoHa, if I had anything to say about it, I'd outlaw anything on an F1 car that had a transistor of any sort in it, except for safety equipment. No radios, no software engine management, no data collection. Auld Skool driver skill.