[Tech Issue] Open Regulation Formula One - What Would it Look Like?

[S14]

So there's been a lot of discussion on the topic of freedom within the technical regulations - whether or not it would be feasible seems to be the main point of contention. But what I haven't seen explored is what a car built under these open regulations would look like, what technologies it would employ, and just how fast it'd be. So, let's speculate.

We'd need to establish the limits we're working with. What I've seen suggested are limits on budget, limits on energy, safety requirements, and size limits. I'm not sure what these should be set at, unfortunately, so I would like to ask for your suggestions on that front.

I recognize that any limits we set will be of minimal use, as we're not F1 designers, but I still think this'd be a fun bit of speculating.

So, shall we have at it?

[miatanut]

My guess would be it would be pretty close to this:


That's pretty darn big, so it would need to be scaled down to meet reasonable overall dimensional limits.

Ben Bowlby discovered a new direction with the narrow front track, strong rear weight/downforce bias, so I would expect the X1 concept would be revised more in that direction.

With energy limits, streamlining would be more important than it has been in the past.

[S14]

The X1 assumes closed cockpits and enclosed wheels - is that what we would want to use, for this little game? I figured on open cockpit and open wheels being required. Besides, if regulations were open, wouldn't we see wildly different approaches?

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by S14

The X1 assumes closed cockpits and enclosed wheels - is that what we would want to use, for this little game? I figured on open cockpit and open wheels being required. Besides, if regulations were open, wouldn't we see wildly different approaches?

I thought this exercise was about technical freedom, in which case an F1 car doesn't have to have open cockpits and wheels.

I agree, there would likely be wildly different approaches, which would be a big part of the appeal. X1 would be one potential flavor.

[S14]

Originally Posted by miatanut

I thought this exercise was about technical freedom, in which case an F1 car doesn't have to have open cockpits and wheels.

I agree, there would likely be wildly different approaches, which would be a big part of the appeal. X1 would be one potential flavor.

Technical freedom, yes, but if it's Formula One, then it's for Formula Cars, isn't it? And aren't the features which typify a Formula Car open wheels and an open cockpit? Technical freedom is the point of the exercise, but technical freedom within the context of a Formula Car series.

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by S14

Technical freedom, yes, but if it's Formula One, then it's for Formula Cars, isn't it? And aren't the features which typify a Formula Car open wheels and an open cockpit? Technical freedom is the point of the exercise, but technical freedom within the context of a Formula Car series.

Stolen from the greatest cars thread:

This would seem to answer the question of open wheels as 'not necessarily'. Open cockpits are currently being debated as well.

[Puzzle]

this looks like fun so here goes:

aerodynamically it would probably look like the x2011 concept but imagine a different style of power-plant. on the one hand their are turbines they are powerful ,light and mean that you won't need a separate fan but they have issues with accelerating from a standstill and if we used them as a fan down force would be dependent on engine speed then their are electric motors which are light weight and compact compared to similarly powerful ICEs and have awesome torque curves but need very large and heavy energy storage systems like batteries, if however we go for a series hybrid both can be exploited for their strengths and their weaknesses mitigated.

If we have active suspension then we could see a move away from wish bone suspension as body roll could simply be dialed out and retaining camber at all ride heights and when going over bumps would take on more importance and trailing arm systems might become the choice.

[S14]

Originally Posted by miatanut

Stolen from the greatest cars thread:

snip

This would seem to answer the question of open wheels as 'not necessarily'. Open cockpits are currently being debated as well.

I'm aware of the Streamliners from the fifties (Mercedes and Ferrari both did them, as I recall). I do believe that they were disallowed after the 1955 season. They were appropriate then, as they benefited some cars some of the time, but now, if we were to allow streamlined wheels then every car would need them in order to be competitive.

As far as open cockpits go, while it may become a necessity due to safety, let's assume that it won't.

Originally Posted by Puzzle

this looks like fun so here goes:

aerodynamically it would probably look like the x2011 concept but imagine a different style of power-plant. on the one hand their are turbines they are powerful ,light and mean that you won't need a separate fan but they have issues with accelerating from a standstill and if we used them as a fan down force would be dependent on engine speed then their are electric motors which are light weight and compact compared to similarly powerful ICEs and have awesome torque curves but need very large and heavy energy storage systems like batteries, if however we go for a series hybrid both can be exploited for their strengths and their weaknesses mitigated.

If we have active suspension then we could see a move away from wish bone suspension as body roll could simply be dialed out and retaining camber at all ride heights and when going over bumps would take on more importance and trailing arm systems might become the choice.

Turbines, series hybrids, and active trailing arm systems - sounds interesting! Though I'd be worried about having turbines intaking air from below the car - the potential for FOD is significant (bodywork, marbles, etc.) and could get nasty. Jet A does have the benefit of being safer to handle than gasoline.

[Richard C]

No driver, fully automated or more likely real time remote from garage (why put all of that heavy processing power on board), extremely light weight, exotic fuel and materials. Basically toss in every banned idea from the past few decades. Cost? Don't ask.

Richard

[Oldtony]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

No driver, fully automated or more likely real time remote from garage (why put all of that heavy processing power on board), extremely light weight, exotic fuel and materials. Basically toss in every banned idea from the past few decades. Cost? Don't ask.

Richard

It is called formula Libre.
And if we really wanted to advance technology and science that is what we would have instead of this sort of celebrity obsessed, contrived formula we call F1.
But I still like watching it even if the wrong people are making all the money for the wrong reasons.

[Casper]

F1 should be about technology and making advances in new technology. One way to do that is give them a rule that limits the liquid fuel pumped in as petrol or whatever they use these days to an amount that makes it impossible to finish a race. Then we would see some thinking based an alternative methods of propelling the thing as fast as possible. The rest should be run what ya brung.

[S14]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

No driver, fully automated or more likely real time remote from garage (why put all of that heavy processing power on board), extremely light weight, exotic fuel and materials. Basically toss in every banned idea from the past few decades. Cost? Don't ask.

Richard

I wonder if remote controlled cars would be able to offer sufficient feedback to the pilot to really push. And what would we do if the electrical systems driving another car interfere with the control systems on the remote cars?

Originally Posted by Oldtony

It is called formula Libre.
And if we really wanted to advance technology and science that is what we would have instead of this sort of celebrity obsessed, contrived formula we call F1.
But I still like watching it even if the wrong people are making all the money for the wrong reasons.

I guess the idea behind this thread was to speculate on what sort of advanced technology would be in use if we had a Formula Libre style Formula One series.

Originally Posted by Casper

F1 should be about technology and making advances in new technology. One way to do that is give them a rule that limits the liquid fuel pumped in as petrol or whatever they use these days to an amount that makes it impossible to finish a race. Then we would see some thinking based an alternative methods of propelling the thing as fast as possible. The rest should be run what ya brung.

We would also see drivers being forced to slow down dramatically in order to finish the race, would we not? Or perhaps the drivers would come to a sort of "gentleman's agreement" to just run at normal speed and thereby artificially shorten the race distance.

[GORDON STREETER]

We have had a thread on this some while ago and I said, the car must fit in a certain measurement/any type of body/ any type and cc of engine but the same type of fuel must be used and limited. Now that would bring out some innovations !!

[S14]

Originally Posted by GORDON STREETER

We have had a thread on this some while ago and I said, the car must fit in a certain measurement/any type of body/ any type and cc of engine but the same type of fuel must be used and limited. Now that would bring out some innovations !!

Why limit the fuel type? What if someone wants to run a jet powered car on single malt scotch (or Jet A, if they're boring)? What if Audi wants to run a TDI, or Tesla a battery car, or hydrogen, or fairy dust? What if General Atomic wants to run a Thorium Fusion reactor?

What sort of technology do we think we'd actually see with more open regulations? Would diesel rise, like cream, to the top at the peak of motorsport (or what at least purports to be the peak of motorsport)? Would petrol be able to maintain dominance? Would single malt prove the answer for the world's renewable fuel problems?

What sort of technological advancement can we expect if everyone must use spec fuel? /snark

Seriously though, I was hoping to hear speculation or what sort of technologies might be used, in specific. Just saying "all the banned stuff from over the years" doesn't really ignite the imagination (at least for me, being unfamiliar with much of it).

[GORDON STREETER]

If you limit what type of fuel can be used that gives a starting point, I think that nuclear fuel would be ruled out because of the safety aspect.

[wolfhound]

Think of all the things that have been banned in F1 over the years and then look at how they might have been developed.

I can imagine having powerful cars with fans for downforce producing so many G's that the cars will be able to drive flatout all race, no brakes required.
The drivers will need G suits but will they save them from blackouts? Otherwise the cars can be driven remotely in simulators.

[S14]

Originally Posted by GORDON STREETER

If you limit what type of fuel can be used that gives a starting point, I think that nuclear fuel would be ruled out because of the safety aspect.

A subcritical thorium reactor should be very safe, but I get your point. Perhaps we limit our liquid fuels to hydrogen, Jet A, pump petrol, pump diesel, and pump CNG? Though that leaves the issue of someone using batteries, though I doubt a pure battery powered car would be competitive in any case.

And let us assume that equivalent amounts of our four fuels would be available to each car.

Edit:

Originally Posted by wolfhound

Think of all the things that have been banned in F1 over the years and then look at how they might have been developed.

I can imagine having powerful cars with fans for downforce producing so many G's that the cars will be able to drive flatout all race, no brakes required.
The drivers will need G suits but will they save them from blackouts? Otherwise the cars can be driven remotely in simulators.

Unfortunately, I wasn't around for most of the things banned in F1 - I was four during the '93 season, which I think is the most recent of the 'banned technology' years, as far as major advancements go. So perhaps we could elaborate on just which technologies would get used, and how they would be developed.

As far as G Suits and fan cars go, I wonder how much lateral G the tires can take before they start letting go. Particularly if that number is higher or lower than 9g, which seems to be the current limit before G-LOC.

[GORDON STREETER]

Originally Posted by S14

And let us assume that equivalent amounts of our four fuels would be available to each car.

I would think that you would have to bring in some sort of cost clause or a "right to buy" otherwise it would just be down to who had the most money.
After the first year everybody would just copy the winners anyway

[S14]

Originally Posted by GORDON STREETER

I would think that you would have to bring in some sort of cost clause or a "right to buy" otherwise it would just be down to who had the most money.
After the first year everybody would just copy the winners anyway

I'm not sure what you mean. I meant equivalent amounts of fuel would be determined, so if you're running petrol then the volume of petrol you are allowed has about the same amount of energy in the fuel as the energy in the volume of someone else's Jet A.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by S14

We would also see drivers being forced to slow down dramatically in order to finish the race, would we not? Or perhaps the drivers would come to a sort of "gentleman's agreement" to just run at normal speed and thereby artificially shorten the race distance.

There would be mo point as even then the amount of regulated supply would not be enough. If the mandated fuel is petrol as pump;ed from a bowser then the secondary means of propelling it would either be compatible with a petrol motor, that let's diesel out but then they might find a way of making a dual fuel motor which in my view would be the aim of the whole thing. It would also encourahe them to make aero that has a whole new aim and purpose.

Anything to get away from the F1 that has turned into something resembling Formula Vee on steroids.

[S14]

Originally Posted by Casper

There would be mo point as even then the amount of regulated supply would not be enough. If the mandated fuel is petrol as pump;ed from a bowser then the secondary means of propelling it would either be compatible with a petrol motor, that let's diesel out but then they might find a way of making a dual fuel motor which in my view would be the aim of the whole thing. It would also encourahe them to make aero that has a whole new aim and purpose.

Anything to get away from the F1 that has turned into something resembling Formula Vee on steroids.

I'm not quite sure what you mean - would they be carrying a second fuel source other than petrol or something? And what do you mean by "aero that has a whole new aim and purpose[?]"

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by GORDON STREETER

I would think that you would have to bring in some sort of cost clause or a "right to buy" otherwise it would just be down to who had the most money.
After the first year everybody would just copy the winners anyway

This would indeed be true. After all, it's teams trying to beat one another and not teams trying to find the craziest way of doing it. If it turns out that a 1,000cc four cylinder diesel turbo engine coupled to super quiet electric motors with CVT are the best way forward, then that'll be the death of F1.