Scuderia Ferrari F1-75 speculation thread

[cooken]

Sorry, I’ve dragged this off topic. I’ll respond briefly to @Ryars examples out of politeness.

In both examples the energy reduction is about 20%. To do this with weight you need to lose 25% of the car mass. Remember the overall car mass includes driver and fuel which are fixed.

Thanks henry.

How much speed can be reduced? What would be the difference in impact for a car crashing, that is travelling at 350+ kph and loses it on a monza straight Vs one that is going at 310 kph? To achieve a reduction of 40 kph, we are talking about shedding loads of BHPs. But how much would that contribute to reduction in impact?

Reducing the speed from 350km/h to 310km/h reduces the kinetic energy of the car - the energy the crash structures/barriers have to deal with - by c.22%.

I did the calculation and it's less than 20%. If the cars are reduced to 2013 levels of weight (reduce 150 kgs), that would result in similar reduction in impact. But then the cars would go even faster with the reduced weight @ current power levels. So on a balance, the cars can be reduced to 700 kgs (reduce 90 kgs) and think of decreasing some power. This is something they can target for 2026 with the removal of MGU-H (and not increasing electrical boost as planned). That would make cars similarly fast to what they are now, lesser crash impact and more agile. Win win. Sorry for being offtopic. I would stop here.

What calculation did you do exactly? 22% seems correct.

[Ryar]

Sorry, I’ve dragged this off topic. I’ll respond briefly to @Ryars examples out of politeness.

In both examples the energy reduction is about 20%. To do this with weight you need to lose 25% of the car mass. Remember the overall car mass includes driver and fuel which are fixed.

Thanks henry.

Reducing the speed from 350km/h to 310km/h reduces the kinetic energy of the car - the energy the crash structures/barriers have to deal with - by c.22%.

I did the calculation and it's less than 20%. If the cars are reduced to 2013 levels of weight (reduce 150 kgs), that would result in similar reduction in impact. But then the cars would go even faster with the reduced weight @ current power levels. So on a balance, the cars can be reduced to 700 kgs (reduce 90 kgs) and think of decreasing some power. This is something they can target for 2026 with the removal of MGU-H (and not increasing electrical boost as planned). That would make cars similarly fast to what they are now, lesser crash impact and more agile. Win win. Sorry for being offtopic. I would stop here.

What calculation did you do exactly? 22% seems correct.

https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/impa ... _1780.html

I looked for F(max), which is the formula for calculating the crash impact force. Used the results between 340kph (94.4 m/s) and 790kg Vs 310kph (86.1 m/s) and 790kg. Then did the same calculation for 340kph (94.4 m/s) and 650kg. Let me know if there is something I have missed there.

[cooken]

Thanks henry.


I did the calculation and it's less than 20%. If the cars are reduced to 2013 levels of weight (reduce 150 kgs), that would result in similar reduction in impact. But then the cars would go even faster with the reduced weight @ current power levels. So on a balance, the cars can be reduced to 700 kgs (reduce 90 kgs) and think of decreasing some power. This is something they can target for 2026 with the removal of MGU-H (and not increasing electrical boost as planned). That would make cars similarly fast to what they are now, lesser crash impact and more agile. Win win. Sorry for being offtopic. I would stop here.

What calculation did you do exactly? 22% seems correct.

https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/impa ... _1780.html

I looked for F(max), which is the formula for calculating the crash impact force. Used the results between 340kph (94.4 m/s) and 790kg Vs 310kph (86.1 m/s) and 790kg. Then did the same calculation for 340kph (94.4 m/s) and 650kg. Let me know if there is something I have missed there.

1. You calculated a force when the other posters both mentioned energy. Those are not the same quantity, and using a force is not as useful as it requires several more assumptions.

2. You used 340km/h, whereas the value used by others was 350km/h.


Maybe just leave this sort of things to others...

[Ryar]

What calculation did you do exactly? 22% seems correct.

https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/impa ... _1780.html

I looked for F(max), which is the formula for calculating the crash impact force. Used the results between 340kph (94.4 m/s) and 790kg Vs 310kph (86.1 m/s) and 790kg. Then did the same calculation for 340kph (94.4 m/s) and 650kg. Let me know if there is something I have missed there.

1. You calculated a force when the other posters both mentioned energy. Those are not the same quantity, and using a force is not as useful as it requires several more assumptions.

2. You used 340km/h, whereas the value used by others was 350km/h.


Maybe just leave this sort of things to others...

Thanks for letting me know crooken.

[jumpingfish]

From Giuliano Duchessa:

All 2021 PUs without adaptations had -80/90 hp with E10.

With design / development 2022 Ferrari has recovered a lot of hp. Nobody seems to have the same max power in 2021. Honda sources confirmed in this regard:
"It's a very difficult change"

In the blacked-out tests in Barcelona it will be impossible even to guess how much power the teams will use.

Even in Bahrain we may have ideas that are not entirely clear, and yet for the first 3 GPs we are receiving cross-cutting signals that suggest that "caution will reign"

If Ferrari now have more power than 'Spicy' Mercedes in Brazil.. I hope it is true.

[F1NAC]

Would it be possible for Ferrari that they ran with E10 during last year? Preparing for this year?

[Cuky]

I don't think that was possible since fuel composition is tightly regulated

[Henri]

Guess redbull know ferrari has powerful engine and have started protesting lol

[aleks_ader]

I don't think that was possible since fuel composition is tightly regulated

I dont think is even possibble test it in practice.

[godlameroso]

https://www.wykop.pl/cdn/c3201142/comme ... tELrcW.jpg

IIRC there's no strakes in the diffuser for 2022, if there are I was not aware, and if there are, the cars would annihilate last year's cars in terms of downforce.

[f1316]

Guess redbull know ferrari has powerful engine and have started protesting lol

I wonder why they would think they could get engine data by testing last year’s car - after all, they ran the car with the upgraded hybrid for half a season in races anyway, what more could they find from a couple of days testing? Unless they thought Ferrari would run the new PU in the old car, but surely that’s against the rules?

[Schippke]

I'm fairly confident it wouldn't be allowed... also might play in some part to the reason that they opted against using the SF21 to test, not just because the rules (still somewhat in limbo at the moment) regarding testing cars under 2 years old, but it would still give them more data on their new Hybrid system they used that was aimed towards 2022.

Every lap on the track you'll learn something... even if the rules aren't identical year to year. Ferrari is using their resources to their advantage; Can't blame them really, and you'd think it would've been put a stop to by now from the FIA if everyone was up in arms about it...

[Jolle]

If they needed to test a PU, they still have a LaFerrari that takes a F1 PU, so, no need to actually put it in the SF71

[JPBD1990]

IT HAS A NAME! F1-75 (see twitter, I don’t know how to do links lol). Where da mods at? Let’s update this thread name fam

[Ryar]