2010 cars

[TRICKLE69]

roost89,

I would love to know what the tank capacity for the 3 Cosworth teams is, and for that matter how much do they actually fill them at the start of each race. If refueling is banned then this would not be giving away any race tactics.

If they post the cars weights next year then we will know.

[oj1983]

I don't see the point of making public the car weights once refuelling is banned. I was under the impressing that it was being done this year to give the public greater insight into what the teams' tactics were, but with all the car fuelled to the finish, it would be basically asking the teams to tell us what their engines fuel efficiency is. I doubt they'd be too keen on that one!

Obviously if I'm being a little naive I will happily hold my hands up and bow to anyone with superior knowledge!

Owen

[ISLAMATRON]

I'd still love to know the car weights, if there is any difference between teammates then we know who can go faster using less fuel.

[ringo]

How does qualifying and the no pit stop thing go together?
Once the car is fueled for quali, does the car run with what's in the tank after qualifying?
Or can you top up for the race on race day?
pardon my ignorance of the new regulations.

[Fil]

its going to go back to low fuel qualifying

[USF1blog]

*

[USF1blog]

*

Ok, wow, not allowed to mention a certain United States based F1 blog site. Well, we see a very big change in the race dynamics of the 2010 chassis. Not as big as 08 to 09 in terms of aero and mechanical, but large in the sense of tire strategy, wear and changes in car weight dynamics over the course of a grand prix distance.

If requested I can copy/paste it here, just let me know! We are so excited about the 2010 debut season and the car that involves!

[BreezyRacer]

IMO, for the 2010 cars they will continue to work on packaging to get the tunnel inlets as far forward as needed. The whole DD diffuser changes everything and really gets us into the realm of tunnels rather than just diffusers. I expect sidepods to be further forward in the chassis. That's not just for fuel packaging. The further forward you move the sidepods the further forward you can move the low pressure area of the undertray.

It wouldn't totally surprise me to see maybe a little tilt of the engines to allow the tunnels to begin sooner .. I don't know exactly where the maximum payoffs will be. But one thing is evident. These 2009 cars are compromised when it comes to optimal DD diffuser design.

Of course next year the real fight will be to control car balance at min and max fuel levels. Moving the aero balance towards the center of mass will do a lot to help this.

As for the smaller front tires, I don't expect the performance to suffer. First the narrower tires will mean more effective front wing area and better managed airflow around the front tires. In addition, with double deck diffusers being designed into the original design, expect the pressure center from the diffuser to be more forward in the chassis.

I'm really not sure about the crash test rules, but if the rules allow it, expect to see someone add a second fuel tank above what has been the splitter area to get that fuel weight as far forward as possible, then use fuel pickup controls to determine which tank to pull fuel from in the race to help balance the car with fuel weight.

I do expect the front tires to wear faster in 2010, whereas the rears wore faster in 2009.

[ESPImperium]

Im expecting the weight ballance to be moved alot more to the front end. Last year it was 45-48% to the front, next year its gonna be more like 49-52% to the front. With result, fronts wear alot faster.

I expect to see the side pods move futher forward, like above, but more for the fact that the cooling package needs to be situated somewhere and with the fuel tank taking up more space, the team with the most undercut sidepods for their fuel cell will win.

I expect to see more smaller turning vaynes and such sprouting all over the car, but within the regs. Im thinking theres gonna be alot of development on the front wings and engine cover areas. Also the area between the front wheels and front wing will also get something to aid the air arround the sides that isnt needed for the DDD at the rear from the centre section of the front wing/nose to try and get the presure zone futher forward.

Id also expect to see alot of suspension packaging work, get it to be as small, as neat and as strong as posible whilst being as aerodynamically streamlined as posible.

The team that can keep their pressure zone futher forward and weight ballance futherst forward and have the most efficent engine for the fuel onboard with the car being as easy on the tyres as it can be, will win. May not be fastest, but will be able to go alot futher in the race.

I think strategy wise, the team that has the shortest stops and can do the best hare and tortoise act will win.

Give it a couple months, i know that 60-70 days is alot of time to wait, but when we see the cars for the first time, im sure we will be able to pick a winner.

[ringo]

IMO, for the 2010 cars they will continue to work on packaging to get the tunnel inlets as far forward as needed. The whole DD diffuser changes everything and really gets us into the realm of tunnels rather than just diffusers. I expect sidepods to be further forward in the chassis. That's not just for fuel packaging. The further forward you move the sidepods the further forward you can move the low pressure area of the undertray.

It wouldn't totally surprise me to see maybe a little tilt of the engines to allow the tunnels to begin sooner .. I don't know exactly where the maximum payoffs will be. But one thing is evident. These 2009 cars are compromised when it comes to optimal DD diffuser design.

Of course next year the real fight will be to control car balance at min and max fuel levels. Moving the aero balance towards the center of mass will do a lot to help this.

As for the smaller front tires, I don't expect the performance to suffer. First the narrower tires will mean more effective front wing area and better managed airflow around the front tires. In addition, with double deck diffusers being designed into the original design, expect the pressure center from the diffuser to be more forward in the chassis.

I'm really not sure about the crash test rules, but if the rules allow it, expect to see someone add a second fuel tank above what has been the splitter area to get that fuel weight as far forward as possible, then use fuel pickup controls to determine which tank to pull fuel from in the race to help balance the car with fuel weight.

I do expect the front tires to wear faster in 2010, whereas the rears wore faster in 2009.

6.1.2 All the fuel stored on board the car must be situated between the front face of the engine and the driver's back when viewed in lateral projection. When establishing the front face of the engine, no parts of the fuel,
oil, water or electrical systems will be considered.
Furthermore, no fuel can be stored more than 300mm forward of the highest point at which the driver's back makes contact with his seat. However, a maximum of 2 litres of fuel may be kept outside the survival cell, but only that which is necessary for the normal running of the engine.

I guess the 2 litres is what can be strapped under the driver legs above the splitter.

and then there is this :

6.2.3 No lines containing fuel may pass through the cockpit.

[BreezyRacer]

Thanks for posting the rules Ringo. I guess there's no room for creativity when it comes to fuel location ..

[ISLAMATRON]

Also, the fuel cell has to be totally encapusalted by the safety cell so there will be no fuel in the side pods, as someone stated, They wont make the safety cell wider so longer is the only option.

[marcush.]

Also, the fuel cell has to be totally encapusalted by the safety cell so there will be no fuel in the side pods, as someone stated, They wont make the safety cell wider so longer is the only option.

why not? I guess there are areas to exploit here.The main point is not the width but the height of the cell especially the fuel volume which is above the CG as this is the true enemy those few litres will raise the CG ,wheras all below will actually lower the CG.So effectively having a clever fueltank layout should help minimise the
worst condition times when carrying a lot of fuel and a high CG.

also do not get the reasoning behind moving the weight to the front with smaller front tyres.With alternative fuel positioning outlawed to counteract the increase
in vehicle length teams might go back and move the oil tank back into the bellhousing ,in fact they even might shorten bellhousings to come back to a wheelbase they feel comfortable with.
A longer car -longer chassis-means additional weight and is not to be confused with a redesign of wishsboneangles.so less to play with in terms of ballast.
I don´t see much potential for moving weight distribution to the fore as you#d need to find a lot of ounzes in the rest of the car again.
btw.Oiltank and engine oil volume: is this part of the mandatory engine weight?If not you could integrate the oiltank into the engine and get hold of a big chunk of tungsten to place favourable...

[meves]

Sorry joined this a bit late so I'm going back a little in the conversation.

Back in previous seasons where refueling was banned (I've looked at 1993 as it was the most recent) the gaps were comparatively large between positions which I hope does not reappear. I know there were a lot of other contributing factors including reliabililty playing a major part and more better funded teams but just a quick look at the first 8 races show (on average) how much of a difference there was in the time gaps between each finishing position (in seconds).



The racing was close at times but the drivers often strung out during a race which was the reason for refueling being brought back in.

I'm not saying that fuel saving strategies can't be interesting either. The end of the season IRL race was a demostration of that (http://www.auto123.com/en/racing-news/o ... tid=112279). But the variation in racing and differing strategies have played their part in exciting racing, lets just hope that a large variation in tyre strategies can keep the racing close at the end. Oh and the reason that other series which no refueling have close racing tends to be due to all drivers having the same equipment rather than a lack of refueling adding to the action.

[mstar]

i am quiet sure we find after lap 3 the field will be seperated and we will see large gaps and i doubt we see the close racing we hoping for.