The Future Of F1 As The Pinnacle Of Technology Is Endangered?

[Greg Locock]

Well, you must be thinking of something, I can't read your mind.

Here's what I asked

Please nominate three technologies that were developed specifically for F1 and then were used successfully in production cars. Or two. Or one.

Here's the previous list


Diacil cylinder? Developed for and used in motorbikes in 2002

CF body? Mclaren MP4 in 1981 . I suppose that might qualify, back then I don't think the aircraft industry was building entire assemblies out of it. Although in 1968 it was used in the VC10s.

Ceramic brake? developed for railway trains in 1988

Nitrogen tyres? Not worth doing

EBD? Developed at Teves in 1992, used in 2004 Dodge Durango if not before

Inconnel in road (not rocket)? Developed for Whittle in 1950s. Used in RX7


So, maybe 1, maybe.

[wuzak]

EBD = exhaust blown diffuser or electronic brake distribution?

If it is the former, then that has been around in F1 since they had diffusers.

http://www.gettyimages.com.au/event/thr ... d150485316

Inconel was developed as the Whittle engine was developed through WW2.

Regarding nitrogen tyres, wasn't one of the things that came from Spygate was that Ferrari used CO2?

[SR71]

Why isn't it fair for F1 to take a technology used in other industries and prove its relevance for race/road use?

Why this incessant need for a technology to be 'born' in F1?

Back to the OP, As long as F1 bases its future on petrol then it's days have always been numbered. There is no debate - electric will overtake.

[Stormy]

There is no debate - electric will overtake.

So Formula E will become F1?
In 20 years time, if there is only autonomous racing, then i guess people will still want to watch real man operating vicious machines.

Like a guy on Sky said, F1 will become like horse racing. We changed cars for horses but some people still want to watch jockeys racing and controlling those amazing animals.

So i guess we may see F1 going back to its roots with gigantic IC engines and powerful sound. However, this means that some manufacturers may bail out.Guess F1 will be consisted of independent manufacturers like Cosworth. I just hope it won't become a spec series.

All in all, it looks like all motorsport is endangered. It's popularity going down to be at the same level as horse racing.

[roon]

The MGU-H hasn't existed elsewhere as far as I know, at least not to the current level of sophistication & performance. The number of aero devices developed within F1 has to be in the hundreds. F1 teams dump large amounts of money into the technologies that help them win races. They call this R and... D. I'm not sure why some members are convinced that F1 does not develop certain technologies, and parrot this whenever the conversation arises. Development partially explains why the cars remain quick despite regulation changes & handicaps. It's not all buying carbon brakes from a train company and a monocoque from Lockheed.

The surface complexity of F1 cars & the speed of iteration is a range of technologies unique to F1. Not found in other motorsports nor in aviation to the same degree. Where else can you find a new batch of refined techno-sculptures every couple of weeks? I'm happy to find out if another exists.

I imagine there are many logistical & organizational techniques which are unique to F1's constitution—its pace, scope, budget, and personalities.

[Greg Locock]

Hang on, I asked a question, got some serious replies which were demonstrably wrong for the most part, and then some rants and toys thrown out of the pram.

I'm not obsessed by thinking that F1's innovations should make it into production cars. To pick an equivalent example, Supermaxi yachts have 'innovated' in all sorts of ways that I hope will never become acceptable in club racing.

As fo MGUs, um, invented in the 1970s by rand or TRW or similar, for production cars.

[roon]

Surely the act of smashing a bottle of champagne against the side of one's vessel would make an interesting addition to the sport. Particularly after races where the drivers are still sour with one another.

Your MGU comment ignores the "-H" and the latter half of the sentence I wrote, so you're arguing with yourself there.

[SR71]

There is no debate - electric will overtake.

So Formula E will become F1?
In 20 years time, if there is only autonomous racing, then i guess people will still want to watch real man operating vicious machines.

Like a guy on Sky said, F1 will become like horse racing. We changed cars for horses but some people still want to watch jockeys racing and controlling those amazing animals.

So i guess we may see F1 going back to its roots with gigantic IC engines and powerful sound. However, this means that some manufacturers may bail out.Guess F1 will be consisted of independent manufacturers like Cosworth. I just hope it won't become a spec series.

All in all, it looks like all motorsport is endangered. It's popularity going down to be at the same level as horse racing.

I see autonomous racing as always remaining niche.

Humans driving electric race cars though should last another 100 years.

However I do see AI assistance becoming a key performance factor. As safety measures increase so will speed. Inevitably track design will catch up and we'll have 300+mph circuits.

The next barrier will be human reaction time - AI assistance will still let the best of the best shine as a mere mortal could still not bring those machines to the edge even with AI assist.

In that sense it will be as pure as it ever has.

[Sevach]

It's been hard to take the "pinnacle of technology" angle seriously for a good while now, regulations are so restrictive and spetacular ideas get banned quickly.

It goes back to the 70/80s, moveable aero, 6 wheelers, double chassis, active suspensions, variable transmissions, brake steer...

Even something "advanced" like the hybrid engines isn't revolutionary, it's a calculated move into a somewhat known technology, it wasn't something dreamed up by an engineer as an idea to get a leg up on the competition like forced induction was back in the day.

For all the dominance Mercedes had recently, the others cars on the grid are tremendously similar, Mercedes simply is(was?) a few percent more efficient everywhere.

The cars are refined to an unbelievable point, but there isn't anything being invented in F1 that contributes in a big way to the automotive industry.

[Greg Locock]

MGU-H? BMW peltiers on exhausts 2008, also Porsche 1988. Never went into production, not cost effective. I think they also tried steam but that's just getting silly. There was a 1990s system designed for trucks.

[roon]

Again, Greg: last half of the sentence. There's a reason your examples aren't commonly known.

Sevach, adding 50% more wheels isn't necessarily high tech nor "pinnacle". Nor was bodywork that scraped against the ground. To the OP: Nor is software engineering nor battery technology, necessarily, compared to other engineering fields.

Are the watchmakers in Switzerland more or less advanced than the app writers in Silicon Valley? It's a matter of framing and prejudices.

What F1 teams do to optimize the cars within the ruleset is a high tech affair expending great resources. Hasn't that always been the case? Compared to other series, and even compared to other industries, this is what perpetuates its reputation. I don't see F1's level of refinement in other series. LMP1 comes close but comparatively lacks development diversity & pace, in-season.

[Jersey Tom]

For one, I'd agree with Greg, and as has been said time and time again - F1 is no way the "pinnacle of technology." It's not an open class, and the money involved is pretty small compared to the auto/transportation industry on the whole, aviation, defense, etc. And that's fine. It's purely for entertainment and marketing.

Horse racing didn't go away when automobiles came around. I don't expect auto racing to go away if/when autonomous vehicles and hybrids or electrics become more common.

[wuzak]

MGU-H? BMW peltiers on exhausts 2008, also Porsche 1988. Never went into production, not cost effective. I think they also tried steam but that's just getting silly. There was a 1990s system designed for trucks.

Was the truck system with an MGUH or just a straight mechanical turbo-compound setup?

[Greg Locock]

Truck based system was based on these modules http://hi-z.com/

using a turbine to drive an electric generator is um, 1920s?

[mclaren111]

Quick question from a non engineer.

Is it possible to use a V8 ( +- 2.0 litre ) turbo but allow only 4 cylinders that can charge the turbo, and use the other 4 cylinders to increase the sound ??

Thus, you have 1 exhaust for turbo cylinders and another for the non turbo cylinders and the waste gates as they are now.

Thank you.