FA+
Shop
The Nerfing of Formula One
8 years ago
General
Anyone who plays MMORPGs knows what "nerfing" is. For those of you who don't, it's when the developers put in new rules or alter weapons and items to tone down combinations that prove to be game-breakingly powerful. These combinations usually aren't made on purpose, rather some enterprising individual finds the magic combination that nobody else considered and proceeds to burn the joint down.
Not surprisingly, the same thing happens in other competitive areas. And one of the most competitive pressure cookers is Formula One racing, where teams will go to great lengths for the slightest of advantage to help eke out a win over the competition.
How far will engineers go? Well, two examples come to mind...
In 2010, McLaren debuted the "F-Duct". It was a system with a small air snorkel mounted on the nose of the car that would scoop up air and vent it into the cockpit to "cool the driver". At least, that's the reason that was given for it. Because if the driver covered up the vent in the cockpit, the air would continue through duct work in the body, down the length of the "dorsal fin" behind the engine cover back to the rear wing where it would blow through a slot in the wing flap element. This air coming out the bottom surface of the flap caused the airflow on the underside to break away and stall the wing.
While it's generally known that a stalled wing doesn't provide lift (or downforce, in this case), the laws of physics dictate that a stalled wing also creates less drag. In fact, stalling out the rear wing could give cars a 3 MPH advantage in a straight line. In practice for the first race of the season, other drivers watched the McLarens "walk away" from them on the straights.
As the season went on, the other teams were forced to come up with their own versions of the F-Duct, but in 2010 the monocoque body of the cars were homologated, meaning no changes could be made to it for the season. McLaren had the advantage that they designed the ducting into their body from the get go. Other teams weren't so lucky and had to come up with "bolt-on" solutions. This also led to less elegant ways for the drivers to control the system, including using their hand so that they only had one hand on the wheel during the high speed sections of tracks. It was thought that if a driver was using their left hand to block a vent and needed to adjust brake bias with their right hand, there could be a point where they had no hands on the wheel.
Concerns about safety led the FIA to outlaw the blown wing at the end of the season, but apparently the liked the general idea. For the next season they would introduce the Drag Reduction System where the wing flap would pivot upward to disrupt airflow, stall the rear wing and give cars a 6 MPH speed advantage in designated zones. It also had the advantage of setting down rules for the use of DRS and making sure it could be used safely.
As a side note, the name "F-Duct" was probably invented by the media, based either on the intake snorkel looking like an "F", or that the snorkel was near the "F" in the "Vodafone" sponsorship on the nose of the car. But Christian Horner of Red Bull probably had the thought that everyone else did when he said, "We call it 'The F-ing Duct'..."
Sometimes it's not a new idea... sometimes it's the combination of old ideas put together that can reap great benefits.
The diffuser is a piece of aerodynamic work under the rear of the car that takes under-car airflow and creates a low-pressure area that helps stick the car to the track surface. And it stands to reason that the faster the airflow through the diffuser, the lower the pressure and the more suction, right? This led to the exhaust-blown diffuser, where the engine's exhaust flow is routed through the diffuser, creating a fast-moving air stream.
But the exhaust-blown diffuser is not new: it was used as far back as 1983. And it wasn't without its problems. Chief among them was when the driver lifted off the throttle, the exhaust gases dramatically decreased and the downforce dried up. It's been described as almost an on/off effect, the downforce disappearing right when it's needed the most going into a corner. Turbocharged engines suffer less from this effect (the exhaust is smoother and more consistent post-turbine) but in 2009 F1 switched up to naturally aspirated V8s.
Enter "off-throttle overrun", a method designed to keep air flowing out the exhaust even when the driver is off the throttle. And it turns out this isn't new technology either: rally racers have been using it as an anti-lag system for decades. When the driver lifts off the throttle, the engine control keeps the throttle open and keeps feeding fuel to the engine. It retards the ignition timing so much that the piston is already traveling down when the fuel in the cylinder is ignited. The burning fuel does almost nothing for pushing on the piston and creating mechanical power, but it still generates all the exhaust that an engine at full-throttle would generate and that is blown out over the diffuser.
While this does the job, it's extremely hard on the engine: all that energy that would be turned into mechanical power stays as heat and engine temps can get excessive. It also takes a bite out of the cars fuel economy given that it's always burning fuel, regardless of how much power is being put to the wheels. And since refueling was banned in F1, fuel economy is a major concern.
For the 2012 season, the FIA banned blown diffusers and put strict regulations on the engine mappings that teams could use. But don't think for a moment it's over, as teams quickly figured out how they could still use the exhaust stream to their advantage, even if they were prohibited from aiming the exhaust down at the diffuser... the quest for wringing every little advantage out of what you've got will never end.
So why would the FIA step in to ban these brilliant technical innovations that the top-notch engineers come up with? After all, if a team's engineers create an advantage that isn't prohibited shouldn't they get the advantage?
Often the teams are running in grey areas of the rules and regulations. The things they do (such as a blown wing) are not explicitly banned, but since actively changeable rear wings are against the rules, and passively flexible rear wing elements are banned... the FIA obviously don't want teams using any kind of rear wing that changes aerodynamically during the course of a race. Which... a blown wing does. The teams are good to the letter of the law, even if they're violating the spirit of it. So they have to continually redefine what is and isn't allowed as teams dream up new things that fit in the gaps.
But mostly I think it's done for a lot of the same reasons it's done in MMORPGs, mainly to try to keep the field competitive. When McLaren comes up with an F-Duct or Red Bull perfects off-throttle blown diffusers, the other big factory-backed teams like Ferrari or Mercedes can spring into action, draw up revised plans, fabricate new pieces and get them on the cars mid-season.
But what about the smaller teams? Teams like Force India or Sauber or Caterham that don't have billions of dollars backing them up? Teams that probably sink their entire season budget into designing, building and running two cars. If some unforeseen innovation springs up mid-season, they can't necessarily afford to redesign and re-fab parts. And if they can't, suddenly they're no longer competitive.
And if halfway through the season a technical innovation causes only four of the ten teams to be able to race for the podium... well what fun is that for the fans?
Not surprisingly, the same thing happens in other competitive areas. And one of the most competitive pressure cookers is Formula One racing, where teams will go to great lengths for the slightest of advantage to help eke out a win over the competition.
How far will engineers go? Well, two examples come to mind...
In 2010, McLaren debuted the "F-Duct". It was a system with a small air snorkel mounted on the nose of the car that would scoop up air and vent it into the cockpit to "cool the driver". At least, that's the reason that was given for it. Because if the driver covered up the vent in the cockpit, the air would continue through duct work in the body, down the length of the "dorsal fin" behind the engine cover back to the rear wing where it would blow through a slot in the wing flap element. This air coming out the bottom surface of the flap caused the airflow on the underside to break away and stall the wing.
While it's generally known that a stalled wing doesn't provide lift (or downforce, in this case), the laws of physics dictate that a stalled wing also creates less drag. In fact, stalling out the rear wing could give cars a 3 MPH advantage in a straight line. In practice for the first race of the season, other drivers watched the McLarens "walk away" from them on the straights.
As the season went on, the other teams were forced to come up with their own versions of the F-Duct, but in 2010 the monocoque body of the cars were homologated, meaning no changes could be made to it for the season. McLaren had the advantage that they designed the ducting into their body from the get go. Other teams weren't so lucky and had to come up with "bolt-on" solutions. This also led to less elegant ways for the drivers to control the system, including using their hand so that they only had one hand on the wheel during the high speed sections of tracks. It was thought that if a driver was using their left hand to block a vent and needed to adjust brake bias with their right hand, there could be a point where they had no hands on the wheel.
Concerns about safety led the FIA to outlaw the blown wing at the end of the season, but apparently the liked the general idea. For the next season they would introduce the Drag Reduction System where the wing flap would pivot upward to disrupt airflow, stall the rear wing and give cars a 6 MPH speed advantage in designated zones. It also had the advantage of setting down rules for the use of DRS and making sure it could be used safely.
As a side note, the name "F-Duct" was probably invented by the media, based either on the intake snorkel looking like an "F", or that the snorkel was near the "F" in the "Vodafone" sponsorship on the nose of the car. But Christian Horner of Red Bull probably had the thought that everyone else did when he said, "We call it 'The F-ing Duct'..."
Sometimes it's not a new idea... sometimes it's the combination of old ideas put together that can reap great benefits.
The diffuser is a piece of aerodynamic work under the rear of the car that takes under-car airflow and creates a low-pressure area that helps stick the car to the track surface. And it stands to reason that the faster the airflow through the diffuser, the lower the pressure and the more suction, right? This led to the exhaust-blown diffuser, where the engine's exhaust flow is routed through the diffuser, creating a fast-moving air stream.
But the exhaust-blown diffuser is not new: it was used as far back as 1983. And it wasn't without its problems. Chief among them was when the driver lifted off the throttle, the exhaust gases dramatically decreased and the downforce dried up. It's been described as almost an on/off effect, the downforce disappearing right when it's needed the most going into a corner. Turbocharged engines suffer less from this effect (the exhaust is smoother and more consistent post-turbine) but in 2009 F1 switched up to naturally aspirated V8s.
Enter "off-throttle overrun", a method designed to keep air flowing out the exhaust even when the driver is off the throttle. And it turns out this isn't new technology either: rally racers have been using it as an anti-lag system for decades. When the driver lifts off the throttle, the engine control keeps the throttle open and keeps feeding fuel to the engine. It retards the ignition timing so much that the piston is already traveling down when the fuel in the cylinder is ignited. The burning fuel does almost nothing for pushing on the piston and creating mechanical power, but it still generates all the exhaust that an engine at full-throttle would generate and that is blown out over the diffuser.
While this does the job, it's extremely hard on the engine: all that energy that would be turned into mechanical power stays as heat and engine temps can get excessive. It also takes a bite out of the cars fuel economy given that it's always burning fuel, regardless of how much power is being put to the wheels. And since refueling was banned in F1, fuel economy is a major concern.
For the 2012 season, the FIA banned blown diffusers and put strict regulations on the engine mappings that teams could use. But don't think for a moment it's over, as teams quickly figured out how they could still use the exhaust stream to their advantage, even if they were prohibited from aiming the exhaust down at the diffuser... the quest for wringing every little advantage out of what you've got will never end.
So why would the FIA step in to ban these brilliant technical innovations that the top-notch engineers come up with? After all, if a team's engineers create an advantage that isn't prohibited shouldn't they get the advantage?
Often the teams are running in grey areas of the rules and regulations. The things they do (such as a blown wing) are not explicitly banned, but since actively changeable rear wings are against the rules, and passively flexible rear wing elements are banned... the FIA obviously don't want teams using any kind of rear wing that changes aerodynamically during the course of a race. Which... a blown wing does. The teams are good to the letter of the law, even if they're violating the spirit of it. So they have to continually redefine what is and isn't allowed as teams dream up new things that fit in the gaps.
But mostly I think it's done for a lot of the same reasons it's done in MMORPGs, mainly to try to keep the field competitive. When McLaren comes up with an F-Duct or Red Bull perfects off-throttle blown diffusers, the other big factory-backed teams like Ferrari or Mercedes can spring into action, draw up revised plans, fabricate new pieces and get them on the cars mid-season.
But what about the smaller teams? Teams like Force India or Sauber or Caterham that don't have billions of dollars backing them up? Teams that probably sink their entire season budget into designing, building and running two cars. If some unforeseen innovation springs up mid-season, they can't necessarily afford to redesign and re-fab parts. And if they can't, suddenly they're no longer competitive.
And if halfway through the season a technical innovation causes only four of the ten teams to be able to race for the podium... well what fun is that for the fans?
If you want to see races that are purely about driver skill, there are Spec classes (like Spec Racer Ford and Spec Miata) where all cars are exactly the same, even down to tire compounds. The only allowed changes are some suspension adjustments to help suit a driver's style.