Design of a Formula One Front Wing for the 2014 Season (with regulations)

Design of a Formula One Front Wing for the 2014 Season

Josh Stevens - 19041584 Hallam University Project Report Page 1

Abstract

Josh Stevens: - written for BEng Mechanical Engineering at Sheffield Hallam

University

Title: - Design of a Formula One Front Wing for the 2014 Season

The speeds that Formula 1 cars are able to corner at are extremely impressive. This

impressive feat is made possible by numerous factors such as the wide profile tires,

mechanical grip and downforce produced from the aerodynamics of the car’s

bodywork. The most influential components of the downforce production are the

wings of the front and rear of the cars. As with all of the aspects of the car there are

rules and regulations set in place each year.

This report intends to progress through the design stages to produce a Front Wing

which complies with the FIA regulations of the 2014 season. This includes the

research and understanding of the published regulations available. From there the

initial design was modeled on Computer Aided Design software. This model was

then imported into Computational Fluid Dynamics software where several

simulations were performed to obtain initial results and visualizations. From these

results and visualizations the Wing was improved upon by the addition of several

downforce producing elements and airflow deflectors to reduce the drag created by

factors such as the front wheels.

The final design results, all be them theoretical, have produced a good outcome for

an initial starting point. With the limited student licensed software and hardware used

the ultimate potential of the design was unable to be tested. The theoretical results

gained through splitting the geometry into suitable elements and sections. The

results were then combined.

This combination method provided results which produced a greater amount of

downforce than the researched values from a Journal on the CFD analysis of a

PACE F1 car. The drag produced was significantly more but this was down to the

simulations being performed to include the wheel assembly. The inclusion of the

wheel assembly was so the air deflection caused by the end plates, elements and

wing can be looked into in order to reduce the drag caused by the wheels. This was

made possible with the visualizations of the software used which showed the path

lines of the airflow, enabling the redesign of the elements to deflect the flow where

required.



Acknowledgments

One does not simply write a dissertation on their own. The undertaking of this project

has been one of the most challenging academic tasks I have faced in my educational

years. The support and guidance offered by the following people made it possible to

complete this study. I owe my upmost gratitude to these people.

David Tipper, my supervisor, for helping me through my project as without his

guidance, like a poor marksman, I'd have kept missing the target.

Steven Brandon, IT specialist, was the man I was looking for transferring my

design into the analysis software. Without him I would have hit a wall very

early on.

Qinling Li, helped show me numerous roads which would help lead me to the

same simulations in CFD. This came in usefulness with increasing the

accuracy but not affecting the convergence time too much.

James Stevens, my older brother, who assisted me structuring this project by

making it so that he engaged helping me out

Alistair and Susan Stevens, my parents, who helped understand to do, or do

not, as there is no try.

Sam Rogerson, Liam Beard and his brother, Jordan, my course mates and

close friends, who kept encouraging me to see the light when all other lights

had gone out.



Contents

Abstract ...................................................................................................................... 1

Acknowledgments ...................................................................................................... 2

Contents ..................................................................................................................... 3

List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................... 5

List of Figures ............................................................................................................. 6

Introduction ................................................................................................................ 7

Background ............................................................................................................ 7

Aims ......................................................................................................................... 10

Objectives ............................................................................................................. 10

Methodology ......................................................................................................... 11

Research .................................................................................................................. 12

Dimension requirements ....................................................................................... 12

Specification Requirements .................................................................................. 13

Aerodynamics .......................................................................................................... 17

History of the Aerodynamics in Formula 1 ............................................................ 17

Importance of Downforce ...................................................................................... 19

Downforce and Drag ............................................................................................. 20

How Downforce is created .................................................................................... 21

FIA Regulations ........................................................................................................ 22

Regulations which are required for this Project: ................................................... 22

Article 1: Definitions .......................................................................................... 22

Article 3: Bodywork and Dimensions ................................................................. 22

Drawing 7: Front Wing Section – Side & Front View ......................................... 22

Limitations ................................................................................................................ 23

Initial Design ............................................................................................................. 25

Design of the Initial Front Wing ............................................................................. 25

Reasoning behind the design ............................................................................... 27

Testing ..................................................................................................................... 29

CFD ...................................................................................................................... 29

Advantages and disadvantages of CFD ............................................................... 29

CFD Process summary ......................................................................................... 29

CFD Types ........................................................................................................... 30



Mesh ..................................................................................................................... 30

Testing of the Initial Design .................................................................................. 32

Setup .................................................................................................................... 33

Reynolds Number ................................................................................................. 34

Results .................................................................................................................. 35

Calculations .......................................................................................................... 36

Calculated Drag and Lift co-efficients ................................................................ 37

Finalised Design Front Wing ................................................................................. 39

Nose and Wheel assembly ............................................................................... 39

Original Wing Test ............................................................................................. 40

Original Wing Test and nose combined Comparison ........................................ 40

Front Wing Analysis Only ..................................................................................... 41

Redesign 1 Wing Test ....................................................................................... 41

Redesign 2 Wing Test ....................................................................................... 41

Element Testing .................................................................................................... 42

Redesign 1 Elements ........................................................................................ 42

Redesign 2 Elements ........................................................................................ 42

Finalised front wing .................................................................................................. 43

Reasoning behind Design Choice ........................................................................ 43

Theoretical Final Design Results .......................................................................... 44

Rendering of the Final Design .................................................................................. 45

Conclusions .............................................................................................................. 46

Future Development ................................................................................................. 47

References ............................................................................................................... 48

Appendices .............................................................................................................. 53



List of Abbreviations

1. FIA - Federation Internationale de l'automobile

2. CAD - Computer Aided Design

3. F1 - Formula 1

4. ViDoc – Video Documentary

5. CFD - Computational Fluid Dynamics

6. CITS - Centre for Integrated Turbulence Simulation

7. LES - Large Eddy Simulation

8. FEA - Finite Element Analysis



List of Figures

Figure 1.1 - F-Duct system (ScarbsF1, 2010)

Figure 1.2 - Example of a 'T-bone' incident (Scott, 2010)

Figure 1.3 - Example of a 2008 front wing (Collantine, 2009)

Figure 2.1 - Changes to F1 cars from 2012 to 2014 (Top Sport Racing, 2012)

Figure 2.2 - PACE F1 front wing downforce and drag results (Chandra, Lee, Gorrell, & Jenson, 2011)

Figure 3.1 - 1968 Lotus 49B (LotusEspritTurbo, 2011)

Figure 3.2 - 1928 Opel RAK1 (Arndt, 1997)

Figure 3.3 - 1928 Opel RAK2 (Arndt, 1997)

Figure 3.4 - Lotus 72 Cosworth Lotus 72 R4 (Melissen, 2013)

Figure 3.5 - Lotus 72 Cosworth Lotus 72 R6 (Melissen, 2013)

Figure 4.1 - FIA regulated wing section (Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA), 2011)

Figure 5.1 - Full Front Wing without Complete Wheel

Figure 5.2 - Complete Wheel

Figure 5.3 - Half Front Wing without Complete wheel

Figure 5.4 - Assembled Half Front Wing and Complete Wheel

Figure 5.5 - Mercedes Five-Element 2013 Front Wing from Jerez, Pre-season testing (Anderson, Formula 1: Pre Season Testing, 2013)

Figure 5.6 - Diagram of the purpose of a 'Wing Endplate' (F1 Country: Technology Behind Formula 1)

Figure 6.1 - Smoothness (Bakker, 2002)

Figure 6.1 - Aspect Ratio (Bakker, 2002)

Figure 6.3 - Fairmount hairpin, Monaco (Fish, 2011)

Figure 6.4 - 130R, Suzuka Circuit (REDBULL, 2012)

Figure 6.5 – CFD Mesh Settings

Figure 7.1 – Visualisation of the pressure on the upper & lower surfaces of the Wing

Figure 7.2 – Streamlines round the geometry



Introduction

This Project will focus on the design and analysis of a simple Formula One Front

Wing. A plan has been imposed to investigate the changes made to the regulations

that the FIA (Federation Internationale de l'automobile) have imposed for the

upcoming 2014 season and the challenges that this will present to the Formula 1

engineers and science teams in order to adhere to them. Using this information, a

further plan is to attempt to design a FIA compliant Formula 1 front wing using CAD

(Computer Aided Design) Software.

Background

Each year 11 Formula One teams compete with one another to produce the two best

cars for their drivers to compete with over the 19 races which make up the

championship (Formula 1, 2013) although this is usually 20 races and is more than

likely to contain 20 races for the 2014 (BBC Sport, 2013) season due to the New

Jersey inaugural race being postponed for a year, this was down to financial

constraints (BBC Sport, 2012).

The design of the vehicle is meticulous, as not only do the engineers and scientists

from each team have to create a car complying with the ever changing FIA rules and

regulations, but also the individual preferences and driving style of the drivers behind

the wheel. Nico Rosberg explained this in a ViDoc (Video Documentary) he made

with the Mercedes AMG team. In it he described how his feet are elevated compared

to the rest of his body and how he and the team communicated to optimise his

driving style (Rosberg, 2012). Every inch of the car is designed to be lightweight to

such a degree, that foam, for supporting the drivers in the seat, is regarded as 'very

heavy' (Rosberg, 2012). This can involve tinkering with the V8 engines to gain

horsepower which is lost over races. Each team is permitted 8 engine changes over

a season or face a ten place grid penalty (Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile

(FIA), 2011). As internal combustion engines are powered on the components rub

against each other they wear out even with lubrication. This action causes loss in the

compression required in the operation of a combustion engine. By cleaning the

engine thoroughly it frees up any dirt which could increase the rate of wear and keep

the horsepower produced to a maximum.



Gear ratios are altered between races to achieve greater acceleration for the more

complex tracks, to make the most of short straights like Monaco’s street track or to

maximise the potential straight line speed on tracks like Belgium’s Spa circuit where

the final gear tends to be lengthened.

The aerodynamics have become a huge feature of the cars. The aspects of the

aerodynamics range from the rear wing, bodywork, diffuser, front wing and even the

air intakes required to keep the engine from overheating (Formula 1, 2013). The

combination of these parts produces the huge amount of downforce which amount to

enough for the car to theoretically drive upside down at speeds upward of 120mph

(Anderson, 2012).

"The forces reacting on an F1 car push it into the ground and make it lean on its

tyres but the car doesn't care if the ground is above it - or below. So in theory the car

could probably drive along upside down in the roof of a tunnel at about 120mph and

it would support its own weight, which is how aerodynamics work in aeroplanes."

(Anderson G, 2012)

The Front Wing is one of the most iconic parts of a Formula 1 race car as well as

being a major aspect of the aerodynamics of the car; as it produces 30-40% of the

total downforce produced (Suzuka, 2010). This enables the car to manoeuvre

corners at high speed. However, the design must also incorporate drag into the

design to optimise top speed on the straights of these high speed circuits.

Each year the regulations laid out by the FIA change due to the ever evolving nature

of the sport. Newly realised safety factors brought about by the increasing speed and

manoeuvrability of the cars, realised and taken advantage of by the exponentially

advancing automotive technology: The FIA rules and regulations are also changed

however, to aid the competitiveness of the championship; Aiding the inadequately

funded teams by removing or limiting certain technologies. These might not have

been available or immediately accessible for research by all the F1 teams. A recent

example of this would be the 'F-Duct', a design which enabled the driver to cover a

hole in the cockpit to alter the airflow to the rear wing (see Figure 1.1 below). This

alteration in the airflow caused a stalling phenomenon which enabled the loss of

most of the Downforce and



Drag produced (Scarbs F1, 2012).

The FIA banned the 'F-Duct' from

the 2011 season onwards (Formula

1, 2011) as it was deemed by some

teams to break the rule on

moveable aerodynamic devices

(Benson, F1 teams decide on 'F-

duct' ban for next season, 2010).

The evolving design of formula 1 vehicles has meant that for the reasons explained

above, the FIA has been forced to impose ever changing regulations governing the

design of the front wing since the introduction of regulations surrounding front wings

in the 1970 season (Formula 1, 2013).

For the 2014 season, the FIA have ruled that the nose of the car must not exceed

certain heights as it progresses further forward of the front wheel centre line. For

more detailed information, please see appropriate FIA regulations listed below. The

theoretical reasoning behind this is to improve the safety of the drivers. The design

has been created to reduce the risk of the nose of the car impacting at head height

of colliding vehicles in the event of an accident (see Figure 1.2). This would largely

come about in a collision know commonly as a 'T-Bone' (see Figure 1.2). These new

regulations will cause the nose and wing assembly (and consequentially, this

project's design), to bear a closer resemblance to those seen in the 2008 season

(see Figure 1.3), rather than the more flamboyant designs of the 2009-2012 seasons.

Figure 1.1 - F-Duct System

Figure 1.2 - T-Bone Example Figure 1.3 - 2008 McLaren F1 Car



Aims

Design and test a Formula 1 Front Wing and Nose Assembly that meets the criteria

of the 2014 season regulations.

Objectives

Research: - Perform extensive research into Formula 1 Front Wing properties

in order to gain a greater understanding of the principals that go into the

designs. In order for the Final Design to adhere to the FIA rules and

regulations, governing the design and limitations of the front wing for the 2014

F1 season, research and understanding of these regulations is required. To

conclude whether the final design is a successful one an investigation of the

average down force produced by Formula 1 Front wings at different speeds

will need to be undertaken.

Initial Design: - Once the regulations set in place have been researched and

understood a design of a Front Wing assembly using Computer Aided Design

software will be compiled.

Testing and Analysis of Design: - The initial design will be implemented into

CFD software in order to test and then analyse the results using values

obtained in the research.

Final design with Testing and Analysis: - After analysing the test results

and deciding where the wing requires too produce more down force, less drag

or deflect the air flow appropriately, alterations to the design in an attempt to

gain the best possible final outcome will take place whilst continually testing to

ensure the project is progressing in the appropriate direction.

Discussion of Results: - Once the design has been finalised and testing

completed the result of the project's design will be evaluated, highlighting

what works well and what could be improved by looking at the down force

produced and drag. From the outcome future work could be suggested if

granted more time.



Methodology

Research: - Using the published FIA technical regulations for the 2014

season a design will be able to be created in accordance with the regulations.

Finding exact values for down force production will be difficult as these figures

are closely guarded but using averaged values and incorporating these

with % calculations should give a clear picture of what performance

specifications the project should be aiming to achieve.

Initial Design: - With the information researched and calculated designing the

wing with in the regulation dimensions will be possible.

Testing and Analysis of Design: - Once the preliminary design has been

finalised CFD analysis will be implemented on the design in order to analyse

the results with the performance specifications decided upon. With these

results the design can be altered in the appropriate areas to reduce drag or

increase down force production.

Final design with Testing and Analysis: - Using the results from the

preliminary testing the design will be improved, sensibly, to attempt to

maximise the down force whilst minimising the drag produced.

Discussion of Results: - Once the final design has produced and has been

run through the same simulations as the preliminary design the Final front

wing will be analysed and the resultant drag and downforce figures will be

compare against current figures and produce a conclusion on whether the

design is a successful one of if it falls short of the intended marker.

Comparing the design to current and past designs a difference in the general

design is intended to be noticeable.



Research

Dimension requirements

The dimension requirements are very easy to understand from the FIA regulations

(Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA), 2011). An article from an Italian

Formula 1 blog also was available to indicate the main differences between the 2012

season and the 2014 seasons (see Figure 2.1).

Figure 2.1 - Changes to F1 cars from 2012 to 2014

Morro - Height

Alerὀn - Width



Specification Requirements

Looking at a Journal of CFD on a PACE F1 car revived by 'Computer-Aided Design

and Applications (ISSN 1686-4360)' which is an Independently run, Internationally

peer-reviewed Journal, some data tables (see Figure 2.2) analysing the down force

and drag production of their version of a Formula 1 front wing at 3 different speeds

were discovered.

Figure 2.2 - PACE F1 front wing downforce and drag results

(Chandra, Lee, Gorrell, & Jenson, 2011)



These results give a range of down force production of between 2000N and 2750N

at top speed and an overall range of 500N to 2750N for speeds between 100Mph

and 220Mph (Chandra, Lee, Gorrell, & Jenson, 2011). It should also be noted that

these tests did not incorporate the front wheel assembly's which this study does

intended to do so.

As well as these figures, Yoshi Suzuka wrote an article in 2010, 'How much do we

really know about aero-dynamics?', in which he stated that current Formula 1 cars

produce between 1245-1360kg of downforce at 150mph when using the highest

downforce trim. However, when using the lowest downforce trim the produced

downforce falls to 860-910kg (Suzuka, 2010). The efficiency of the aerodynamics is

not affected greatly as the lift: drag ration is in the region of 3.0-3.3:1 for the whole

car (Suzuka, 2010).

Using the information acquired from the official Formula 1 website (Formula 1, 2012)

and the BBC Sport race reports (BBC Sport, 2012) I have been able to find the top

speeds of the modern F1 cars taken in the speed trap or other areas of the courses

that make up the 2012 Formula 1 season and use this data as an indication of the

Top Speeds the cars achieve. The information is outlined in the table below. These

traps tend to be placed at the quickest part of the race (Formula 1, 2013). However,

they can sometimes are positioned in a different place by different sources. The

speeds are taken from qualifying or the race itself as the cars are put under 'Parc

Ferme' conditions (Formula 1, 2013). This is the area where the cars are left after

qualifying until 5 hours before the race. During this time the work the teams can carry

out on the cars is limited to strictly-specified routine procedures. These procedures

are expanded when there is an example of a ' change in climatic conditions', for

example a wet qualifying session followed by a dry race. Bracketed times are

speeds posted in Practice sessions which were quicker than the qualifying or race

speeds, the reasoning behind these is due to the race and/or qualifying being

affected by wet weather or the set-up of the car being changed (Formula 1, 2013).

The table below also includes the ambient air temperatures from which I will use to

determine whether the speeds will create a Mach speed of 0.3 where the flow will be

compressible. From that temperature I will calculate the speed of sound for that

temperature. The Mach number is easily calculable from these speeds of sound.



Practice session temperatures were not available and hence the appropriate speed

of sound for each suitable session was not calculable.

A Table to show the top speeds attained at each 2012 Formula 1

circuit and the corresponding Mach Number

Race Top Speed

(KpH)

Air Temp.

(°C)

Speed of Sound

(ms-1)

Mach Speed

Australia 316.7 (317.9) 22 344.632 0.255

Malaysia 312.7 (314.4) 26 347.056 0.25

China 322.4 (325.9) 22 344.632 0.26

Bahrain 318.1 (320.1) 27 347.662 0.254

Spain 323.2 22 344.632 0.261

Monaco 282.5 (282.6) 22 344.632 0.228

Canada 324.8 (325.6) 26 347.056 0.26

Europe 321.4 (321.6) 30 349.48 0.255

Great Britain 301.9 (310.7) 20 343.42 0.244

Germany 318.1 (319.9) 22 344.632 0.256

Hungary 305.2 30 349.48 0.243

Belgium 310.6 (327

BBC Report)

22 344.632 0.25 (0.264)

Italy 342.7 (345.4) 28 348.268 0.273

Singapore 294.9 (295.1) 28 348.268 0.235

Japan 311.7 (312.5) 23 345.238 0.251

Korea 325.1 21 344.026 0.262

India 323.2 29 348.874 0.257

Abu Dhabi 325.8 29 348.874 0.259

United States 320.4 (322.4) 24 345.844 0.257

Brazil 314.1 (321.9) 19 342.814 0.255

Average Top

Speed

315.775

(323.275)

24.6°C 346.2076 0.25325

(0.25395)

(Formula 1, 2012), (BBC Sport, 2012) and (F1-Fansite, 2012)



Using these speeds and knowledge of the cornering speeds on tracks after years of

following and analysing formula 1, I will decide upon various speeds to attempt to

keep the downforce performance in the low speed corners high whilst not inducing

too much drag for the high speed straights. With the two averages found a suitable

top test speed would be 320Kph (198.839mph).

These for the air temperature also show the speed of sound for that temperature

assuming the race takes place in dry air (0% humidity).

( )

cair = speed of sound in air

ϑ = temperature in degrees Celsius (°C)

The Mach number is then calculated using the equation,

M = Mach number

v = velocity of the source relative to the medium

a = Speed of sound in the medium = cair

From the calculated Mach speeds, the qualifying speeds were not included as the

temperatures would have been different to the race day. This proves that the Mach

speed does not exceed the value of 0.3 which keeps the flow incompressible.



Aerodynamics

The success of a modern Formula 1 car depends not only upon the horsepower

produced by the engine. Tens of millions of dollars are spent researching,

developing and testing the field of aerodynamics each year. The principle concerns

around the aerodynamics are the creation of downforce and the minimisation of drag

(Formula 1, 2012).

History of the Aerodynamics in Formula 1

The development of the aerodynamics seen on

the modern cars started in the 1968 (Brooks,

Surtees, Stewart, Mansell, & Coulthard, 1999)

when Colin Chapman and team Lotus began

pioneering the technical side of Formula 1 with the

Lotus 49B (see Figure 3.1). Although this wasn't

the first time aerofoils were attached to a high

speed vehicle (Yelverton, 2006). In 1928 Fritz von

Opel created the series of Rocket powered cars the 'Opel RAK's. These were the

first example of inverted aerofoils being attached to counter act the effects of high

speed lift. The RAK.1 (see Figure 3.2) had small inverted aerofoils, whereas the

RAK.2 (see Figure 3.3) incorporated oversized inverted aerofoils attached to a lever

which would enable the pilot to change the angle of attack (Droop Snoot Group,

2013).

Figure 3.2 - OPEL RAK.1 Figure 3.3 - OPEL RAK.2

Figure 3.1 - 1968 Lotus 49B



Even with these oversized Aerofoils when the RAK.2 was unleashed to the world at

the AVUS near Berlin, Fritz was fighting to keep the vehicle under control and

ultimately shut the propulsion down when the vehicle's front end began to lift

dangerously (Droop Snoot Group, 2013).

As the wings were developed, before the time that regulations were in place, the

designers consciously risked the safety their driver and potential destruction to their

vehicles, to increase the performance of the car. This was proved during the 1969

Spanish GP, where the identical wing designs on the both Lotus vehicles failed on

the same ridge (grandprix.com, 1969). Following this accident wings were banned,

yet would return shortly afterward in a limited form by restricting the tall movable

wings.

As the restrictive regulations were implemented the following year Colin Chapman,

once again, brought Formula 1 the first of the modern cars with the Lotus 72

variations (see Figures 3.4 and 3.5) and near identical to ones embraced by today's

team designers, as this design incorporated the thinking around the relationship

between downforce and drag.

Figure 3.4 - Lotus 72 Cosworth Lotus 72

R4 Figure 3.5 - Lotus 72 Cosworth Lotus 72

R6

Colin Chapman brought Formula 1 into the modern age but at a cost: As safety

specifications had not been brought into force at this point, competitive designers

pushed and consequently broke the boundaries of safety in search of glory. These

risks taken by the designers, described by Sir Jackie Stewart as 'Barbaric Excesses',

would be rightly exiled but only after Jochen Rindt clinched the 1970 World

Championship posthumously (Couldwell, 2010).



Importance of Downforce

As previously stated, the importance of the Front wing is a major aspect of the

design of a Formula 1 car. The major teams of modern formula 1 racing, such as

Ferrari, spend hundreds of millions of pounds developing their cars; whereas the

former Minardi team spent less than 50 million each season from 1985-2005 (One

Inch Entertainment Pvt. Ltd.). Although Minardi had little success, the team were still

able to score 38 points in the 20 years of racing in the Formula 1 World

Championship (Novikov, 2013).

At preseason testing for the 2013 F1 season in Jerez, Spain, Gary Anderson, BBC's

F1 Technical analysis, has analysed the Mercedes testing focusing upon the Front

Wing. He mentions the thoughts of Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes new driver who has

driven for McLaren Mercedes throughout his life (Benson, 2012). McLaren are

known to be a more competitive team than Mercedes and is shown initially when

Hamilton, who moved to the Mercedes Team from McClaren at the end of the 2012

season (Benson, 2012), was quoted saying that the downforce in the Mercedes is a

lot less than that of the McLaren’s from the previous year (Anderson, 2013).

Anderson goes on to state that from June in the 2012 season Mercedes have been

compromising their downforce production by taking downforce-producing

components off it, which from his calculations equates to 40kg (Anderson, 2013).

Now because of the estimated 40:60 ratio this 40kg becomes 100kg of downforce,

which is worth about 0.8seconds a lap (Anderson, 2013).

Mercedes claim to be focusing on the 2014 season to put them in a better position

like Brawn did for the previous big rule change in 2009 (Benson, 2012), which is

being doubted after a very successful pre-season testing for the 2013 season where

Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg both topped their respective final test days

(Benson, 2013) (Barretto, 2013). Although this is not always the evidence of which

car will be best suited to the new season as it is dependent on which tyres the other

drivers were using and if they were performing long or short stints of fuel loads. The

16th of March 2013, when the Australian GP and the new season officially starts, will

give a better insight to which cars will be the main competitors (Benson, 2013).



When the 2014 season begins all the large regulation changes take place, like the

introduction of 1.6-litre V6 turbo engines which is giving Mercedes a huge advantage

as they are well down the road with development and integrating the new engine into

the car, but due to the small changes in the chassis the team need to prove they

understand the current rules in order to get the best of the aerodynamics (Anderson,

2013).

Downforce and Drag

Downforce is the force created perpendicular to the direction of travel when an object

travels through a fluid. Aerofoils are used to produce lift for aircraft and the simple

principle is that a Front wing is an inverted aircraft wing. Downforce is produced at

an unavoidable consequence, Drag. Drag is produced inevitably when an object

moves through a fluid and acts parallel and opposite to the direction of which it

travels (Formula 1, 2013).

Once the preliminary front wing assembly has been designed the geometry will be

imported in ANSYS fluent to be used in flow simulations; that will then calculate the

downforce and drag produced. This will then allow a more suitable front wing which

deflects the flow away from the wheels to be designed. This, hypothetically, will

counter the main drag inducer. The suspension bars are designed in the shapes of

aerofoils to reduce drag induced to a minimum (Formula 1, 2012).



How Downforce is created

After the discovery of aerodynamic downforce and the effects on the performance of

a race car, they have become fundamental to the design, with the simplest approach

of attaching inverted wings to the car. Lift is generated with the difference in pressure

according to Bernoulli’s principle. With the wing traveling through the air, the wing

deflects the flow, with some going above the wing and some below the wing. With

the curved top surface, the air’s velocity on the top side of the wing is larger than the

velocity on the underside of the wing where there is no curved surface. The air flow

traveling under the wing maintains the same speed and pressure. With the quicker

flow on the top of the wing less pressure is exuded. This difference in pressure

produces lift as the higher pressure air ‘pushes’ the wing upwards to the lower

pressure above the wing (National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 2010).

The wing for a formula 1 car is inverted and therefore the lower pressure is produced

on the lower part of the wing, meaning the wing is pushed towards the ground.

Although Formula 1 wings are not entirely the same as aircraft wings as found by

Katz in 1994 in which he summarised the technological transfer difficulties down to;

the wing’s operating within the strong ground effect of air flow; open-wheel race car

rear wings have an extremely small aspect ratio; and there being a strong interaction

between the wings and other car components, such as the body, wheels or even

other wings (Katz, 2006).



FIA Regulations

Regulations which are required for this Project:

The following Regulation numbers are required to be followed or relate to this Project.

Article 1: Definitions

The three sections listed relate to the parts of the car that are to be included in this

report with a definition from the FIA.

1.4, 1.5, 1.6

Article 3: Bodywork and Dimensions

These sections are required to be abided by in order for the design to be permitted

by the FIA. Appendix 2 includes the suitable pages from the FIA regulations and

contains all of the following sections. These sections include the permitted heights of

the wings and nose, maximum width of the Wheel outer tire walls and permitted

width of the front wing.

3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.4.3, 3.6, 3.7.1, 3.7.2, 3.7.3, 3.7.4, 3.7.5, 3.7.7, 3.11.1,

3.11.2, 3.12.10, 3.12.11, 3.12.12, 3.14.1, 3.14.2, 3.14.3, 3.15, 3.17, 10.5.1, 12.4.1,

12.4.2, 15.1.1

Drawing 7: Front Wing Section – Side & Front View

A suitably cut down copy of the FIA’s 2014 F1 Technical Regulations accompanies

this Project for clarification, one of the pages in question contains information on the

FIA regulated Front Wing section, (Appendix 2) (Fédération Internationale de

l’Automobile (FIA), 2011).



Limitations

Attempts to contact numerous Formula 1 teams, such as Williams, Force India,

Caterham, but have either not heard back from the companies or in the case of

Williams, have been unable to visit the factory of operations due to the sensitivity of

the parts requested information on. A sliver of hope of hearing back from the other

teams contacted after enquiring to meet some professionals to gain advice on the

designs. Among the Teams which no reply has been received include Mercedes,

Marussia, Caterham, Lotus and McLaren. No attempt to contact Ferrari or Toro

Rosso due to their headquarters being located in Italy. (Appendix 1)

The software used to find the lift and drag values limited the accuracy as the system

was limited to 512000 cells. This will cause a decrease in accuracy for the more

advanced designs later in the analysis due to the increased complexity of the

geometry. In an attempt to increase the accuracy the geometry boundaries were

reduced; this in turn will affect the simulated flow of the air which could affect the

consistency of the testing. The test data gained by the PACE F1 stated a total of 3.1

million cells were used meshing the Formula 1 Car geometry alone (Chandra, Lee,

Gorrell, & Jenson, 2011). After many futile attempts to produce a mesh which would

have been worth testing a decision to split the test up into 2 parts was made. This

included using the constant geometry of the nose, regulated front wing section and

the wheel and suspension as a separate test and then the whole front wing without

the nose, wheel and suspension. Although this would have a small impact of the final

outcome due to the deflected air flow from the front wing not being tested in the later

designs.

As an outcome of trying to keep the number of cells to a minimum, any extra detail

that could have affected the design was unfortunately left out or made to be quite

basic. These details included the detailed wheel alloys and some details on the

suspension and turning bars connecting the wheel to the body of the car.

Another limiting factor was the computer used. In the PACE F1 journal (Chandra,

Lee, Gorrell, & Jenson, 2011), the testing used a Super Computer to perform the

simulations which reduced the simulation time from 22.5 hours to under 60minutes

per test. This Super computer used contained a mammoth 9592 core processors

with a total operating memory of 27.1TB, compare this amount to that of the



standard Dual-core processor computers which was initially used in the PACE

simulations and the computer used throughout the testing of this project it is a huge

difference (Chandra, Lee, Gorrell, & Jenson, 2011).



Initial Design

Design of the Initial Front Wing

The following shows the initial designs where the front wing is using only 1

component after the FIA regulated section of the wing.

Figure 5.1 - Full Front Wing without Complete Wheel

Figure 5.2 - Complete Wheel



Figure 5.3 - Half Front Wing without Complete wheel

Figure 5.4 - Assembled Half Front Wing and Complete Wheel



Reasoning behind the design

The initial design will be recognisable to persons who have an understanding of

Formula 1. However, those who are new to this sport will be left asking questions.

The design consists of the FIA regulated area where the aerofoil must lie within the

specified points that the FIA have set.

As the aerofoil extrudes away from this regulated area its design smoothly alters into

an exaggerated inverted aerofoil (see Figure 5.1 above). This style of front wing is

used to produce as much downforce whilst limiting the drag produced to a minimum.

By using the aerofoil profile the drag and downforce are optimised compared to other

profiles. This is required to give the car and its driver the best possible chance to

outperform the competition. Another reason for the exaggerated aerofoil is to deflect

the air flow as smoothly as possible away from features which would induce a lot of

drag; for instance, the front wheels (see Figure 5.2 above). The design intends to

divert the majority of the

flow up above the wheels

although the majority of the

drag produced is expected

to be induced by the wheels

as this preliminary design

only used 1 element to

divert the airflow away from

the wheels whilst modern

designs use up to 5-

elements on the front wing (Figure 5.5).

Another major aspect that will cause a large amount of drag will be the abrupt end to

nose design. This sharp edged design will cause drag but this is inevitable and

unfortunately, unavoidable due to the nature of the project only focusing upon the

front wing of a Formula 1 car and not the entirety of the vehicle itself.

Figure 5.5 - Mercedes Five-Element 2013 Front Wing



The end plates purpose is to deflect the airflow away from the wheels. Due to the

regulations the front wing is limited to a certain point, this point does not extend past

the wheel profile. The design of the end plates is to cause as little drag as possible

with retrospect to both the deflection process of the air flow and drag caused by the

end plate's profile. Using an aerofoil positioned on its side would deflect the flow well

due to the shape as well as producing as little drag force whilst performing the

intended purpose. Although the

aerofoils create a force perpendicular to

the direction the car would be traveling

in, the force would be cancelled out with

the symmetry of the Front Wing design.

The wing tips are intended to reduce the

amount of lift induced drag. The

pressure difference from the top of the

front wing is that much higher that the

low pressure on the underside 'sucks'

air in from all angles, not just the

direction of travel (see Figure 5.6). The endplates stop the encouraged act of the

high-pressure air rolling over the end of the wings to the low-pressure area. The dirty

air created by the front tires can also flow under the car and affect the downforce

created by the diffuser. The endplates secondary function is to reduce this effect but

the main antagonists to discourage the dirty air are splitters; vertical fences on the

under surface of the front wing to assist the endplate (F1 Country: Technology

Behind Formula 1).

Figure 5.6 - Diagram of the purpose of a

'Wing Endplate'



Testing

CFD

CFD stands for Computational Fluid Dynamics and can be summarized as "the

science of predicting fluid flow, heat and mass transfer, chemical reactions and

related phenomena by solving numerically the set of governing mathematical

equations." (ANSYS, 2011)

Advantages and disadvantages of CFD

CFD has become a significant aspect of engineering design, particularly in the field

of product development. As a powerful, cost-effective tool for the study of complex

geometry, CFD allows the user to input and test without having to write the program

of the calculations but there is no chance that an exact solution will be outputted (Li,

2013).

When comparing CFD to experimental methods, the advantages heavily out weight

the disadvantages. Not only is CFD a lot safer where uncertainties are involved with

high pressure cylinders but there is a quicker turn around as there is no need to

create the geometry and so therefore tends to be less expensive with the increase

cost of materials in this current economic climate as well as tooling costs (Li, 2013).

With the huge competition in Formula 1 car designs CFD has become a major

aspect of the team's car aerodynamic development. The car designs are put through

CFD where they hope to maximise downforce and minimise drag. If the results

produced are given only then will a team build a model for actual wind tunnel testing

(Williams F1, 2012).

CFD Process summary

When initially beginning a CFD analysis, it is critical that the problem is understood

and that a method of solving the issue has been identified.

Once the problem is defined the next requirement is to select or produce the correct

geometry. Not using the appropriate geometry will affect the results but there are

numerous settings that can be implemented to improve the accuracy of the results or

reduce the computational time but this would reduce the accuracy. These settings



include the mesh quality, number of control volumes and complexity of the shape

being analysed (Li, 2013).

CFD Types

The types which can be implemented for CFD analysis include Finite Volume and

Finite Difference. Commercial and Industrial applications are able to use structured

and unstructured meshes which are then implemented to analyse Finite Volume

CFD types (Li, 2013). This method is efficient and well developed with regards to

iterative solvers. The cell shapes are unrestricted and when using a coarse mesh

mass, energy and momentum are conserved. The Finite Difference uses in-house

coding, this type is easy to implement but is programed in-house for a specified

application and so cannot be used for different models (Li, 2013). Although this type

is restricted to simple grids and does not conserve mass, energy or momentum

when using coarse meshes.

Mesh

There are two types of mesh, structured and unstructured. Structured meshes force

the grid lines to pass through the entire domain. For this reason structured meshes

cannot be applied to very complicated geometries. With unstructured meshes the

cells are arranged in an arbitrary fashion to produce a random mesh which will

allows more complex shapes to be generated (Li, 2013).

The density of the mesh and the type of the

mesh can improve the accuracy of the results

and reduce the value of the inevitable truncation

error produced when using CFD analysis. A

dense mesh is able to record a lot more

features of the flow to give a higher accuracy.

To produce a fine mesh in close proximity of the

wall boundaries an advanced size function is

used on the Proximity and Curvature of the

geometry which resolves the boundary layer

flow. Quality of the mesh can be measured by the smoothness (see Figure 6.1). To

achieve good quality smoothness, a transition between the layers of the cells close

Figure 6.1 - Smoothness

Figure 6.2 - Aspect ration



to the geometry is required. The aspect ratio (see Figure 6.2 above) of a cell has an

impact on the accuracy of the results. Aspect ratio is the ratio of the longest edge

length to the shortest edge length. Ideally this aspect ratio should be equal to 1 for a

square or equilateral triangle (Li, 2013). Keeping this ration as close to 1 produces

an even results output for every direction the flow enters the cell.

A higher quality mesh will give a higher accuracy but this is at a cost of increased

memory usage and computational running time. Often a supercomputer is put into

use to analyse the model and keep the computation time low but does increase the

cost of simulation (Li, 2013).



Testing of the Initial Design

To test the design and visualise what occurs with the air flow the CFD package that

will be used is ANSYS 13; where the model will be imported and a sensible test

mesh is set up. After this process a set of parameters will be produced ranging from

30mph to replicate the slowest corner in F1, the hairpin turn on Monaco's track (see

Figure 6.3) to 200mph. This figure is the average top speed calculated using ‘A

Table to show the top speeds attained at each 2012 Formula 1 circuit and the

corresponding Mach Number’ (see above). Several focal speeds will be tested

between this range, for instance the maximum permitted speed of 111.847mph for

Formula 1 Wind Tunnels (Williams-F1, 2012), and 190mph to see the figures for the

highest speed corner in Formula 1, the 130R corner at the Suzuka Circuit in China

(see Figure 6.4). As the results can vary the testing will be carried out to a high

number of continuity to allow for fluctuations in the software.

The Selected test velocities of 13.4, 35.8, 50.0, 67.1, 84.9 and 89.4ms-1 with a lot of

focus on the 67.1ms-1 to compare the results to those gained from the PACE F1 car

journal (Chandra, Lee, Gorrell, & Jenson, 2011) (see Figure 2.2 above).

Figure 6.3 - Fairmont hairpin, Monaco Figure 6.4 - 130R, Suzuka Circuit



Setup

To generate the required mesh needed in ANSYS a method was undertaken where

the designs of the Front Wing assembly would be cut in half to enable me to produce

a high quality mesh (see Figure 5.3 above). This mesh would have a 'Symmetry' line

down where the centre of the car would usually be. This method allows a full model

(see Figure 5.4 above) to be produce without compromising on the quality of results.

The maximum number of cells, or elements, is 512000 (see Figure 6.5). By altering

the mesh options an attempt to get as close to this number as possible was made to

ensure the mesh was of as high a quality as possible.

Figure 6.5 – CFD Mesh Settings

These settings create a finer mesh close to the front wing's surface, to generate a

more accurate result through more iterations. After finishing testing the design and

additional wing elements have been added to the design these will change as the

complexity of the model will be altered and create a coarser mesh than the original.

This will decrease the accuracy of the results slightly but should still give a good

indication on how the design performs.

A choice was made to use a more accurate finite volume method third Order MUSCL

(Monotone Upstream-centred Schemes for Conservation Laws) to analyse the

system, when available to be used. This method is a lot more accurate than the



other options available and so will take longer to converge to a result. When the

simulations failed to converge a Second-Order Upstream method was used instead.

Reynolds Number

To determine the flow properties of this design, the dimensionless Reynolds number

is required to be calculated. Depending on the value of the Reynolds number, the

flow can be laminar, transitional or turbulent.

Re = Reynolds number ρ = Density of the fluid (1.225kgm-3)

u = Velocity relative to fluid (ms-1) L = Travelled length of the fluid (2.8615m)

μ = Dynamic viscosity of the fluid (1.7894x10-5kg(ms)-1)

Velocity (m/s) Reynolds Number

13.4 2627181.3

35.8 7005816.8

50.0 9794748.3

67.1 13135906.5

84.9 16638814.9

89.4 17514542.0

The flow is determined by the size of the Reynolds Number. The flow is deemed

Laminar when the Reynolds number is less than 2300, Turbulent when greater than

4000 and in Transitional flow when between these numbers (Kaminski & Jensen,

2005). As the Reynolds numbers calculated here are all above 4000 by a large

margin, then it is safe to say that the flow for the experimental data will be Turbulent

flow.



Results

The following tabulated results show the given values of Lift and Drag compared to

the velocity of the test. These results are for half the Front wing so need to be

multiplied by 2 to achieve the full assembly values.

Velocity (mph)

(m/s in brackets)

Drag (N) Lift (N) Total Drag (N) Total Lift (N)

30 (13.4) 23.42 -26.01 46.84 -52.02

80 (35.8) 143.38 -176.21 286.76 -352.42

111.847 (50.0) 272.75 -339.76 545.50 -679.52

150 (67.1) 480.31 -607.50 960.62 -1215.00

190 (84.9) 761.88 -975.83 1523.76 -1951.63

200 (89.4) 844.81 -1069.21 1689.62 -2138.42

With F1 teams maximising the minimum permitted weight of 642kg, which includes

the driver but no fuel, they use ballast which must be attached to the car securely to

achieve this weight (Formula 1, 2013). Using this minimum weight, equating to

6298N using the equation F=mg, the value of 50.0001m/s test data should make the

downforce produced at this value above the 30-40% mark of the total weight of the

car. This means that if the value is above 1889.4N-2519N then the design can be

considered a successful one. As the preliminary design is a simple inverted aerofoil

then the later designs are expected to achieve a value alto closer to this target with

the additional elements.



Calculations

Cd = Drag Coefficient Fd = Drag Force (includes Viscous and Pressure)

ρ = Mass Density of the Fluid (in this case the mass density of air: 1.225kg/m3)

v = velocity of the object relative to the fluid. This will be taken as the velocities I'll be

testing by assuming there is no wind speed.

A = the projected frontal area 0.16387m2 for half the front wing or 0.32774m2 for

projected area of the full front wing and assembly.

CL = Lift Coefficient L = Lift Force (includes Viscous and Pressure)

ρ = Mass Density of the Fluid (in this case the mass density of air: (1.225kgm-2)

S = Planform Area (0.60696m2 for half the assembly and 1.21392m2 for the whole

assembly)

v = True airspeed. For this it will be the car's velocity as the race tracks are at ground

level.

√

TAS = True Airspeed EAS = Equivalent Airspeed

ρ0 = Air density at standard sea level (1.225 kg/m3)

ρ = density of the air in which the object is traveling

For the purposes of this report the density of air that the car is traveling in will be

assumed to be sea level. This means that the True Airspeed will be equal to the

Equivalent Airspeed which is test speed of the car.



Calculated Drag and Lift co-efficients

Using the equations previously stated the desired lift and drag co-efficients and

tabulate the results will be calculated.

For the Drag Co-efficient and

for the Lift Co-efficient

Velocity (mph)

(m/s in brackets)

Drag Co-efficient Lift Co-efficient

30 (13.4) 1.30 -0.39

80 (35.8) 1.12 -0.37

111.847 (50.0) 1.09 -0.37

150 (67.1) 1.06 -0.36

190 (84.9) 1.05 -0.36

200 (89.4) 1.05 -0.36

Rearranging the equations gives the evidence that the total lift and drag produced is

dependent on the Planform area and the projected area.

And

some sites state that the area used for calculating the co-

efficients should be taken as the same. By doing this it produces a constant for

although it is debated as to which area to use.

These results, along with the visualisations that ANSYS produced, allow to account

for where the air streams are causing the most drag and account for that by creating

elements on the upper and lower surfaces of the front wing in my redesign of the

initial concept.



Figure 7.1 – Visualisation of the pressure on the upper & lower surfaces of the Wing

The pressure values for above and below the wing at a speed of 89.408ms-1 (see

Figure 7.1). As can be seen the pressure on top of the wing is higher than the

pressure below. This is what causes the downforce. From the ANSYS calculations

the figure of downforce is given as 2138.43N at the speed of 89.408ms-1. With the

forced regulated mid-section of the Front wing the profile follows the minimum and

maximum points required to abide by with the regulations.

The air flow streamlines surrounding the design (see Figure 7.2) shows that the flow

is deflected by a minimal amount

away from drag inducing features

but there is room for improvement.

The end plates do deflect the flow

quite well round the tyres but with

no air deflection on the main wing a

lot of the flow is affected by the

wheel and the induced drag caused

by it. This will be achieved by the

addition of smaller aerofoils on the

upper surface of the wing as well as

flow deflectors similar to the

endplates on the lower surface.

Figure 7.2 – Streamlines round the geometry



Finalised Design Front Wing

After the testing and analysis of the initial design it was evaluated where the airflow

needed deflecting more to reduce the drag or increase the downforce produced. To

achieve this desired outcome additional elements will be incorporated to the design.

Using influence from the elements from other Formula 1 front wings a decision will

be made on the final design which will then be put through testing.

Due to the limitations on the number of cells permitted in the mesh it was decided to

keep the constant geometry separate from the changing front wing. This has leaded

to testing the wing section of the design separately from the rest of the assembly. By

doing this the rest of the design's geometry will not be included in the test but the

downforce produced by the front wing itself will be able to be simulated.

Again the results will have to be multiplied by 2 as only half the wing and symmetry

setup is being used.

Nose and Wheel assembly

Velocity (mph)

(m/s in brackets)


30 (13.4) 18.45 6.77 36.90 13.54

80 (35.8) 329.47 215.64 658.94 431.28

111.847 (50.0) 600.95 391.93 1201.90 783.86

150 (67.1) 1115.65 767.41 2231.30 1534.82

190 (84.9) 1757.18 1126.03 3514.36 2252.06

200 (89.4) 2010.16 1428.82 4020.32 2857.64

Plan form area = 0.634m2 Projected area = 0.345m2 Length = 1.49m



Original Wing Test

Velocity (mph)

(m/s in brackets)


30 (13.4) 6.32 -24.39 12.64 -48.78

80 (35.8) 43.43 -179.14 86.86 -358.28

111.847 (50.0) 84.78 -353.21 169.56 -706.42

150 (67.1) 152.50 -639.33 305.00 -1278.66

190 (84.9) 244.79 -1030.24 489.58 -2060.48

200 (89.4) 271.27 -1143.43 542.54 -2286.86

Plan form area = 0.31m2 Projected area = 0.074m2 Length = 0.6m

Original Wing Test and nose combined Comparison

Combining the Original wing test with the constant geometry only test we can

compare the affect the Original front wing has on the rest of the geometry.

Velocity (mph)

(m/s in brackets)

Wing and Nose Test Separate Wing and Nose

Tests Combined

Total Drag (N) Total Lift (N) Total Drag (N) Total Lift (N)

30 (13.4) 46.84 -52.02 49.54 -35.24

80 (35.8) 286.76 -352.42 745.80 73.00

111.847 (50.0) 545.50 -679.52 1371.46 77.44

150 (67.1) 960.62 -1215.00 2536.30 256.16

190 (84.9) 1523.76 -1951.63 4003.94 191.58

200 (89.4) 1689.62 -2138.42 4562.86 570.78

Plan form area = 0.60696m2 Projected Area = 0.16387m2 Length = 0.6m

This combination of the results proves that even the original wing had a large impact

on the deflection of the air flow and so in turn aided the effect of the downforce

produced and in reducing the drag.



Front Wing Analysis Only

With the software limited to 512000 cells the more complex geometry couldn't be

used in conjunction with the nose and wheel assembly, this is due to the complexity

of the model being increased and restricting a final mesh quality to a poor standard

which would have produced inconsistent data to compare.

Redesign 1 Wing Test

Velocity (mph)

(m/s in brackets)


30 (13.4) 7.18 -21.76 14.36 -43.52

80 (35.8) 46.57 -152.92 91.14 -305.84

111.847 (50.0) 90.24 -300.46 180.48 -600.92

150 (67.1) 162.07 -544.20 324.17 -1088.40

190 (84.9) 259.85 -877.91 519.70 -1755.82

200 (89.4) 285.42 -966.97 570.84 -1933.94


Redesign 2 Wing Test

Velocity (mph)

(m/s in brackets)

Drag (N) Lift (N) Total Drag

(N)

Total Lift (N)

30 (13.4) 6.66 -21.73 13.32 -43.46

80 (35.8) 45.62 -159.23 91.24 -318.46

111.847 (50.0) 88.69 -313.46 177.38 -626.92

150 (67.1) 158.34 -564.97 316.68 -1129.94

190 (84.9) 253.02 -909.10 506.04 -1818.20

200 (89.4) 279.78 -1006.96 559.56 -2013.92


After testing both designs of the front wing it was decided test the elements added to

the design separately. this was due to the results produced being technically worse

than initially expected of them to be but this was realised and has been accepted as

a limitation of the software as with the complexity of the Elements added to the

design the Mesh still had quality issues regarding having to use a student licenced

software for what would be considered a commercial application.



Element Testing

The same CFD modelled elements would be used but gain some more accuracy the

reduced size in geometry allowed for a finer mesh to be generated initially. The

Endplates were kept in the elemental tests as they were required for the elemental

modelling. Yet again the results will be multiplied by two in order to gather a total

downforce produced by the symmetrical Wing.

Redesign 1 Elements

Velocity (mph)

(m/s in brackets)


30 (13.4) 2.84 -11.79 5.68 -23.58

80 (35.8) 19.58 -89.01 39.16 -178.02

111.847 (50.0) 38.24 -176.03 76.48 -352.06

150 (67.1) 69.07 -319.72 138.14 -639.44

190 (84.9) 110.74 -515.46 221.48 -1030.92

200 (89.4) 122.69 -571.68 245.38 -1143.36


Redesign 2 Elements

Velocity (mph)

(m/s in brackets)


30 (13.4) 1.91 -5.79 3.82 -11.58

80 (35.8) 12.53 -42.62 25.06 -85.24

111.847 (50.0) 24.30 -84.17 48.60 -168.34

150 (67.1) 43.45 -152.50 86.90 -305.00

190 (84.9) 69.47 -245.96 138.94 -491.92

200 (89.4) 76.92 -272.82 153.84 -545.64


From these two tests it's clear to see that the Redesign 1 Elements simulated to

produce better results than the Redesign 2. This is believed to be down to the initial

results from the Redesign 1's testing using a lesser mesh quality, causing the belief

that the design required fewer elements to produce an aerodynamically superior

design.



Finalised front wing

This section is implied to show what the final design looks like as well as explain the

differences between the preliminary design and the unrevised version.

Reasoning behind Design Choice

Unfortunately the results show that the up-revised version of the design is actually

worse than using a simple inverted aerofoil. It is believed to be a false representative

of the design potential. The mesh quality being reduced to incorporate the higher

complexity of the later designs is thought to be the cause. Having decided to test

only the wings the mesh quality was still not of high enough quality to allow the

program to run appropriately and to a high enough standard. An example of this is

the Boeing CFD analysis of a high-lift configuration of one of their wing designs using

22million cells, or the Centre for Integrated Turbulence Simulations (CITS) from

Stanford University which used a total of 94 million cells (Jameson & Fatica, 2005).

Another factor could have been the type of CFD method used. These figures

obtained from the paper 'Using Computational Fluid Dynamics for Aerodynamics' by

Antony Jameson and Massimiliano Fatica from Stanford University (Jameson &

Fatica, 2005) did suggest using a Large Eddie Simulation (LES) method but this

would require access to a super computer to carry out the analysis as well as a

unrestricted licence and a software with this Model incorporated on it.



Theoretical Final Design Results

As a result of this information a decision to combine the elemental results from the

redesign 2 directly on to the original Wing and Nose test to incorporate some of the

air flow deflection from the design round drag inducing features such as the wheels.

By doing this the following values for Lift and Drag plus the respective coefficients

were achieved.

Velocity (mph)

(m/s in brackets)

Total Drag

(N)

Total Lift (N) Coefficient of

Drag

Coefficient of

Lift

30 (13.4) 52.52 -75.60 1.14 -0.57

80 (35.8) 325.92 -530.44 0.99 -0.56

111.847 (50.0) 621.97 -1031.57 0.97 -0.56

150 (67.1) 1098.75 -1854.43 0.95 -0.56

190 (84.9) 1745.23 -2982.58 0.94 -0.56

200 (89.4) 1935.00 -3281.79 0.94 -0.55

Plan form area = 1.21 m2 Projected Area = 0.42 m2 Length = 1.49m

This data does not represent the data as accurately as that would have been liked to

but with the limited resources available it is believed to be a reasonable portrayal of

the potential of the design. With the final results unable to incorporate the additional

deflection elements of the wing the wing has the possibility to perform better than

that has been able to simulate with the aspects of drag. These combined results do

include the drag force produced by the end plate twice as well as additional material

from the elements which do not exist for the final design due to the merging of the

Elements to the wing.



The ratio of the drag to lift of the initial design at the top speed tested provided an

outcome of 1:1.27 and a ratio for the theoretical design values produced 1:1.70. This

33.86% increase in the ration proves that the theoretically achieved value has

improved the initial design.

Rendering of the Final Design

This rendering is to show the additional elements added to the upper surface of the

Front Wing design. The additional flow deflectors supporting the additional inverted

aerofoils are clearly seen next to the rear elements with the Sheffield Hallam decal

and on the forward elements next to the ANSYS and Solidworks Decals.

-3500

-3000

-2500

-2000

-1500

-1000

-500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Forc

e (

N)

Velocity (m/s)

Design Comparison

Final DesignTotal DragFinal DesignTotal LiftInitial DesignTotal DragInitial DesignTotal Lift



Conclusions

The knowledge of the effect of airfoils has on lift and drag was proved with the

inclusion of inverted airfoils. With the end plates deflecting some of the airflow

around the wheels it is believed that this design feature worked well and did inspire

some of the later designs which incorporated flow deflectors, not only for the

intended purpose of reducing drag, but also to provide support to the extra elements.

The support offered by these deflecting walls is hoped to provide sufficient stress

relief from the elements whilst performing their intended purpose of producing

downforce. Due to the restricted license it was not possible to test the airflow

deflection properties of these supports but due to the similar shape as the endplates

it is believe that the drag caused by the wheels would be reduced.

Comparing the results for 67.1ms-1 with those from the PACE F1 (Figure 2.2)

(Chandra, Lee, Gorrell, & Jenson, 2011), the theoretical values gained at this speed

of downforce is around 600N greater than the maximum value gained from that of

the PACE data. With the PACE test data not incorporating the wheel assembly in the

test the comparison of the drag is not essentially a good value to compare with the

final test. With the value attained not being as large as that predicted by Yoshi

Suzuka (Suzuka, 2010) it is thought that there is room for improvement with the

design.

The Front wing tests which only used the Wing geometry were unable to achieve a

high quality mesh and so the results achieved are unreliable barring the original wing

design. This design achieved a similar downforce value but when the drag was

compared it was nearly 3 times as much as that of the PACE car. It is assumed this

is because of fact that the PACE car design is a lot thinner geometry and the end

plates are not designed for the purpose of air flow deflection around the front wheels.

The reason why the geometry of this design was not made thinner was the thinking

of the forces acting upon the wing which could cause failure if the force overcomes

the yield strength of the Carbon fiber used in a Mechanical Failure situation.



Future Development

To further progress with this design in the future acquisition to a commercial package

of ANSYS or similar package would be required. It is felt that the initial work is a

good basis to continue with the expansive design of this Front Wing and would be

interesting to find out the effect the Aerodynamic Elements added to the design

could potentially make to the Drag and Lift if tested together.

It would also be required to perform Full FEA (Finite Element Analysis) testing to

ensure the design would be capable of withstanding the forces across the wing, on

the elements and into the Wing/Nose connectors. To perform this analysis a finalised

CFD result would be required to input the force imposed upon the wings. This force

would be required to incorporate a safety factor to cover the higher speeds attained

by the cars on circuits such as Spa, Belgium and if any of these high speeds

reached are whilst racing into a head wind. This analysis would enable possible

design changes such as creating thinner profile wings if the analysis would allow it.



References

Anderson, G. (2012, November 12). Formula for Success - Aerodynamics. Retrieved

April 5, 2013, from BBC Sport: Formula 1:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/20264490

Anderson, G. (2013). Formula 1: Pre Season Testing. Jerez: BBC.

ANSYS. (2011, January). Introduction to CFD. Retrieved Fabuary 26, 2013, from

SHU Blackboard:

https://shuspace.shu.ac.uk/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=n

ull&url=/webapps/blackboard/execute/courseMain?course_id=_262910_1

Arndt, R. (1997). Opel Rocket Vehicles (1928-1929) [Pictures]. Strange Vehicles of

pre-war Germany & the Third Reich (1928-1945).

Bakker, A. (2002). Lecture 7 - Meshing. Retrieved Febuary 7, 2013, from bakker.org:

http://www.bakker.org/dartmouth06/engs150/07-mesh.pdf

Barretto, L. (2013, March 3). Final day of Formula 1 pre-season testing as it

happened. Retrieved April 5, 2013, from BBC Sport: Formula 1:


BBC Sport. (2012). Formula 1 2012 Calendar. Retrieved December 2012, 30, from

BBC Sport: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/race-calendar/

BBC Sport. (2012, October 19). Grand Prix of America postponed until 2014,

organisers confirm. Retrieved April 5, 2013, from BBC Sport: Formula 1:


BBC Sport. (2013, March 8). Formula 1 chiefs confirm a 19-race season for 2013.

Retrieved April 5, 2013, from BBC Sport:


Benson, A. (2010, May 9). F1 teams decide on 'F-duct' ban for next season.

Retrieved April 5, 2013, from BBC Sport: Forumla 1:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/8670795.stm

Benson, A. (2012, September 28). Hamilton looks for long-term success at

Mercedes. Retrieved April 5, 2013, from BBC Sport, Andrew Benson's Blog:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2012/09/hamilton_looks_for_long-

term_s.html

Benson, A. (2012, September 28). Lewis Hamilton to leave McLaren after signing

Mercedes contract. Retrieved April 5, 2013, from BBC Sport: Formula 1:




Benson, A. (2013, March 2). Lewis Hamilton sets outright fastest test time in

Barcelona. Retrieved March 5, 2013, from BBC Sport: Formula 1:


Benson, A. (2013, March 3). Stage set for enticingly close Formula 1 season after

final test. Retrieved March 5, 2013, from BBC SPORT:


Brooks, T., Surtees, J., Stewart, J., Mansell, N., & Coulthard, D. (1999). 68: A Year

of Change. In T. Brooks, J. Surtees, J. Stewart, N. Mansell, D. Coulthard, & B.

Jones (Ed.), 50 Years of the Formula One World Championship (pp. 100-103).

London: Carlton Books Ltd.

Chandra, S., Lee, A., Gorrell, S., & Jenson, G. C. (2011). CFD Analysis of PACE

Formula-1 Car. http://www.cadanda.com/CAD_PACE_1__1-14.pdf.

Collantine, K. (2009). Mclaren, 2008 F1 grid [Lewis Hamiltons 2008 MP4-23].

F1Fanatic The Formula 1 Blog.

Couldwell, C. (2010). Formula One: Made in Britain. Croydon: Virgin Books.

Droop Snoot Group. (2013). RAK.2 - Opel's contribution to the Space Race.

Retrieved from droopsnoot.co.uk: http://www.droopsnoot.co.uk/rak2.htm

F1 Country: Technology Behind Formula 1. (n.d.). Aerodynamics Features of the F1

Vehciel. Retrieved Febuary 20, 2013, from F1-Engineer: http://www.f1-

country.com/f1-engineer/aeorodynamics/f1-aerodynamics.html

F1-Fansite. (2012, November 25). F1 2012 Results. Retrieved Febuary 20, 2013,

from F1-Fansite: http://www.f1-fansite.com/f1-result/

Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA). (2011). FIA Regulations. 2014

Formula One Technical Regulations, 77.

Fish, J. (2011, October 25). New Jersey to Host Formula One Grand Prix in 2013

[Picture: Gilham, Paul - Getty Images]. The Epoch Times: English Edition, p. 1.

Formula 1. (2011, Febuary 3). 2011 rule change - F-duct ban. Retrieved March 3,

2013, from Formula 1:

http://www.formula1.com/news/technical/2011/0/823.html

Formula 1. (2012, November 25). Formula 1: Results: Season. Retrieved December

2012, 30, from Formula 1: http://www.formula1.com/results/season/

Formula 1. (2012). Inside F1: Understanding The Sport: Suspension. Retrieved

Febuary 1, 2013, from Formula 1:

http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/understanding_the_sport/5285.html



Formula 1. (2013). 2013 FIA Formula One World Championship Race Calendar.

Retrieved 2013, from Formula 1:

http://www.formula1.com/races/calendar.html

Formula 1. (2013, March 4). Inside F1: Rules & Regulations: Parc Ferme. Retrieved

March 4, 2013, from Formula 1:

http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules_and_regulations/sporting_regulation

s/8685/

Formula 1. (2013). Inside F1: Understanding the Sport: Aerodynamics. Retrieved

November 16, 2012, from Formula 1:

http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/understanding_the_sport/5281.html

Formula 1. (2013). Technical Regulations: Weight. Retrieved March 18, 2013, from

Formula 1:

http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules_and_regulations/technical_regulation

s/8711/

grandprix.com. (1969, May 4). Grand Prix Results: Spanish GP, 1969. Retrieved

January 15, 2013, from grandprix.com:

http://www.grandprix.com/gpe/rr175.html

Jameson, A., & Fatica, M. (2005). Using Computational Fluid Dynamics for

Aerodynamics. Stanford: Stanford University.

Kaminski, D. A., & Jensen, M. K. (2005). Introduction to Thermal and Fluid

Engineering. Troy, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Katz, J. (2006). Aerodynamics of Race Cars. San Diego State University,

Department of Aerospace Engineering. San Diego: San Diego State

University.

Li, Q. (2013, January 1). Finite Volume Analysis and Computational Fluid Dynamics:

Learning Materials. Retrieved March 23, 2013, from SHU Space Blackboard:

https://shuspace.shu.ac.uk/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=n

ull&url=/webapps/blackboard/execute/courseMain?course_id=_262910_1

LotusEspritTurbo. (2011). Lotus Models [Picture of a 1968 Lotus 49B]. Retrieved

November 15, 2012, from LotusEspritTurbo.com:

http://www.lotusespritturbo.com/Lotus_Models.htm

Melissen, W. (2013). Lotus 72 Cosworth. Retrieved December 18, 2012, from

Ultimatecarpage.com: http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/pic/276/Lotus-72-

Cosworth_13.html



National Aeronautics and Space Administration. (2010, September 21). Aerodynamic

Forces. Retrieved December 22, 2012, from NASA:

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/k-12/airplane/presar.html

Novikov, A. (2013). Minardi F1 Team. Retrieved April 5, 2013, from All Formula One

Info: http://www.allf1.info/teams/minardi.php

One Inch Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. (n.d.). Formula 1 for Beginners. Retrieved January

8, 2013, from F1Scarlet: http://www.f1scarlet.com/f1_beginners.html

Performance Composites Ltd. (2009, July 1). Mechanical Properties of Carbon Fibre

Composite Materials. Retrieved April 13, 2013, from Performance Properties:

http://www.performance-

composites.com/carbonfibre/mechanicalproperties_2.asp

REDBULL. (2012, October 1). Suzuka Circuit Guide [Picture: Ferraro, Andrew - LAT

Photographic]. Retrieved March 5, 2013, from REDBULL:

http://www.redbull.com/en/motorsports/f1/stories/1331577002525/suzuka-

circuit-guide

MERCEDESAMGPETRONAS (Director). (2012). Nico Rosberg explains his driving

position [Motion Picture]. YouTube.

Scarbs F1. (2012, March 4). Blown Rear wings: seperating and stalling. Retrieved

March 3, 2013, from ScarbsF1 everything technical in F1:

http://scarbsf1.com/blog1/2010/03/04/blown-rear-wings-seperating-and-

stalling/

ScarbsF1. (2010, March 25). Sauber: F-Duct detail [F-Duct system picture].

Retrieved March 4, 2013, from ScarbsF1 everything technical in F1:

http://scarbsf1.com/blog1/2010/03/25/sauber-f-duct-detail/

Scott, C. (2010, August 31). Button Says Vettel Doesn’t Deserve Title, While

Whitmarsh Calls Him a ‘Crash Kid’ [Sebastian Vettel's Red Bull T-boning

Jenson Button's McLaren at Spa]. formula1nexus, 1.

Suzuka, Y. (2010). How much do we really know about aero-dynamics? Musings -

Yoshi Suzuka, 1-3.

Top Sport Racing. (2012, July 19). Formula 1 2014 will be 5 seconds slower.

Retrieved October 30, 2012, from topsportracing:

http://topsportracing.com/formula-1-2014-will-be-5-seconds-slower/

WilliamsF1TV (Director). (2012). Williams in 60 seconds: Wind Tunnel [Motion

Picture].

Williams-F1 (Director). (2012). Inside Formula 1 [Motion Picture].



Yelverton, M. (2006, November 18). F1 History Part 4:. Retrieved Febuary 21, 2013,

from The Truth about Cars: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2006/11/f1-

history-part-4-using-the-downforce/



Appendices

This section of the report is intended as extra reading or evidence which is related to

the project but not necessarily required in the bulk text.

1. Reply form Williams F1 regarding the sensitive nature of the section of the car

information was requested on

2. Copy of the suitably edited FIA Regulations for the 2014 season follows.

2014 F1 Technical Regulations 1 / 77 14 July 2011 © 2011 Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile

2014 FORMULA ONE TECHNICAL REGULATIONS

SUMMARY

ARTICLE 1 : DEFINITIONS 1.1 Formula One Car 1.2 Automobile 1.3 Land Vehicle 1.4 Bodywork 1.5 Wheel 1.6 Complete wheel 1.7 Automobile Make 1.8 Event 1.9 Weight 1.10 Cubic capacity 1.11 Pressure charging 1.12 Cockpit 1.13 Sprung suspension 1.14 Survival cell 1.15 Camera 1.16 Camera housing 1.17 Cockpit padding 1.18 Brake caliper 1.19 Electronically controlled 1.20 Open and closed sections 1.21 Power train 1.22 Power unit 1.23 Engine 1.24 Energy Recovery System (ERS) 1.25 Motor Generator Unit - Kinetic (MGUK) 1.26 Motor Generator Unit - Heat (MGUH) 1.27 Energy Store (ES) ARTICLE 2 : GENERAL PRINCIPLES 2.1 Role of the FIA 2.2 Amendments to the regulations 2.3 Dangerous construction 2.4 Compliance with the regulations 2.5 New systems or technologies 2.6 Measurements 2.7 Duty of competitor

ARTICLE 3 : BODYWORK AND DIMENSIONS 3.1 Wheel centre line 3.2 Height measurements 3.3 Overall width 3.4 Width ahead of the rear wheel centre line


3.5 Width behind the rear wheel centre line 3.6 Overall height 3.7 Front bodywork 3.8 Bodywork in front of the rear wheels 3.9 Bodywork between the rear wheels 3.10 Bodywork behind the rear wheel centre line 3.11 Bodywork around the front wheels 3.12 Bodywork facing the ground 3.13 Skid block 3.14 Overhangs 3.15 Aerodynamic influence 3.16 Upper bodywork 3.17 Bodywork flexibility 3.18 Driver adjustable bodywork ARTICLE 4 : WEIGHT 4.1 Minimum weight 4.2 Ballast 4.3 Adding during the race

ARTICLE 5 : POWER UNIT 5.1 Engine specification 5.2 Other means of propulsion and energy recovery 5.3 Power unit dimensions 5.4 Weight and centre of gravity 5.5 Torque control 5.6 Exhaust systems 5.7 Variable geometry systems 5.8 Fuel systems 5.9 Ignition systems 5.10 Energy Recovery System 5.11 Engine ancillaries (coolant, lubricant and scavenge pumps) 5.12 Engine intake air 5.13 Materials and construction - Definitions 5.14 Materials and construction – General 5.15 Materials and construction – Components 5.16 Materials and construction – Pressure charging and exhaust systems 5.17 Materials and construction – Energy recovery and storage systems 5.18 Starting the engine 5.19 Electric mode 5.20 Stall prevention systems 5.21 Replacing power unit parts

ARTICLE 6 : FUEL SYSTEM 6.1 Fuel tanks 6.2 Fittings and piping 6.3 Crushable structure 6.4 Fuel tank fillers 6.5 Refuelling 6.6 Fuel draining and sampling


ARTICLE 7 : OIL AND COOLANT SYSTEMS AND CHARGE AIR COOLING 7.1 Location of oil tanks 7.2 Longitudinal location of oil system 7.3 Catch tank 7.4 Transversal location of oil system 7.5 Coolant header tank 7.6 Cooling systems 7.7 Oil and coolant lines

ARTICLE 8 : ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS 8.1 Software and electronics inspection 8.2 Control electronics 8.3 Start systems 8.4 Data acquisition 8.5 Telemetry 8.6 Driver controls and displays 8.7 Driver radio 8.8 Accident data recorders (ADR) 8.9 Track signal information display 8.10 Medical warning system 8.11 Installation of electrical systems or components

ARTICLE 9 : TRANSMISSION SYSTEM 9.1 Transmission types 9.2 Clutch control 9.3 Traction control 9.4 Clutch disengagement 9.5 Gearboxes 9.6 Gear ratios 9.7 Reverse gear 9.8 Torque transfer systems

ARTICLE 10 : SUSPENSION AND STEERING SYSTEMS 10.1 Sprung suspension 10.2 Suspension geometry 10.3 Suspension members 10.4 Steering 10.5 Suspension uprights

ARTICLE 11 : BRAKE SYSTEM 11.1 Brake circuits and pressure distribution 11.2 Brake calipers 11.3 Brake discs and pads 11.4 Air ducts 11.5 Brake pressure modulation 11.6 Liquid cooling

ARTICLE 12 : WHEELS AND TYRES 12.1 Location 12.2 Number of wheels 12.3 Wheel material 12.4 Wheel dimensions 12.5 Supply of tyres


12.6 Specification of tyres 12.7 Tyre gases 12.8 Wheel assembly

ARTICLE 13 : COCKPIT 13.1 Cockpit opening 13.2 Steering wheel 13.3 Internal cross section 13.4 Position of the driver’s feet

ARTICLE 14 : SAFETY EQUIPMENT 14.1 Fire extinguishers 14.2 Master switch 14.3 Rear view mirrors 14.4 Safety belts 14.5 Rear light 14.6 Cockpit padding 14.7 Wheel retention 14.8 Seat fixing and removal 14.9 Head and neck supports

ARTICLE 15 : CAR CONSTRUCTION 15.1 Permitted materials 15.2 Roll structures 15.3 Structure behind the driver 15.4 Survival cell specifications 15.5 Survival cell safety requirements

ARTICLE 16 : IMPACT TESTING 16.1 Conditions applicable to all impact tests 16.2 Frontal test 1 16.3 Frontal test 2 16.4 Side test 16.5 Rear test 16.6 Steering column test

ARTICLE 17 : ROLL STRUCTURE TESTING 17.1 Conditions applicable to both roll structure tests 17.2 Principal roll structure test 17.3 Second roll structure test

ARTICLE 18 : STATIC LOAD TESTING 18.1 Conditions applicable to all static load tests 18.2 Survival cell side tests 18.3 Fuel tank floor test 18.4 Cockpit floor test 18.5 Cockpit rim tests 18.6 Nose push off test 18.7 Side intrusion test 18.8 Rear impact structure push off test 18.9 Side impact structure push off test

ARTICLE 19 : FUEL 19.1 Purpose of Article 19 19.2 Definitions


19.3 Properties 19.4 Composition of the fuel 19.5 Air 19.6 Safety 19.7 Fuel approval 19.8 Sampling and testing at an Event

ARTICLE 20 : TELEVISION CAMERAS AND TIMING TRANSPONDERS 20.1 Presence of cameras and camera housings 20.2 Location of camera housings 20.3 Location and fitting of camera and equipment 20.4 Transponders 20.5 Installation

ARTICLE 21 : FINAL TEXT


ARTICLE 1: DEFINITIONS

1.1 Formula One Car :

An automobile designed solely for speed races on circuits or closed courses.

1.2 Automobile :

A land vehicle running on at least four non-aligned complete wheels, of which at least two are used for steering and at least two for propulsion.

1.3 Land vehicle :

A locomotive device propelled by its own means, moving by constantly taking real support on the earth's surface, of which the propulsion and steering are under the control of a driver aboard the vehicle.

1.4 Bodywork :

All entirely sprung parts of the car in contact with the external air stream, except cameras, camera housings and the parts definitely associated with the mechanical functioning of the engine, transmission and running gear. Airboxes, radiators and engine exhausts are considered to be part of the bodywork.

1.5 Wheel :

Flange and rim.

1.6 Complete wheel :

Wheel and inflated tyre. The complete wheel is considered part of the suspension system.

1.7 Automobile Make :

In the case of Formula racing cars, an automobile make is a complete car. When the car manufacturer fits an engine which it does not manufacture, the car shall be considered a hybrid and the name of the engine manufacturer shall be associated with that of the car manufacturer. The name of the car manufacturer must always precede that of the engine manufacturer. Should a hybrid car win a Championship Title, Cup or Trophy, this will be awarded to the manufacturer of the car.

1.8 Event :

Any event entered into the FIA F1 Championship Calendar for any year commencing at the scheduled time for scrutineering and sporting checks and including all practice and the race itself and ending at the later of the time for the lodging of a protest under the terms of the Sporting Code and the time when a technical or sporting verification has been carried out under the terms of that Code.

1.9 Weight :

Is the weight of the car with the driver, wearing his complete racing apparel, at all times during the Event.

1.10 Engine cubic capacity :

The volume swept in the cylinders of the engine by the movement of the pistons. This volume shall be expressed in cubic centimetres. In calculating engine cubic capacity, the number Pi shall be 3.1416.

1.11 Pressure charging :

Increasing the weight of the charge of the fuel/air mixture in the combustion chamber (over the weight induced by normal atmospheric pressure, ram effect and dynamic effects in the intake and/or exhaust system) by any means whatsoever. The injection of fuel under pressure is not considered to be pressure charging.


ARTICLE 3 : BODYWORK AND DIMENSIONS

One of the purposes of the regulations under Article 3 below is to minimize the detrimental effect that the wake of a car may have on a following car.

Furthermore, infinite precision can be assumed on certain dimensions provided it is clear that such an assumption is not being made in order to circumvent or subvert the intention of the relevant regulation.

For illustrations refer to drawings 1A-17A in the Appendix to these regulations.

3.1 Wheel centre line :

The centre line of any wheel shall be deemed to be half way between two straight edges, perpendicular to the surface on which the car is standing, placed against opposite sides of the complete wheel at the centre of the tyre tread.

3.2 Height measurements :

All height measurements will be taken normal to and from the reference plane.

3.3 Overall width :

The overall width of the car, excluding tyres, must not exceed 1800mm with the steered wheels in the straight ahead position.

3.4 Width ahead of the rear wheel centre line :

3.4.1 Bodywork width between the front and the rear wheel centre lines must not exceed 1400mm.

Bodywork width ahead of the front wheel centre line must not exceed 1650mm.

3.4.2 In order to prevent tyre damage to other cars, any bodywork outboard of the most inboard part of the bodywork used to define the area required by Article 3.7.5, and which is more than 450mm ahead of the front wheel centre line, must be at least 10mm thick (being the minimum distance when measured normal to the surface in any direction) with a 5mm radius applied to all extremities.

3.4.3 In order to avoid the spread of debris on the track following an accident, the outer skins of the front wing endplates and any turning vanes in the vicinity of the front wheels (and any similarly vulnerable bodywork parts in this area), must be made predominantly from materials which are included for the specific purpose of containing debris.

The FIA must be satisfied that all such parts are constructed in order to achieve the stated objective.

3.5 Width behind the rear wheel centre line :

3.5.1 The width of bodywork behind the rear wheel centre line and less than 150mm above the reference plane must not exceed 1000mm.

3.5.2 The width of bodywork behind the rear wheel centre line and more than 150mm above the reference plane must not exceed 750mm.

3.6 Overall height :

No part of the bodywork may be more than 950mm above the reference plane.

3.7 Front bodywork :

3.7.1 All bodywork situated forward of a point lying 330mm behind the front wheel centre line, and more than 250mm from the car centre line, must be no less than 75mm and no more than 275mm above the reference plane.


3.7.2 Any horizontal section taken through bodywork located forward of a point lying 450mm forward of the front wheel centre line, less than 250mm from the car centre line, and between 125mm and 200mm above the reference plane, may only contain two closed symmetrical sections with a maximum total area of 5000mm2. The thickness of each section may not exceed 25mm when measured perpendicular to the car centre line.

Once fully defined, the sections at 125mm above the reference plane must be projected vertically to join the profile required by Article 3.7.3. A radius no greater than 10mm may be used where these sections join.

3.7.3 Forward of a point lying 450mm ahead of the front wheel centre line and less than 250mm from the car centre line and less than 125mm above the reference plane, only one single section may be contained within any longitudinal vertical cross section parallel to the car centre line. Furthermore, with the exception of local changes of section where the bodywork defined in Article 3.7.2 attaches to this section, the profile, incidence and position of this section must conform to Drawing 7.

3.7.4 In the area bounded by lines between 450mm and 1000mm ahead of the front wheel centre line, 250mm and 400mm from the car centre line and between 75mm and 275mm above the reference plane, the projected area of all bodywork onto the longitudinal centre plane of the car must be no more than 20,000mm2.

3.7.5 Ahead of the front wheel centre line and between 750mm and 825mm from the car centre line there must be bodywork with a projected area of no less than 95,000mm2 in side view. Any intersection of this bodywork with a lateral vertical plane or a horizontal plane must form one continuous line.

3.7.6 Only a single section, which must be open, may be contained within any longitudinal vertical cross section taken parallel to the car centre line forward of a point 150mm ahead of the front wheel centre line, less than 250mm from the car centre line and more than 125mm above the reference plane.

Any cameras or camera housings approved by the FIA in addition to a single inlet aperture for the purpose of driver cooling (such aperture having a maximum projected surface area of 1500mm2 and being situated forward of the section referred to in Article 15.4.3) will be exempt from the above.

3.7.7 No bodywork situated more than 1950mm forward of rear face of the cockpit entry template may be more than 550mm above the reference plane.

3.8 Bodywork in front of the rear wheels :

3.8.1 Other than the rear view mirrors (including their mountings), each with a maximum area of 12000mm² and 14000 mm2 when viewed from directly above or directly from the side respectively, no bodywork situated more than 330mm behind the front wheel centre line and more than 330mm forward of the rear wheel centre line, which is more than 600mm above the reference plane, may be more than 300mm from the car centre line.

3.8.2 No bodywork between the rear wheel centre line and a line 800mm forward of the rear wheel centre line, which is more than 375mm from the car centre line, may be more than 500mm above the reference plane.

3.8.3 No bodywork between the rear wheel centre line and a line 400mm forward of the rear wheel centre line, which is more than 375mm from the car centre line, may be more than 300mm above the reference plane.

3.8.4 Any vertical cross section of bodywork normal to the car centre line situated in the volumes defined below must form one tangent continuous curve on its external surface. This tangent continuous curve may not contain any radius less than 75mm :


3.10.7 No part of the car more than 375mm from the car centre line may be more than 350mm behind the rear wheel centre line.

3.10.8 In side view, the projected area of any bodywork lying between 300mm and 950mm above the reference plane and between the rear wheel centre line and a point 600mm behind it and more than 355mm from the car centre line must be greater than 330000mm².

3.10.9 Any horizontal section between 600mm and 750mm above the reference plane, taken through bodywork located rearward of a point lying 50mm forward of the rear wheel centre line and less than 75mm from the car centre line, may contain no more than two closed symmetrical sections with a maximum total area of 5000mm2. The thickness of each section may not exceed 25mm when measured perpendicular to the car centre line.

Once fully defined, the section at 745mm above the reference plane may be extruded upwards to join the sections defined in Article 3.10.2. A fillet radius no greater than 10mm may be used where these sections join.

3.11 Bodywork around the front wheels :

3.11.1 With the exception of the air ducts described in Article 11.4 and the mirrors described in Article 3.8.1, in plan view, there must be no bodywork in the area formed by the intersection of the following lines :

- A longitudinal line parallel to and 900mm from the car centre line.

- A transverse line 450mm forward of the front wheel centre line.

- A diagonal line from 450mm forward of the front wheel centre line and 400mm from the car centre line to 750mm forward of the front wheel centre line and 250mm from the car centre line.

- A transverse line 750mm forward of the front wheel centre line.

- A longitudinal line parallel to and 165mm from the car centre line.

- A diagonal line running forwards and inwards, from a point 875mm forward of the rear face of the cockpit entry template and 240mm from the car centre line, at an angle of 4.5° to the car centre line.

- A diagonal line from 875mm forward of the rear face of the cockpit entry template and 240mm from the car centre line to 625mm forward of the rear face of the cockpit entry template and 415mm from the car centre line.

- A transverse line 625mm forward of the rear face of the cockpit entry template.

For reference this area is shown in Drawing 17A in the Appendix to these regulations.

3.11.2 With the exception of the air ducts described in Article 11.4, in side view, there must be no bodywork in the area formed by two vertical lines, one 325mm behind the front wheel centre line, one 450mm ahead of the front wheel centre line, one diagonal line intersecting the vertical lines at 100mm and 200mm above the reference plane respectively, and one horizontal line on the reference plane.

3.12 Bodywork facing the ground :

3.12.1 With the skid block referred to in Article 3.13 removed all sprung parts of the car situated from 330mm behind the front wheel centre line to the rear wheel centre line, and which are visible from underneath, must form surfaces which lie on one of two parallel planes, the reference plane or the step plane. This does not apply to any parts of rear view mirrors which are visible, provided each of these areas does not exceed 12000mm² when projected to a horizontal plane above the car, or to any parts of the panels referred to in Article 15.4.7 and 15.4.8.


3.12.9 In an area lying 450mm or less from the car centre line, and from 400mm forward of to 350mm rearward of the rear wheel centre line, any intersection of any bodywork visible from beneath the car with a lateral or longitudinal vertical plane should form one continuous line which is visible from beneath the car.

When assessing the compliance of bodywork surfaces in this area the aperture referred to in Article 3.12.7 need not be considered.

3.12.10 In an area lying 650mm or less from the car centre line, and from 385mm rearward of the front wheel centre line to 350mm forward of the rear wheel centre line, any intersection of any bodywork visible from beneath the car with a lateral or longitudinal vertical plane should form one continuous line which is visible from beneath the car.

3.12.11 When intersected by a horizontal plane, all sprung parts of the car which are between 450mm forward and 325mm rearward of the front wheel centre line and less than 200mm above the reference plane may contain no more than one single section which must be symmetrical about the car centre line.

Any cameras or camera housings fitted in accordance with Article 20, including their mountings, will not be considered when assessing compliance with this Article.

3.12.12 From 330mm rearward of the front wheel centre line to 450mm forward of the cockpit entry template, the periphery of all bodywork less than 600mm from the car centre line when viewed from beneath the car, must contain no radii less than 50mm in a horizontal plane.

3.12.13Compliance with Article 3.12 must be demonstrated with the panels referred to in Articles 15.4.7 and 15.4.8 and all unsprung parts of the car removed.

3.13 Skid block :

3.13.1 Beneath the surface formed by all parts lying on the reference plane, a rectangular skid block, with a 50mm radius (+/-2mm) on each front corner, must be fitted. This skid block may comprise no more than three pieces, the forward one of which may not be any less than 1000mm in length, but must :

a) Extend longitudinally from a point lying 330mm behind the front wheel centre line to the rear wheel centre line.

b) Be made from an homogeneous material with a specific gravity between 1.3 and 1.45.

c) Have a width of 300mm with a tolerance of +/- 2mm.

d) Have a thickness of 10mm with a tolerance of +/- 1mm.

e) Have a uniform thickness when new.

f) Have no holes or cut outs other than those necessary to fit the fasteners permitted by 3.13.2 or those holes specifically mentioned in g) below.

g) Have seven precisely placed holes the positions of which are detailed in Drawing 1. In order to establish the conformity of the skid block after use, its thickness will only be measured in the four 50mm diameter holes and the two forward 80mm diameter holes.

Four further 10mm diameter holes are permitted provided their sole purpose is to allow access to the bolts which secure the Accident Data Recorder to the survival cell.

h) Be fixed symmetrically about the car centre line in such a way that no air may pass between it and the surface formed by the parts lying on the reference plane.

3.13.2 Fasteners used to attach the skid block to the car must :

a) Have a total area no greater than 40000mm² when viewed from directly beneath the car.


b) Be no greater than 2000mm² in area individually when viewed from directly beneath the car.

c) Be fitted in order that their entire lower surfaces are visible from directly beneath the car.

When the skid block is new, ten of the fasteners may be flush with its lower surface but the remainder may be no more than 8mm below the reference plane.

3.13.3 The lower edge of the periphery of the skid block may be chamfered at an angle of 30° to a depth of 8mm, the trailing edge however may be chamfered over a distance of 200mm to a depth of 8mm.

3.14 Overhangs :

3.14.1 No part of the car may be more than 600mm behind the rear wheel centre line or more than 1200mm in front of the front wheel centre line.

3.14.2 No part of the bodywork more than 200mm from the car centre line may be more than 1000mm in front of the front wheel centre line.

3.14.3 All overhang measurements will be taken parallel to the reference plane.

3.15 Aerodynamic influence :

With the exception of the driver adjustable bodywork described in Article 3.18 (in addition to minimal parts solely associated with its actuation) and the ducts described in Article 11.4, any specific part of the car influencing its aerodynamic performance :

- Must comply with the rules relating to bodywork.

- Must be rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car (rigidly secured means not having any degree of freedom).

- Must remain immobile in relation to the sprung part of the car.

Any device or construction that is designed to bridge the gap between the sprung part of the car and the ground is prohibited under all circumstances.

No part having an aerodynamic influence and no part of the bodywork, with the exception of the skid block in 3.13 above, may under any circumstances be located below the reference plane.

With the exception of the parts necessary for the adjustment described in Article 3.18, any car system, device or procedure which uses driver movement as a means of altering the aerodynamic characteristics of the car is prohibited.

3.16 Upper bodywork :

3.16.1 With the exception of the opening described in Article 3.16.3, when viewed from the side, the car must have bodywork in the area bounded by four lines. One vertical 1330mm forward of the rear wheel centre line, one horizontal 550mm above the reference plane, one horizontal 925mm above the reference plane and one diagonal which intersects the 925mm horizontal at a point 1000mm forward of the rear wheel centre line and the 550mm horizontal at a point lying 50mm forward of the rear wheel centre line.

Bodywork within this area must be arranged symmetrically about the car centre line and, when measured 200mm vertically below the diagonal boundary line, must have minimum widths of 150mm and 50mm respectively at points lying 1000mm and 50mm forward of the rear wheel centre line. This bodywork must lie on or outside the boundary defined by a linear taper between these minimum widths.

3.16.2 Bodywork lying vertically above the upper boundary as defined in 3.16.1 may be no wider than 125mm and must be arranged symmetrically about the car centre line.


3.16.3 In order that a car may be lifted quickly in the event of it stopping on the circuit, the principal rollover structure must incorporate a clearly visible unobstructed opening designed to permit a strap, whose section measures 60mm x 30mm, to pass through it.

3.17 Bodywork flexibility :

3.17.1 Bodywork may deflect no more than 20mm vertically when a 1000N load is applied vertically to it 800mm forward of the front wheel centre line and 795mm from the car centre line. The load will be applied in a downward direction using a 50mm diameter ram to the centre of area of an adapter measuring 300mm x 150mm, the 300mm length having been positioned parallel to the car centre line. Teams must supply the adapter when such a test is deemed necessary.

The deflection will be measured along the loading axis at the bottom of the bodywork at this point and relative to the reference plane.

3.17.2 Bodywork may deflect no more than 10mm vertically when a 500N load is applied vertically to it 450mm forward of the rear wheel centre line and 650mm from the car centre line. The load will be applied in a downward direction using a 50mm diameter ram and an adapter of the same size. Teams must supply the latter when such a test is deemed necessary.

3.17.3 Bodywork may deflect by no more than one degree horizontally when a load of 1000N is applied simultaneously to its extremities in a rearward direction 925mm above the reference plane and 20mm forward of the forward edge of the rear wing endplate.

3.17.4 Bodywork may deflect no more than 2mm vertically when a 500N load is applied simultaneously to each side of it 200mm behind the rear wheel centre line, 325mm from the car centre line and 970mm above the reference plane. The deflection will be measured at the outer extremities of the bodywork at a point 345mm behind the rear wheel centre line.

The load will be applied in a downward direction through pads measuring 200mm x 100mm which conform to the shape of the bodywork beneath them, and with their uppermost horizontal surface 970mm above the reference plane. The load will be applied to the centre of area of the pads. Teams must supply the latter when such a test is deemed necessary.

3.17.5 Bodywork may deflect no more than 5mm vertically when a 2000N load is applied vertically to it at three different points which lie on the car centre line and 100mm either side of it. Each of these loads will be applied in an upward direction at a point 380mm rearward of the front wheel centre line using a 50mm diameter ram in the two outer locations and a 70mm diameter ram on the car centre line. Stays or structures between the front of the bodywork lying on the reference plane and the survival cell may be present for this test, provided they are completely rigid and have no system or mechanism which allows non-linear deflection during any part of the test.

Furthermore, the bodywork being tested in this area may not include any component which is capable of allowing more than the permitted amount of deflection under the test load (including any linear deflection above the test load), such components could include, but are not limited to :

a) Joints, bearings pivots or any other form of articulation.

b) Dampers, hydraulics or any form of time dependent component or structure.

c) Buckling members or any component or design which may have any non-linear characteristics.

d) Any parts which may systematically or routinely exhibit permanent deformation.

3.17.6 The uppermost aerofoil element lying behind the rear wheel centre line may deflect no more than 5mm horizontally when a 500N load is applied horizontally. The load will be applied 950mm above the reference plane at three separate points which lie on the car centre line and 190mm either side of it. The loads will be applied in a rearward direction using a suitable 25mm wide adapter which must be supplied by the relevant team.


3.17.7 The forward-most aerofoil element lying behind the rear wheel centre line and which lies more than 730mm above the reference plane may deflect no more than 2mm vertically when a 200N load is applied vertically. The load will be applied in line with the trailing edge of the element at any point across its width. The loads will be applied using a suitable adapter, supplied by the relevant team, which :

- May be no more than 50mm wide.

- Which extends no more than 10mm forward of the trailing edge.

- Incorporates an 8mm female thread in the underside.

3.17.8 In order to ensure that the requirements of Article 3.15 are respected, the FIA reserves the right to introduce further load/deflection tests on any part of the bodywork which appears to be (or is suspected of), moving whilst the car is in motion.

3.18 Driver adjustable bodywork :

3.18.1 The incidence of the rearmost and uppermost closed section described in Article 3.10.2 may be varied whilst the car is in motion provided :

- It comprises only one component that must be symmetrically arranged about the car centre line with a minimum width of 708mm.

- With the exception of minimal parts solely associated with adjustment of the section, no parts of the section in contact with the external airstream may be located any more than 355mm from of the car centre line.

- With the exception of any minimal parts solely associated with adjustment of the rearmost and uppermost section, two closed sections are used in the area described in Article 3.10.2.

- Any such variation of incidence maintains compliance with all of the bodywork regulations.

- When viewed from the side of the car at any longitudinal vertical cross section, the physical point of rotation of the rearmost and uppermost closed section must be fixed and located no more than 20mm below the upper extremity and no more than 20mm forward of the rear extremity of the area described in Article 3.10.2 at all times.

- The design is such that failure of the system will result in the uppermost closed section returning to the normal high incidence position.

- Any alteration of the incidence of the uppermost closed section may only be commanded by direct driver input and controlled using the control electronics specified in Article 8.2.

3.18.2 The adjustable bodywork may be activated by the driver at any time prior to the start of the race and, for the sole purpose of improving overtaking opportunities during the race, after the driver has completed a minimum of two laps after the race start or following a safety car period.

The driver may only activate the adjustable bodywork in the race when he has been notified via the control electronics (see Article 8.2) that it is enabled. It will only be enabled if the driver is less than one second behind another at any of the pre-determined positions around each circuit. The system will be disabled by the control electronics the first time the driver uses the brakes after he has activated the system.

The FIA may, after consulting all competitors, adjust the above time proximity in order to ensure the stated purpose of the adjustable bodywork is met.


- On the survival cell or gearbox are separated by at least 100mm measured between the centres of the two attachment points.

- On each wheel/upright assembly are separated by at least 90° radially with respect to the axis of the wheel and 100mm measured between the centres of the two attachment points.

- Are able to accommodate tether end fittings with a minimum inside diameter of 15mm.

Furthermore, no suspension member may contain more than one tether.

Each tether must exceed 450mm in length and must utilise end fittings which result in a tether bend radius greater than 7.5mm.

10.4 Steering :

10.4.1 Any steering system which permits the re-alignment of more than two wheels is not permitted.

10.4.2 Power assisted steering systems may not be electronically controlled or electrically powered. No such system may carry out any function other than reduce the physical effort required to steer the car.

10.4.3 No part of the steering wheel or column, nor any part fitted to them, may be closer to the driver than a plane formed by the entire rear edge of the steering wheel rim. All parts fixed to the steering wheel must be fitted in such a way as to minimise the risk of injury in the event of a driver’s head making contact with any part of the wheel assembly.

10.4.4 The steering wheel, steering column and steering rack assembly must pass an impact test, details of the test procedure may be found in Article 16.6.

10.5 Suspension Uprights :

10.5.1 The suspension uprights must be made from a permitted aluminium alloy. Particulate reinforced aluminium alloy matrix composites are forbidden.

10.5.2 The loads from the suspension members and wheel bearings must individually and entirely be carried by the suspension upright. Exceptionally up to three suspension members may be connected together by titanium, aluminium alloy or steel components before their load is passed into the upright.

10.5.3 Suspension uprights may not protrude beyond :

- A vertical plane parallel to the inner face of the wheel rim and displaced from it by 120mm toward the car centre line.

- A radius of 180mm from the centre of the wheel when viewed from the side.

The above measurements will be made with the wheel held in a vertical position.


ARTICLE 12 : WHEELS AND TYRES

12.1 Location :

Wheels must be external to the bodywork in plan view, with the rear aerodynamic device removed.

12.2 Number of wheels :

The number of wheels is fixed at four.

12.3 Wheel material :

Wheels must be made from AZ70 or AZ80 magnesium alloys.

12.4 Wheel dimensions :

12.4.1 Complete wheel width must lie between 305mm and 355mm when fitted to the front of the car and between 365mm and 380mm when fitted to the rear.

12.4.2 Complete wheel diameter must not exceed 660mm when fitted with dry-weather tyres or 670mm when fitted with wet weather tyres.

12.4.3 Complete wheel width and diameter will be measured horizontally at axle height, with the wheel held in a vertical position and when fitted with new tyres inflated to 1.4 bar.

12.4.4 Wheel dimensions and geometry must comply with the following specifications :

- The minimum wheel thickness is 3.0mm.

- The minimum bead thickness is 4.0mm (measured from hump to outer edge of the lip).

- The ETRTO standard bead profile is prescribed.

- The tyre mounting widths are 12” (304.8mm +/-0.5mm) front; 13.7” (348.0mm +/-0.5mm) rear.

- The wheel lip thickness is 9mm (+/-1mm).

- The outer lip diameter is 358mm (+/-1mm).

- A lip recess of maximum 1.0mm depth between a radius of 165mm and a radius of 173mm from wheel axis is permitted (for wheel branding, logo, part number, etc.).

- With the exception of the wheel lip, only a single turned profile with a maximum thickness of 8mm is allowed radially outboard of the exclusion zones specified in Article 12.4.5.

- The design of the wheel must meet the general requirements of the tyre supplier for the mounting and dismounting of tyres including allowance for sensors and valves.

- The wheel design cannot be handed between left and right designs.

12.4.5 No wheel material is permitted in the following exclusion zones :

- A concentric cylinder of diameter 305mm and length 115mm positioned with its inner face lying in the same plane as the inboard face of the front wheel.

- A concentric cylinder of diameter 305mm and length 25mm positioned with its outer face lying in the same plane as the outboard face of the front wheel.

- A concentric cylinder of diameter 305mm and length 100mm positioned with its inner face lying in the same plane as the inboard face of the rear wheel.


ARTICLE 15 : CAR CONSTRUCTION

15.1 Permitted materials :

15.1.1 The following is the list of permitted materials. These are the only materials permitted to be used in the construction of the Formula One Car provided only that in all cases the material is available on a non-exclusive basis and under normal commercial terms to all competitors.

Permitted materials :

1) Aluminium alloys.

2) Silicon carbide particulate reinforced aluminium alloy matrix composites.

3) Steel alloys.

4) Cobalt alloys.

5) Copper alloys containing ≤ 2.5% by weight of Beryllium.

6) Titanium alloys (but not for use in fasteners with <15mm diameter male thread).

7) Magnesium alloys.

8) Nickel based alloys containing 50% < Ni < 69%.

9) Tungsten alloy.

10) Thermoplastics : monolithic, particulate filled, short fibre reinforced.

11) Thermosets : monolithic, particulate filled, short fibre reinforced.

12) Carbon fibres manufactured from polyacrylonitrile (PAN) precursor. (*)

13) Carbon fibres manufactured from polyacrylonitrile (PAN) precursor which have :

- A tensile modulus ≤ 550GPa.

- A density ≤ 1.92 g/cm3.

- Unidirectional or planar reinforcement within their pre-impregnated form, not including three dimensional weaves or stitched fabrics (but three dimensional preforms and fibre reinforcement using Z-pinning technology are permitted).

- No carbon nanotubes incorporated within the fibre or its matrix.

- A permitted matrix, not including a carbon matrix.

14) Aramid fibres.

15) Poly(p-phenylene benzobisoxazole) fibres (e.g. “Zylon”).

16) Polyethylene fibres.

17) Polypropylene fibres.

18) E and S Glass fibres.

19) Sandwich panel cores: Aluminium, Nomex, polymer foams, syntactic foams, balsa wood, carbon foam.

20) The matrix system utilised in all pre-impregnated materials must be epoxy, cyanate ester, phenolic, bismaleimide, polyurethane, polyester or polyimide based. (*)


21) The matrix system utilised in all pre-impregnated materials must be epoxy, cyanate ester or bismaleimide based.

22) Monolithic ceramics.

[Materials marked (*) are permitted only for parts classified as either front, rear or side impact structures, side intrusion panels or suspension members as regulated by Articles 15.4.3, 15.5.3, 15.4.6, 15.4.7 and 10.3 of the Technical Regulations respectively.]

Exceptions :

1) All electrical components (e.g. control boxes, wiring looms, sensors).

2) All seals & rubbers (e.g. rubber boots, o-rings, gaskets, any fluid seals, bump rubbers).

3) Fluids (e.g. water, oils).

4) Tyres.

5) Coatings and platings (e.g. DLC, nitriding, chroming).

6) Paint.

7) Adhesives.

8) Thermal insulation (e.g. felts, gold tape, heat shields).

9) All currently regulated materials (e.g. fuel bladder, headrest, extinguishant, padding, skid block).

10) Brake and clutch friction materials.

11) All parts of power units homologated according to Appendix 4 of the Sporting Regulations.

15.1.2 No parts of the car may be made from metallic materials which have a specific modulus of elasticity greater than 40GPa / (g/cm3). Tests to establish conformity will be carried out in accordance with FIA Test Procedure 03/02, a copy of which may be found in the Appendix to these regulations.

15.2 Roll structures :

15.2.1 All cars must have two roll structures which are designed to help prevent injury to the driver in the event of the car becoming inverted.

The principal structure must be at least 940mm above the reference plane at a point 30mm behind the cockpit entry template. The second structure must be in front of the steering wheel but no more than 250mm forward of the top of the steering wheel rim in any position.

The two roll structures must be of sufficient height to ensure the driver's helmet and his steering wheel are at least 70mm and 50mm respectively below a line drawn between their highest points at all times.

15.2.2 The principal structure must pass a static load test details of which may be found in Article 17.2. Furthermore, each team must supply detailed calculations which clearly show that it is capable of withstanding the same load when the longitudinal component is applied in a forward direction.

15.2.3 The highest point of the second structure may not be more than 645mm above the reference plane and must pass a static load test details of which may be found in Article 17.3.

Design of a Formula One Front Wing for the 2014 Season (with regulations)

Documents

Transcript of Design of a Formula One Front Wing for the 2014 Season (with regulations)