Welcome to the brand new Codemasters Forums! Be sure to check the FAQ and Forum Rules before you get started.

Alternative to DRS

ForeverchampsForeverchamps Member Wheel Nut
edited August 31 in World of Motorsport

I was reading this article (https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/grid-penalties-end-brawn-drs-947189/), about Ross Brawn wanting to remove DRS, and it got me thinking of an alternative to DRS, whereby drivers cant just 'push to pass', but overtaking is still possible.

My idea was to have a system that increases downforce, instead of reducing it. If a driver is within 2 seconds of the car in front, they can use a system that deploys flaps somewhere on the car, which increases downforce. They would use this through the corners, and it would allow them to stay close in the turbulent air. Then, on the straights, they would turn the system off (returning to normal downforce levels), and would need to slipstream their way past or overtake under braking.

This is my idea - does anyone else have an idea of how we can retain overtaking, while removing DRS.

Comments

  • HughesyHughesy Member Champion
    I don't mean to poo on your idea, but I can't see it working. The flaps would have to be standard across all cars, and each car is different and uses downforce differently, so it would probably cause more issues. Personally I've never been a fan of DRS, overtaking just because you can go faster isn't exciting for me, less overtakes that required skill to get past excites me a lot more. Until they simplify the front wings and go back to ground effect it's always going to be tricky to follow. 
  • ForeverchampsForeverchamps Member Wheel Nut
    edited September 1
    Hughesy said:
    I don't mean to poo on your idea, but I can't see it working. The flaps would have to be standard across all cars, and each car is different and uses downforce differently, so it would probably cause more issues. Personally I've never been a fan of DRS, overtaking just because you can go faster isn't exciting for me, less overtakes that required skill to get past excites me a lot more. Until they simplify the front wings and go back to ground effect it's always going to be tricky to follow. 

    Unfortunately, in F1 right now, being faster isn't anywhere near enough to overtake - you need to be a great deal faster to make the overtake, as the dirty air makes such a difference - I think I remember hearing a driver has to be about 3 seconds quicker a lap just to stay in the dirty air, let alone make the overtake.

    With regards to how I would suggest it working, I would suggest flaps on the sidepods, that have specified dimensions, and extend to a specified angle - of course, it may help some cars slightly more than others, but that is the same with DRS - if a car has a rear wing that produces more drag, it has a greater effect.

  • KamyKaze1098KamyKaze1098 Member New Car Smell
    For me they should just build a spec aero pack for everyone and let them develop motor and chassis + suspensions with free reigns.

    Point being manufacturers benefit more from developing the engine technology to use on the road, as with aero technology not so much.
    Also Aero development is really a big part of budget, so with more money they could develop more the other areas.
    Also with same Aero Spec they could do one that would promote more clean air to promote more close racing.

    I think this would attract more manufacturers to F1 in my opinion.
  • HughesyHughesy Member Champion
    edited September 1
    Hughesy said:
    I don't mean to poo on your idea, but I can't see it working. The flaps would have to be standard across all cars, and each car is different and uses downforce differently, so it would probably cause more issues. Personally I've never been a fan of DRS, overtaking just because you can go faster isn't exciting for me, less overtakes that required skill to get past excites me a lot more. Until they simplify the front wings and go back to ground effect it's always going to be tricky to follow. 

    Unfortunately, in F1 right now, being faster isn't anywhere near enough to overtake - you need to be a great deal faster to make the overtake, as the dirty air makes such a difference - I think I remember hearing a driver has to be about 3 seconds quicker a lap just to stay in the dirty air, let alone make the overtake.

    With regards to how I would suggest it working, I would suggest flaps on the sidepods, that have specified dimensions, and extend to a specified angle - of course, it may help some cars slightly more than others, but that is the same with DRS - if a car has a rear wing that produces more drag, it has a greater effect.

    That's why I said they should use ground effect, you'd then have simple front wings and the ability to follow better. F1 has mostly always had issues with overtaking, but I'm not of the view that more overtakes means better races. I'd much rather see a driver push himself to the limit to make an overtake. Look at Indy when they do ovals, the overtakes mean nothing nor are they exciting until the end, as they swap so many times. Obviously that creates the unknown, you don't know who's going to win, but it doesn't make the actual racing more exciting. Horner said last year that the new rules would make it hard to overtake, but the powers  that be didn't listen and just thought faster lap times would make it more exciting.
    It's a good discussion though.  :)
  • ForeverchampsForeverchamps Member Wheel Nut
    edited September 1
    Hughesy said:
    Hughesy said:
    I don't mean to poo on your idea, but I can't see it working. The flaps would have to be standard across all cars, and each car is different and uses downforce differently, so it would probably cause more issues. Personally I've never been a fan of DRS, overtaking just because you can go faster isn't exciting for me, less overtakes that required skill to get past excites me a lot more. Until they simplify the front wings and go back to ground effect it's always going to be tricky to follow. 

    Unfortunately, in F1 right now, being faster isn't anywhere near enough to overtake - you need to be a great deal faster to make the overtake, as the dirty air makes such a difference - I think I remember hearing a driver has to be about 3 seconds quicker a lap just to stay in the dirty air, let alone make the overtake.

    With regards to how I would suggest it working, I would suggest flaps on the sidepods, that have specified dimensions, and extend to a specified angle - of course, it may help some cars slightly more than others, but that is the same with DRS - if a car has a rear wing that produces more drag, it has a greater effect.

    That's why I said they should use ground effect, you'd then have simple front wings and the ability to follow better. F1 has mostly always had issues with overtaking, but I'm not of the view that more overtakes means better races. I'd much rather see a driver push himself to the limit to make an overtake. Look at Indy when they do ovals, the overtakes mean nothing nor are they exciting until the end, as they swap so many times. Obviously that creates the unknown, you don't know who's going to win, but it doesn't make the actual racing more exciting. Horner said last year that the new rules would make it hard to overtake, but the powers  that be didn't listen and just thought faster lap times would make it more exciting.
    It's a good discussion though.  :)
    Yes, I totally agree - ground effect would be the best way forward, but we will be stuck with the current car design for a good few seasons, and I was trying to think of  a solution to make overtaking possible in the current formula.

    I am not saying make overtaking easy, like at Indy, but overtaking should be possible, as this in itself forces the drivers to push harder, as they know that if they slow off the pace too much, the driver behind will overtake. Likewise, allowing drivers to stay close in the dirty air would allow drivers to differentiate themselves from the other drivers by showing their overtaking and defending skills.
  • ForeverchampsForeverchamps Member Wheel Nut
    edited September 1
    For me they should just build a spec aero pack for everyone and let them develop motor and chassis + suspensions with free reigns.

    Point being manufacturers benefit more from developing the engine technology to use on the road, as with aero technology not so much.
    Also Aero development is really a big part of budget, so with more money they could develop more the other areas.
    Also with same Aero Spec they could do one that would promote more clean air to promote more close racing.

    I think this would attract more manufacturers to F1 in my opinion.
    To be honest, I think this would mean the end of F1 if they did this - Formula E is already doing the same thing, albeit in an electric formula. Likewise, Indycar has spec aero, but the only differences between the cars are the engines. It is expected that all motorsport will probably be electrified within 20-30 years, so if F1 is running a spec aero and electric motor, there wouldn't be anything to differentiate F1 from Formula E.

    Also, I struggle to see how you could give the teams free reign on the chassis - what would stop teams adding wings to the chassis, and claiming it is just a part of their chassis design?

    I do agree though, they need to work out a way of cutting budgets and/or sharing the prize money more evenly.
  • VetteIfanVetteIfan Member Race Engineer
    Novel idea OP, but (adding to the reasons Hughesy mentioned) is that really much different to the conceptual problem of DRS? It's still an artificial method of getting a trailing car in a better position to overtake, just using a different tactic. 

    We need to also get away from the idea that just "adding ground effect" is the saviour to all the problems. If it was that simple it would've been done already. 

    I've just finished studying Motorsport Engineering at university and I did my final year dissertation on exactly this topic, an investigation in to how we can influence aerodynamic design to allow cars to follow more closely. A large part of that was looking at ground effect. The simplified conclusion was - while increasing reliance on a ground effect system and decreasing reliance on wings did help a trailing car retain a sizeable amount larger % of it's downforce, it's still not to the extent that cars would suddenly be able to follow nose to tail. This was proven in both CFD and wind tunnel testing. I got a first class on the project, and the findings were in line with most other independent investigations in to such matters (if you need credentials). 

    The ultimate conclusion is while we're racing in earth's atmosphere and F1 cars produce downforce, this is always going to be a problem. Ground effect aero could help limit it, but not eliminate it.
  • ForeverchampsForeverchamps Member Wheel Nut
    edited September 1
    VetteIfan said:
    Novel idea OP, but (adding to the reasons Hughesy mentioned) is that really much different to the conceptual problem of DRS? It's still an artificial method of getting a trailing car in a better position to overtake, just using a different tactic. 

    We need to also get away from the idea that just "adding ground effect" is the saviour to all the problems. If it was that simple it would've been done already. 

    I've just finished studying Motorsport Engineering at university and I did my final year dissertation on exactly this topic, an investigation in to how we can influence aerodynamic design to allow cars to follow more closely. A large part of that was looking at ground effect. The simplified conclusion was - while increasing reliance on a ground effect system and decreasing reliance on wings did help a trailing car retain a sizeable amount larger % of it's downforce, it's still not to the extent that cars would suddenly be able to follow nose to tail. This was proven in both CFD and wind tunnel testing. I got a first class on the project, and the findings were in line with most other independent investigations in to such matters (if you need credentials). 

    The ultimate conclusion is while we're racing in earth's atmosphere and F1 cars produce downforce, this is always going to be a problem. Ground effect aero could help limit it, but not eliminate it.


    I totally agree, my idea would not be easy to implement, and there are a lot of issues with it, but I came up with it, as instead of giving the trailing car an advantage, as with the 'push to pass' system of DRS, it merely gives them a way to overcome the disadvantage of the wake turbulence.

    Also, I mentioned once before in another, similar topic about another idea I had for overcoming the wake turbulence issue, and given your engineering knowhow @VetteIfan, your input would be great to see whether this would be feasible. I have written my idea below;

    The idea is based around the Brabham BT46B – the "fan car". I believe this car was banned, as it produced too much grip, making it dangerous. However, I thought it would be a good idea, if this was introduced as standard on all cars (standardized fan designs and angles, standardized intake/outlet sizes and shapes, limited fan rpm, and so on...).  If this was limited in such a way, the FIA could ensure the downforce levels are not reaching dangerous levels, and it may also lead to closer racing between teams, as no team will have a major aero advantage.

    With this, the conventional aero could be heavily restricted by the FIA, meaning the cars are less reliant on this aero, and thus the wake turbulence would have a negligible impact on this aero.

    I have come up with this idea, based around the assumption that wake turbulence would have little or no effect on the performance of this high rpm fan, is this correct?

  • VetteIfanVetteIfan Member Race Engineer
    edited September 3
    @Foreverchamps

    The fan car was a response to the ground effect Lotus 79 being run at the time. Both work in the same way - as in they speed up the flow of air under the car. The difference is the Lotus used the traditional ground effect "tunnels" to do this while the Brabham used a fan to suck the air from underneath the car. 

    So long story short, seen as both ground effect and 'the fan' produce downforce in the same way, the turbulence should have a pretty similar impact on the underbody aero performance no matter what. 
  • HughesyHughesy Member Champion
    I'm well aware ground effect isn't the perfect solution, but compared to the current cars and rules it would surely help.
  • fIsince08fIsince08 Member Moderator
    Backing off the aero and focussing on mechanical grip should work, but the Adrian Neweys aren't going to be very happy about it.

    I am not a Codemasters employee.

    #RIPJules

    ---->Forum Rules<----   ---->Forum FAQ<----

  • RodrigoMendesRodrigoMendes Member Wheel Nut

    Backing off the aero and focussing on mechanical grip should work, but the Adrian Neweys aren't going to be very happy about it.
    They're already have done it this year. Larger cars and larger tyres, dont? It's working. Overtakes are a lot more real.

    I think DRS is a a compesate feature for modern cars. I really don't see a problem and it's often to see a lot of drivers turning on the DRS and not overtaking. Specially this year.
  • PercocetPantherPercocetPanther Member New Car Smell
    Personally, I think everyone should have the same engine, chassis etc...like the feeder formulas, so we get the best drivers winning.

    But, of course, that isn't how formula 1 works, unless everyone had either Ferrari or Mercedes, so the next best thing is minimal driver aids... meaning get rid of DRS, not introduce an alternative.
Sign In or Register to comment.