|
предполагам материалите са включени в хомологизирането, пък и тая една секунда ми се вижда много :)
но че ще се намерят някакви заобикалки мисля, че няма спор. Ето ако на някой му е скучно:
Understanding the New Engine Rules
As the Formula One engine makers submit their current engine specifications to the FIA for a development freeze that will last the next four seasons, autosport.com's technical writer Craig Scarborough explains how the rule will be enforced, why it was introduced, and how it will affect the sport
By Craig Scarborough
autosport.com's technical writer
As the cars rolled into parc ferme at the end of the Japanese Grand Prix two weeks ago, a process kicked in that will alter Formula One for the next three years at least.
Part of FIA president Max Mosley's vision going into the next decade will see the specification of engines frozen until after 2010. The change is unprecedented in F1 history and has been the subject of much political dispute.
According to the new rules, the engines will be subject to a homologation process, whereby the design of the engine and any subsequent alterations are controlled by the FIA. Thus, there will be no fast-paced development of engines, and power levels will effectively be capped - compounded by the additional limit of 19,000 rpm.
Why change the rules?
The change is part of Mosley's agenda to control several aspects of F1, namely: speed, costs, environmental issues, and improving the "show".
Engines are one of the top three factors in the pace of the cars, with tyres and aerodynamics the other major influences. Even with the new V8 engines for 2006, the 2.4-litre engines are producing over 750hp and revving to 20,000 rpm.
Each year the teams find nearly 5% more power from the engines. This increment alone drops lap times by almost three quarters of a second. Thus, engines are a key way to limit the escalation in speeds, and as a by-product a way to improve safety.
Currently, F1 engines are supplied by the major road car manufacturers; these companies have huge resources and have applied enormous budgets just to get a competitive engine to the grid, not to mention the additional costs to develop it to be the best engine in F1.
The manufacturers are dedicating as many as 300 staff members to their engine program, as well as relying on other specialists within their corporations for specific tasks.
The environmental lobby is increasingly focusing on activities fed by fossil fuels, from the humble motorist to the increase in air travel. Clearly F1 can be viewed as a wasteful sport in environmental terms. Only too aware of this increasing powerful movement, Mosley holds the view that F1 should reflect this change in culture.
In many respects, F1 is not a major impact on the environment - the cars are very efficient with fuel usage; they do not complete huge amount of mileage; and carbon emissions for a race are small in comparison to other industries.
But F1 is a focus for world attention on the motoring industry and as a result has a degree of responsibility for the industry's image.
On top of that, the entertainment value that Formula One is providing these past few years has been a matter of constant debate. The recent FIA/AMD survey shows, unsurprisingly, that fans want to see more overtaking, and while this should be in principal a simple aim, it is not one that's technically easy to produce without adding a fake element to the sport.
Many people will recall the turbo era in the seventies and eighties, when overtaking was possible with a bit of bravery and the boost turned up temporarily. The idea of a boost button appeals to many, but the current crop of un-turbo charged engines cannot provide this "push to pass" functionality. The engines are already at their limit and no more power could be liberated for brief periods. Thus, only by some restriction on the engine's performance could the overtake option be incorporated.
Why now?
The philosophy leading to these latest rule changes has been developing for some time. The late adoption of the V8 engines and their associated technical restriction in 2005 and 2006 suggested more engine regulations would be some way off. However, it is perhaps for that very reason that the engine freeze has been scheduled so soon.
The sweeping changes that dropped the V10s for V8s have levelled the playing field, and most insiders believe peak power outputs are comparable across the field.
Despite many media reports of gaping power differences, the usual 1-2% spread of power between the teams could provide as little as 10-15hp between manufacturers. This rare moment of parity between engine suppliers provides a window in which a freeze could be fair for all involved.
What's proposed?
In essence, the engine freeze is just what its name suggests: the specification of the engines completing the Japanese Grand Prix will form the race engine for that manufacturer for the next four years, with the additional 19,000 rpm restriction.
As is usual for the FIA, the concept of the rule is agreed beforehand, which then leaves the FIA technical delegates and the teams to agree on how the rule will work in detail. Again as is usual, there is little information published about how the rules will work. The loops of meetings, emails and faxes circulating between those involved will run on to the first race of 2007, with more clarifications sought after and published throughout the season.
The process by which the engine's specifications are documented and controlled is called homologation. This is a new concept to the normally technically free Formula One, but not unusual in many other top level motorsport series.
The FIA's World Rally championship (WRC), for example, requires the manufacturers to declare all aspects of their car's design to the governing body before competing in events. The car is subsequently compared to this documentation as part of the scrutineering process throughout the championship.
Thus, the engines and documentation that were delivered to the FIA after the Japanese round will be reviewed and homologated. It's not clear what exactly is covered by the freeze, but the FIA's current rules define the engine for weight and parc ferme purposes as the main components within the outer casings, from the injection system to the oil/water pumps and alternator. This excludes bolt-on parts such as clutch, exhaust and wiring.
The aim of the new rule is to prevent the usual steps in engine development we see every few races, where major parts like cams, cylinders heads and pistons are replaced - giving some components a life of only two race weekends, before they are superseded by a newly designed part.
With such development now banned, this would clearly be a major cost saving for the manufacturers. However, the homologation rules do allow for sensible alterations, and a documented change process is included to specific exceptions to the technical freeze.
With the cap on engine speed to 19,000 rpm, the teams will be able to re-tune their engines to suit the new limit. This limit will also reduce the manufacturers' options on the limited development available over the coming years.
This limit will be enforced by the teams' own electronics in 2007, but as of 2008, this will be directly under the FIA's control via the standardised ECU. Thus, the governing body could allow a limited over-rev facility to offer about 500 rpm more for limited periods over the weekend. This would allow a "push to pass" facility, although the extra revs won't significantly boost power, so drivers will not be able to solely rely on the boost button to pass other cars.
Effect on the sport
We are unlikely to see any major change in a team's competitiveness; however, any subtle imbalances between the engines will not be easy to recover. If an engine is lacking in one area, its manufacturer will not be able to simply redesign the problem away.
Reliability should be improved slightly, as manufacturers will not be able to stretch new untested components to their limits, thus causing blow ups on new spec engines. Moreover, having revs capped at 19,000 rpm will ease the load on the engines that are currently designed for up to 20,000 rpm.
Another issue will be any new manufacturer aiming to enter F1 during the engine freeze period. Such manufacturer could have a potential advantage by bringing in a newly designed engine, but currently no other engine maker is expected to join F1, so this concern is unlikely to arise.
Equally, any manufacturer leaving the sport before 2009 will leave a void of one or two teams without engines. However, as the business of producing the homologated engines has been eased in terms of costs and logistics, other manufacturers could make up the shortfall in engine supply with little impact to their costs and operation.
Effect on the teams
With engines not contributing to an increase in speed - and with a single tyre supplier having a similar effect - Formula One will become, effectively, a chassis formula. The major contributor to lap times will be, from now on, aerodynamics, electronics, transmissions and suspension, in approximately that order.
Electronics and transmissions are, however, directly attributable to engine integration, and this will be a critical area for the teams to develop. Few teams will want to be without an effective seamless transmission next year, as this will be one of the few areas of innovation possible that will provide significant lap time improvements.
Other aspects of engine integration with the chassis will be the airbox and exhaust pipes. As the sole source of tuning, the manufacturers will be keen to optimise these to improve power delivery, which in turn may have an effect on the chassis and in particular aerodynamics.
A Bulkier exhaust system or a wider airbox may reap more power, but it may slow the car due to more aero drag. The net gain will need to be considered between team and engine supplier to decide what is the best route to follow. However, some new compromises in design will no doubt be seen as the seasons progress.
Effect on the manufacturers
The Manufacturers will be the most fundamentally affected by the rule changes. Primarily, they will now no longer be able to develop their engine to the same degree as before. Some development will still occur to parts outside of the freeze - mainly the on the airbox and exhaust pipe, plus the electronics, oils/fuel and some smaller ancillary components.
The manufacturers will be able to use these to influence the power delivery. As the engines are capped on revs, the emphasis will focus much more on power delivery than peak power. An engine with a fuller power curve in the critical middle and upper ranges of 12,000-19,000 rpm will lap faster than an engine with more peak power but a weaker mid-range.
Thus, the Manufacturers have the dilemma of what to do with the hundreds of development engineers they currently employ. Some will still be required to work on the limited development allowed or transfer to similar technical areas such as transmissions. But other engineers could find themselves redundant.
However, Mosley has already allowed for one new development path for the engineers: his concept of recyclable energy as a part of the 2009 rules will need huge levels of research and development. This includes systems such as hybrid technologies that provide power to the car from energy normally wasted in braking and the engine on the over-run.
But these are new types of engineering and not directly associated with the very mechanical process of developing a Formula One engine, so the incumbent engineers might not be suited to this new role, again raising the prospect of job losses.
By having a frozen specification and having to follow the homologation process, the focus of how the manufacturer operates will also subtly change.
Firstly, costs could be further reduced as the essentially similar components will be made and raced for three years. But the quality control to ensure the right components are always installed and not deviate from the homologated specification will be critical. It is unlikely any one will set out to cheat, but small errors could impact on the same rules, leading to fines, loss of points and a great deal of embarrassment.
In planning the production of the engines, manufacturers will need to ensure they can still buy any parts or materials for the next three years. Even simple parts like injectors or sensors must be homologated, and these parts are not always produced for long periods and can become obsolete by their manufacturer.
<--Да ти...
|
(wormwood)