The 2008 Technical Preview

Heading into the new season, Formula One appears to be going into a seminal year. Although far-reaching rule changes are included in this years rule book, the even more radical changes to the car for 2009 will make this year the last of complex aerodynamics, grooved tyres and cars solely relying on the petrol-burning engine for power.

Despite such radical overhauls due for next year, this year's cars have had to respond to new cost-cutting rules relating to the electronics and gearboxes, as well as further optimise the cars around the Bridgestone tyres that were introduced last year.

Thus, the cars are going to be at a peak of performance and several who struggled through last year are expected to create a tighter fight at the front of the grid.

Rule Changes

The actual list of rule changes is quite short for 2008, however the major change has had a fundamental impact on the work the teams have had to carry out in developing their new cars.

For a long time, drivers' aids have been on the FIA's list of technologies to be banned. However previous attempts at banning functions such as traction control have been met with ever-more complex electronics side-stepping the wording of the ban, and having been near-impossible to audit for legality.

Thus for many years we have been left with traction control and the less-publicised launch aids, differential controls and engine braking systems.

The draconian solution has been to introduce a single ECU to control both the engine and chassis functions. With a single specification of hardware and software, plus reworded regulations, these active functions can now be more effectively banned.

Supplied by a subsidiary of the McLaren Group, the new Single ECU (known as SECU) is a partnership between Microsoft and McLaren electronics.

There has been a lot of remarks made about the McLaren team's advantage in having already used the basics of the SECU solution. But their advantage in understanding the software and packaging for the SECU will already be diminished compared to the better-funded teams. McLaren have still had to rewrite the control strategies to react to the rules banning the driver aids.

The ban on traction control (TC) and any system which can actively alter the cars power delivery or differential will make the cars trickier to drive. But most drivers have raced most of the careers in passive cars, and the step away from TC will not be the great divider between drivers that many believe.

Equally, the impact on the cars' design will be minimal. Most teams are striving to make their cars handling more forgiving, but this is a perennial aim and this year the electronics will not be the focus for less sensitive cars - the suspension and aerodynamics will be.

The FIA have also introduced a gearbox life regulation to follow on from the successful long-life engine regulations introduced in 2004. Where the engine regulation was brought in slowly, with engines initially only having to last one weekend before the extension to two weekends for 2005, the gearbox ruling is coming straight in with a life of four race weekends.

Up until now gearboxes have been a freely changeable component, albeit within the parc ferme rules, as a new gearbox could be fitted for qualifying without having to run Saturday morning or in Friday's test sessions.

Now, the gearbox will be sealed and only changed after four race weekends, or a penalty of five grid positions will be imposed. While the cost saving enabled by this rule is clear, the practicality is initially illogical, as teams customise the gear ratios for each track as part of the car's set-up.

Thus, the rules define the gearbox as the case, selection mechanism, shafts, bearings, pumps and differential. Also exempt are the hydraulics and clutch.

However the rules make allowances for this. The gear ratios themselves are partially exempt, as are the dog rings, which engage the gears to the shafts. Dog rings are matched to the ratios, and are particularly fragile.

Teams can change ratios in between races as long as the ratios are different to those in the previous race. So when going from Turkey to Monaco to Canada, the teams can have the ideal ratios for each track.

However, there may be a loophole that the teams can exploit. Where two races demand the same ratios, teams can subtly alter the final drive gearing and the specific gear ratios to create the same overall ratio. This allows them to fit new parts for the second race, while keeping the same ratio.

One further dispensation is given to the teams. If a gear or a dog ring is damaged during the race weekend, the ratio/dog ring is allowed to be changed for an identical one. However this swapping of parts must not form a pattern to ensure that teams aren't bypassing the rule.

In addition to the life of the gearbox, some dimensions and weights have been specified to ensure that teams aren't investing huge amounts of money into ever-smaller, thinner gear ratios.

Thus, there are minimum thicknesses set and the distance between the gear shafts fixed. These fixed parameters have forced every team to redesign its gear cluster, particularly to meet the shaft spacing rule. Added to that workload is the detail design work required to ensure each component can have the 3000 kilometre life to last four race weekends.

Exacerbating the mechanical side of the gearbox rules, the SECU ruling means that the teams have also had to create all-new control code to sequence the hydraulics to set select the gears, plus manage the clutch and differential.

The majority of teams now use seamless transmissions, and with the heavy demands the seamless selection mechanism places on the mechanics and electronics of the gearbox, solid reliability will be an issue, with teams possibly taking a step back in shift speed to ensure reliability. Every team will need to judge the risk/benefit of faster shifts or reliability.

Additionally, the option of managing gearbox life may come into play, just as the teams do by limiting engines revs for reliability. For example, Friday sessions or quiet spells during the race could be run without the extreme seamless selection mode being run to give the internals an easier time.

At this stage the gearbox design remains free to change through the season, and teams can modify their gearbox every four races (or after any retirement) as no design freeze is enforced as with engines.

Car by Car

Ferrari F2008 (Ferrari 056)

As the first team to launch its car, Ferrari's evolutionary F2008 has been setting the pace throughout winter testing. The team's work over the winter has been troubled by a few reliability issues, but the pace, particularly over long runs, suggests it will be the yardstick all other teams will be measured by.

While the F2008 has been developed in the run-up to Melbourne the rumour mill has been suggesting that a more radical overhaul of the car's aerodynamics is due.

The much-discussed nose cone with a slot passing through it from bottom to top has yet to be seen. It's possible the slotted nose could be a real design, but whether it ever makes to the 2008 season is another matter.

In theory some advantage could be gained from sending the high pressure air forming at the trailing edge of the front wing through the nose and perhaps out over the top of the nose cone or around the sides. Williams created a similar solution with the walrus nose in 2004, but it's believed that Ferrari's solution retains a full-length nose cone to aid in passing the FIA crash tests.

If the nose cone may be just a product of the media finding something sensational to write about the winter, the actual development to the F2008 has been very subtle. The Melbourne aero set-up has been run at the last two tests.

The car has featured revised forward turning vane mounts, and instead of a slender strut holding up the curved boards, a thicker McLaren-like shape has been run. Additionally, the trailing edge of the bargeboard, with its small flap, is integrated into a much neater solution.

A more twisted rear wing has been tried, along with new rear brake ducts with inlet scoops reaching around to the front edge of the tyre.

One detail noted on the new Ferrari has been the rear suspension set-up. Ferrari has dropped the rotary dampers at the rear in order to get better wheel control for stability and grip.

Images of the Ferrari's rear end suggest that the team has a novel layout for the rear dampers, adopting linear dampers laid horizontally across the top of the gearbox. It has been suggested Ferrari have also moved away from Sachs as its damper supplier, instead getting bespoke units from another undisclosed manufacturer.

BMW Sauber F1.08 (BMW P86/8)

BMW's winter has not been as smooth as the team would like, the new F1.08 having proven to be a more sensitive car than its predecessor.

Last year BMW Sauber created a car that was on the pace at all circuits, notwithstanding having the change to Bridgestones to contend with. This year's car appears to have lost some of its stability. The team are working on resolving the problems and from recent driver comments the car has improved, but there remain hurdles in getting the best from it.

Almost as soon as the car started running, the BMW Sauber has surprised with its aerodynamic complexity. Early tests were marked by the appearance of the stag wings on the nose cone and the joining of the pod wing to the bargeboards. These changes were also followed by the return of the viking wings (dropped in 2007) and new front wing later in testing.

The fact that the team has run these add-ons consistently suggests that it does not feel that these parts contribute to the car's sensitivity problems.

With these issues hanging over the team, we could expect BMW to have greater pace when the track and conditions suit the car. But potentially an inconsistent year is on the cards, with BMW having only just achieved consistency in 2007.

Renault R28 (Renault RS27)

Renault lost its way with aerodynamic testing late in 2006 and the switch to Bridgestones in 2007, leaving the car with an inadequate aero/weight balance. The 2008 car has been Renault's chance to regroup.

Outwardly an evolution of the R27 which went before it, the new R28 is a very different car in layout and detail. The new zero keel front end, combined with the arched under-nose and aggressive front wing, are far from conservative solutions.

The aero changes, combined with the forward weight shift, leave Renault with a lot of learning to do regarding the new package. Certainly early testing times suggested there isn't a lot of pace from the new set-up, but Renault have proved in subsequent tests that it does have the speed to challenge at the front of the midfield. But threatening Ferrari or McLaren will require unusual circumstances this year.

Late in testing some new developments were noted on the car. The pod wings were joined to the bargeboard in a BMW-like set up, as well as a small fin appearing on the monocoque behind the bargeboards.

Ferrari ran a fin like this in 2007, which works in conjunction with the sidepod undercuts. Previously, Renault has had a bulge moulded to the side of the tub, possibly to serve a similar purpose.

Also, the bridge wing has evolved from the launch version, with the thinner middle part of the flap being separated from the broader out tips by small endplates. This would help manage the flow where the wing goes form creating downforce for grip, to creating lift for managing the flow to the rear wing.

Williams FW30 (Toyota RVX-08)

Another team with a car barely altered on first inspection. But the FW30 is actually a major rework of the successful FW29 from last year. Weight distribution, rear end stability and other details have been improved, while the aerodynamics follow the same principals put in place last year.

There's been little obvious development to the car during testing, but equally the car's pace and reliability are suggesting that the team is going to be nearer the front of the midfield this year.

Red Bull Racing RB4 (Renault RS27)

To take the step from the Jaguar days to becoming a serious front runner, Red Bull employed Adrian Newey and pressed ahead with a complete car redesign for 2007.

The RB3 was step forwards in design terms, but the car lacked reliability and the forward-biased weight distribution needed for the Bridgestone tyres.

The additional recruitment of Geoff Willis in late 2007 is working to balance Newey's design creativity with getting the design detail right. As such the Red Bull has shown far better reliability over the winter - which is not to say the cars have been totally reliable.

Flashes of pace were evident in the RB3, and the RB4 is a step forwards. The car sports a more complex diffuser, and early in testing it with the 'big fin'.

This oversized engine cover fin has been added to aid stability in side winds and under braking. Its unusual shape is to provide the surface area needed to deter the tail from sliding, while the cut out beneath the fin still feeds the rear wing when the car is turned. As this fin appeared so early and has remained on the car through testing, we can expect it to also appear at the first races.

Developments for Melbourne appeared late in Barcelona testing. The new front wing was allied to new bargeboards. The forward pair of smaller boards are joined along their lower edges to form a U-shape, and the larger rear boards feature serrations cut into the top edges.

Toyota TF108 (Toyota RVX-08)

Toyota has made a major direction change in its cars aerodynamics over the winter. The shift to large bargeboards leaves it behind the other teams in knowing how to best exploit them. Hence, the cars appearance at its launch and first tests was quite simple.

But as the winter has progressed, the car has started to evolve more complex details. At the last Barcelona test the bargeboards received two new extras - a small fin at its trailing edge and a new format of fin halfway up the board.

This fin points forwards and is placed as wide the bodywork regulations allow, and probably works in conjunction with the pod wing in sending the flow around the lower half of the sidepods.

Aiding this flow around the car are new front wishbones, which feature different profiles from the simpler version on the car at its launch. Also, the rear wing endplates have received a new undercut trailing edge.

Toyota has been critical of the SECU and its affect on the car. Both engineers and drivers had made comments suggesting that other teams are ahead of the curve in its implementation, and that Toyota has more work to do to release pace from the engine and control systems.

As the team is starting from a new point in the cars development its pace has not been blindingly fast, but some quick test times have been put in by Trulli, suggesting that the underlying package has latent pace. It may take a few races and upgrades to the car to realise this potential.

Toro Rosso STR2B (Ferrari 056)

As part of Red Bull Technologies, Toro Rosso is expected to release their version of the Red Bull Racing's RB4. The team has not yet rolled out the car, which is expected to be introduced after the opening races.

In the meantime the team is pressing on with an interim STR02, the 2007 car updated with a new gearbox, electronics and cockpit padding to meet the regulations. With such a well-known package, the car can be expected to run well in the opening races while other teams learn their new cars and iron out any reliability issues.

The lack of aero updates on the interim car will potentially hinder its pace, as the other teams have made bigger steps with their new cars.

Honda RA108 (Honday RA808E)

Much like Toyota, Honda has taken a step back to tread a new path aerodynamically. With the change in technical staff, which is now headed by Ross Brawn, the team will need time to understand the direction it needs to take and optimise the details of the new, larger barge boards on the car.

Thus, the car appears to be quite simple aerodynamically, the range of small pieces other teams adopt are yet to be proven on the new bodywork. Most of the testing has been with the same front wing and bargeboard arrangement, but rear wings and engine cover wings have been tried.

Most dramatic of all was the wavy rear wing, dubbed a 'W wing' due to its shape and the rumours of a radical Renault-style rear wing. The Honda rear wing also revived the Renault-style endplate moulded into the flap. This has only been used at lower drag tracks in the past, and its appearance on a higher downforce wing suggests that the team is chasing efficiency by lowering drag.

Honda is trying to match the profile of the rear wing to the differing flows approaching it. To aid these onset flows, the teams have tried McLaren-style viking wings and a new shelf wing. This latter detail is the aerofoil that sits between and ahead of the rear wheels, and is usually near horizontal, but Honda tested a version that sweeps upwards to meet the pointed tail of the engine cover.

In addition to the aerodynamics, Honda have struggled with the SECU. Paddock speculation indicates that the team have power delivery problems which are stressing the gearbox.

Other mechanical developments have been the appearance of large cubes of ballast added to the front bulkhead. Most teams have moved weight forwards this year to suit the Bridgestone tyres, but have done this with the cars' layout and packaging to allow conveniently-placed slabs of ballast low down in the car.

That fact that Honda needs to run ballast this far forwards suggests the car's basic layout may be flawed. The penalty for this ballast is that it is mounted higher up than usual, which affects the car's centre of gravity - which is key to cornering speed.

Already the team is stating that the 2008 season will be about building towards a more competitive 2009. How far the team will be prepared to go to develop the RA108 with such different rules coming in for 2009 will be the question.

If it does not understand why the old car isn't performing, it cannot go forwards with a new car. Thus, the development resources will need to be split. Clearly 2008 will be another hard year for the team.

Super Aguri (Honda RA807E)

With the apparent budget and ownership problems surrounding the team, it's unclear whether the team will be racing at all in 2008.

In testing the team has run a development of last year's lamentable Honda RA107. A new car is due to be launched which is expected to be little more than a definitive revision to the RA107. However Super Aguri has proven that it is able to take a basic car and develop it themselves with some degree of success - both of the cars to date have been reworked from either the 2003 Arrows A23 or the 2006 Honda RA106.

But any development is dictated by budget, and last year development halted early when a sponsor defaulted on payment. This year appears to present the team with the same problems as it faced in its first two years.

Force India VJM01 (Ferrari 056)

Force India has evolved from the Spyker outfit racing last year. While Spyker's promised investment soon fell short of what the team needed, the new ownership appears to be injecting the necessary funding.

An expanded technical department led by Mike Gascoyne has pragmatically updated the 2007 car, with new aerodynamics and some forthcoming mechanical updates. Despite the team attending most of the winter testing the definitive VJM01 only appeared late, and as such testing hasn't featured many new parts, but more updates are due for Melbourne.

In its limited track time the car has set good lap times, boosting confidence in the new package, but the team is realistic that the car does not yet have the aerodynamic efficiency to challenge the midfield.

There is clearly a limit to how far the team can push the two-year-old chassis with new aero and mechanical parts, but it has a race proven gearbox and a Ferrari engine, so finishes in the early part of the season will be critical in proving the package's worth.

McLaren MP4-23 (Mercedes FO108V)

Even at its launch the new McLaren MP4-23 was a more aggressive evolution than the more conservative Ferrari. There were few technical changes in its early tests, which allowed Ferrari to initially outpace the team. But by the last Barcelona test the team had the Melbourne aero package on the car, and the pace was eclipsing Ferrari on shorter runs.

It's still believed that Ferrari has the edge on longer, race-length stints, but the battle will be close.

McLaren has run a range of aero add-ons through the later tests, so the actual Melbourne configuration is far from clear. The basis of the updates centres on front wing, rear wing and bargeboard changes.

The new front wings use a much flatter centre section, both on the main wing and the bridge element. Additionally, one version of the bridge element has much more angled flaps, including a slot across part of the span to keep the flow attached under the more aggressive angled tips.

The bargeboard development has gone hand in hand with some sidepod inlet alterations. One version of the test car had different sidepod inlets, with slightly higher openings, and this has been matched by bargeboards with more of the top edge cutaway. The combined effect probably retains the same level of cooling; the smaller opening being offset by more flow from the smaller bargeboards.

Lastly, an all-new rear wing was debuted. This follows Renault's practice of merging the endplate into the flap, which reduces the drag created at the wing tip, making the car achieve higher top speeds for the same downforce.

Allied to the merged endplate was a very tall gurney flap. Curiously, gurney flaps are excluded from the car's maximum height, although agreements are in place to prevent teams going over the top in the size of these strips.

Gurney flaps are a device to prevent the wing stalling at steep angles of attack, and are also used as a tuning solution to create slightly different lift/drag ratios for the rear when going up a notch on the rear wing angle is not needed.

With the team running variations of these parts it was able to top the times in Barcelona. The team is now completing more straight-line testing in Menorca before setting off for Australia.

So narrow is the gap between the teams from last and during the winter tests, it is hard to tell which team will have the upper hand either in Melbourne or over the course of the season.

Much like last year we can expect the teams' relative competitiveness to vary between differing tracks, and as each team introduce new steps on the car.

We want to hear from you!

Let us know what you would like to see from us in the future.

Take our survey

- The Autosport.com Team

Read and post comments