Mikey F1 - 2012 Innovations

[MIKEY_!]

I've been having a few ideas on some innovations for next year but as I have no experience and no access to CFD I'd appreciate some opinions on them.

First up, we know intakes for driver cooling are allowed in the nose tip but could they feed other things as well, like the radiators. I know it's a long way to pipe the air but there is less turbulence around the nose tip and that could allow a smaller intake + less drag. Is that allowed in F1 and would it even work?

Also could you make the front wing like a venturi tunnel (but a lot smaller obviously). Would the lift at the leading edge be to much (thinking of the leverage here) or was this just banned ages ago.

More ideas to come...

[godlameroso]

FW's are already diffuser/venturi like far more than resembling a mere aero-foil. What I see happening for next year is all about the main bodywork, the biggest area where teams can gain performance is in the sidepods, and the way the bodywork converges at the rear of the car. Everything is gonna center around tuning the trailing wake vortex of the car with the bodywork, beam wing, and diffuser. The front wing regulations have barely changed since 2009, so most teams have very sophisticated and evolved front wings; in fact, I'll bet that most cars produce far more front downforce than rear. I also see teams pushing the weight distribution towards the rear, since there is no longer a mandated distribution.

[Sonic59]

Mikey, please, draw pictures.

[MIKEY_!]

Something like this for the FW.


(Cross section, no flaps) Sounds like the current wings aren't very different anyway.

Nose intake is hard to represent in MS Paint . Think something like this but much bigger.


The air would have to get past the driver/suspension, through the tub and would mean much bulkier bodywork around the splitter, under the drivers legs.

[Sonic59]

First about wing:
Basically multi-element wing has higher max Cl:

But u also need fw to control flow around the whole car. So its very difficult to say whether your idea would work or not.
Secondly about nose intake:
It would be very difficult to design such a system due to it complexity. And It would also cause a huge flow energy loss due to friction. Friction would also cause additional drag. So I dont think its realistic.

[MIKEY_!]

Thanks sonic. PS does that mean a multi element floor would have a higher max CI too???

For my next potentially time wasting idea:
Can the RW endplate have a hole cut in it so that air would spill from the upper side of the wing to the lower. This would create a vortex along the underside of the wing to increase DF either by Bernoulli or by allowing the wing to have greater AoA. Also serves the same purpose as the slots usually located higher up and blows the wing.



Another question. Are teams still allowed to run inverted V shaped beam wings like this?

They would aid stability just as V shaped wings do on aircraft. Can other wings be angled in a similar way, thinking mainly about the RW, some teams have a cascade like that too.

[godlameroso]

Having the beam wing angled like that does more to reduce drag than increase out and out downforce. When two surfaces join at a 90 degree angle it causes turbulence/drag decreasing or increasing the angle at which two surfaces join decreases drag(to a point), and improves the quality of the flow. The reason teams use slots on the end-plates is precisely to ameliorate some of the drag caused the uneven pressure build up at the area near the end plates.

Something to take note of: you want the most efficient downforce, that is you want the most consistent flow possible, that will net you the most downforce for a given amount of drag. You can have a wing with tons of downforce, but that downforce could be very draggy and the flow prone to separation, so it's window of operation ends up being very narrow. As with most things car related, it's a compromise, you can give up a little downforce, but shed a lot of drag, as well as increase the working window for the wing, so that it works at lower speeds. This all depends on which shape you use of course.

[ESPImperium]

Something like this for the FW.


(Cross section, no flaps) Sounds like the current wings aren't very different anyway.

Nose intake is hard to represent in MS Paint :lol: . Think something like this but much bigger.


The air would have to get past the driver/suspension, through the tub and would mean much bulkier bodywork around the splitter, under the drivers legs.

Those nose air intakes already cool the brake fluid and power steering fluid units at the front of the car. As well as keep the driver cool at a relativly small cost to aero performance.

I am thinking there wont be many innovations on the 2012 cars, more of an optomising of what they already have to the 2 big changes, the low 2009 style nose cone and the return of periscope exhausts. However i think there will be one big change in another area that hasnt been already mentioned, and that is the abolishment of the mandatory weight distrubution that was in for 2011 just so everyone couldnt luck into thje Pirellis sweet spot and gain an advantage.

Im expecting the grid to be alot tighter than this year, probably to within 5 seconds front to back and not 7 to 7.5 as it presently is.

[raymondu999]

There aren't that many radical innovations that are still within the realm of possibility now though is there? Most innovations just get banned these days.

I'm all for stable regulations; but God do I hate restrictive regs

ESP - was the mandatory weight distribution not reinstated until the end of 2012?

I think for the most part; the aerodynamic and mechanical designs of the leading cars have almost reached a saturation point in terms of how much more juice you can squeeze out of it. More gains I think will be had by improved tyre usage - in terms of heating them quickly; getting maximum grip; and not wearing them out/overheating them. I think that's where McLaren have been very strong since Germany; they can switch on tyres very fast, but yet have very little tyre heat deg.

Also; as Red Bull are doing this year; I think most time gains will be had by optimizing your aero package race by race for each specific circuit

[MIKEY_!]

Not sure when increasing DF came into the beam wing argument. It's to make the car more stable, nothing more.

Actually it might help shift air in behind the rear tires like Mclarens endplates do.

ESP: I'm not trying to predict innovations for next year I'm just coming up with stuff that I think might just be legal and a perhaps even beneficial and being modest enough to ask those who actually know what they are doing for some opinions. I agree there probably won't be anything revolutionary next year, just solid engineering.

Those nose air intakes already cool the brake fluid and power steering fluid units at the front of the car. As well as keep the driver cool

Not especially strenuous.

[godlameroso]

Not sure when increasing DF came into the beam wing argument. It's to make the car more stable, nothing more.

Actually it might help shift air in behind the rear tires like Mclarens endplates do.

ESP: I'm not trying to predict innovations for next year I'm just coming up with stuff that I think might just be legal and a perhaps even beneficial and being modest enough to ask those who actually know what they are doing for some opinions. I agree there probably won't be anything revolutionary next year, just solid engineering.

Those nose air intakes already cool the brake fluid and power steering fluid units at the front of the car. As well as keep the driver cool

Not especially strenuous.

The beam wing influences the trailing wake vortex, and stability you speak of comes from downforce, more negative lift in the rear = more stability. I assume teams are doing plenty of studies to get the shape of the monocoque perfect, as it's something that really can't be changed mid season. Just about everything else can be adjusted and modified to a point. Whoever can generate the most rear downforce will most likely be the fastest car on the grid, because most cars already generate more downforce in the front than the rear.

[MIKEY_!]

By stability I mean side to side motion (rocking). It is commonly used in aviation for wings to be V-shaped when view from the front. When the plane banks the lower side of the V is upright and produces more lift than the higher side. This difference causes the plane to level out. It is a common practice. This must of course be and inverted V as the lift is inverted too.

[raymondu999]

I was just thinking too that you were talking about actually providing lateral forces with the v-beam wing; rather than downforce. But would that not provide a deadly difficult car to drive in crosswinds? Any sign of crosswind would through it hideously off balance

[MIKEY_!]

Maybe, works well enough on planes (actually helps in a crosswind), just thought it might be useful on a car. + the beam wing is fairly sheltered.

[raymondu999]

I'm not saying you're wrong mate; I certainly don't know how that would fare in a crosswind. But in my view it would be affected quite badly in a crosswind... maybe others can comment?