Boundary layer suction

[matt21]

The regulations allow for two intakes to feed the engines.
I´m thinking if this could be used for boundary layer suction in order to decrease drag.

I´m thinking in placing these ducts as slots on top of the side pods.

Anyone thinking the same way?

Rules specifying these intakes:

5.14.1
With the exception of incidental leakage through joints or cooling ducts in the inlet system (either into or out of the system), all air entering the engine must enter the bodywork through a maximum of two inlets which are located :
a) Between the front of the cockpit entry template and a point 500mm forward of the rear wheel centre line longitudinally.
b) No less than 200mm above the reference plane vertically.
c) On vertical cross-sections normal to the car centre line.

Furthermore, any such inlets must be visible in their entirety when viewed from the front of the car and without the driver seated in the car.

[Per]

Do you think the drag reduction would be larger than the power loss resulting from this less-than-ideal intake positioning? I doubt it.

[Greg Locock]

Could you use this to accelerate the flow under the car?

[matt21]

Do you think the drag reduction would be larger than the power loss resulting from this less-than-ideal intake positioning? I doubt it.

IMO the "ideal" position is depending on what you want to achieve.
If you can reduce the airbox size, it should give you better flow to the rear wing.

Regarding the drag reduction some CFD could be done. But I'm not used to it. For me it is a theoretical approach at the moment.

Could you use this to accelerate the flow under the car?

The rules say the intakes have to be a minimum of 200mm above the reference plane. So this possibility is gone.

[zac510]

I suppose you mean something like the Benetton B188/B189, but with the ducts placed further rearwards?

What is the air inlet speed likely to be? (depending on the car speed, of course). Perhaps intake air could be used to help accelerate cooling air through the radiator duct.

[matt21]

I´m thinking more in terms of horizontal slots running across the sidepod.

[godlameroso]

Given the height of the rear wing and the space between the air box and rear wing. I'd be willing to bet that the rear wing is less affected by the airbox than you think. Particularly with the way the body work is shaped.

[matt21]

But 2017 the RW should be lower again. And a TC engine is not depending on ram air.
But maybe it is just a silly idea of mine

[godlameroso]

No, it's not silly, don't think like that, it's just hard to go a different route, not that a different route wouldn't be better, it's just that packaging wise it's a real challenge. You're correct in thinking the intake is not as important with a turbo. Again you have to deal with packaging restrictions, in other words while your idea could yield some gains in through body aero, the cost and implementation may make some other direction more worth pursuing. Afterall you still have to have the roll hoop above the driver, incorporating the intake and the roll hoop makes sense from packaging standpoint.

[wuzak]

Ram air intake could have a small effect on the energy recovery of the MGUH.

I'm not sure what the ram effect would be in terms of pressure, but any reduction would mean more turbine power can be used by the MGUH.

[zac510]

I like the idea but I wouldn't limit it to boundary layer suction because that might be a solution for something that's not really a problem.
Anywhere a bit of energy from the intake stream can used to improve other performance characteristics could be interesting to study.
I considered that maybe some of that front tire wake could be cleared up by sucking it into the engine, but then you'd be back to the kind of situation we had with blown diffusers where you have more aerodynamic performance while on-throttle.

[matt21]

I considered that maybe some of that front tire wake could be cleared up by sucking it into the engine, but then you'd be back to the kind of situation we had with blown diffusers where you have more aerodynamic performance while on-throttle.

that´s the reason why I came to the idea of using this to reduce the boundary layer to minimize drag at high speed.
But I like your idea of reducing tire wake effect.

Could it be used to create a kind of Coanda effect in order to direct airflow in a specific direction?

[MrNoo]

Gliders use boundary layer suction, well some do, not all. DG 300 has a line of tiny holes all along the wing and a duct in a low pressure area to give the "suction" they use "turbulators" to, namely Zig-zag tape.
If i remember correctly the tiny holes are very prone to becoming blocked, if you wax the wing, you have to be careful to not fill the holes with wax. Glider pilots call them a "blown wing" but they are in fact not blown at all, the holes are on the underside of the wing 3/4 of the chord or even further back.

[Vyssion]

Do you think the drag reduction would be larger than the power loss resulting from this less-than-ideal intake positioning? I doubt it.

This.

Plus, once you remove the boundary layer, another will begin to form immediately after the suction device. You would of course have "some" reduction in the viscous drag, but pressure drag would remain almost untouched.

[matt21]

Seeing the pictures below and having thaught about this post here viewtopic.php?f=12&t=25969&start=360#p680709 I would like to revive the idea of boundary layer suction