My understanding was that Ferrari went down a completely different route to everyone else, in that they were doing all the cooling out the back of the sidepods. This, as I understood it, was facilitated by the radiators being mounted on their sides.mx_tifoso wrote:Hopefully I'm understanding you correctly, but I don't think there is a need for a change in the radiator layout. We've seen them (and other teams) change the cooling outlet configurations within a GP weekend so I doubt it requires such a drastic update to the entire cooling system.
Although wasn't the gaping hole in the engine cover somewhat related to the gearbox oil cooler being mounted up there last year?
I wouldn't count on that Garry Andersons statement. In Ferraris case he determined mixing cool and hot gases is a no no, later this year, he came to conclusion that it is a good thing when Williams introduced their new exhaust layout and cooling.f1316 wrote:My understanding was that Ferrari went down a completely different route to everyone else, in that they were doing all the cooling out the back of the sidepods. This, as I understood it, was facilitated by the radiators being mounted on their sides.mx_tifoso wrote:Hopefully I'm understanding you correctly, but I don't think there is a need for a change in the radiator layout. We've seen them (and other teams) change the cooling outlet configurations within a GP weekend so I doubt it requires such a drastic update to the entire cooling system.
Although wasn't the gaping hole in the engine cover somewhat related to the gearbox oil cooler being mounted up there last year?
Gary Anderson said this: Not only did the bodywork affect the airflow there detrimentally, that problem was exacerbated because they are also using the rear of the sidepod as a radiator-air exit.
Radiator air is hot and slow - exactly what you don't need somewhere you want fast airflow.
The new bodywork also features radiator outlets near the exhaust exit, when I think in an ideal world you'd use the back of the engine cover for that, as Red Bull did last year. "
So I presumed that they would have to go with the "conventional" angle of the radiators in order to do the "conventional" cooling through the engine cover. But perhaps I'm wrong.
if the composite suspension members are hollow as shown in this most excellent thread viewtopic.php?f=6&t=11557#p295751, then the buckling strength could be increased by thickening the walls by adding plies inside the members. this is not the most efficient way to increase the section properties against buckling. but it leaves alone both the attach geometry at the ends that has to mate to other parts and the external airflow shape.mx_tifoso wrote:...but is wondering how the suspension is technically strengthened? My guess is changing (strengthening) the parts where buckling or snapping is most likely to occur, mainly around the uprights. But yet leaving the dimensions of the arms and rods alone.
I have the same impression but it's difficult judging from this image. Unfortunately I haven't found better images.Mr.G wrote:Is it me or we can see a quite big rear center cooling outlet (half of it).
Here's a better shot. Massa ran a large open hole like this while Fernando ran the smaller ones. But I'm pretty sure that was Free Practice only.Mr.G wrote:Is it me or we can see a quite big rear center cooling outlet (half of it).
They changed the size, but it was always thereHemsy wrote:An engine cover with a cooling outlet would not facilitate a new radiator layout. Last year RBR alternated between an engine cover with and without a cooling outlet depending on the climatic conditions and the type of circuit. Do you think they changed their entire radiator layout?