BMW Sauber F1.06

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter does not belong here.
manchild
manchild
22
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 9:54 am

Post

I think that design of nose derives from intention to make no-keel suspension with least problems for geometry. That is why I think BMW tried to lower the whole front end as much as possible. It can't be seen from all angles but that front end reminds me very much on mutant between stepped front ends used on Minardi and Jordan in 2000 (stepped as not constant decline but with some sort of “valley” between the highest and the lowest point of the nose.

Image
Image
Image

dumrick
dumrick
0
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2004 12:36 pm
Location: Portugal

Post

Exactly. Now it's obvious that it is a no-keel, but a compromise seems to have been tried, since the lower wishbones rise a lot less, compared with the MP4-20 and the TF105B/106.

You are the 2.nd person that compares their front end with a Minardi's. I'm sure that can't be a good thing... :twisted:

User avatar
Spencifer_Murphy
0
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 10:29 pm
Location: London, England, UK

Post

The front end does remind me of the 2000 Minardi (what an ugly nose assembly btw)...with tht terrible paint scheme...fluroesent yellow lol.

Oh well...if it works we'll all be looking like fools.
Silence is golden when you don't know a good answer.

Guest
Guest
0

Post

Put simply, Toyota did not had the best looking car in their first season, however the current car looks much better and aerodynamically sound.

You should appreciate that designing a car from scratch for the first time is not an easy task especially when it has to meet the rules. I can assure you that BMW will have a much better looking car next season.

The front nose does not look great as many of the people have mentioned, however I can say for sure that It does produce the required performance in terms aerodynamics other wise it would not look like that.

If you are an Aerodynamicist then can you please explain how it is poorly designed?

polar_agva@hotmail.com
polar_agva@hotmail.com
0

Post

:oops: twin keel????..it's stiff but less effective on bumpy tracks..such as spa...hope they get tings rite b4 the starts.. :oops:

dumrick
dumrick
0
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2004 12:36 pm
Location: Portugal

Post

Anonymous wrote:The front nose does not look great as many of the people have mentioned, however I can say for sure that It does produce the required performance in terms aerodynamics other wise it would not look like that.
Could it be that we have F1 engineers posting here as guests??? :shock:

User avatar
Spencifer_Murphy
0
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 10:29 pm
Location: London, England, UK

Post

You should appreciate that designing a car from scratch for the first time is not an easy task
BMW did not design this car from scratch, the car was designed by sauber, and would theoretically be called the C25.

But i must agree with you that they wouldn't have designed such an absurd nose without reason! there must be a benifit. Although, what the wind-tunnel says isn't always correct....just asked Williams about the FW26....they though THAT nose hasd reasoning...and it did...it just didnt work lol.
Silence is golden when you don't know a good answer.

Guest
Guest
0

Post

The car has been designed from scratch. Sauber used Ferrari's design solutions on their old car, however this BMW does not show any aspects similar to the old Sauber.

DiESEL[P]
DiESEL[P]
0

Post

ummm, it's an evolution of the old sauber, the team hasn't even changed mate, just renamed...

User avatar
Spencifer_Murphy
0
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 10:29 pm
Location: London, England, UK

Post

The car has been designed from scratch. Sauber used Ferrari's design solutions on their old car, however this BMW does not show any aspects similar to the old Sauber.
Oh i get what you mean, its a new design ethos over the C24...sorry I thought u meant that the BMW team have designed this car over the winter just themselves...no input from Sauber lol...my mistake!

But yeah really its a Sauber C25 lol...kinda like the RB1 was really a Jag R6 hehe.

But i will be interested to see how ity goes. Like i sed, they wouldn't make a strange design without their data showing that there are benifits...but data showing benifits doesnt always mean that there are benifits ON TRACK...so it will be interesting to see how the BMW Sauber will fayre. To be honest I'm expecting it to score more pionts in '06 than the RB2.
Silence is golden when you don't know a good answer.

TryHard
TryHard
9
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 10:46 am

Post

The thing we need to remember with the nose, is that it's not so much about the topsides, but the underneath.
I read in an interview somewhere, that Willy Rampf has tried to keep the underside of the chassis as flat as possible. Add to this the restrictions placed onthe chassis construction by the FIA (the front two bulkheads have to be certain minimum dimensions) and you'll end up with something like this.

A lot of the other teams seem to have a flat top side, and sloping underside. I guess it means BMW are upside down :p

It does seem there is a bigger gap between the upper and lower wishbones on this car than other zero keelers, and I guess this may aid the suspension setup.

Still, seems to have gone well in testing so far

Ed

kilcoo316
kilcoo316
28
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 3:45 pm
Location: Kilcoo, Ireland

Post

Anonymous wrote:The front nose does not look great as many of the people have mentioned, however I can say for sure that It does produce the required performance in terms aerodynamics other wise it would not look like that.

If you are an Aerodynamicist then can you please explain how it is poorly designed?
Well....


Normally you can guess at the front end efficiency from how it aligns with the front suspension arms - good wings have it, bad don't, but with the suspension geometry of the BMW being weird it doesn't really apply here.


The wing doesn't appear to be designed with the interference of the monocoque/nose in mind, the 2nd element is a simple curve, with no real adjustment for the effects of the nose. I tend not to be enthusiastic about a wing design where the wake is hitting the monocoque/nose at a significant angle of incidence - easy to see in the pic below - it would tend to create unwanted turbulence which will affect the flow onto the splitter and thus the whole floor/diffuser of the car.

Image

Obviously, no-one can tell how efficient their wing profiles are - thats simply impossible without simulation or experiment.


As for making a qualititative prediction on the downforce levels... :lol: :lol: :lol: if anyone comes along and says otherwise (unless they actually work for the team in question) - they are talking pure brown stuff.

luisandregg
luisandregg
0
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 7:53 pm
Location: Campinas, Brazil

Post

Monocoque: Moulded carbon fibre and aluminium honeycomb composite monocoque, manufactured by the Renault F1 Team and designed for maximum strength and stiffness with minimum weight. Engine installed as a fully-stressed member.
Can't BMW manufacture their own monocoque?

User avatar
Scuderia_Russ
0
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2004 9:24 pm
Location: Motorsport Valley, England.

Post

Actually if you want to get pedantic, this years BMW can trace its roots back to the F2003GA!

manchild
manchild
22
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 9:54 am

Post

BMW monocoque is manufactured in Sauber facilites not by Renault F1 Team. Where did you get that thing you quoted? :?