A low-nose for modern F1

Post here information about your own engineering projects, including but not limited to building your own car or designing a virtual car through CAD.
roon
439
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2016 6:04 pm

A low-nose for modern F1

Post by roon » Wed Oct 18, 2017 11:14 pm

Hearing of the rumored demise of front-axle KERS within the next evolution of the formula, and considering the technology's apparent packaging difficulty within a high-nose chassis, I began to wonder what a low-nose car, in the modern context, would look like. A low-nose chassis would allow the packaging of a motor & drivetrain below front-wheel centerline, rather than above it.

Dropping the nose down introduces various cascading after-effects, perhaps most significantly to the aerodynamic philosophy. Low-noses were specifically abandoned more than two decades ago in the interest of improving aerodynamic efficiency. A return to such a layout would entail not-necessarily a return to reduced efficiency, but would certainly entail a need to drastically alter the aero philosophy.

While illustrating this idea I also came upon a different interpretation of the 'halo' cockpit intrusion protection device, due out out next year.

Summary of the features proposed:

-front chassis bulkhead placed below front wheel centerline
-MGU-K within chassis, between front wheels
-relocated front wing placed behind the now lowered suspension arms*
-no-bodywork-above-engine provision for visual interest
-cockpit intrusion protection in the form a robust convex mirror-bar
-no bodywork above tire height (except airbox, roll hoop, and mirror-bar) to improve rearward visibility
-diffusor termination ahead of rear axle to accommodate lowered rear wing

Image

*Suspension arms below wheel centerline would interfere with the low pressure expansion region behind the rear wing. I chose to place the front wing behind the suspension arms & half-shafts so that they interfere with the high pressure upper surface of the wing. Probably not ideal. A more optimized front wing & suspension arm complex could surely be arranged.

Just_a_fan
468
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:37 pm

Re: A low-nose for modern F1

Post by Just_a_fan » Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:25 am

It would be more simple to just go for a larger diameter wheel and have in-wheel hub generators as part of a regen braking system. Motor/generators would allow for four wheel drive too which might be an interesting change.
Turbo says "Dumpster sounds so much more classy. It's the diamond of the cesspools." oh, and "The Dutch fans are drunk. Maybe"

Tommy Cookers
510
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 3:55 pm

Re: A low-nose for modern F1

Post by Tommy Cookers » Thu Oct 19, 2017 9:25 am

that would be importing another level of covert 4 wheel ABS and traction control effect
a pretence of neutrality based on steady-state characteristics - but the dynamic characteristic are inherently ABS/TC emulatory
if the load suddenly reduces the mapped torque (tending to wheelspin or locking) will not be developed as the synchronicity will fail
this would be happening in a wheel load specific way and so 'steer' when cornering

and the much heavier wheels would be much more dangerous when detached in a crash

bill shoe
231
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 7:18 am
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA

Re: A low-nose for modern F1

Post by bill shoe » Thu Oct 19, 2017 2:06 pm

like much of it, especially open engine bay.

Nonserviam85
10
Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 10:21 am

Re: A low-nose for modern F1

Post by Nonserviam85 » Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:29 pm

Just_a_fan wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:25 am
It would be more simple to just go for a larger diameter wheel and have in-wheel hub generators as part of a regen braking system. Motor/generators would allow for four wheel drive too which might be an interesting change.
Adding all this unsprung weight will drive the chassis engineers crazy. The handling will be a nightmare. In-wheel motor-generators might be ok for trams, trains and Priuses but it is an absolute nightmare for motorsports especially Formula 1.

Zynerji
60
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: A low-nose for modern F1

Post by Zynerji » Thu Dec 28, 2017 1:45 am

Tommy Cookers wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 9:25 am
that would be importing another level of covert 4 wheel ABS and traction control effect
a pretence of neutrality based on steady-state characteristics - but the dynamic characteristic are inherently ABS/TC emulatory
if the load suddenly reduces the mapped torque (tending to wheelspin or locking) will not be developed as the synchronicity will fail
this would be happening in a wheel load specific way and so 'steer' when cornering

and the much heavier wheels would be much more dangerous when detached in a crash
I'm ok with ABS of its recharging the batteries. AWD with vector steering, please!