2014 Design

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.
User avatar
FW17
232
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:56 am

Re: 2014 Design

Post

RicerDude wrote:
WilliamsF1 wrote:http://i1267.photobucket.com/albums/jj5 ... 9ff873.jpg

I guess it will be getting the air flow around the nose cone rather than under.
That front wing looks huge for a 2004 car or is it just me?
It was just a quick stretch of the 2003 wing to the current width. If it had to be done right then the central control section should have been cropped.

I was just trying to figure out what a narrow nose with wide wing would look like.

An RB3 would what I would consider a normal width of a nose, a brawn gp would be a wide nose.
Image
Image

I dont think that we would see a nose as wide as the fw26 again, but it would be fun to see it.

I would really like to know what the difference is in raising the narrow nose to 150 mm from reference plain against running at at reference plain

Image
Image

User avatar
turbof1
Moderator
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 8:36 pm
Location: MountDoom CFD Matrix

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Some air will still pass under the nose to the diffuser in the case of the renault. The older williams comes from an era where the benefits of a higher nose weren't known, so they just put the nose cone directly on the wing to get the biggest CoG benefit. Going several years forward to that (2004?) Renault, the benefit of getting air underneath the nose were clear, but simply not needed because the diffuser were back then much bigger, producing much more downforce, and the front DF was the limiting factor.
#AeroFrodo

Huntresa
Huntresa
54
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 10:33 am

Re: 2014 Design

Post

turbof1 wrote:Some air will still pass under the nose to the diffuser in the case of the renault. The older williams comes from an era where the benefits of a higher nose weren't known, so they just put the nose cone directly on the wing to get the biggest CoG benefit. Going several years forward to that (2004?) Renault, the benefit of getting air underneath the nose were clear, but simply not needed because the diffuser were back then much bigger, producing much more downforce, and the front DF was the limiting factor.
Actually it was during the Williams-Renault era it was first shown that a high nose was equal or better, with Benetton going high nose during this era or time, and then ppl following suite.

But it was more a high nose with the pelican bump under it like we have today just that the pelican nose was just how the chassis was back then.

It started with the B191:

Image

and then this is how high it was in 1995

Image



And by that time most top teams had gone the same route.

User avatar
Sebp
28
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 9:52 pm
Location: Surrounded

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Huntresa wrote:
It started with the B191:

http://cdn2.carsdata.net/pics/Benetton/ ... 191-03.jpg
Sorry to correct but this Tyrrell 019 (1990) by Harvey Postlethwaite started it all:

Image
No smartphone was involved in creating this message.

Huntresa
Huntresa
54
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 10:33 am

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Ah yeah i forgot about Tyrrells funky FW pylon position on the high nose. Somehow my brain didnt see it as a high nose but just thought bout standard pylon position on high nose.

Edit: Off-topic but the FWs on the Tyrrells from this time are funky with a nice inwash desgin.

From the 020

Image

User avatar
FW17
232
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:56 am

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Huntresa wrote:
Image

My eyes are on that flat floor behind it =P~

User avatar
turbof1
Moderator
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 8:36 pm
Location: MountDoom CFD Matrix

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Are teams currently allowed to remove the neutral section in their wings? I guess not, but if so we might get such Tyrell wings in 2014 again.
#AeroFrodo

Huntresa
Huntresa
54
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 10:33 am

Re: 2014 Design

Post

turbof1 wrote:Are teams currently allowed to remove the neutral section in their wings? I guess not, but if so we might get such Tyrell wings in 2014 again.
they aren't allowed to remove cause I think the rules say you gotta have bodywork there but neutral.

but if the rules had been written as if the area just had to be neautral I guess we could have gotten tyrrell wing in 09 alrdy

User avatar
Blackout
783
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 3:12 am

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Knowing that the engines will lose 2 cylinders and more than 5000 tr/min, and that the Turbo and the energy recovery units will need fresh air for power and cooling, how do you think the different radiators and the air intakes will look in 2014 ? (size, position etc)

And why will they remove the beam wing ? will they replace it by a central pillar or a neutral part like the FW's central section ?

Neno
Neno
-24
Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 12:41 am

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Blackout wrote:Knowing that the engines will lose 2 cylinders and more than 5000 tr/min, and that the Turbo and the energy recovery units will need fresh air for power and cooling, how do you think the different radiators and the air intakes will look in 2014 ? (size, position etc)

And why will they remove the beam wing ? will they replace it by a central pillar or a neutral part like the FW's central section ?
if i read it carefully somewhere, there is no beam wing in 2014 rules. but i am very interested how will sidepods looks in
combination with gearboxes. will some teams make extreme designs with small gearbox and small sidepods (maybe with new engines cause unreliability, overheating) or will they make just basic car design to work on reliability and upgrade car later. i think very interesting year will come, just i hope FIA will not screw up like it did 2009!

Huntresa
Huntresa
54
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 10:33 am

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Blackout wrote:Knowing that the engines will lose 2 cylinders and more than 5000 tr/min, and that the Turbo and the energy recovery units will need fresh air for power and cooling, how do you think the different radiators and the air intakes will look in 2014 ? (size, position etc)

And why will they remove the beam wing ? will they replace it by a central pillar or a neutral part like the FW's central section ?
No beam wing at all, thats it.

Huntresa
Huntresa
54
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 10:33 am

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Neno wrote:
Blackout wrote:Knowing that the engines will lose 2 cylinders and more than 5000 tr/min, and that the Turbo and the energy recovery units will need fresh air for power and cooling, how do you think the different radiators and the air intakes will look in 2014 ? (size, position etc)

And why will they remove the beam wing ? will they replace it by a central pillar or a neutral part like the FW's central section ?
if i read it carefully somewhere, there is no beam wing in 2014 rules. but i am very interested how will sidepods looks in
combination with gearboxes. will some teams make extreme designs with small gearbox and small sidepods (maybe with new engines cause unreliability, overheating) or will they make just basic car design to work on reliability and upgrade car later. i think very interesting year will come, just i hope FIA will not screw up like it did 2009!
You mean DD as the screw up or ? I dont count that as a screw up, but more of what f1 is about, finding those loopholes and finding that little extra.

User avatar
turbof1
Moderator
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 8:36 pm
Location: MountDoom CFD Matrix

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Sauber will have an advantage concerning sidepod design. The radiator and packaging designs can be carried over. Infact count the complete car as a stepping stone between this generation of cars and the next generation starting next year.
Last edited by turbof1 on Tue Apr 30, 2013 12:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
#AeroFrodo

Neno
Neno
-24
Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 12:41 am

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Huntresa wrote:
Neno wrote:
Blackout wrote:Knowing that the engines will lose 2 cylinders and more than 5000 tr/min, and that the Turbo and the energy recovery units will need fresh air for power and cooling, how do you think the different radiators and the air intakes will look in 2014 ? (size, position etc)

And why will they remove the beam wing ? will they replace it by a central pillar or a neutral part like the FW's central section ?
if i read it carefully somewhere, there is no beam wing in 2014 rules. but i am very interested how will sidepods looks in
combination with gearboxes. will some teams make extreme designs with small gearbox and small sidepods (maybe with new engines cause unreliability, overheating) or will they make just basic car design to work on reliability and upgrade car later. i think very interesting year will come, just i hope FIA will not screw up like it did 2009!
You mean DD as the screw up or ? I dont count that as a screw up, but more of what f1 is about, finding those loopholes and finding that little extra.
KERS and DD. First KERS because they didnt restrict it to everyone to use it or ban it. And DD was needed to be banned (and should was) because regulations in 2009. are meant to slow the cars and remove all those little wings around the car, not made them faster. Because of those two mistakes, Red Bull become force in F1 (they didnt have it cause car with KERS had balance problems on braking), and they could easier upgrade DD on their car then rest of teams (for same reason car's balance). FIA wanted to stop dominations like ferrari's and renault's, and in irony created Red Bull domination.
So i just want FIA to stop meddling in F1 and make strict regulations rules about what is illegal and what is legal. I just dont want in 2014. that some team driving on track second and half faster then rest...

User avatar
FW17
232
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:56 am

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Huntresa wrote:
Blackout wrote:Knowing that the engines will lose 2 cylinders and more than 5000 tr/min, and that the Turbo and the energy recovery units will need fresh air for power and cooling, how do you think the different radiators and the air intakes will look in 2014 ? (size, position etc)

And why will they remove the beam wing ? will they replace it by a central pillar or a neutral part like the FW's central section ?
No beam wing at all, thats it.
FIA does not define a beam wing or does it? My understanding was that it is the wing support and its shape is a result of lack of regulations. It is similar to the suspension wishbone where the shape and dimension is not defined.

Wishbone started like this
Image
but now
Image

New 2014 regulations does not say anything like the rear wing is to be center supported, hence beam wing is not banned.
Neno wrote:
Blackout wrote:Knowing that the engines will lose 2 cylinders and more than 5000 tr/min, and that the Turbo and the energy recovery units will need fresh air for power and cooling, how do you think the different radiators and the air intakes will look in 2014 ? (size, position etc)

And why will they remove the beam wing ? will they replace it by a central pillar or a neutral part like the FW's central section ?
if i read it carefully somewhere, there is no beam wing in 2014 rules. but i am very interested how will sidepods looks in
combination with gearboxes. will some teams make extreme designs with small gearbox and small sidepods (maybe with new engines cause unreliability, overheating) or will they make just basic car design to work on reliability and upgrade car later. i think very interesting year will come, just i hope FIA will not screw up like it did 2009!
I am quiet sure that the radiator and inter cooler will be arranged as it was in the last turbo era or like today's lmp cars for a starter and then evolve into something newer. But these below pictures are of upright radiators, while majority of F1 teams with exception of Ferrari and Sauber have moved to inclined radiators. So we could see the teams move back to upright radiators or something new.

Image