Hypothetical: Side pod design with LESS restrictions?

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.
rileykirn
rileykirn
2
Joined: 17 Jan 2017, 15:12

Hypothetical: Side pod design with LESS restrictions?

Post

OK, Hypothetical here as I hate how restrictive the rules have become through the years & yearn for the time when cars were competitive(I know this wasn't always the case) even though they looked different & had completely different design concepts. In my opinion side pod design (not the underbody/floor) should be a LOT more open to variance & design opportunity in the new 2021 rule set. I miss side radiator vents, chimneys, NACA ducts, etc. The Bennett B186 entire side pod of louvers, the Mclaren Mp4/15 Chimneys, all the various Ferrari side pod opening shapes. These were all examples of designers allowed to envision their own, creative solutions.

What would the side pods of the 2021 cars look like if above the new floors the only restriction was a dimensioned, rectangles box, starting from the entry to the floor, as high as the edge of the opening to the driver cell, as wide as the new floor dimensions allow & ending at the front edge of the back tire? Safety structures/spars stay as is. Anything allowed within this box. Aggressive side pod shapes, airflow openings, turning vanes, chimneys, vents, winglets, etc., All other rules stay the same.

User avatar
Big Tea
99
Joined: 24 Dec 2017, 20:57

Re: Hypothetical: Side pod design with LESS restrictions?

Post

rileykirn wrote: ↑
04 Jan 2020, 18:40
OK, Hypothetical here as I hate how restrictive the rules have become through the years & yearn for the time when cars were competitive(I know this wasn't always the case) even though they looked different & had completely different design concepts. In my opinion side pod design (not the underbody/floor) should be a LOT more open to variance & design opportunity in the new 2021 rule set. I miss side radiator vents, chimneys, NACA ducts, etc. The Bennett B186 entire side pod of louvers, the Mclaren Mp4/15 Chimneys, all the various Ferrari side pod opening shapes. These were all examples of designers allowed to envision their own, creative solutions.

What would the side pods of the 2021 cars look like if above the new floors the only restriction was a dimensioned, rectangles box, starting from the entry to the floor, as high as the edge of the opening to the driver cell, as wide as the new floor dimensions allow & ending at the front edge of the back tire? Safety structures/spars stay as is. Anything allowed within this box. Aggressive side pod shapes, airflow openings, turning vanes, chimneys, vents, winglets, etc., All other rules stay the same.
So, without restrictions, could the 'inside' sidepod be used as a wing surface(s) or venturi?
When arguing with a fool, be sure the other person is not doing the same thing.

User avatar
Zynerji
110
Joined: 27 Jan 2016, 16:14

Re: Hypothetical: Side pod design with LESS restrictions?

Post

I'd like to see if they can harness the air/water type tube intercooler tech to replace the ancient fin type radiators completely.

wesley123
wesley123
204
Joined: 23 Feb 2008, 17:55

Re: Hypothetical: Side pod design with LESS restrictions?

Post

rileykirn wrote: ↑
04 Jan 2020, 18:40
OK, Hypothetical here as I hate how restrictive the rules have become through the years & yearn for the time when cars were competitive(I know this wasn't always the case) even though they looked different & had completely different design concepts. In my opinion side pod design (not the underbody/floor) should be a LOT more open to variance & design opportunity in the new 2021 rule set. I miss side radiator vents, chimneys, NACA ducts, etc. The Bennett B186 entire side pod of louvers, the Mclaren Mp4/15 Chimneys, all the various Ferrari side pod opening shapes. These were all examples of designers allowed to envision their own, creative solutions.

What would the side pods of the 2021 cars look like if above the new floors the only restriction was a dimensioned, rectangles box, starting from the entry to the floor, as high as the edge of the opening to the driver cell, as wide as the new floor dimensions allow & ending at the front edge of the back tire? Safety structures/spars stay as is. Anything allowed within this box. Aggressive side pod shapes, airflow openings, turning vanes, chimneys, vents, winglets, etc., All other rules stay the same.
Probably not all that different. Sidepod development has evolved a lot since 2008, adding the flip ups/chimneys/winglets from that era would probably be counter-effective these days.
"Bite my shiny metal ass" - Bender

Just_a_fan
Just_a_fan
591
Joined: 31 Jan 2010, 20:37

Re: Hypothetical: Side pod design with LESS restrictions?

Post

If the rules limit everything else, the sidepods will converge to a single design.
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.

User avatar
Zynerji
110
Joined: 27 Jan 2016, 16:14

Re: Hypothetical: Side pod design with LESS restrictions?

Post

Just_a_fan wrote: ↑
04 Jan 2020, 23:59
If the rules limit everything else, the sidepods will converge to a single design.
Like finding the hypotenuse of two triangles that have the same length of sides... I definitely agree.

rileykirn
rileykirn
2
Joined: 17 Jan 2017, 15:12

Re: Hypothetical: Side pod design with LESS restrictions?

Post

I have to politely disagree. While I understand the logic of your points in regards to everything else being limited & thus impacting, ultimately, the side pod design, I think it is impossible to say that definitively because the rules offer almost NO flexibility for creativity, they mandate how the side pods vent air, etc. Designers have very little motivation to invest time & resources to look at new cooling concepts or airflow concepts because they can't. If they could, I guarantee they would & this would create different ideas & different concepts.

User avatar
PlatinumZealot
551
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 03:45

Re: Hypothetical: Side pod design with LESS restrictions?

Post

@OP there would pretty much converege to simething like the 2008 side pod designs. Lots of vents, chineys and gills. There were also some 2009 designs with air vents running on the side of the floor...
It would still be a pod basically because you still have to house all the systems inside, but designed to minimize drag and lift.
πŸ–οΈβœŒοΈβ˜οΈπŸ‘€πŸ‘ŒβœοΈπŸŽπŸ†πŸ™

trinidefender
trinidefender
317
Joined: 19 Apr 2013, 20:37

Re: Hypothetical: Side pod design with LESS restrictions?

Post

Zynerji wrote: ↑
04 Jan 2020, 20:41
I'd like to see if they can harness the air/water type tube intercooler tech to replace the ancient fin type radiators completely.
What do you mean by this?

User avatar
Zynerji
110
Joined: 27 Jan 2016, 16:14

Re: Hypothetical: Side pod design with LESS restrictions?

Post

trinidefender wrote: ↑
04 Feb 2020, 00:53
Zynerji wrote: ↑
04 Jan 2020, 20:41
I'd like to see if they can harness the air/water type tube intercooler tech to replace the ancient fin type radiators completely.
What do you mean by this?
https://mezzotech.com/

https://mezzotech.com/performance-appli ... radiators/

Just_a_fan
Just_a_fan
591
Joined: 31 Jan 2010, 20:37

Re: Hypothetical: Side pod design with LESS restrictions?

Post

The website suggests they already are doing so:
The remarkably low air side pressure drop of Mezzo's microtube radiators has made them the first choice of the most competitive teams in Formula 1, LMP1, and Indycar.
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.

User avatar
PlatinumZealot
551
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 03:45

Re: Hypothetical: Side pod design with LESS restrictions?

Post

Zynerji wrote: ↑
04 Feb 2020, 04:48
trinidefender wrote: ↑
04 Feb 2020, 00:53
Zynerji wrote: ↑
04 Jan 2020, 20:41
I'd like to see if they can harness the air/water type tube intercooler tech to replace the ancient fin type radiators completely.
What do you mean by this?
https://mezzotech.com/

https://mezzotech.com/performance-appli ... radiators/
This technique is already in use. Ferrari Engines had this in 2014.
πŸ–οΈβœŒοΈβ˜οΈπŸ‘€πŸ‘ŒβœοΈπŸŽπŸ†πŸ™

User avatar
Zynerji
110
Joined: 27 Jan 2016, 16:14

Re: Hypothetical: Side pod design with LESS restrictions?

Post

I remember the intercoolers, not the radiators being like this. That was my point, to transition away from fins, and using the tube tech to integrate into more contourable ducting.