Is it possible

[marmer]

To move the air box from above the drivers head to the front wing cone. Then take back to the engine via pipework. This would make the cars much sleeker providing the role hoop could also be moved

[mclaren111]

Sure it can be done.

The role hoop is there for protection of driver when rolling.

Might get it lowered a little bit.

[Manoah2u]

anything is possible, but does it make sense?

no it doesn't, it would negatively impact the air flow, it would negatively impact the front crash structure as tunnelling needs to happen for it to work, it would thus add unneccesary weight and tubing, that would additionally cost precious space in the cockpit area, and then the roll hoop still is there, without any 'ram air' function to it.
add to that the far less efficient way of providing air to the engine, coupled to less engine cover area to also use as a sponsor 'board', and it makes absolute zero sense do change it.

in the 80's, there were some instances where the 'airbox' was on top of the sidepods. still, that too would turn into an inefficient way of forcing air into the engine and would be rather unaerodynamic and again, providing a unneccesary tunnel system atleast nowadays for getting air to the engine.

it is perfect where it is.

[Just_a_fan]

You could just have a protective roll hoop above the driver but take the air from elsewhere. Running air tubes from the front would be perfectly practical and could be used to form additional side impact protection along the outside of the tub. The nose crash structures are mostly hollow anyway, after all.

There is precedent for just a roll structure above the driver with air taken in elsewhere.

Why not? Let's have some variation on the grid!

[jjn9128]

As with everything else, the reason the engine air intake aperture is housed within the main roll hoop structure is that it is where the rules require it to be. Teams would rather move it, especially with forced induction engines (ram pressure is no longer necessary from the air horn as the turbo compresses the intake air beyond atmospheric pressure), to clean up the airflow to the rear wing. The Merc blade roll hoop tried to move the engine intake, but the rules were tightened meaning the blade had to be thicker to prevent it digging in to gravel and their intake had to be higher and closer to the driver for legality - which is why only Caterham tried it since - unsuccessfully! If we're honest team bosses also want a big 'sail' area on the side of the car to put big stickers.

As others have pointed out, it would be heavy to implement the necessary tubing through to the engine. BUT it also puts the air intake at the height of the exhaust of another car, where the car wants the coolest possible air being fed into the airbox. This is a bit of an annoyance for me watching some touring car series.

[Tommy Cookers]

ram pressure is free horsepower as it increases the difference between turbine power and compressor power, ie recovery

as teams seem willing to throw that away, it seems we have just another aero formula

[dobbster71]

I always like the solution on the first version of the Ferrari 640, before the intake moved into the roll hoop:

[godlameroso]

As with everything else, the reason the engine air intake aperture is housed within the main roll hoop structure is that it is where the rules require it to be. Teams would rather move it, especially with forced induction engines (ram pressure is no longer necessary from the air horn as the turbo compresses the intake air beyond atmospheric pressure), to clean up the airflow to the rear wing. The Merc blade roll hoop tried to move the engine intake, but the rules were tightened meaning the blade had to be thicker to prevent it digging in to gravel and their intake had to be higher and closer to the driver for legality - which is why only Caterham tried it since - unsuccessfully! If we're honest team bosses also want a big 'sail' area on the side of the car to put big stickers.

As others have pointed out, it would be heavy to implement the necessary tubing through to the engine. BUT it also puts the air intake at the height of the exhaust of another car, where the car wants the coolest possible air being fed into the airbox. This is a bit of an annoyance for me watching some touring car series.

Sauber started the year with one.

[jjn9128]

Sauber started the year with one.

Gosh!! Good point - just goes to show how much of an impact the Sauber had on me this season! As the roll hoop is homologated with the chassis, they had to run it all year - maybe they chose the blade so they could alter the air box shape if they had an issue with the lower rear wings. But it does prove my point that the rules mean even with a blade roll hoop the air box can't start as far back or low down they did as on the 2010 Merc or Force India.

ram pressure is free horsepower as it increases the difference between turbine power and compressor power, ie recovery

Perhaps; "...with a forced induction engine, ram pressure is less critical..." would have been a better wording.

[j2004p]

If the aim is to open up the roll hoop to allow a better flow to the rear wing, how about the solution on the Benetton 188/189?

[jjn9128]

I've not seen any decent pictures of the internal layout of the new Indycar (IR18) but I believe the sidepod inlets are split so that the turbos are fed from a duct running between the cockpit and the heat exchangers.

[zac510]

I suppose that these kind of inlet ducts have fallen out of popularity because of some kind of boundary layer building up on the bodywork before the inlet?
But I agree they look cool and the design variety would be quite refreshing!

[jjn9128]

There's an interesting video somewhere where Willem Toet talks about the Ferrari F92A (the double floor Ferrari), where John Barnard got it into his head that boundary layer growth on the sides of the chassis was a major issue - so he suck the sidepod inlets outboard - towards the wheel wakes. The chassis boundary layer is a small issue - compared to the heat/turbulence/unsteadiness you will get from other sources on a race car. Obviously the air intake up high and/or without any preceding bodywork is better for power, but can adversely impact other aerodynamic surfaces.

[Manoah2u]

If the aim is to open up the roll hoop to allow a better flow to the rear wing, how about the solution on the Benetton 188/189?

https://i2.wp.com/www.thebestf1.es/wp-c ... =750%2C500

i'd prefer the vastly more successful Mclaren MP4/4 then, to be honest

[j2004p]

If the aim is to open up the roll hoop to allow a better flow to the rear wing, how about the solution on the Benetton 188/189?

https://i2.wp.com/www.thebestf1.es/wp-c ... =750%2C500

i'd prefer the vastly more successful Mclaren MP4/4 then, to be honest

https://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/wp-content/ ... onda-2.jpg

Agreed, however with all the additional cooling requirements that a modern F1 car needs these days I wouldn't have thought that it would be possible to acheive using a sidepod scoop only type configuration. The Benetton solution at least brings the 'ram effect' into play although I'm not sure how relevant this is in a Turbo car.

What the benetton solution also might bring would possibly be a way to interact favourably with the Halo and/or head restraint cushions.