F1technical.net

I too expect it would be much less effective but better than nothing when the exhaust exit moves next year (bit off topic). Meredith Effect could be important here.

Are Meredith effect rads even allowed in F1?

Btw Mikey I'm reporting our conversation here so that Mods can move it out into a different thread

I have question due to new exhaust rule. Is it possible do something similar as is shown on the picrure I draw? The green part will cover the exhaust which must be bend to top and then trough the chassis lead the airflow from exhaust to the difuser. Is this possible or is this baned with the new rules?

Regards
M.

i think it has to be 45° but not sure

Mr.G wrote:I have question due to new exhaust rule. Is it possible do something similar as is shown on the picrure I draw? The green part will cover the exhaust which must be bend to top and then trough the chassis lead the airflow from exhaust to the difuser. Is this possible or is this baned with the new rules?

Regards
M.

If I'm not mistaken that isn't allowed

Scarbs has had a chance to see the draft regulations for 2012 and made an overview of what would still be possible with exhausts next year.
http://scarbsf1.wordpress.com/2011/10/2 ... n-effects/

Personally I don't see how teams can differentiate a lot in this area, except for focusing on the exhaust direction, especially deciding whether to flow towards the centre of the car of towards the rear tyres.

I'm quite disappointed to see that on top of the exhaust exit positions, a limitation in angle of the exits.

Well what is shown in the regs, is that even if a team finds an exploitation, it will be obvious to all teams and can be copied, as it will have nothing to do with the bodywork of the car or suspension.

I was wondering whether this is going to be a problem for McLaren next year. The exhaust position seems to be right in the centre of their "U" section sidepods.

That's a big question isn't it - how McLaren chooses to run their exhausts on the side pods. Some say that Mclaren might even just stick it there so the hot air can energize the air in the sidepod channels

I liked Scrab's idea of using the rear suspension elements to redirect the flow. Look at the compromises made with the front suspension, could something as radical function at the rear?

Brian

hardingfv32 wrote:I liked Scrab's idea of using the rear suspension elements to redirect the flow. Look at the compromises made with the front suspension, could something as radical function at the rear?

Brian

How about using a reinforced RB cannon style in order to redirect the flow downwards exactly in the area where now they are blowing?

I need a quick explanation. Isn't "cold blowing" dumping the uncombusted fuel mixture into the exhaust where it is then combusted by the exhaust system which is at a temp above the fuel mixture flash point?

When fuel gets into it it's hot blowing

Cold blowing is when only the throttle valve is kept open allowing the engine to act as an air pump but no fuel is injected. No additional amount of gases is produced.

The regulations are pretty loopholeless, and there are a couple of options for the teams.

1/ Try to aim the exhausts in order to energise airlow under the rear wing main elements, to try to boost downforce. This method is probably most difficult, due to this area being quite far away from the exhaust exit, so whether there would be any potential benefits of doing this is up for discussion.

2/ Aim the exhausts to interact with the outside of the rear wing endplate. Energised airflow here reduces drag, and even gives a small downforce increase.

Anyone else got any ideas?