F1technical.net

WilliamsF1 wrote:

Huntresa wrote:Why do you say its not accurate ? Looks to me to be a basic 2014 design without any actualy fuzz with the nose or anything fancy.

Nose seems to be as low as it should, exhaust exiting in the same area and at the back. Cant rly tell if the FW is the right size from this angle and obv the FW design itself we wont know until pre season testing.

i guess it is the 2 exhaust pipes and no support for the rear wing

Well the rearwing can be supported if connected to the floor, but that prob wont be done. And the exhausts i cant remeber what the rules say about how far back they need to exit, i mean it will look pretty crasy if they are mandatory to exit under the RW and not just ahead of it like GP2 or this picture.

I was wondering why various teams are experimentin double drs; that has no future with the new regulations ;
I think it is not so. According to the positioning of the single exaust, i think it will be crucial according to its location;
I know that it must shoot away from the diffuser; i suppose it aims in an angle exactly towards the rear wing, on the main flap.
Here is that the pipes of the double drs tested in 2012-2013 should be simulate the hot exaust of the car 2014-
both are Basically two fluids (in this case gases) only one hot and one cold,so that they can have a drs passive using the exhaust gases

I think this system could be a double drs allowed in a totally passive kind.
and perhaps even more stable
'cause it doesn't depends on the speed as in the double drs tested yet
itwould seems more stable to me
however, is only a theory.
i hope i explained this well, I would like to know your opinions about it

Huntresa wrote:Well the rearwing can be supported if connected to the floor, but that prob wont be done. And the exhausts i cant remeber what the rules say about how far back they need to exit, i mean it will look pretty crasy if they are mandatory to exit under the RW and not just ahead of it like GP2 or this picture.

I actually expect most teams to use rear wing endplates that extend downwards till the top of the diffuser, unless they find out it influences the flow around the rear wheels and the diffusor so that downforce is lost.

The second possibility is to use a central support on both sides of the exhaust. The exhaust exit has to have a diameter between 97,7 and 133,5mm ( §5.8.3 ), behind the exhaust there is a no-bodywork-cylinder which has a diameter 30mm greater than the exhaust ( §5.8.5b ). This means that even behind the exhaust bodywork is allowed, it only has to be at least (97,7+30)/2 = 63,85mm away from the car center line. Bodywork is allowed within 75mm from the car center line between the rear wheel center line and a point 350mm behind it. And §3.10.8 allows to connect bodywork to the rear wing profiles. This is a possible area to create a passive DRS!

Red Bull set to make 2014 aerodynamic test at Idiada /Spain. Testing low and bend nose and stuff like that

The articel doesn't tell when it will / has take[n] place. But are there any pictures available (<- the reason for chosing this thread).

The article is written as if the test will happen in the near future, but at the same time it is pure speculation.
Of course, i hope it is true and we'll maybe see some spy pics soon.

The photoshop nose from the article

It looks like the F1 car belonging to Richard Reeds from the Fantastic Four.

I posted this in the "Ugly Nose" thread over in the general area

I started designing a 2014 car, I have the rest of the safety cell in another file. This is only Section BB to the tip of the nose.

My Section AA & BB are at max height

Section BB to the tip of the nose is 1,875mm





The real limiting factor is the 9000mm^2 cross section 50mm behind the tip of the nose

To me it looks Awesome.

How do most people think the teams are going to recover the loss of the beam wing? Using the rear suspension as a kind of beam wing? What does everyone think?

They can't do that. Regulations stipulate a max angle for suspension. They are loosing quite a chunk of rear downforce overall. Maybe they'll recover a little bit from the central positioned exhaust and better diffuser efficiency.

turbof1 wrote:They can't do that. Regulations stipulate a max angle for suspension. They are loosing quite a chunk of rear downforce overall. Maybe they'll recover a little bit from the central positioned exhaust and better diffuser efficiency.

Is there any regulation about how wide for example the rear wishbone and connecting arm has to be?

I believe this rule applies on that:

10.3.1
With the exception of minimal local changes of section for the passage of hydraulic brake
lines, electrical wiring and wheel tethers or the attachment of flexures, rod ends and spherical
bearings, the cross-sections of each member of every suspension component, when taken
normal to a straight line between the inner and outer attachment points, must :

-Intersect the straight line between the inner and outer attachment points.

-Have a major axis no greater than 100mm.

-Have an aspect ratio no greater than 3.5:1.

-Be nominally symmetrical about its major axis.The major axis will be defined as the largest dimension of any such cross-section.

The aspect ratio effectively limits surface.

From 2014 season - Ugliest noses ever?

dren wrote:With the exhaust harnessing going on, the flow will not be very energized at all, and it is in a relatively "aero neurtral" section of the car with no body work allowed behind it.

I guess they must be worried about some energy otherwise why mandate the position?

dren, your reply seemed to suggest that you could put bodywork in front of the exhaust outlet? Is that true? If that's the case, might it be possible to have some sort of blown flap just in front of the exhaust, i.e move the monkey seat in front of it?

... the exhaust ... flow ... is in a relatively "aero neurtral" section of the car with no body work allowed behind it.

The monkey seat can be more or less as "in front" of the exhaust exit in 2014 as the sidepods are "not" "in front" of the exhaust exit now.
It will take a purpose built monkey seat, maybe some funny geometry, but it can be done. Don't quote me now on exactly how many mm or degrees the monkey seat has to be away from the exhaust exit in 2014, but whoever made the regulations keeps on thinking that the exhaust flow stays focused in a neat cylinder like a sort of gas laser... it does not, and even if it did, it would still pull a lot of immediately adjacent air to pretty high speeds. So expect to see funny monkey seat just behind and above the exhaust exit in 2014.

hollus wrote:Expect the current "mostly for attachment" monkey seats to turn into an all out war of direct downforce (plus attachment). They have just put a large part of the energy still in the exhaust gases, which was supposed to be harvested as much as possible, at the direct service of downforce.

Just saw this back on page 10!

I think the 5 degree angle is tough to deal with, I suspect you would want to try and make the plume go a bit more vertical to use it effectively with a wing. If this does work, then it'll be gone in 2015.