F1technical.net

Yes Julien i tried again and it worked! thank god! and shouldn't there be 30 odd teams!?

theres a good point raised in CSR's topic, but i thought it should be discussed here not his car thread

for next season, to prevent tiny sidepods with the regulated inlet area may it be worth making a 3d rectangle for the radiator? so you can then create the rule that the supplied radiator must fit in the sidepod at any desired angle?

this may help to prevent unrealistic sidepod sizes

The 'best' way would be for a supplied internals pack that included everything from engine and gearbox to radiator and electronics. It would take a fair bit of work but would solve the 'problem' instantly.
I would be happy to look into sorting something out.

Having spec parts like that limits your options on shapes - look at the mp4-26 or the STRs. I think a rule on cross-section area would be better.

its a difficult one isn't it. its something that i think should be 'solved' for the future. but you don't want to limit people too much

cdsavage - what would your example be?

cdsavage wrote: I think a rule on cross-section area would be better.

Exactly. Something like this: "the largest cross section of a car must have an area of more than or equal to: X"

cdsavage wrote:Having spec parts like that limits your options on shapes - look at the mp4-26 or the STRs. I think a rule on cross-section area would be better.

Yes it does but if the time was taken to produce a library of stock parts for each component people could mix and match, much like the point made a few pages back about teams having to buy in gearboxes from the likes of X-Trac etc, no two products are the same shape and size.

There are a few ways to solve the 'problem' I just thought that this approach would give teams the option to package their car in different ways, some might look at fitting certain things in the slitter area, others down the mid-line of the car.

This idea is more than just setting a regulation for minimum size, it also gives designers the real headache that real designers have to contend with, how is everything going to fit in the car whilst making it as small as possible, it turns KVRC into more than just a pure aero competition where we strive to get the best aero performance from the minimum sizes stated in the regs, we would also be trying to produce a legal car within the restrictions of the rules and available components.

Just an idea.

that would work only if everything was the same size (in terms of area/volume) but shaped differently. otherwise everyone would go for the smallest parts.

CottrellGP wrote:shouldn't there be 30 odd teams!?

don't start that topic up again

astracrazy wrote:that would work only if everything was the same size (in terms of area/volume) but shaped differently. otherwise everyone would go for the smallest parts.

Yeah, you could do gearboxes that were more V shaped or ones that were more A shape. They could be higher at the crash structure end or lower at that end.
Could do that with a number of different components.

it would be could once we get this season out the way if we created a forum on the kvrc website to discuss options/suggestions for the future with Nick and Julien or chat session

i think everyone has some ideas to make this even better for next year

Interesting suggestions, however we have thought of most of these before.

Problem with Stock parts: All cars look the same
Problem with having mandated radiator sizes: make them vertical with no angle and you have the smallest sidepod with no cooling.

We are thinking of how to do this and not allow silly sidepod sizing, but so far the only thing I personally have came up with is taking a cross section of the sidepod X distance from the intake, however where do you define where the sidepod is and the engine cover starts?

Thanks
Nick

I use a different program for modelling so I dont know how hard it is to measure something like this in Sketchup, but I would propose:

In a plane normal to the car centerline and A mm rearwards of the sidepod inlet, the cross-section of all bodywork from B mm outboard, and above C mm from the reference plane, must be greater than D mm^2.

Where A is whatever and B is some value such that the cross section only includes bodywork outboard of the tub. C would be some value slightly greater than 50mm so that the floor is not included.

What about something like
"the bodywork inside a box that extends between x and y mm ahead rear wheels centerline [...] (etc, define a box where should be sidepots) should have at least one cross section with area larger than X?

N12ck wrote:however where do you define where the sidepod is and the engine cover starts?

Ok maybe a solution that involves 2 cross sections with a minimum area:
the first one is the largest and must be paced at a given distance behind the sidepod air intake (it avoids Sauber sidepods);
the second one is way smaller but it must be placed at a given distance from rear wheel center line (it avoids the lack of bodywork around the engine).

Apart from these, i don't see the need for other limitations.