F1technical.net

IndyCar Series 2018 season will ditch the airbox intake and replaced by Champ Car-style engine cover. F1 looks to switch from airbox intake to Champ Car-style engine cover in the future because of revolutionary car design.

theriusDR3 wrote:https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CvwIwxdVIAAS82E.jpg:large

IndyCar Series 2018 season will ditch the airbox intake and replaced by Champ Car-style engine cover. F1 looks to switch from airbox intake to Champ Car-style engine cover in the future because of revolutionary car design.

Looks to me it's more a retro look thing then a revolutionary design feature.

In both series the general shape of the airbox or the lack of it is mandated in the rules, but looking at f1 how the teams like to replace some of the sidepod volume with a bigger airbox, I won't see it happen.

It's an estetic thing as well, for the last 30-odd years F1 had airboxes above the drivers head, the marketing people think it's one of the key aspects what makes a f1 car a f1 car.

Jolle wrote:

theriusDR3 wrote:https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CvwIwxdVIAAS82E.jpg:large

IndyCar Series 2018 season will ditch the airbox intake and replaced by Champ Car-style engine cover. F1 looks to switch from airbox intake to Champ Car-style engine cover in the future because of revolutionary car design.

Looks to me it's more a retro look thing then a revolutionary design feature.

In both series the general shape of the airbox or the lack of it is mandated in the rules, but looking at f1 how the teams like to replace some of the sidepod volume with a bigger airbox, I won't see it happen.

It's an estetic thing as well, for the last 30-odd years F1 had airboxes above the drivers head, the marketing people think it's one of the key aspects what makes a f1 car a f1 car.

I don't think the esthetics would be an issue


But as you have stated; the rules are very tight; unless they actively change the rules we probably won't see such engine-covers. Furthermore, it would mean less room for sponsors

Formula Wrong wrote:

Jolle wrote:

theriusDR3 wrote:https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CvwIwxdVIAAS82E.jpg:large

IndyCar Series 2018 season will ditch the airbox intake and replaced by Champ Car-style engine cover. F1 looks to switch from airbox intake to Champ Car-style engine cover in the future because of revolutionary car design.

Looks to me it's more a retro look thing then a revolutionary design feature.

In both series the general shape of the airbox or the lack of it is mandated in the rules, but looking at f1 how the teams like to replace some of the sidepod volume with a bigger airbox, I won't see it happen.

It's an estetic thing as well, for the last 30-odd years F1 had airboxes above the drivers head, the marketing people think it's one of the key aspects what makes a f1 car a f1 car.

I don't think the esthetics would be an issue
http://www.wallpaperup.com/uploads/wall ... 5b66b0.jpg

But as you have stated; the rules are very tight; unless they actively change the rules we probably won't see such engine-covers. Furthermore, it would mean less room for sponsors

In the early 2000's the covers were acually getting smaller but they gave them a minimum surface for sponsors indeed.

But probably, if the MP4/4 was made by modern designers with today tools, I would have had a air intake like today.

The "above head air intake" was made illegal half way trough the '76 season by the way.

And, come on, 1988 is 28 years ago

Formula Wrong wrote: I don't think the esthetics would be an issue
http://www.wallpaperup.com/uploads/wall ... 5b66b0.jpg

:

Nope, they won't

With the turbo do they really get as much benefit from the ram air effect?
If so would it not be aerodynamically better to get rid of the scoop part and draw air from a better place?

strad wrote:With the turbo do they really get as much benefit from the ram air effect?
If so would it not be aerodynamically better to get rid of the scoop part and draw air from a better place?

With the correct sizing the scoop becomes more or less neutral (the air gets sucked in by the speed of the car) or even positive. Plus any obstruction is a loss. Because there is a rollhoop mandatory in that place, having air sucked trough it makes lots of sense.

Jolle wrote:

strad wrote:With the turbo do they really get as much benefit from the ram air effect?
If so would it not be aerodynamically better to get rid of the scoop part and draw air from a better place?

With the correct sizing the scoop becomes more or less neutral (the air gets sucked in by the speed of the car) or even positive. Plus any obstruction is a loss. Because there is a rollhoop mandatory in that place, having air sucked trough it makes lots of sense.

Plus some of the teams are using that area to feed other coolers.

Plus some of the teams are using that area to feed other coolers.

True

This would probably only happen as a knock-on effect from another rule change. For example, if underbody downforce was greatly reduced then it would put more importance on the rear wing.

A similar thing happened in LMP1 a few years back. The ACO reduced the chord of the rear wing and soon afterwards the swan neck wing mounts started showing up on cars. The teams had cranked up the AoA to recover the downforce lost from the rule change, which in turn caused air to start separating around the wing mounts. Thus they designed the swan neck mounts to be able to run the short chord wings at high AoA.

also reminds me of Panoz DP01 Champ Car chassis

strad wrote:With the turbo do they really get as much benefit from the ram air effect?
If so would it not be aerodynamically better to get rid of the scoop part and draw air from a better place?

It's not just the ram air effect, it's also an aerodynamically efficient way of getting air into the engine, especially since the turbo placement rules probably means that any configuration you pick for your airbox will more than likely require a close to 90 degree bend in the flow.

I agree with Jolle that it's trying to copy the late 80s-early 90s Indycar look which was long regarded as the best era.