Would a sidepod-less car be realistic?

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.
Marty_Y
Marty_Y
28
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2021 10:37 pm

Re: Would a sidepod-less car be realistic?

Post

theblackangus wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 4:00 pm
izzy wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 3:51 pm
theblackangus wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 2:35 pm


Ahh had not seen any rumors...
That would be some crazy stuff. The rules don't specifically state there has to be a side pod?
Wouldn't that make the side impact structures useless?
The safety structure can be more like two wings I think, they're basically two tubes one upper and one lower. Plus an anti-intrusion panel. Also Mercedes have kept checking with FIA all the time, and after all a hollow sidepod is a duct onto the beam wing! But yes corriere seem quite excited about it.
I understand what the side impact structures actually look like, but w/o something spanning them the nose of a car would directly contact the tub on 1st impact most likely, which seems like a bad scenario.

Is Merc supposed to show up at the next test with this new design or the 1st race?
It's just speculation at this point, it's probably very unlikely to happen imo, the budget cap and limited wind tunnel testing would make it difficult to develop two different approaches I would think?

theblackangus
theblackangus
6
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 12:03 am

Re: Would a sidepod-less car be realistic?

Post

Marty_Y wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 4:10 pm
theblackangus wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 4:00 pm
izzy wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 3:51 pm

The safety structure can be more like two wings I think, they're basically two tubes one upper and one lower. Plus an anti-intrusion panel. Also Mercedes have kept checking with FIA all the time, and after all a hollow sidepod is a duct onto the beam wing! But yes corriere seem quite excited about it.
I understand what the side impact structures actually look like, but w/o something spanning them the nose of a car would directly contact the tub on 1st impact most likely, which seems like a bad scenario.

Is Merc supposed to show up at the next test with this new design or the 1st race?
It's just speculation at this point, it's probably very unlikely to happen imo, the budget cap and limited wind tunnel testing would make it difficult to develop two different approaches I would think?
Yeah I cant picture this as well, but maybe this isn't as complicated as one would imagine?
Or maybe they have been looking at both for a much longer period. After all the formula was announced before the budget caps came into play.

User avatar
Zynerji
106
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: Would a sidepod-less car be realistic?

Post

Looking at this again, my question now is about induced flow possibilities.

Could you do a sidepod that looks like the first 300mm stub of an airplane wing, have a spanwise radiator seperating the upper and lower chambers and the top having forward facing gills in the rearmost 25% of the legal surface, and the bottom having the same rear facing gills on the forward edge of the bottom side of the stub. The idea being that by blowing across the leading edge it creates a suction that draws in from the top/rear gills, and through the radiator.
If that works, I think you could then drop a vertical panel from the outer edge, to the floor, and shape that as a venturi as well. Thus, the bottom gills would be in the throat of the sidepod, drawing through air in at a boundary layer separation area, heating it up, and accelerating it out the rear "cannon". I think JaF has mentioned Merideth sidepods before... Something like this might be neat.

izzy
izzy
41
Joined: Sun May 26, 2019 9:28 pm

Re: Would a sidepod-less car be realistic?

Post

theblackangus wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 4:00 pm
izzy wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 3:51 pm
theblackangus wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 2:35 pm


Ahh had not seen any rumors...
That would be some crazy stuff. The rules don't specifically state there has to be a side pod?
Wouldn't that make the side impact structures useless?
The safety structure can be more like two wings I think, they're basically two tubes one upper and one lower. Plus an anti-intrusion panel. Also Mercedes have kept checking with FIA all the time, and after all a hollow sidepod is a duct onto the beam wing! But yes corriere seem quite excited about it.
I understand what the side impact structures actually look like, but w/o something spanning them the nose of a car would directly contact the tub on 1st impact most likely, which seems like a bad scenario.

Is Merc supposed to show up at the next test with this new design or the 1st race?
Yes I agree I think they'd connect the two tubes as you say, but it could be quite a thin bar and not really a blockage. I suppose it all depends on the exact tests they do. I'm expecting them to test the race version personally, as it's only a week apart, but who knows, this is all word of mouth from one mate to another to another, by the sound of it. All good for building suspense anyway, can't wait :)

holeindalip
holeindalip
17
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2013 12:58 am
Location: Decatur,IL USA

Re: Would a sidepod-less car be realistic?

Post

Zynerji wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 4:20 pm
Looking at this again, my question now is about induced flow possibilities.

Could you do a sidepod that looks like the first 300mm stub of an airplane wing, have a spanwise radiator seperating the upper and lower chambers and the top having forward facing gills in the rearmost 25% of the legal surface, and the bottom having the same rear facing gills on the forward edge of the bottom side of the stub. The idea being that by blowing across the leading edge it creates a suction that draws in from the top/rear gills, and through the radiator.
If that works, I think you could then drop a vertical panel from the outer edge, to the floor, and shape that as a venturi as well. Thus, the bottom gills would be in the throat of the sidepod, drawing through air in at a boundary layer separation area, heating it up, and accelerating it out the rear "cannon". I think JaF has mentioned Merideth sidepods before... Something like this might be neat.
Can I see a drawing of this or a link to an article?

User avatar
Zynerji
106
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: Would a sidepod-less car be realistic?

Post

holeindalip wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 4:32 pm
Zynerji wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 4:20 pm
Looking at this again, my question now is about induced flow possibilities.

Could you do a sidepod that looks like the first 300mm stub of an airplane wing, have a spanwise radiator seperating the upper and lower chambers and the top having forward facing gills in the rearmost 25% of the legal surface, and the bottom having the same rear facing gills on the forward edge of the bottom side of the stub. The idea being that by blowing across the leading edge it creates a suction that draws in from the top/rear gills, and through the radiator.
If that works, I think you could then drop a vertical panel from the outer edge, to the floor, and shape that as a venturi as well. Thus, the bottom gills would be in the throat of the sidepod, drawing through air in at a boundary layer separation area, heating it up, and accelerating it out the rear "cannon". I think JaF has mentioned Merideth sidepods before... Something like this might be neat.
Can I see a drawing of this or a link to an article?
Let's not comment on the MS paint skills... :lol:

https://imgur.com/sbTDFDP

holeindalip
holeindalip
17
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2013 12:58 am
Location: Decatur,IL USA

Re: Would a sidepod-less car be realistic?

Post

Zynerji wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 5:45 pm
holeindalip wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 4:32 pm
Zynerji wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 4:20 pm
Looking at this again, my question now is about induced flow possibilities.

Could you do a sidepod that looks like the first 300mm stub of an airplane wing, have a spanwise radiator seperating the upper and lower chambers and the top having forward facing gills in the rearmost 25% of the legal surface, and the bottom having the same rear facing gills on the forward edge of the bottom side of the stub. The idea being that by blowing across the leading edge it creates a suction that draws in from the top/rear gills, and through the radiator.
If that works, I think you could then drop a vertical panel from the outer edge, to the floor, and shape that as a venturi as well. Thus, the bottom gills would be in the throat of the sidepod, drawing through air in at a boundary layer separation area, heating it up, and accelerating it out the rear "cannon". I think JaF has mentioned Merideth sidepods before... Something like this might be neat.
Can I see a drawing of this or a link to an article?
Let's not comment on the MS paint skills... :lol:

https://imgur.com/sbTDFDP
I guess it all depends on which location Mercedes’ has their sips positioned. If in the lowered position the lower sip would be covered by the floor correct?
And the ms paint skills aren’t bad at all😜

User avatar
Stu
Moderator
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 9:05 am
Location: Norfolk, UK

Re: Would a sidepod-less car be realistic?

Post

holeindalip wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 6:13 pm
Zynerji wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 5:45 pm
holeindalip wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 4:32 pm


Can I see a drawing of this or a link to an article?
Let's not comment on the MS paint skills... :lol:

https://imgur.com/sbTDFDP
I guess it all depends on which location Mercedes’ has their sips positioned. If in the lowered position the lower sip would be covered by the floor correct?
And the ms paint skills aren’t bad at all😜
All of the teams seem to have the lower SIPS within the floor structure.

Good sketch @Zynergi, it ‘kind of’ looks like a very extreme version of what AM launched with???
The more that I learn, the more I appreciate how much more there is to know….

User avatar
Zynerji
106
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: Would a sidepod-less car be realistic?

Post

Stu wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 6:49 pm
holeindalip wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 6:13 pm
Zynerji wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 5:45 pm


Let's not comment on the MS paint skills... :lol:

https://imgur.com/sbTDFDP
I guess it all depends on which location Mercedes’ has their sips positioned. If in the lowered position the lower sip would be covered by the floor correct?
And the ms paint skills aren’t bad at all😜
All of the teams seem to have the lower SIPS within the floor structure.

Good sketch @Zynergi, it ‘kind of’ looks like a very extreme version of what AM launched with???
Id say it could be. I mean, if they dropped a sail panel from the underside of their pod to the floor, they would have a reasonable enclosed venturi. The first track pics that I saw of the RB18, I felt that it had a "vanity panel" hiding the true depth of their sidepod undercut. Then, I asked myself if they are using it as a duct instead? The down-draft type sidepod that I sketched is easiest way that I could think to utilize such a device that RB could be using, as the gills have a volume reference, so they could be top opening, or bottom opening. If you thought-plot it out and take that to its logical conclusion (no real limitations on internal duct aero), I felt they could very well be piping this air through all kinds of of rabbit holes and interdimensional portals... :mrgreen:

User avatar
Stu
Moderator
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 9:05 am
Location: Norfolk, UK

Re: Would a sidepod-less car be realistic?

Post

Zynerji wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 7:06 pm
Stu wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 6:49 pm
holeindalip wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 6:13 pm


I guess it all depends on which location Mercedes’ has their sips positioned. If in the lowered position the lower sip would be covered by the floor correct?
And the ms paint skills aren’t bad at all😜
All of the teams seem to have the lower SIPS within the floor structure.

Good sketch @Zynergi, it ‘kind of’ looks like a very extreme version of what AM launched with???
Id say it could be. I mean, if they dropped a sail panel from the underside of their pod to the floor, they would have a reasonable enclosed venturi. The first track pics that I saw of the RB18, I felt that it had a "vanity panel" hiding the true depth of their sidepod undercut. Then, I asked myself if they are using it as a duct instead? The down-draft type sidepod that I sketched is easiest way that I could think to utilize such a device that RB could be using, as the gills have a volume reference, so they could be top opening, or bottom opening. If you thought-plot it out and take that to its logical conclusion (no real limitations on internal duct aero), I felt they could very well be piping this air through all kinds of of rabbit holes and interdimensional portals... :mrgreen:
To be honest, I thought that was exactly what Ferrari were doing with their very groovy side pods, I’m a bit disappointed that they seem not to be (unless that is what they are bringing to Bahrain??)
The more that I learn, the more I appreciate how much more there is to know….

vorticism
vorticism
77
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2022 7:20 pm

Re: Would a sidepod-less car be realistic?

Post

1. Enclose track
2. Air condition entire circuit to 0* C
3. Shrink radiators
...

Or maybe go with an evaporative cooling system. Carry a not excessively large amount of water on-board. Spray on the engine block and oil cooler, trailing a steam wake, much to the awe of onlookers. On every fifth lap, the driver must extend their refilling periscope into the coolant trough on the slow side of the main straight. Certain tracks will not have this infrastructure and the refill pond must be used. The slick tires allow for hydroplaning across it relatively easily, to much fanfare as the car returns to the track with wet tires. "Now that's good racing, like the old days," they'll say. "But it's too humid, let's go home."

Zynerji wrote:
Tue Mar 08, 2022 5:45 pm
Let's not comment on the MS paint skills... :lol:
Stick with it.

Image

johnny comelately
johnny comelately
48
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 11:55 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Would a sidepod-less car be realistic?

Post

i think this might be appropriate here:
and oops it was already in the W13 thread

User avatar
FW17
151
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:56 am

Re: Would a sidepod-less car be realistic?

Post

Image

LM10
LM10
102
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2018 11:07 pm

Re: Would a sidepod-less car be realistic?

Post

Is having no sidepods at all and maximizing the flow over the floor the single best thing you’ll try doing? What about the disadvantage of having a significantly higher COG due to putting all the cooling high up? How is it ging to affect your mechanical grip/slow speed performance?

Going for a sidepod-less design means decreasing drag and at the same time maximizing floor-flow which sounds beneficial with ground-effect cars - so combined, that means you’ve the main objective of being fast on the straights and in fast corners.
However, slow speed performance will be crucial and a big differentiator with current regs. How would that design path pan out?

vorticism
vorticism
77
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2022 7:20 pm

Re: Would a sidepod-less car be realistic?

Post

Yes, you have to ask "Where do the radiators go?" If speculation re: Ferrari's sidepods are correct then you could potentially reduce drag with wider sidepods. Compare to sportscars. By a certain % of this forum's logic, they are more 'draggy' (looking) because they have wide bodywork. Yet it's the opposite, and their L:D ratios are better than F1.

Central radiators would raise the CoG, and that is such a critical spec in this series that I doubt they'd go there. That said, they do place a significant % of the radiator mass up there as is. Williams show you can have large cutouts in the bodywork ahead of a certain Y dimension. So maybe it's something like an upscaled version of that (sort of like SF71H).