F1technical.net

The Lotus T72 was the first F1 car with sidepods.



The reasons were many, but mostly to aid in the wedge shape, as the nose was not to be tall enough to house a radiator or two. This helped bring the COG closer to the center and improved the handling, and allowed the rads to be smaller, albeit in two places.

During the ground effect years, the sidepods became more about under-body channels, and the radiators were now mounted much higher, effecting the COG, but since the grip was so great from the skirted sidepods, there was no reason to worry about the COG change.



Fast forwarding to the introduction of flat bottomed F1 cars, it became time to get the rads as low as possible again, but in the constant quest for the reduction of frontal area, we were blessed with one of the prettier F1 cars, IMO, but the coming side impact rules meant that sidepods were going to take a new direction.



Again in the future, with cars such as the Mclaren MP4/8 as an iconic example, we would start to see the basic shape we still see today. Details like raised noses and such make huge differences, but the two wing, side mounted rad style was here to stay.



It wasn't really until renault started the whole swooping look to side pods (this is debatable) and the r24 was one of the first different style of sidepods we still see today. It was the beginning of a trend that has continued, and to me is the first modern looking car, in relation to what is around now.



Finally, I see the Brawn as the apex of sidepod design. The intakes have been shrinking, and the rads becoming smaller all the time, and laid as flat as possible.



Now the future is where I think this becomes interesting. I was struck by this aircraft, the Fairey Firefly, and the rads at the leading edge of it's wing.



It made me think, that the current sidepods are just a couple of mutations away from being wings. Wings that are inverted, and flow the air down, and towards the center line of the car.

I wonder what the next major evolution will produce, and what if any advantage could be gained by having venturi tunnels above the floor, exiting at the rear wheels. I also ponder what could be gained by having two 'wingpods' at either side of the car. This could be usable downforce, and would give the sidepods another function other than protection for the driver, and radiator housing.

If it was wing shape, then the front of the wing would be lowest, and the trailing edge highest, again lowering the COG.

good post, i always wonder what f1 cars will look like 5-10 years from now. Indeed sidepods are always getting smaller and tighter.

I guess how small they will get will depend mainly on the temp levels internal components can run at? at a guess...

astracrazy wrote:good post, i always wonder what f1 cars will look like 5-10 years from now. Indeed sidepods are always getting smaller and tighter.

I guess how small they will get will depend mainly on the temp levels internal components can run at? at a guess...

Interesting thread and food for thought.
I am not sure on the inverted wing sidepod idea, I think the rear aerodynamics would prove a problem. Have to think on that one.
Leading edge radiators should be OK but my own belief is that the heat will be converted to electrical energy as soon as the technology is mature enough and radiators and conventional brake design will become obsolete, certainly in regard to the radiator size.

Following on from that, and as Giblet briefly mentioned, Side-impact regulations will more than likely be the defining factor for the shape of sidepods at that stage that autogyro speaks of.

i wonder whether the 2013 engine reg changes will be that defining year for the next stage in sidepod evolution.

good i'm no the only one thinking about this too
it is possible to make sidepods shaped as wings i would think but they would have more drag than today's sidepod and i don't know about the effect on the floor

So where would the exhausts go?

CMSMJ1 wrote:So where would the exhausts go?

Eventualy I would hope the exhausts would also become an energy recovery system.

CMSMJ1 wrote:So where would the exhausts go?

I guess they could go through a central opening, kinda like the Red Bull has the central hole, below the shark fin.

Nice timeline Giblet. I didn't know how they developed over time.

Shrek wrote:good i'm no the only one thinking about this too
it is possible to make sidepods shaped as wings i would think but they would have more drag than today's sidepod and i don't know about the effect on the floor

A sidepod wing wouldn't be worthwhile with the current regs that require a flat floor below the bodywork. Any sidepod induced d/f would be offset by lift on the top of the floor and would probably also reduce the effectiveness of underfloor by reducing pressure above the floor. I would think.

Just_a_fan wrote:

Shrek wrote:good i'm no the only one thinking about this too
it is possible to make sidepods shaped as wings i would think but they would have more drag than today's sidepod and i don't know about the effect on the floor

A sidepod wing wouldn't be worthwhile with the current regs that require a flat floor below the bodywork. Any sidepod induced d/f would be offset by lift on the top of the floor and would probably also reduce the effectiveness of underfloor by reducing pressure above the floor. I would think.

what about getting rid of that extra bit of floor, even though you might lose a bit of dowforce from the diffuser

wasn´t the first car to really use the concept of undercut sidepods this
Design from 1992?

http://images.google.de/imgres?imgurl=h ... s%3Disch:1

Thanks for the inputs.

Like I had mentioned, the undercut is up for debate. Undercut is hard to define really. If you look at the mp4/4, you could say it also has an undercut, but what I was really referring to was the sweeping undercut at the rear, that the Renault was one of the first to really take to the extreme.

Shrek wrote:

Just_a_fan wrote:

Shrek wrote:good i'm no the only one thinking about this too
it is possible to make sidepods shaped as wings i would think but they would have more drag than today's sidepod and i don't know about the effect on the floor

A sidepod wing wouldn't be worthwhile with the current regs that require a flat floor below the bodywork. Any sidepod induced d/f would be offset by lift on the top of the floor and would probably also reduce the effectiveness of underfloor by reducing pressure above the floor. I would think.

what about getting rid of that extra bit of floor, even though you might lose a bit of dowforce from the diffuser

The rules currently require the floor below any bodywork. That's why McLaren got away with their cut out in front of the rear wheels last year - nothing above it.

If I understand what you're suggesting, you'd end up with something like the March 701:



This sort of a wing would produce less downforce than the flat floor driven by a diffuser and would also likely be very draggy compared to a diffuser driven underfloor. Stick a vertical endplate on it, however, and you're almost back to the "ground effect" days
(note: current F1 cars are ground effect cars too)

Oooo nice pic. Thanks.

That is sort of what I was thinking, but there is no floor of course. That car, to my eyes, looks like it has a tall nose for what appears to be inboard brakes, and a central mounted rad. The side pontoons are just for the ground effect it appears, and maybe the fuel tanks?

I gotta go read about this pretty lady.

The whole post I did was just for a contribution to the technical side of the board, and was meant to spawn though about the sidepods. The wing intakes of the aircraft started the thought process in my head. It just seems like there must be a 3rd use that can be garnered from them, aside from cooling and side impact protection.

EDIT: The front wheels had outboard discs. I thought I saw a shaft there, but it must be steering. The rears however were inboard.

Giblet wrote:The wing intakes of the aircraft started the thought process in my head. It just seems like there must be a 3rd use that can be garnered from them, aside from cooling and side impact protection.

The Lotus 78 did what you are suggesting, of course - the rads were fed from the leading edge of what was, effectively, a very short span wing:


It was just this sort of thing that the flat floor rule was brought in to outlaw.

The current vogue for undercut sidepods is to help the rear end of the car create downforce rather than for the sidepods themselves to do so. By undercutting the sidepod, the floor extending outwards does what, in Group C cars, was done by the "Southgate lip" and reduces airflow going under the floor from the sides.