Disadvantages…well I think it's illegal!!
Side pods make a Ventouri chanell that are forbiden in F1!
- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
Such a system would be only illegal in my opinion when there would be no floor provided. However this is not at all a ground effect car as the low pressure region under the car is separated from that under the sidepodpompelmo wrote:Disadvantages…well I think it's illegal!!
Side pods make a Ventouri chanell that are forbiden in F1!
Thanks akbar21881,akbar21881 wrote:Great idea! It sounds really innovative to cut that area altogether since that particular area is getting smaller and smaller due to slimmer sidepod bottom nowadays.
But I'm not so sure about the idea of using the air flow down the sidepod for extracting the air from radiator. Is there sufficient airflow in that area?
One more thing...I'm no aerodynamicist here, but, if the airflow flow straight from the from of the car( passing through wing and suspension of course) and then through the cut awat sidepod bottom, wouldn't it create bigger drag when it hits the rotating rear wheel?
In current configuration, I think the airflow is less "energetic" when they arrived in the coke bottle area and wont create too much high pressure area in front of the rear wheel.
In any case...keep innovate!!
Aerodynamic efficiency is the main objective of this concept, not downforce generating. How much downforce could gain is questionable but it shouldn't be less that what we have nowadays.pompelmo wrote:yes..but if the floor would still be on the car, the undercut sidepods will not have any positive aerodynamic effect..regarding aero grip...I can't explain it by typing the explanation..I'm a physic and theoreticaly just doesn't gonna work..sorry
There will be spillage under the radiator away from the car's centre-line, indeed, the shape of the sidepod will ensure there is a flow away from the car centre line at that point regardless of the flow through the radiator. You are thinking in a 2D sense about the venturi duct, in a 3D environment, with the options available to the flow, it will spill out beyond the sidepod - ask yourself, why does the flow move faster when the cross-sectional area is reduced? - its because its forced to in order to conserve the mass flow rate - if you give the flow the option of an easier route (to the side of the sidepod) it will take it.No it doesn’t because the air doesn’t bounces of the track but hits the floor/mixes with air flowing between sideopod and the floor. There is no action-reaction there.
Approximately 90 degrees C of cooling liquid can’t heat up the air that flows trough radiator gills and than mixes with huge amount of cold air before it reaches the rear end so much that it could melt anything. Melting is out of the question (BTW operating temperature of an F1 tyre is quite similar to operating temperature of cooling liquid). Also, the air from the sidpods doesn’t hit the rear tyres solely but flows mixed with huge mass of cold air.
I didn't mean physically melt the tyre, I meant heat it to a point where it experiences adverse wear and is good for only a handful of laps.Below the radiator is the point of highest air speed due to shape of sidepod’s bottom. Also the pressure from the sidepod thrusts the air trough the gills, so that is the point with high dynamics – least passive point of the sidpod.
Not quite, the diffuser also works by moving the air that passes over its upper surface upwards - why else do you think the teams are anxious to get the smallest gearbox they can and refine the coke-bottle shape.The air flowing trough diffuser is picked up below the cars bottom (at front) not from any point above or sideways.
My point being this will reduce somewhat the willingness of the flow to go through the radiatorCertainly!
But you are not doing it for the same reason they did - and this design may not produce the same effects the ferrari's did.manchild wrote: When Ferrari used double floors in 1992 and 1996 they did it to increase the downforce and I use that fact as justification that the downforce would benefit from my concept.
Oh, sorry... don't take the shape of the sidepods from the drawings as something defined, that is just a sketch to show the idea...pompelmo wrote:ok..you said that it will increse downforce..i'm trying to telll you that this isn't true..but if you change the side pods a little bit you could gain some aero grip...try it...
kilcoo316 wrote:There will be spillage under the radiator away from the car's centre-line, indeed, the shape of the sidepod will ensure there is a flow away from the car centre line at that point regardless of the flow through the radiator. You are thinking in a 2D sense about the venturi duct, in a 3D environment, with the options available to the flow, it will spill out beyond the sidepod - ask yourself, why does the flow move faster when the cross-sectional area is reduced? - its because its forced to in order to conserve the mass flow rate - if you give the flow the option of an easier route (to the side of the sidepod) it will take it..
kilcoo316 wrote:See my post above with regards the venturi concept, if you put a "endplate" on it may work better - I believe the main thrust through the radiator will come from the ram effect of the more conventional sidepod duct.
kilcoo316 wrote: Not quite, the diffuser also works by moving the air that passes over its upper surface upwards - why else do you think the teams are anxious to get the smallest gearbox they can and refine the coke-bottle shape.
kilcoo316 wrote: My point being this will reduce somewhat the willingness of the flow to go through the radiator
From what I've found they did it to improve downforce. What I did comes from a logic that tells - why cut sidepods bit by bit, season after season instead of making one big final cut?kilcoo316 wrote:But you are not doing it for the same reason they did - and this design may not produce the same effects the ferrari's did.
They did it to minimise the turbulence of the airflow coming from the splitter, around the sidepod and going over the top of the diffuser.