The old is now new again Oil tanks

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.
Shrek
Shrek
0
Joined: 05 Jun 2009, 02:11
Location: right here

The old is now new again Oil tanks

Post

I was looking at Formula1.com and they have a special about the John Barnard Arrow's oil tank design to where you could fit a bigger fuel tank without changing the wheelbase could someone please explain it a little better?
http://www.formula1.com/news/technical/2010/0/714.html
Spencer

mx_tifoso
mx_tifoso
0
Joined: 30 Nov 2006, 05:01
Location: North America

Re: The old is now new again Oil tanks

Post

The article just says that the oil tank could be placed where it once was; around the gearbox casing.

It originally was placed there, then brought forward in front of the fuel tank, but since the fuel tank has been enlarged, the oil tank can now go towards the back and contribute to better weight distribution.
Forum guide: read before posting

"You do it, then it's done." - Kimi Räikkönen

Por las buenas soy amigo, por las malas soy campeón.

riff_raff
riff_raff
132
Joined: 24 Dec 2004, 10:18

Re: The old is now new again Oil tanks

Post

Shrek,

The oil mass in an F1 chassis normally remains fairly constant throughout a race, while the fuel mass constantly changes between pit stops. So in order to minimize the change in the chassis' polar moment of inertia characteristics as fuel mass is burned off or added during a pitstop, the fuel cell naturally wants to be located as close to the car's fore/aft and side/side C of G as possible.

Aircraft also employ this principle with their fuel tank systems, for the same reasons.

Regards,
Terry
"Q: How do you make a small fortune in racing?
A: Start with a large one!"

xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: The old is now new again Oil tanks

Post

Shrek wrote:I was looking at Formula1.com and they have a special about the John Barnard Arrow's oil tank design to where you could fit a bigger fuel tank without changing the wheelbase could someone please explain it a little better?
http://www.formula1.com/news/technical/2010/0/714.html
I don't think a few litres of lube-oil is going to do much for the fuel-tank capacity, but everything counts I guess.
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"

mx_tifoso
mx_tifoso
0
Joined: 30 Nov 2006, 05:01
Location: North America

Re: The old is now new again Oil tanks

Post

xpensive wrote:I don't think a few litres of lube-oil is going to do much for the fuel-tank capacity, but everything counts I guess.
It's not about the fuel tank capacity, but rather the weight distribution and the wheelbase. With the oil tank in its current location under the fuel tank the wheel base must increase (more?) due to packaging/space limitations. But with the oil tank placed in the rear alongside the gearbox there's more space for the growing fuel tank, thus having less effect on the wheelbase and weigh distribution.

You also have a lower CoG with the oil tank out from under the fuel tank, since the fuel tank base would sit lower. Unless it would be placed in a higher position than before in it's 'new' position alongside the gearbox. :?

And yes, the devil is in the details.
Forum guide: read before posting

"You do it, then it's done." - Kimi Räikkönen

Por las buenas soy amigo, por las malas soy campeón.

xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: The old is now new again Oil tanks

Post

mx_tifosi wrote:
xpensive wrote:I don't think a few litres of lube-oil is going to do much for the fuel-tank capacity, but everything counts I guess.
...But with the oil tank placed in the rear alongside the gearbox there's more space for the growing fuel tank...
I think I said that, didn't I say that? Yes, I definately said that. Sure I did say that? :lol:
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"

mx_tifoso
mx_tifoso
0
Joined: 30 Nov 2006, 05:01
Location: North America

Re: The old is now new again Oil tanks

Post

Thank you for the serious response.

And it was my mistake for not being clear enough (and too clear in others), but there's no point in correcting that anymore.



EDIT: The sementank.com add banner on this page is disturbing and creepy.
Forum guide: read before posting

"You do it, then it's done." - Kimi Räikkönen

Por las buenas soy amigo, por las malas soy campeón.

scarbs
scarbs
393
Joined: 08 Oct 2003, 09:47
Location: Hertfordshire, UK

Re: The old is now new again Oil tanks

Post

I also thought that this would be a useful way to claim 5-10 litres of fuel tank capacity. So I asked adrian newey about this a few weeks ago, he said as the engine design is frozen, inlcudign the oiling layout, switching the tank to the rear woud not be practical.

marcush.
marcush.
159
Joined: 09 Mar 2004, 16:55

Re: The old is now new again Oil tanks

Post

you want the oil tank high and shallow ,not as low as possible ,to ensure a good feed of oil at the pickup at all times with minimum oil quantity.So the net gain in
fuel tank volume is all but one or maybe two litres very low down ... so easily it can be concluded ...no way they will change all the principles and current layout from front to back supply for no real advantage.
In fact those low down oiltanks in the bellhousing where the constant source of big issues in oilsupply because of the awkward shape mandated by the design constaraints.. a lot of designers where actually famous for not doing a good job in that area ...alan jenkins pops up in my memory...
BUT as the oiltank can actually prodrude towards the engine ,it seems to be obvious that this will be followed up by the teams to claim back some millimeters in car length ,morphing the oiltank more into the front cover /airbox shapes to gain valuable space here possibly.With CAD this is more a theme of affording the necessary time ..