A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter do not belong here.
ISLAMATRON wrote:
They could be running richer to help cool the engine, that would allow for smaller intake openings(less drag) but would require them to carry more fuel(didnt someone mention a 200KG fuel tank)... but if they want fast down the straights the fuel weight is not a big deal.
What they would need to do is hold off any cars in the corners and pass down the straights, and then hold them off in the corners again.
It was a 200L tank which is the same as everyone else...allows for what 180Kg's of fuel??
ISLAMATRON wrote:
They could be running richer to help cool the engine, that would allow for smaller intake openings(less drag) but would require them to carry more fuel(didnt someone mention a 200KG fuel tank)... but if they want fast down the straights the fuel weight is not a big deal.
What they would need to do is hold off any cars in the corners and pass down the straights, and then hold them off in the corners again.
It was a 200L tank which is the same as everyone else...allows for what 180Kg's of fuel??
Thanks for the correction... but at .75kg/L(closest I've seen) that is only 150kg... anyone else have a better estimation of fuel density? Or the volume capacities of the other teams.
ISLAMATRON wrote:
They could be running richer to help cool the engine, that would allow for smaller intake openings(less drag) but would require them to carry more fuel(didnt someone mention a 200KG fuel tank)... but if they want fast down the straights the fuel weight is not a big deal.
What they would need to do is hold off any cars in the corners and pass down the straights, and then hold them off in the corners again.
It was a 200L tank which is the same as everyone else...allows for what 180Kg's of fuel??
Thanks for the correction... but at .75kg/L(closest I've seen) that is only 150kg... anyone else have a better estimation of fuel density? Or the volume capacities of the other teams.
I think its 150KG maximum per the Regs, whitch is 240L or 37 or 38 Gallons in imperial.
But it would help if someone posted a KG to Litres comparison/conversion chart.
Sure, top edges are lifted up, but bottom edges aren't. Like I said it's more U-nose.
So what's the point of lifting top edges then?
What do you think?
It's been a long time since we drove last time, but it has also been a short time at the same time
Roam Grosjean ponders the passing of time on the first day of testing at Jerez February 5, 2013
I think v-nose is just shorthand for saying just that: the underside is curved at the attaching point. The Red Bull nose isn't a v, if I recall correctly.
ISLAMATRON wrote:
They could be running richer to help cool the engine, that would allow for smaller intake openings(less drag) but would require them to carry more fuel(didnt someone mention a 200KG fuel tank)... but if they want fast down the straights the fuel weight is not a big deal.
What they would need to do is hold off any cars in the corners and pass down the straights, and then hold them off in the corners again.
It was a 200L tank which is the same as everyone else...allows for what 180Kg's of fuel??
I didn't get the whole point if the height is measured inside the V and not at the top.
dumrick wrote:So, I believe that V-noses keep the same section as rectangular ones, but there's a trade-off between the drag from the top bulges vs. less underflow trapped between the wheels and the tub.
Now that explains it. Thank you. I actually misread Scarbs' explanation earlier.
Scarbs wrote:In fact the cars don’t look like the RB5, but simply one major cosmetic aspect of the car has been inspired by Adrian Newey’s design, the nose. Newey himself terms it a “V” nose, not to be confused with the Renault “V” keel. Modern F1 cars all use raised nosed to improve airflow in between the front wheels and hence towards the rear of the car. The better airflow you can get up front the better the airflow routed over the top of the diffuser, and hence create more downforce.
Since the early nineties and up until last year teams conformed to the FIA technical regulations, where by the foot well of the car had to be a minimum of width and height. This of course suggests a rectangular cross section, and teams followed the rules to the letter (see below - left). What Newey realised is that the rules demand these minimum measurements, but not relation to each other. Thus the edges of the rectangle can be raised up and the middle drooped, creating the so called “V“ shape(see below - right). This reduces the obstruction between the wheels as the lower edges of the nose are chamfered. http://scarbsf1.com/2010/vnoses.html
All credit to them for being the first new team out the door with a running car, even ahead of some of the established contenders. There's obviously going to be some evolution going on. There have been tail-end teams in the past that, for the life of them, couldn't get sponsors, arrange drivers and get a launch going until the night before the first race of the season. For a first-year team to be right on the delivery timeline is monumental - among a climate of big teams pulling out all over, this is just great for the sport.
Regardless of how competitive they may or may not be, what they represent so far is no small achievement.
A bunch of engineers at Cosworth must be rapt to hear their best engines in a second car - really heating up for these guys.
I agree SZ, however, could this have something to do with them trusting CFD all the way?
Wonder how much, if any, windtunnel calibration they have bothered with?
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"
ISLAMATRON wrote:
They could be running richer to help cool the engine, that would allow for smaller intake openings(less drag) but would require them to carry more fuel(didnt someone mention a 200KG fuel tank)... but if they want fast down the straights the fuel weight is not a big deal.
What they would need to do is hold off any cars in the corners and pass down the straights, and then hold them off in the corners again.
It was a 200L tank which is the same as everyone else...allows for what 180Kg's of fuel??
This is only a consideration by the author. The technical regulations are at http://argent.fia.com/web/fia-public.ns ... 0CLEAN.pdf Compare § 6 "Fuel System". There is nothing in the regulations about a minimum size fuel tank.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best ..............................organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)
Fuel:
If the regs say 150kg then the capacity is 200L which is inline with the requirements for a 2.4L V8 reving to 18,000rpm. Density of motor gasoline is in the rnage from 0,72 to 0.77 and they would want to be on the denser side to keep energy density, but not the densest spec allowed because the flame speed is far more important than the Octane.
Vr-01:
Lovely little car. Seems they have gone for the long and narrow approach which means they wanted to keep everything close to the centreline of the car. Ferrari have gone a similar way.
The Front wing is nice and simple which is the clever place to start. They have to verify a lot of simulated flow to real world conditions before they proceed to a more complex design. I assume the diffusor too, is a relatively simple design for the same reason.
interesting solution around the front chassis. raised sides of the monocoque but a fairly broad singe keel. I hope they have got the torsonal rigidity of the chassis in the right ball park relative to the other teams. if they lack stiffness in this area they could loose their way trying to solve an aero problem when they have chassis twist to solve. I'm sure they ran their numbers I just hope that their target was line with what others are achieving.
Lets see how she runs in Jere for the next few weeks.
=D> to Virgin /Manor and their partners for delivering a neat little car.
