Downforce's idea - my implemetation

[manchild]

Downforce - memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=1680

He'll elaborate it more when he gets online. Basically, he came up to idea to play with mirrors fairing since FIA is about to move them inboard. So, he reckoned that instead of pointy fairing shape, they could have full span air inlet in-front to be used as F-duct or for some similar purpose, thus to reduce drag. He asked me to make some photoshop suggestion how it might look.

I've commented it by mentioning him obvious problem with branches that would have to be much thicker in order to be used as air tunnels.

So, I was thinking and thinking, and came to solution to attach mirrors without branches, sideways, directly to tub. That might be helpful for his idea as well as for common inboard mirrors since it makes branches obsolete. Also, the driver would loose less focus since mirrors would be in his view field.

Pictures are worth 1000 words...









high-res -> http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/9462/new8.jpg

[Giblet]

Not sure if they can go there:

14.3.3 No part of the reflective surface may be less than 250mm from the car center line of more than 750mm from the rear of the cockpit entry template.

If I read that correctly, than the mirrors have to be withing 3/4 of a meter of the back of the drivers head.

Not that this couldn't also work in the regular mirror position, as I know the drawing is for illustration purposes.

[manchild]

Not that this couldn't also work in the regular mirror position.

I know, but in regular position sidepods would be at same height, so mirrors would be blocked by them.

[010010011010]

Nice Idea,
How about just building it into the side pods in the likely event of f ducts being banned?

heres my very rough diagram

orignal


and soloution

[marcush.]

one big problem is :they are directly in the major line of sight of the driver when cornering...so with restricted visibility straight ahead your idea will also remove a considerable amount of view from the driver towards the apex of corners...

I think the whole mirror thing should be axed and modern times with a rear view camera and monitor should be implemented.

[manchild]

010010011010, sidepods are half meter backwards. I wish they were more forward like that, it would be much safer as the tub would be more protected with additional impact structure

marcush, when it matters mirrors being in viewpoint, I can't see how that's a minus relative to having to move eyesight from what's going in front on as it is now.

BTW, if they were like that, the spring that hit Massa last year would either ricochet upwards over the cockpit zone, or fall below.

[rich1701]

Looks like this solution would generate significant drag in proportion to the straight line speed advantage it would create. I would suggest bigger ducts do not necessarily translate to a greater stalling effect on the rear wing or greater straight line speed.

[manchild]

Pics are just visual hints. Imagine them with much smaller inlet for F duct.

I bet Newey is reading this and thinking "Damn! How come I didn't came up with this?"

[Downforce]

Imagine them with much smaller inlet for F duct.

That's right. They don't need to be THAT big obviously. Duct used on BMW Sauber is a great example. It would perfectly fit in mirror dimensions.

I've commented it by mentioning him obvious problem with branches that would have to be much thicker in order to be used as air tunnels.

Mirror supports would be thicker. That is also true. But is it possible to make them in a shape that would additionaly condition flow? Is there some rule that prevents this? Could their cross section be shaped like an airfoil? My idea is that supports are positioned parallel to longitudinal axis of a vehicle, and connected directly to upper front part of the sidepods. They could be inclined to longitudinal axis, or twisted alog their own axis...I'm still figuring out what is best solution...

Here is some rough sketch...



This is just a concept. Everything is changeable, from shape of the mirror and support, to inlet shape and size etc...

The teams will have to relocate the mirrors, and they will be using some form of inlet for F-duct. This will increase drag, especially if these are separated and close to each other. So why wouldn't they integrate these two things into one, and try to use mirror support as a flow conditioner?

Inlet for F-duct could go to the rear wing or to the sidepods - coke bottle area, as ringo said in Renault R30 topic:

Look like blowing slots along the side pod to prevent any eddies or separation.
The can use a tighter waist line without fear of having too low a pressure over the floor there which also affects the drag on the body.

It's thrue that it's not easy to incorporate this solution into already existing aerodynamics of cars, but I guess it's worth of a try...

[forty-two]

As I understand it, one of the problems that teams will have in implementing an F-Duct system in-season is in finding a suitable route for ducting from such a vent to the fludic valve/rear wing through the already tight cockpit space. This is (i believe) why Sauber's idea of placing the vent on the sidepod was a compromise and perhaps why they were able to implement something so quickly (apparently).

Surely a new mirror location on the tub would still suffer from the same problem, and it would also suffer from similar problems to Sauber in terms of how a driver may "operate" such a device.

I wholeheartedly believe that IF the McLaren system is "controllable" (and we don't yet know either way!) then it relies on the driver doing something with his feet and NOT (as keeps being repeated by the BBC) his knee.

Anyway, an interesting proposal. It'll be interesting to see if any teams follow this idea.

[autogyro]

There must be an ideal speed and lateral turn dynamic that dictates the ideal point where rear wings (and perhaps other DF generators) can be switched off.
If this is the case IMO there is no need for a manual control input, it should be possible to do it by tuning a control air flow effect, to change a main flow at a suitably chosen vehicle condition.

Get to it guys.

[manchild]

Ok, I had no idea about the sketch up till now. Perhaps something like this?



"X-ray"




BTW, I hate f duct/blown wing, and I think it will be abandoned soon.

[stoikee]

Hi Guys!

Sorry, newbie here. I just have a question. Is the area on the back of the driver's helmet homologated as well? Is it possible to have a hole there that can be covered by resting the helmet on the hole and open it by the driver leaning forward?

[Pandamasque]

You read it first at F1T: Let's make a hole in the driver's head! In the corners it will just cool his brains, while on the straights he will align the hole his head with the hole in the headrest and blow some air towards the rear wing!

[stoikee]

You read it first at F1T: Let's make a hole in the driver's head! In the corners it will just cool his brains, while on the straights he will align the hole his head with the hole in the headrest and blow some air towards the rear wing!

OK, I guess Ukranian's don't understand english very well so I'll elaborate. I meant the portion of the car just behind the driver's helmet under the roll structure and above the driver's seat.