New 2013 F1 aerodynamic formula

[autogyro]

I can see no way to prevent cars becoming airborne in an open wheeled formula.
Car bottom designs that allow aerodynamic lift at low angles of attack should be avoided of course but once initialy airborne the shape of the car has little influence on how high it flies as by that time the airflow will be broken up and the surfaces stalled.
It is wheel contact and riding up that causes most flips and unless a more closed wheel design is used there is no cure.

[WhiteBlue]

I generally agree, but one should take into account that the stepped bottom rule has been beneficial in preventing additional lift. One should avoid designs that increase the tendency of the car to become airborne.

[FW17]

A sidepod extending all the way over the front suspension is a lot safer than the current format. Even cockpit side protection maynot be required.

I generally agree, but one should take into account that the stepped bottom rule has been beneficial in preventing additional lif

How is a stepped bottom going to prevent a flip?

[riff_raff]

A car won't come off of the ground unless the lift exceeds the weight of the car. The more surface area the car has, the greater potential it has for creating lift. The most effective way to prevent unwanted lift is to require spoilers on the edges of any surface that could create lift. That's what NASCAR does with those hinged roof flaps you see, and they are actually quite effective.

Underbody tunnels tend to be less prone to losing downforce than flat bottoms under turbulence or yawing. Thus would be less prone to flipping.

[ringo]

I think placing the rear wing ahead of the rear wheel center line could also help.
The rear wing acts to pitch the car and is only countered by the weight, front wing and floor downforce.
I would agree that tunnels are more predictable than flat bottom cars.
Maybe tunnels with skirts with a reasonable ride height limit could be used.

[godlameroso]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... esert.html

It seems that we can create rain with huge ionizers, any chance they can be fitted on the cars to influence the way the car interacts with air?

[747heavy]

did you had something like this in mind?

>> Plasma enhanced aerodynamics was used to provide roll control at high angles of attack on a scaled 1303 UAV configuration.<<

http://www.nd.edu/~tcorke/AIAA-2007-0884.pdf
or
http://www.nd.edu/~tcorke/w.ExpFluidsAr ... asma_2.pdf

http://www.nd.edu/~tcorke/w.J_Aircraft_ ... lowres.pdf


if you search for "Plasma enhanced aerodynamics" or "dielectric barrier discharge (SDBD)" you will find more informations about this technology in regards to aircraft aerodynamics and it´s use for wind turbine blades



the next generation F-duct / Front wing actuator ???

[Formula None]

A way to consume excess KERS energy under braking without taxing the batteries, perhaps?

A wing or diffuser exit could conceivably increase its angle of attack during braking without stalling through the use of such system, thereby increasing downforce in high speed braking zones.

[Blackout]

Interesting.

What do you think of this GE design ? (two venturi tunnels + coke bottle shape)

[FW17]

What is the point to having air move around the side pod when the sole purpose of a GE design is to get as much air under the car and make the tunnels as large as possible. The coke bottle shape just not good enough.


Can a GE car have a raised nose?

[747heavy]

What is the point to having air move around the side pod when the sole purpose of a GE design is to get as much air under the car and make the tunnels as large as possible. The coke bottle shape just not good enough.

Can a GE car have a raised nose?

if you can have the downforce with less drag, you have higher aero-efficiency.
The idea behind a coke bottle/tear drop shape is to reduce drag.
Therefore, I don´t think, that the time is up for the coke bottle shape.







the idea is not that new either, just take a look at the Rumpler tear drop car




can a GE car have a high nose?
IMHO - yes, take a look at the GP3 car


If you look at the later GE cars in the first GE era of F1, they did not had front wings, or had them mounted higher up to not disturb the flow into the tunnels.

If we see high or low noses, will be defined by the chassis rules, not so much by the physics behind the GE concept - IMHO

[marcush.]

coke bottle is the equivalent of a raised nose only at the rear ?

As soon as you start to try reducing crossection and try to direct air between
tyre and structure you will see convergence and so you need as much waisting as possible to separate the wheels from the main body ?

[PlatinumZealot]

What is the point to having air move around the side pod when the sole purpose of a GE design is to get as much air under the car and make the tunnels as large as possible. The coke bottle shape just not good enough.


Can a GE car have a raised nose?

The coke shape doesn't affect the under floor.
The tunnels can still be as large as possible.

Anyway we were talking earlier about the air intakes for a turbo formula being positioned else where from the roll hoop.

I found this:
Beneton B188


I don't like it, or think it will fit as well with the bigger cockpits these days, but it's interesting.

[Blackout]

More relevant and interesting: Benetton B186 - L4 Turbo

[Blackout]

The idea behind a coke bottle/tear drop shape is to reduce drag.

And the other ideas behind my interpretation of future GE cars is; 1: to keep the nice look, 2: increase suction by letting more air pass directly above the diffuser (+ using gurneys)...