Aerodynamic implications of nose inlets

[PlatinumZealot]

Excellent rough and dirty effort with the CFD. I do think the Caterham/Lotus type nose will give the best drag numbers with that kind of analysis. Did you include the RB8's side fences on your CFD analysis? I think that would improve the spillage greatly, and increase the flow into the intake.

Yes I had the side fences. When I say Rough and dirty I mean:

I had rolling road
5 refinement levels (very good actually)
No spining wheels
Just ball park surface roughness and turbulence levels
I had gravity effects
No driver

There might be other effects that propagate backwards, but I am no expert.

Wow, I think you are selling yourself short calling it "rough and dirty" then!

I am very surprised that the fences didn't result in less side spill than your results showed.

I wonder if Newey might have the exit flowing into an area of faster moving air to create a suction on the intake?

Wait, both experiments were with Fences, the only difference was the hole in the step. The slot in the step was the interesting bit so that Is what I tested, slot and no slot.

[hardingfv32]

No more or less than anything else that gets jarred to holy hell throughout the course of a race.
(FYI: You don't have to disguise as questions any statements you wish to make; you can just say whatever it is you want to say. I know you didn't just do it. I've simply chosen this time to say something.)

1) The movement of the splitter is much greater than that of the chassis. They are very flexible relative to the chassis. The batteries are not going to survive in the splitter.

2) The additional strength required in the splitter could affect its flexing characteristics.

3) No disguising, just my style of writing. It is not going to change.

Brian

[bhall]

We're using the word splitter to refer two different things. You're referencing what I thought was called, at least colloquially, the "tea tray." I'm referencing the vertical, well, splitter underneath and slightly in front of the the driver's seat.

[hardingfv32]

We're using the word splitter to refer two different things. You're referencing what I thought was called, at least colloquially, the "tea tray." I'm referencing the vertical, well, splitter underneath and slightly in front of the the driver's seat.

That makes the idea worse. It is not even close to passing the CG or 'keep everything low test'.

Your not relating your ideas to any sort of design priorities.

Brian

[bhall]

I'm also not in a thread where any of that is relevant. I only mentioned the idea in passing because it resulted from another, more pertinent thought.

[strad]

Under and behind the seat

The three main components of the KERS are as follows:
•
An electric motor positioned between the fuel tank and the engine is connected directly to the engine crankshaft to produce additional power.

•
High voltage lithium-ion batteries used to store and deliver quick energy.

•
A KERS control box monitors the working of the electric motor when charging and releasing energy.

[marekk]

Why do you think there is ANY spillage off the top surface of the front of the car to the sides?

You are not following the context of the tread. It is being proposed that the RB nose step vent reduces spillage. I am questioning that premise.

Brian

Brian, slow down a bit.
Sure I'am. Even posted my thoughts on the topic on page 5 of this tread.
And my question was to both you and shelly, after reading yours:

1) There is always spillage off the top surface of the front of the car. I can agree that the step causes more...

[hardingfv32]

You are correct, we don't know if there is spillage.

I rephrase the statement: 1)' If we assume' there is always spillage off the top surface of the front of the car. I can agree that the step causes more...

Brian

[Adrian Newby]

Under and behind the seat

The three main components of the KERS are as follows:
•
An electric motor positioned between the fuel tank and the engine is connected directly to the engine crankshaft to produce additional power.

•
High voltage lithium-ion batteries used to store and deliver quick energy.

•
A KERS control box monitors the working of the electric motor when charging and releasing energy.

Sure enough!

So those are flat batteries under the fuel tank. I still think they could be getting cooling from at least the lower front intake, and probably the upper one as well.

[Adrian Newby]

Yes I had the side fences. When I say Rough and dirty I mean:

I had rolling road
5 refinement levels (very good actually)
No spining wheels
Just ball park surface roughness and turbulence levels
I had gravity effects
No driver

There might be other effects that propagate backwards, but I am no expert.

Wow, I think you are selling yourself short calling it "rough and dirty" then!

I am very surprised that the fences didn't result in less side spill than your results showed.

I wonder if Newey might have the exit flowing into an area of faster moving air to create a suction on the intake?

Wait, both experiments were with Fences, the only difference was the hole in the step. The slot in the step was the interesting bit so that Is what I tested, slot and no slot.

Ah. OK, thanks for the clarification.

[Adrian Newby]

at least on those cars - those triangle areas are where we ran everything that needed to go from the cockpit to the rear end.Unless you have a square butt or a rounded chassis bottom, there will be triangle areas there.

At your race meetings, have you ever seen an example of a duct running a long and contorted path similar to what you are proposing... No. That is in any class. You still are not accounting for the fact that the duct must expand in size as it travels back or how the exhaust, many times larger cross section, finds a way to a low pressure area.

Brian

Just how big do you think that duct needs to be? That slit is not very big.

The prime example of a contorted duct is the F-duct, which also did not seem to have to expand in size.

The front lower duct could stay as a flat duct and travel under the seat - no contortions at all. Or it could split and go through the triangles - not much contortion going on for that either - a gentle s-turn. And the upper duct could join it at the very front, with very few contortions.

Also, there is more room in a formula car chassis than you would think, mostly due to the realities of packaging such an odd, mostly rounded, shape as the driver.

[Robbobnob]

any air flowing through that duct isnt going to have sufficient flow to produce any useful cooling for the KERS system

at its absolute best it will produce 7 KW of cooling power

Once you duct it down to where the KERS components you WILL have pressure losses that will reduce the volume flow and therefore reduce the cooling power even further, making the whole venture pretty futile.

[Adrian Newby]

I'm not sure they need a whole lot, if they are using it to supplement last year's KERS cooling, which wasn't quite up to the task.

[hardingfv32]

Just how big do you think that duct needs to be? That slit is not very big.

Visit some of the KERS threads and see what kind of heat rejection you are talking about. It is all there for you to read. I assume from your quote you have no idea. After you get a number, someone on the form can help you with the duct size calculations. Then we will have a starting point for an intelligent discussion.

Also read the FIA F1 Rules.

http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules ... gulations/

Please be careful to note the chassis drawings on page 93.

Brian

[Adrian Newby]

Just how big do you think that duct needs to be? That slit is not very big.

Visit some of the KERS threads and see what kind of heat rejection you are talking about. It is all there for you to read. I assume from your quote you have no idea. After you get a number, someone on the form can help you with the duct size calculations. Then we will have a starting point for an intelligent discussion.

Also read the FIA F1 Rules.

http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules ... gulations/

Please be careful to note the chassis drawings on page 93.

Brian

I know I can look up numbers and formulae. You are the one talking about how big the ductwork has to be, so I asked you what you thought.

Also, my point was about supplementing the cooling the RB7 already had. You would have to know by how much the RB7 KERS overheated, and how efficient the RB8 KERS is, etc., to know how much to supplement. But if we (I) assume that that is what Newey is doing with the hump intake, then we could also assume that is the amount of extra flow he thought he needed.