WhiteBlue wrote:And where do you suppose to have your diffusor?
You still have the mdidle centimeters free even without beamwing, so you could put a monkey seat on the crash structures top level, if its workable to attach like that.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-i7gC3y3hCgY/U ... 014RW2.jpg
In this image you see that there is no way you can have a monkey seat under the rules. The central green exclusion zone is gone. All the space between the diffusor and the rear wing has to be free of body work. No loop hole.
The green area is still free game Whiteblue, and could house a monkey seay but will most likely be used for RW support.
I think 'monkey seat' will be more important than ever. If exhaust-driven down-force will indeed be nullified and with no beam wing, rear wing will need all the help it can get to generate enough down-force to balance the car.
Paul wrote:I think 'monkey seat' will be more important than ever. If exhaust-driven down-force will indeed be nullified and with no beam wing, rear wing will need all the help it can get to generate enough down-force to balance the car.
Or just mount the monkey seat elements on the wing supports.
Any horizontal section between 600mm and 750mm above the reference plane, taken through bodywork located rearward of a point lying 50mm forward of the rear wheel centre line and less than 75mm from the car centre line, may contain no more than two closed symmetrical sections with a maximum total area of 5000mm².
The thickness of each section may not exceed 25mm when measured perpendicular to the car centre line. Once fully defined, the section at 745mm above the reference plane may be extruded upwards to join the sections defined in Article 3.10.2. A fillet radius no greater than 10mm may be used where these sections join."
This limits the center area right below the rear wing profiles (3.10.2) but allows to connect the bodywork to the rear wing. But the thickness of 25mm and the total area of 5000mm² limits this volume to a great extent. Below 600mm above the reeference plane and the crash element there seem to be no further limits other than the maximum width for the center area.
Dear FIA, if you read this, please pm me for a redesign of the Technical Regulations to avoid finger nose shapes for 2016! :-)
I think you're interpreting my image/article incorrectly the central 150mm is still free from design restrictions and the Monkey Seat will still be able to be used. With the loss of the Beam Wing it will most likely feature throughout the teams designs as a means of attachment to balance the car.
I'd also suspect that teams will follow Lotus' / Mercedes lead with the exhaust exiting below the upper section of the Monkey Seat like they have done with their DRD seats.
turbof1 wrote:How about pointing the exhaust exits at the monkey seat?
I reïterate... . The new regs bring the exhaust right to the back on the centreline. As they removed the beam wing purely because they didn't want it to be blown by the exhausts, the 15cm centreline bodywork exception does allow a monkey seat contruction right behind the exhaust exit. Or is this too much aero hocus pocus?
i'm throwing this out there only because i'm looking at this openly. i haven't really got any ideas. is there a small possibility of a loop hole in the wording of the nose rule
15.4.3
An impact absorbing structure must be fitted in front of the survival cell. This structure need not be an integral part of the survival cell but must be solidly attached to it. It must have a minimum external cross section, in horizontal projection, of 9000mm² at apoint 50mm behind its forward-most point.
Furthermore :
a) No part of this cross-section may lie more than 500mm above the reference plane.
b) The centre of area of this section must be no more than 185mm above the reference plane.
c) No part of this section may be more than 50mm below its centre of area.
is there a possibility you could keep the current high nose then just create something coming of the tub aimed at complying with above rule? like i say just putting it out there
As the impact absorbing structure (=the nose from the tip to the survival cell) has to be IN FRONT OF the survival cell, not below of it, i see no chance of a loophole here.
Dear FIA, if you read this, please pm me for a redesign of the Technical Regulations to avoid finger nose shapes for 2016! :-)
