With the track debut of the new V6 turbo engines coming closer and closer, teams are admitting that one of the major challenges of getting and efficient and reliable package will be managing the cooling systems.
As they said, there is no way to put extra things on that create turbulence without hurting your own cars performance. To answer your other question, once designers stay within the rule book when it comes to car design then they can do what they want. There has been some rules introduced throughout the years to reduce turbulence. If I remember correctly, the neutral center section of the front wing was added to try to smoothen out airflow around the car. Also the banning of all the extra wings and body protrusions. Part of it was to slow the cars down but I also suspect to reduce turbulent air for following cars. I'm also of the opinion that at least part of the reason for removing the beamwing was to have more clean airflow for any car following close behind.Manoah2u wrote:just a question that popped into my mind.....could constructors perhaps delibaretly create vortices or 'aerodynamics' at the rear of the car that cause turbulent air with the intention of messing up the air behind so it will cause a negative effect to the cars behind? Obviously there is the risk of actually ruining your own aero if not done properly, but is it actually possible and is it legal?
for example; let's say Ferrari has a car that is aerodynamically sound, and they put some effects at the very rear of their
rear wing endplates, which will not harm them but will induce a significant amount of turbulent air behind them, messing
up the aero for the car directly behind them.
is that possible, are there rules that prevent this and if not, does this already happen?
The Audi R8 e-tron is fitted with size 225/35 and 275/35 tires with optimized rolling resistance. From about 50 km/h (31.07 mph), adjustable flaps close the apertures in the 19-inch wheels by centrifugal force; at low speeds they open again. The active aerodynamic wheels trim about 0.02 off the cD value. Site: fourtitude.com
Remember 2012 when Red Bull ducted air through the front axle and through the front rims? It was banned because it was considered a movable aerodynamic device. So I'd say if it has a aerodynamic effect on the car, it cannot move by any means. So this wheel would not be legal.idfx wrote:Fernando Alonso & Audi R8 E-Tron
I found this video Fernando Alonso and Andrea Stella "admiring" Audi.
And the official website of Audi found this image of the details of the wheels audi R8 e-tron.
This idea can be adapted in the 2014 regulation ?
It is innovative.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvcH8vs01rk
http://fourtitude.com/wp-content/upload ... on-435.jpg
The Audi R8 e-tron is fitted with size 225/35 and 275/35 tires with optimized rolling resistance. From about 50 km/h (31.07 mph), adjustable flaps close the apertures in the 19-inch wheels by centrifugal force; at low speeds they open again. The active aerodynamic wheels trim about 0.02 off the cD value. Site: fourtitude.com
http://fourtitude.com/news/Audi_News_1/ ... r8-e-tron/
Thanks
AFAIK the center of the nose tip has to be in the center of the car. And I don't get what the idea behind your drawing is.turbof1 wrote:I was thinking about a possible solution - is it allowed to place the nose tip assymetrical? If so, this might be possible
http://imageshack.us/a/img268/8427/3g6r.jpg
It's kind of shown crude on the image, but I think the idea and intend should be clear.
Okay now I get it. But 1, I don't think the asymmetric design is allowed and 2, the nose cant be attached to the front wing. It has to be connected with 2 pylons.turbof1 wrote:Very simple: the nose tip has to be low enough, but if you could place it assymetrically, you could shape it as the right/left FW pillar; the vanity panel could then fill in the opposite pillar. That way you simulate almost perfectly, within dimensional boundaries set by rules, pre-2014 high nose, as looking from the side the nose would still drop in a continual line.
