- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
Team: Tim Goss (TD), Sam Michael (SD), Simon Roberts (OD), Neil Oatley (Director of Design & Development), Jonathan Neale (MD), Ron Dennis (McLaren Group CEO)
Drivers: Jenson Button (22), Kevin Magnussen (20), Stoffel Vandoorne (Res)
acosmichippo wrote:but is suspension considered "bodywork"?
Indeed, suspension parts are not considered as bodywork by the rules ("All entirely sprung parts of the car in contact with the external air stream"). But article 3.15 says the following :avatar wrote:But aren't there specific exemptions (wheel/tyre,brake ducts,the nut behind the wheel, suspension/steering elements, driveshafts)
The FIA could state that those wishbones "influence the aerodynamic performance of the car". I don't know if they will, but they surely can.Article 3.15 of the 2014 F1 Technical Regulations wrote:With the exception of the driver adjustable bodywork described in Article 3.18 (in addition to
minimal parts solely associated with its actuation) and the ducts described in Article 11.4, any
specific part of the car influencing its aerodynamic performance :
- Must comply with the rules relating to bodywork.
- Must be rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car (rigidly secured means not
having any degree of freedom).
- Must remain immobile in relation to the sprung part of the car.
[...]
Wouldn't they be attached the actual changeable (as opposed to the main chassis) nose section anyway, so could easily be designed differently if what you suggest is right...bryanbrink wrote:If so, would the rest of the aero work with the other nose types? For one thing the dog ear camera positions are not there and that seems pretty core to the design on the Merc and Ferrari?
IMHO they shouldn't, because it's not something that the other teams can't copy easily (even if the positioning of suspension means it's not as effective for them) and is an interesting design...Gusgus wrote:acosmichippo wrote:but is suspension considered "bodywork"?Indeed, suspension parts are not considered as bodywork by the rules ("All entirely sprung parts of the car in contact with the external air stream"). But article 3.15 says the following :avatar wrote:But aren't there specific exemptions (wheel/tyre,brake ducts,the nut behind the wheel, suspension/steering elements, driveshafts)
The FIA could state that those wishbones "influence the aerodynamic performance of the car". I don't know if they will, but they surely can.Article 3.15 of the 2014 F1 Technical Regulations wrote:With the exception of the driver adjustable bodywork described in Article 3.18 (in addition to
minimal parts solely associated with its actuation) and the ducts described in Article 11.4, any
specific part of the car influencing its aerodynamic performance :
- Must comply with the rules relating to bodywork.
- Must be rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car (rigidly secured means not
having any degree of freedom).
- Must remain immobile in relation to the sprung part of the car.
[...]
Well im assuming at high speed they open up and therefore are creating minimal drag, then when cornering they close and create downforce where drag is not an issue.Shakeman wrote:Can someone explain how these venetian blinds are beneficial?
These layman's eyes see drag but where is the benefit coming from that extra drag? More air directed over the top of the diffuser?
Interested to know...
Gusgus wrote:The FIA could state that those wishbones "influence the aerodynamic performance of the car". I don't know if they will, but they surely can.Article 3.15 of the 2014 F1 Technical Regulations wrote:With the exception of the driver adjustable bodywork described in Article 3.18 (in addition to
minimal parts solely associated with its actuation) and the ducts described in Article 11.4, any
specific part of the car influencing its aerodynamic performance :
- Must comply with the rules relating to bodywork.
- Must be rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car (rigidly secured means not
having any degree of freedom).
- Must remain immobile in relation to the sprung part of the car.
[...]
the movement of the suspension arm is minimal. probably they will "open" or change their configuration enough to produce some beneficial effect...but the drag will remain almost all theredanielk wrote: Well im assuming at high speed they open up and therefore are creating minimal drag, then when cornering they close and create downforce where drag is not an issue.
but i could be very wrong
So they made two superposed 'Blonchimont bells'' out of the upper wishbones ?daveyrace wrote:They look almost like paddles, the lower one is definitely a different shape to the upper.
http://i.imgur.com/lHkSePi.jpg
We think they're cooling chimneys....apparently Sauber have had them before...will try and find a picture...the EDGE wrote:Are the black u-shaped things on top of the side pods at the front edge sensors or vortex genorators?
I don't recall ever seeing anything like them before
f1rules wrote:looking at this Picture maybe they are meassuring devices
http://www.formula1.com/wi/enlarge/0x0/ ... 9ja038.jpg
Here we go, all the way back in 2011 on the C30...adrianjordan wrote:We think they're cooling chimneys....apparently Sauber have had them before...will try and find a picture...the EDGE wrote:Are the black u-shaped things on top of the side pods at the front edge sensors or vortex genorators?
I don't recall ever seeing anything like them before
