Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.
Scardini1
Scardini1
0
Joined: 24 Mar 2014, 15:34

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.

Post

Are there any regulations that would prevent a Delta Wing type design from appearing at F1? The underbody aerodynamics alone would be a deal-killer at first glance.

Lycoming
Lycoming
106
Joined: 25 Aug 2011, 22:58

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.

Post

Scardini1 wrote:Are there any regulations that would prevent a Delta Wing type design from appearing at F1?
There are many.

Covered wheels are not allowed
Front wheels that narrow are not allowed
The extreme rear weight bias is not allowed
It also violates several bodywork rules, including but not limited to:
3.7.1

Aside from that, there are more practical limitations, such as:
-it would be difficult to get adequate cooling for the 2014 powertrains within the tiny body of a deltawing-like design, which originally housed an engine with much lower heat rejection requirements. They had quite some difficulty getting it to not overheat the 1.9l elan engine.
-not having wings makes it hard to adjust aerodynamic balance and change drag/downforce betweeen tracks
-Pirelli doesn't supply a bicycle tire for the fronts
-You'd be giving up DRS
-You can't capitalize on the weight advantage of the design because of the minimum weight

xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.

Post

Image
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"

xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.

Post

Found this on the web, obviously a Tyrrell 011 (1981-83), anyone who knows more about it, a primitive diffuser perhaps?

Image
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"

zonk
zonk
69
Joined: 17 Jun 2010, 00:56

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.

Post

Image
Image
Source: AUTO hebdo n°351, January 13th 1983

xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.

Post

1983, the first year with the flat bottom rule, picture dated Januari 13th, the above might be the very first diffuser?

But check this out, back in 1974 they knew how to make a decent scoop!

Image
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"

wesley123
wesley123
204
Joined: 23 Feb 2008, 17:55

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.

Post

Osella
Image
"Bite my shiny metal ass" - Bender

User avatar
FW17
169
Joined: 06 Jan 2010, 10:56

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.

Post

Adams Escort Can-Am
Image
Image
Image

User avatar
FW17
169
Joined: 06 Jan 2010, 10:56

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.

Post

Image

User avatar
FW17
169
Joined: 06 Jan 2010, 10:56

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.

Post

Image
Image
Last edited by FW17 on 04 Aug 2014, 20:08, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
FW17
169
Joined: 06 Jan 2010, 10:56

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.

Post

Image
Image
Image

McMrocks
McMrocks
32
Joined: 14 Apr 2012, 17:58

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.

Post

Blanchimont wrote:
Some motorcycle aero:
http://www.speedzilla.com/forums/street ... force.html
Just out of curiosity, do wings that generate downforce make any sense on motorcycles?

I'd say they don't make any sense when the leaning angle is more than 45°. Because when the angle is more than 45° the downforce will push the motorcycle off the track rather than pressing it on the track. #-o

nacho
nacho
6
Joined: 04 Sep 2009, 08:38

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.

Post

It doesn't make sense for providing grip in corners unless the wings are active and stay perpendicular to ground.

User avatar
FW17
169
Joined: 06 Jan 2010, 10:56

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.

Post

nacho wrote:It doesn't make sense for providing grip in corners unless the wings are active and stay perpendicular to ground.

Wings need not be perpendicular to the road.

xpensive
xpensive
214
Joined: 22 Nov 2008, 18:06
Location: Somewhere in Scandinavia

Re: Most pec...bizarre aerodynamics thread.

Post

WilliamsF1 wrote:
nacho wrote:It doesn't make sense for providing grip in corners unless the wings are active and stay perpendicular to ground.
Wings need not be perpendicular to the road.
Perhaps the wings should be applied radially to counter centripetal forces, F = m * v^2/r, in the corners? :idea:
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"