2015 Noses merged thread

[turbof1]

Be wary of the representation - it's simplified, meaning it has the correct dimensions but there's still room for smoothening and variations (albeit to a lesser degree).

[mrluke]

It states a maximum width not a minimum width, this still leaves a fair degree of freedom / interpretation on how to achieve the required areas.

[Waywardism]

Will this benefit Mercedes and Ferrari since their current noses probably fit this spec, or very close to it, meaning they wouldn't have to redesign the aero package from scratch to work with a new nose?

[turbof1]

Will this benefit Mercedes and Ferrari since their current noses probably fit this spec, or very close to it, meaning they wouldn't have to redesign the aero package from scratch to work with a new nose?

The first iteration of the Mercedes nose comes quite close to the new regulations. Perhaps it needs to be moved a bit further over the main plane, and a bit lower.

I believe that, unless teams find loopholes that give a better benefit, that the Mercedes solution will become fairly standard across the grid next year.

[Hobbs04]

Based on the "pylons connect under the nose" Caterham's new nose looks to be following 2015 rules.

http://img3.auto-motor-und-sport.de/And ... 804093.jpg

Question: is the vanity panel still available for teams to gain an aero advantage? Otherwise we will have 22 cars that all look very similar.

[n_anirudh]

Tried modelling the nose area earlier, the nose seems to be a lot lower the reference plane/front win mainplane.

Same rules = boring races and design evolution and sometimes less evolution. Shake up of the rules is interesting from an engineering perspective.

[Blanchimont]

Let's have a look at the current nose of the Mercedes car. The tip is located approximately 800mm ahead of the front wheel center line and is around 300mm wide at the tip and also behind. Both these dimensions are not legal for 2015!

Article 15.4.3 (of the 2015 regs) says about the nose crash structure:
"...its forward-most point must not be less than 850mm forward of the front wheel centre line..."

"A single external vertical cross-section, perpendicular to the car centre line, of more than 9000mm² at a point 50mm behind its forward-most point. No part of this cross-section may lie less than 135mm above the reference plane and its overall width must not exceed 140mm."

"A single external vertical cross-section, perpendicular to the car centre line, of more than 20000mm² at a point 150mm behind its forward-most point. The overall width of this cross-section must not exceed 330mm.

When measuring these sections, only parts between the highest point of the section and 100mm vertically below this point, may be considered."



Here are some basic shapes for the two cross sections mentioned above, that should be possible within these new regulations. Article 3.7.9 further limits the height of the first cross section to 85mm (=220mm-135mm).

[Blanchimont]

This is one modelled version with the first cross section being 140mm wide and the second cross section 300mm.
To me this looks similar to the noses Red Bull and Williams use this year.



When the second cross section is an inverted U

[flyboy2160]

General comments about the 2015 regulations go in the 2009-2015 regulations thread. This will be just about the 2015 noses.

[henra]

Here are some basic shapes for the two cross sections mentioned above, that should be possible within these new regulations. Article 3.7.9 further limits the height of the first cross section to 85mm (=220mm-135mm).

http://i.imgur.com/3zGDtJG.png

Thanks Blanchimont!
Really great work.
Only one minor remark.
If I'm not completely mistaken the cut out in the Merc style nose could be slightly bigger since the required area is only 20000 mm^2.
That would allow for a cut out of 13000 mm^2 instead of the 9500mm^2 in your dcrawing, i.e. 35mm wide vertical sections per side instead of 70 mm.
Just nitpicking though.
I also commend your more creative approaches since it might give FIA a clue and thus a chance to re- think what is possible in the planned rules. Might save them from another embarrassment....

[Hobbs04]

Regarding the wording that the nose must taper back to bulkhead. Obviously this is an attempt to remove the awful noses of late, but is the term taper refer to the bodywork surrounding the crash structure or just the crash structure?

For instance, Can Ferrari keep the Hoover looking droop nose if underneath the vanity panels the crash structure complies? Or are we limited to a fixed ever increasing conical shape nose?

Further the purpose of the anteater noses was an attempt at pulling more air under the nose, it seems if you could still crown the top of the nose to pull air around as opposed to a flat top would be an appropriate direction for next year. It appears in Spa the W05 nose was slightly more round and are trying to keep the airflow attached around the nose such as the F14t has done since birth.

Imagine a field of Hoover's

[theWPTformula]

Here are my initial impressions on the nose regulations. I might have made a mistake regarding the distance between the bulkhead and the back of the Y250 section, but please be nice... Constructive comments would really help! http://thewptformula.com/2014/09/18/ana ... e-changes/

[FrukostScones]

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 26406.html

AMUS: advantage for Mercedes and Ferrari (due to development advance..)?

as short noses might be the best under the new rules 2015, Merc and Ferrari are a step ahead in terms of aero philosophy and construction/design (crash testing)...

[theWPTformula]

Photoshop of the Lotus with the Mercedes nose courtesy of octanephotos.co.uk, showing what we could roughly see in the US during practice in preparation for 2015. No antenna camera pods next year, mind you.
https://twitter.com/theWPTformula/statu ... 1510237184

[turbof1]

Looks pretty expensive to test that during FP1; they still need to pass the crasht test.