New tailpipe regulations (exit holes and loopholes)

[Nickel]

It is my understanding that currently, Mercedes and Ferrari both run in Q3 with the wastegate wide open and the compressor driven by the gu-h. I feel any extra benefit that can be derived from wastegate tailpipes will apply most in this scenario, but also need to take it into account. I can't see anyone using it to stall anything, put a different way.

[scarbs]

You could have one wastegate tailpipe end flush with an anular duct wrapped around it. When the wastegate opens via the ECU at high speed, the resulting exhaust flow entrains flow out of the duct creating low pressure. This could be linked to fluid switch to send a stalling airflow up under the rear wing.
Similar in execution to the Lotus passive F-Duct but using the wastegate flow as a signal. The other wastegate tailpipe would be used at low speed so as not to switch the F-Duct.

[R_Redding]

Is this more relative to bypassing the turbo , than adding noise?.

The Ferrari engine here has a significant ability to bypass the turbo through the wastegate arrangement , so will they have to remove the bypass valve block and exhaust all bypassed gasses through the wastegate pipes , or keep them and add two extra wastegates that they can claim are used for overpressure events.



Rob

[aleks_ader]

You could have one wastegate tailpipe end flush with an anular duct wrapped around it. When the wastegate opens via the ECU at high speed, the resulting exhaust flow entrains flow out of the duct creating low pressure. This could be linked to fluid switch to send a stalling airflow up under the rear wing.
Similar in execution to the Lotus passive F-Duct but using the wastegate flow as a signal. The other wastegate tailpipe would be used at low speed so as not to switch the F-Duct.

Agree.

1. But how circumvent bodywork rules? Paper slit maybe?

2. The main exhaust will be unwanted interference. So the CFD sim will be not easy.

But is doable in my opinion.

[aleks_ader]

Is this more relative to bypassing the turbo , than adding noise?.

The Ferrari engine here has a significant ability to bypass the turbo through the wastegate arrangement , so will they have to remove the bypass valve block and exhaust all bypassed gasses through the wastegate pipes , or keep them and add two extra wastegates that they can claim are used for overpressure events.

http://i897.photobucket.com/albums/ac18 ... Sakhir.jpg

Rob

This is lasyear arrangement.

This is this year 059/4

http://img3.auto-motor-und-sport.de/Fer ... 857406.jpg

[krisfx]

First a question to the turbo experts here: Will this really increase noise that much? Are they used all that often anyways? Also, can this be used to increase power somewhat?

I'm not sure of the accuracy, but there's something known as a "screamer pipe", which seems to be the same concept, using a wastegate pipe to generate a louder noise than would typically come from the car. I don't know whether this is the same thing as I'm not really knowledgeable on turbos so I guess we'll have to wait for testing/filming days to be sure!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screamer_pipe

[Carbon]

Apologies for the noob question, but why is there such a disparity between the sounds of today's turbo charged F1 engine and the sound of a CART turbo'd engine of a decade ago. I understand the capacity was bigger (2.65l) and number of pistons is now reduced (8 vs 6), but is the layout any different? Those engines were incredibly loud and very exciting to hear.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ILh9SAjlx2Q

[flat out]

Apologies for the noob question, but why is there such a disparity between the sounds of today's turbo charged F1 engine and the sound of a CART turbo'd engine of a decade ago. I understand the capacity was bigger (2.65l) and number of pistons is now reduced (8 vs 6), but is the layout any different? Those engines were incredibly loud and very exciting to hear.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ILh9SAjlx2Q

I am not that much of an expert neither but I think it has something to do with the layout of the turbine. The layout nowadays (and especially in these f1 power units) is so efficient that it transfers a lot of the kinetic energy of the exhaust gases into "rotary" energy of the turbine which drives the compressor to feed the cylinders with pre-compressed air. The better the efficiency of the turbine-compressor unit, the better the volumetric efficiency, the better the overall efficiency of the engine. In comparison to the CART engines, the back pressure in F1 V6 Turbo ICEs (which actually creates the sound) should be not that high. Dr. Wolfgang Ulrich once said "Sound is lost energy" or something like that.

This leads to the question I wanted to pose: With optimizes engine mapping and optimal usage of the wastgate: Is the effect of a blown diffusor going to be that big?
I once heard that the exhaust gases of the V6 Turbos exit the exhaust at only one third of the velocity the exhaust gases of the V8s traveled at.

[pgfpro]

I remember watching the CART Indy cars at the GI Joe 200 in Portland and like you said the cars were extremely loud!!!

Most of this was due to dumping excess fuel to spool the turbo "anti lag" at the start and on deceleration into a corner.
I had Padock passes and you could get within inches of these cars in the pits. When they would warm them up and do a few free revs the engines sounded like they had mufflers on them, they were so mild sounding. But out on the track the pops and bangs sounded like sticks of dynamite going off.

[Tommy Cookers]

those cars had a very low or low boost (and so a low exhaust pressure), more like road car boost
so the turbo would be taking only a little energy from the exhaust ?
and those noisy pulses wouldn't be reduced so much passing through the turbo ?
though maybe they also had a restrictor ??? to help them avoid cheating

[PlatinumZealot]

Apologies for the noob question, but why is there such a disparity between the sounds of today's turbo charged F1 engine and the sound of a CART turbo'd engine of a decade ago. I understand the capacity was bigger (2.65l) and number of pistons is now reduced (8 vs 6), but is the layout any different? Those engines were incredibly loud and very exciting to hear.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ILh9SAjlx2Q

As a neutral observer it sounds very similar to me.. not a large disparity between F1.

[PlatinumZealot]

You could have one wastegate tailpipe end flush with an anular duct wrapped around it. When the wastegate opens via the ECU at high speed, the resulting exhaust flow entrains flow out of the duct creating low pressure. This could be linked to fluid switch to send a stalling airflow up under the rear wing.
Similar in execution to the Lotus passive F-Duct but using the wastegate flow as a signal. The other wastegate tailpipe would be used at low speed so as not to switch the F-Duct.

There is a way you have to make this duct to make it useful. A regular annular duct by itself won't entrain much air. You have to create and area of low pressure. Then Slotted wings are not allowed any more so some more engineering will have to go into making the fluidic swtich. Where will the driving air be sourced, and where will it be diverted.

The "Monkey staller"TM addresses these questions...

is on it's way...

I would appreciate a little competition. someone try come up with a wing staller faster than I can!

[hollus]

Monkey stallers are for sissies. Aim your wastegates dangerously close to the monkey seat supports, qualify with glorious downforce, then burn your monkey seat away during the race for increased top speed.
Or did you have something more subtle in mind?

[bhall II]

I can't see the utility of wastegate-derived downforce, because any implementation thereof would be unavoidably inconsistent, and that's why the first generation of exhaust-blown diffusers were abandoned.



It was found that cars were both quicker and easier to drive if peak downforce wasn't predicated on throttle position. The later advent of off-throttle blowing is what made the solution truly viable.

[scarbs]

You could have one wastegate tailpipe end flush with an anular duct wrapped around it. When the wastegate opens via the ECU at high speed, the resulting exhaust flow entrains flow out of the duct creating low pressure. This could be linked to fluid switch to send a stalling airflow up under the rear wing.
Similar in execution to the Lotus passive F-Duct but using the wastegate flow as a signal. The other wastegate tailpipe would be used at low speed so as not to switch the F-Duct.

There is a way you have to make this duct to make it useful. A regular annular duct by itself won't entrain much air. You have to create and area of low pressure. Then Slotted wings are not allowed any more so some more engineering will have to go into making the fluidic swtich. Where will the driving air be sourced, and where will it be diverted.

The "Monkey staller"TM addresses these questions...

is on it's way...

I would appreciate a little competition. someone try come up with a wing staller faster than I can!

As my solution uses a fluid switch as an amplifier the anular duct doesn't need to create a lot of low pressure, just enough to trigger the switch. Secondly as with the Lotus, no wing slot is needed; just the under wing duct exit blowing onto the wing surface.
More reliable and quick to stall and unstall the wing, than relying on the monkey seat cascading a stalling effect to the top rear wing.
Simple...