A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter do not belong here.
I see no conflict as long as said apertures fall within size regs, which I haven't noticed the holes getting bigger so I figure they do.
As long as they don't add up to more than 50,000mm2 and are no lareger than 350mm at any point.I'm an American stuck with a weird measuring system, so I can't really visually estimate those numbers easily, but I believe it's legal.
“To be able to actually make something is awfully nice”
Bruce McLaren on building his first McLaren racecars, 1970
“I've got to be careful what I say, but possibly to probably Juan would have had a bigger go”
Sir Frank Williams after the 2003 Canadian GP, where Ralf hesitated to pass brother M. Schumacher
MIKEY_! wrote:Is that in any particular projection?
no only allwed area and size. projection controlled by tailpipe regs because it's an exhaust aperture and tailpipe has tightly specified loctation
“To be able to actually make something is awfully nice”
Bruce McLaren on building his first McLaren racecars, 1970
“I've got to be careful what I say, but possibly to probably Juan would have had a bigger go”
Sir Frank Williams after the 2003 Canadian GP, where Ralf hesitated to pass brother M. Schumacher
MIKEY_! wrote:
BTW the 350mm is 13.8 inches and the 50,000mm squared is 77.5 inches squared if you're interested.
Ahh! numbers my simple American brain can process. and yes the numbers I quoted are in the exhaust opening regs but those are what the exhaust pods consist of
Last edited by Pierce89 on 02 Mar 2012, 09:55, edited 2 times in total.
“To be able to actually make something is awfully nice”
Bruce McLaren on building his first McLaren racecars, 1970
“I've got to be careful what I say, but possibly to probably Juan would have had a bigger go”
Sir Frank Williams after the 2003 Canadian GP, where Ralf hesitated to pass brother M. Schumacher
MIKEY_! wrote:
BTW the 350mm is 13.8 inches and the 50,000mm squared is 77.5 inches squared if you're interested.
Ahh! numbers my simple American brain can process. and yes the numbers I quoted are in the exhaust opening regs
For future reference, if your computer is slow to react, don't hit submit again.
“To be able to actually make something is awfully nice”
Bruce McLaren on building his first McLaren racecars, 1970
“I've got to be careful what I say, but possibly to probably Juan would have had a bigger go”
Sir Frank Williams after the 2003 Canadian GP, where Ralf hesitated to pass brother M. Schumacher
and as for the acer ducts being the their only outlet for cooling you can see there is a shroud around the crash structure in the pic above. Although i'm not sure that is new and im not sure if its possible for the sidepod airflow to exit here.
I think the inner strakes are further forward in the diffuser while outer ones are at the back. The inner ones guide air past the end of the plank/reference plane as it narrows.
OK. Going on the assumption that the outer exhaust housings are permitted when the more inboard exhausts are being used, the question is, do you keep them?
I think they should be eliminated, and I suspect that will happen, too.
I don't think the housings were necessarily designed with a downward slope for performance reasons. That downward slope kept the car legal despite the contradictory regulation calling for the exhaust pipe itself to be angled up.
3.8.4 Any vertical cross section of bodywork normal to the car centre line situated in the volumes defined below must form one tangent continuous curve on its external surface. This tangent continuous curve may not contain any radius less than 75mm. [Emphasis is mine.]
All bodywork in that area naturally slopes downward simply because that's just how contemporary sidepods are designed, so any related bodywork is required to follow the same curve.
Now that they appear to be focusing the exhausts on the beam wing, I don't see a point in keeping the old housings, even if they provide a cooling benefit or help to direct air flow to the back. I think it's better to have nothing there at all, because it's always easiest to move air through an otherwise empty space.
hope it is legal its longer bodywork
