2014 Design

[astracrazy]

but you can't go any smaller than 9000 m2 which is measured only 50mm front the furthest point of the nose. The RB4 may be that size, i don't know, but if its not then they can't do that in 2014.

[Huntresa]

but you can't go any smaller than 9000 m2 which is measured only 50mm front the furthest point of the nose. The RB4 may be that size, i don't know, but if its not then they can't do that in 2014.

Yeah if anyone knows if they changed the area size of the nose since 2009 plz let us know. And if they havent, would a smaller be better then a larger one when it comes to aero ?

[turbof1]

You can go even smaller. The mclaren mp4-21-23 had a very small nose tip. A smaller nosetip would be preferential to as less as obstruction as possible.

I also don't believe teams will put the air inside the wheels. i've looked at this myself and you lose to much overall area and wasting a lot of allowed space which could be used to produce downforce

It'll depend on what the teams actually need. If they find themselves in shortage of rear downforce, they have no use to extra front downforce. Diverting air inside the wheels could then help to feed the diffuser. They could also argue the wheel vortices create too much drag and will keep the current outboard airflow. Personally I believe we'll see them both next year, with teams having different solutions.

[astracrazy]

but you can't go any smaller than 9000 m2 which is measured only 50mm front the furthest point of the nose. The RB4 may be that size, i don't know, but if its not then they can't do that in 2014.

Yeah if anyone knows if they changed the area size of the nose since 2009 plz let us know. And if they havent, would a smaller be better then a larger one when it comes to aero ?

i didn't think they had a minimum area size until the 2014 regs?

[Huntresa]

but you can't go any smaller than 9000 m2 which is measured only 50mm front the furthest point of the nose. The RB4 may be that size, i don't know, but if its not then they can't do that in 2014.

Yeah if anyone knows if they changed the area size of the nose since 2009 plz let us know. And if they havent, would a smaller be better then a larger one when it comes to aero ?

i didn't think they had a minimum area size until the 2014 regs?

The minimun size is in 2012 regs, so atleast from 2012.

Edit: I Found 2009 regs and it says, " Furthermore, it must have a minimum external cross
section, in horizontal projection, of 9000mm² at a
point 50mm behind its forward-most point. "

So yeah we can go small noses in 2014.

[astracrazy]

ok that ties that up.

I think i've missed something with aa line height though. Is it now only allowed to be 525mm? where the bb and cc can be 625mm? i'm pretty sure last time i read through the aa line could be 625 max and it just has the same rule as this year (that gives us the stepped nose) - something like 50mm ahead of the aa line the maximum height of all bodywork is 525mm (it wasn't like that just thats in my own words to explain)

or am i just confussed

[Steven]

That 9000mm² rule is in place for safety reasons, and effectively prevents teams from fitting just a horizonal pin ahead of its actual nose cone to count as a part of the nose. It's still pretty small and leaves much room for different designs.

One thing I'm wondering though is this low nose influencing the diffuser thing. Given that diffusers will not be sealed as they are today with the exhaust flows, isn't there simply less need for high noses. I mean, suppose you'd leave the nose regs open as today, wouldn't we see lower noses in 2014 anyway?

Also, I'm writing an article on the 2014 aero reg changes at the moment. Anybody who can / wants to help with text, insights or diagrams of any kind is welcome to drop me a message!

[turbof1]

That 9000mm² rule is in place for safety reasons, and effectively prevents teams from fitting just a horizonal pin ahead of its actual nose cone to count as a part of the nose. It's still pretty small and leaves much room for different designs.

One thing I'm wondering though is this low nose influencing the diffuser thing. Given that diffusers will not be sealed as they are today with the exhaust flows, isn't there simply less need for high noses. I mean, suppose you'd leave the nose regs open as today, wouldn't we see lower noses in 2014 anyway?

Also, I'm writing an article on the 2014 aero reg changes at the moment. Anybody who can / wants to help with text, insights or diagrams of any kind is welcome to drop me a message!

I don't believe there is an automatic reason for a natural evolved lower nose. Yes, with the diffuser LESS sealed (teams will still attempt it with vortices), the more airflow beneath the floor, the higher the spilling. However, the diffuser will still receive more air with a higher nose then with a lower one, spilling included. I am not sure, but I think you might be referring to the pre-2009 cars. Yes they generally had lower noses, but the difference was that those cars had more rear downforce potentional then front one. Higher noses would have created rear downforce that would have impossible to balance out at the front without huge drag penalties. For next year, the df reduction seems to be bigger at the rear then at the front (by quite some margin).

[astracrazy]

anyone see any reason for the teams to still use the vanity panel in 2014?

[hollus]

I also don't believe teams will put the air inside the wheels.

Diverting air inside the wheels could then help to feed the diffuser.

I'd like to remind everyone that "pushing the air inside the wheels or outside the wheels" are somewhat misleading expressions. They are easy to visualize and help reasoning, but one does not get to accumulate extra air or less air between the wheels. The density of air is, for practical effects, constant around a F1 car, and variations in the nose / front wheel area will be rather small. When the wind pushes air somewhere, there is no vacuum created where the air was initially aimed for, but instead other mass of air goes there. Similarly, where the air has now been redirected, one does not get any extra density, simply the air that was there gets pushed somewhere else. The whole air circulation should be viewed as a 3D vectorial field where everything influences everything else, even upstream.
One gets to choose which particular mass of air goes in between the front wheels and towards the floor and diffuser, one gets to choose if this is undisturbed or turbulent air, if it would like to move upwards or downwards on the way there, it is is faster or slower, if it has more or less energy, more or less vortices; but one does not get to send any extra air to the floor or diffuser, as the density is more or less constant.
The current outwash end plates seem to push air around the tires, but this does not result in less air between the tires. They also "pull" the air immediate in the inner side of the end plate, which has worked very hard and is very messy, towards the rotating rubber, where otherwise "clean" air would have been ruined anyways. All this outwards moving air will then recruit a different air mass to fill the space between the tires.
It gets complicated, but wings and end plates redirect air, do not accumulate it or disperse it anywhere.

[rssh]

That 9000mm² rule is in place for safety reasons, and effectively prevents teams from fitting just a horizonal pin ahead of its actual nose cone to count as a part of the nose. It's still pretty small and leaves much room for different designs.

One thing I'm wondering though is this low nose influencing the diffuser thing. Given that diffusers will not be sealed as they are today with the exhaust flows, isn't there simply less need for high noses. I mean, suppose you'd leave the nose regs open as today, wouldn't we see lower noses in 2014 anyway?

Also, I'm writing an article on the 2014 aero reg changes at the moment. Anybody who can / wants to help with text, insights or diagrams of any kind is welcome to drop me a message!

Thats a really good point about the lower nose to balance the aero in 2014 but I expect more teams experimenting the pelican nose so that during the season they could find more rear downforce and adjust the pelican bulges accordingly. Doesn't more air to coke bottle generate more downforce even if the diffuser is not sealed as it is today?

Also I didn't really understand the shallow rear wing concept can anyone explain what the different to current regulation because I can't really interpret 2014 rear wing from the technical regulation

[WhiteBlue]

A shallower rear wing is just flatter. If you look at a low downforce wing like Monza you get the idea. Wings will simply be more restricted in angle of attack or the amount of downforce they create.

[Blanchimont]

Also I didn't really understand the shallow rear wing concept can anyone explain what the different to current regulation because I can't really interpret 2014 rear wing from the technical regulation

Current regulations (3.9 and 3.10) say that the rear wing profiles have to be located in a box between 730 and 950mm above the reference plane and between the rear wheel center line (RWCL) and 350mm behind the RWCL. This results in an angle of arctan(220/350) = 32,15 degrees

In 2014 the limits for the box are 750 and 950mm above the reference plane, the horizontal limits are the same. The angle is 29,74 degrees, not exactly what we see in Monza!

[astracrazy]

Blanchimont:

where are you getting the angles from? or how did you work that out? won't they be different between cars/tracks

to all:

have the fia made any restrictions the front wings in terms of cascades? i thought it was something they were hoping to restrict but i haven't seen anything to restrict it

[Saribro]

where are you getting the angles from? or how did you work that out?

It's just the angle of the diagonal of the RW bounding box.