2014 Design

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.
Huntresa
Huntresa
54
Joined: 03 Dec 2011, 11:33

Re: 2014 Design

Post

smirkoff wrote:
rjsa wrote: Did you clip the 150mm from the front wing width?
Yes. As you can see, the visual impact of the change is very small.
But looking at this image it doesnt look like youve taken 15cm of the FW, more like 1.5cm :P

Image

User avatar
turbof1
Moderator
Joined: 19 Jul 2012, 21:36
Location: MountDoom CFD Matrix

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Just wanting a bit of input here. For next year, the beam wing is getting removed, which means the rear wing needs to be fitted on something else. The obvious solution is on the rear crash structure with pillars, but are there possible different solutions which do not involve the pillars, leaving that area open? I remember from 2009 that teams extended the rear wing endplates completely to the diffuser sidewalls. Could that give the needed rigidity?

Edit: apperently Red Bull succeeded in that back in 2009, without pillars, though of course the beam wing was still attached and might have given the extra needed rigidity.
Image
#AeroFrodo

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

Re: 2014 Design

Post

the problem is that that would require a much more rigid floor as well as end plates, it would increase overall weight plus flex would be much more of a problem.
"Bite my shiny metal ass" - Bender

Huntresa
Huntresa
54
Joined: 03 Dec 2011, 11:33

Re: 2014 Design

Post

turbof1 wrote:Just wanting a bit of input here. For next year, the beam wing is getting removed, which means the rear wing needs to be fitted on something else. The obvious solution is on the rear crash structure with pillars, but are there possible different solutions which do not involve the pillars, leaving that area open? I remember from 2009 that teams extended the rear wing endplates completely to the diffuser sidewalls. Could that give the needed rigidity?

Edit: apperently Red Bull succeeded in that back in 2009, without pillars, though of course the beam wing was still attached and might have given the extra needed rigidity.
http://images.gpupdate.net/large/123372.jpg
Its this then http://www.formula1.com/news/technical/ ... 7/647.html

User avatar
turbof1
Moderator
Joined: 19 Jul 2012, 21:36
Location: MountDoom CFD Matrix

Re: 2014 Design

Post

wesley123 wrote:the problem is that that would require a much more rigid floor as well as end plates, it would increase overall weight plus flex would be much more of a problem.
Isn't that convenient. They have to add up alot of weight for next year and the weight would then be placed rather low.
#AeroFrodo

Kolin68
Kolin68
3
Joined: 14 Nov 2012, 21:16

Re: 2014 Design

Post


Huntresa
Huntresa
54
Joined: 03 Dec 2011, 11:33

Re: 2014 Design

Post

That link isnt working, it direct you to your own photos, as in my photos not yours.

Kolin68
Kolin68
3
Joined: 14 Nov 2012, 21:16

Re: Дизайн-2014

Post

Huntresa wrote:
Kolin68 wrote:https://./photos/yourphotos?pid=5900731511565495650&oid=108827790736548681810
Что ссылка не работает, он направит вас на собственные фотографии, как в мои фотографии, не твое.
https://twitter.com/Kolins68/status/357 ... 24/photo/1

Huntresa
Huntresa
54
Joined: 03 Dec 2011, 11:33

Re: Дизайн-2014

Post

Kolin68 wrote:
Huntresa wrote:
Kolin68 wrote:https://./photos/yourphotos?pid=5900731511565495650&oid=108827790736548681810
Что ссылка не работает, он направит вас на собственные фотографии, как в мои фотографии, не твое.
https://twitter.com/Kolins68/status/357 ... 24/photo/1
Bargeboards wont be removed.

astracrazy
astracrazy
31
Joined: 04 Mar 2009, 16:04

Re: 2014 Design

Post

i know they were planning to, but are there any rules restricting the fw cascades?

Huntresa
Huntresa
54
Joined: 03 Dec 2011, 11:33

Re: 2014 Design

Post

astracrazy wrote:i know they were planning to, but are there any rules restricting the fw cascades?
I asked Scarbs that question after he did his 2014 post and he said "No cascades were always going to be there. there was a rule to simplify the endplates which appears to have been dropped!"

bonjon1979
bonjon1979
30
Joined: 11 Feb 2009, 17:16

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Huntresa wrote:
smirkoff wrote:
rjsa wrote: Did you clip the 150mm from the front wing width?
Yes. As you can see, the visual impact of the change is very small.
But looking at this image it doesnt look like youve taken 15cm of the FW, more like 1.5cm :P

http://imageshack.us/scaled/large/600/h2x7.jpg
Looks right to me, 7.5cm on each side.

User avatar
SectorOne
166
Joined: 26 May 2013, 09:51

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Looks like 7.5mm to me.
"If the only thing keeping a person decent is the expectation of divine reward, then brother that person is a piece of sh*t"

User avatar
SectorOne
166
Joined: 26 May 2013, 09:51

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Actually...did some quick photoshop work and it seems to be a much less visible change then what some illustrations have shown.

I don´t know the width of the Pirelli´s but one rule said it has to be between 305 and 355 so i chose 330 and the graphics show 82.5mm reduction instead of the actual 75mm

Image

EDIT: also, how will this help decrease drag? I thought the front wing (current spec) guided airflow around the front tire and thus lowered the drag because of that.
Now with a narrower front wing it seems guiding airflow around the tire will be tougher.

I was under the impression the tires were the draggiest bit on a car (except for maybe wings) and that the more air you deflect around it the better in terms of drag.
Last edited by SectorOne on 16 Jul 2013, 15:10, edited 1 time in total.
"If the only thing keeping a person decent is the expectation of divine reward, then brother that person is a piece of sh*t"

User avatar
matt21
86
Joined: 15 Mar 2010, 13:17

Re: 2014 Design

Post

Do you think they will come up with the inverted-U-shaped plates on the lower endplate edges again? I think they were vortex generators.

Image