2014 Design

[Holm86]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't exhaust gases high pressure? To produce downforce you want, ideally, as much low pressure beneath and as much high pressure on top of an aerofoil or wing element.

No. Exhaust gasses are not high pressure. They are very fast flowing though. And to create downforce you want the air to be faster underneath the wing relative to above it. This gives lower pressure underneath the wing. And exhaust gasses are very hot as well. This means they have low density. This decreases the pressure underneath the wing even more.

[Holm86]

Nice, yea probably something around that area.
It´s all just a approximation but should give a visual idea of the height.

It´s gonna look better then the stepped noses at least. Or so i hope.

If you can, make the nose gradually thinner. Would probably give an even better visualization.

Edit: 10 second photoshop,

http://i.imgur.com/Apv0ZC1.jpg

This looks very very good IMO

[Lycoming]

http://thewptformula.files.wordpress.co ... =625&h=442

I hope that thing behind that link behind the a arm isn't the toe link, because that's a rather narrow base over which to react the self aligning torque. And, just curious, why would a longer chord, "guide airflow more efficiently around the rear wing endplates and, more importantly, extract more performance from the aerodynamic elements below (e.g. brake ducts, edge of the diffuser)"?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't exhaust gases high pressure? To produce downforce you want, ideally, as much low pressure beneath and as much high pressure on top of an aerofoil or wing element. Therefore in this instance the exhaust surely ruins this ideal circumstance as high pressure is being projected from the exit beneath the winglet, right?

The key thing about exhaust gasses is they're high velocity. What happens when you send a high velocity flow over the lower surface of the wing?

Or are we likely to see the rear wing supported purely by the endplates?

I don't see any reason for them to change from what they've been doing for a while now. Mounting the wing solely by the endplates isn't great for stiffness under any sideways loading of the wing, but the teams don't seem bothered by it. Unless that changes, anything other than the current solution is more weight, more drag and less usable span.

[Holm86]

I see you have drawn up your idea from a few pages back.

I don't know if this has already been mentioned in this thread but there are ways of improving efficiency at the rear of the car without the beam wing.

You can almost create an artificial beamwing using the trailing part of the upper rear wishbone. The regulations dictate that suspension arms can only be of a maximum cross sectional area. However you could place two pieces, of maximum area, side-by-side to create this part of the wishbone. This effectively creates one large section of the wishbone but it is made up of two pieces. Both pieces attach at roughly the same point on the gearbox casing and the rear wheel so mechanically it wouldn't make too much difference.

Obviously you can't create much AoA with suspension members due to the regulations, but having a larger area for the airflow to pass over will help maximise the potential of the brake ducts below and aid airflow passing around the rear wing endplates.

This looks good if it is allowed in regulations. You write you have some interesting information on one of next years cars. Is this something you would share here??

[hollus]

Low density does not equal low pressure. The density goes down as the temperature goes up so as to keep the pressure about constant. You have less molecules per unit volume, hence less collisions producing pressure, but each collision is more energetic. In open air, where volumes are relatively for free, you won't get any significant changes in pressure over the surroundings, as those would oherwise quickly make space or rush in.

[theWPTformula]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't exhaust gases high pressure? To produce downforce you want, ideally, as much low pressure beneath and as much high pressure on top of an aerofoil or wing element.

No. Exhaust gasses are not high pressure. They are very fast flowing though. And to create downforce you want the air to be faster underneath the wing relative to above it. This gives lower pressure underneath the wing. And exhaust gasses are very hot as well. This means they have low density. This decreases the pressure underneath the wing even more.

Thanks for the clarification, been meaning to ask about this for a while now.

In that case there is a small advantage!

[theWPTformula]

@ Holm86

I've had some information but I'm yet to decide if I want to share it...

It won't affect the teams' preparations by sharing it at this stage but I'm playing the safe game. Sorry guys!

[wuzak]

I see you have drawn up your idea from a few pages back.

I don't know if this has already been mentioned in this thread but there are ways of improving efficiency at the rear of the car without the beam wing.

You can almost create an artificial beamwing using the trailing part of the upper rear wishbone. The regulations dictate that suspension arms can only be of a maximum cross sectional area. However you could place two pieces, of maximum area, side-by-side to create this part of the wishbone. This effectively creates one large section of the wishbone but it is made up of two pieces. Both pieces attach at roughly the same point on the gearbox casing and the rear wheel so mechanically it wouldn't make too much difference.

Obviously you can't create much AoA with suspension members due to the regulations, but having a larger area for the airflow to pass over will help maximise the potential of the brake ducts below and aid airflow passing around the rear wing endplates.

http://thewptformula.files.wordpress.co ... m-wing.jpg

This looks good if it is allowed in regulations. You write you have some interesting information on one of next years cars. Is this something you would share here??

I don't think that is legal at all. The Monkey seat is in an exclusion zone that exists around and behind the exhaust pipe.

[theWPTformula]

http://thewptformula.files.wordpress.co ... =625&h=442

I hope that thing behind that link behind the a arm isn't the toe link, because that's a rather narrow base over which to react the self aligning torque. And, just curious, why would a longer chord, "guide airflow more efficiently around the rear wing endplates and, more importantly, extract more performance from the aerodynamic elements below (e.g. brake ducts, edge of the diffuser)"?

I believe that the toe link is next to the lower wishbone although this drawing is based on an image so I could not tell you for sure.

The extra chord length could prevent oncoming airflow spilling into the outgoing airflow from the brake duct "flicks" downstream. It could also control hot air being extracted from the hub assembly directly beneath the wishbone by acting almost like a blockage or a seal. Most teams will probably want to vent the hot air inboard of the rest tyre now as this reduces drag.

As a result this could improve the efficiency of the edge of the diffuser but I don't have any evidence to prove this.

[wuzak]

Just how much further would McLaren need to lower the nose of the MP4-27 to fit the 2014 regulations?

About here,

http://i.imgur.com/654RwTl.jpg

It should be much further down considering the center of the wheel is 660 mm, the wheel center would be 330 mm with a 25 mm ride height (as in the picture). Next years nose is at 185 mm which would be 120 mm below the line drawn.

The 185mm will be from the reference plane.

The reference plane is 50mm above the step plane. There is a 10mm "plank" below the step plane.

Thus, with a 25mm ride height, the height of the nose will be 25 + 10 + 50 + 185 = 270mm. With the tyre diameter being 660mm the nose will, therefore, be 60mm below the wheel centreline.

[theWPTformula]

I see you have drawn up your idea from a few pages back.

I don't know if this has already been mentioned in this thread but there are ways of improving efficiency at the rear of the car without the beam wing.

You can almost create an artificial beamwing using the trailing part of the upper rear wishbone. The regulations dictate that suspension arms can only be of a maximum cross sectional area. However you could place two pieces, of maximum area, side-by-side to create this part of the wishbone. This effectively creates one large section of the wishbone but it is made up of two pieces. Both pieces attach at roughly the same point on the gearbox casing and the rear wheel so mechanically it wouldn't make too much difference.

Obviously you can't create much AoA with suspension members due to the regulations, but having a larger area for the airflow to pass over will help maximise the potential of the brake ducts below and aid airflow passing around the rear wing endplates.

http://thewptformula.files.wordpress.co ... m-wing.jpg

This looks good if it is allowed in regulations. You write you have some interesting information on one of next years cars. Is this something you would share here??

I don't think that is legal at all. The Monkey seat is in an exclusion zone that exists around and behind the exhaust pipe.

If Monkey Seats are still allowed in the same place (which I believe that they are) then the pipe exit is within this area, too. It must exit between 170mm and 185mm from the rear wheel centre line.

[wuzak]

I don't think that is legal at all. The Monkey seat is in an exclusion zone that exists around and behind the exhaust pipe.

If Monkey Seats are still allowed in the same place (which I believe that they are) then the pipe exit is within this area, too. It must exit between 170mm and 185mm from the rear wheel centre line.

There is an imaginary cylinder around the exhaust pipe that excludes bodywork. That exclusion zone is extend well behind the car.

5.8.5 There must be no bodywork lying within a right circular cylinder which :
a) Shares a common axis with that of the last 150mm of the tailpipe.
b) Has a diameter 30mm greater than the tailpipe.
c) Starts at the exit of the tailpipe and extends rearwards as far as a point 600mm behind the rear wheel centre line.

[theWPTformula]

The 185mm will be from the reference plane.

The reference plane is 50mm above the step plane. There is a 10mm "plank" below the step plane.

Thus, with a 25mm ride height, the height of the nose will be 25 + 10 + 50 + 185 = 270mm. With the tyre diameter being 660mm the nose will, therefore, be 60mm below the wheel centreline.

I thought that the step plane was 50mm above the reference plane, with a 10mm plank attached beneath it?

[theWPTformula]

I don't think that is legal at all. The Monkey seat is in an exclusion zone that exists around and behind the exhaust pipe.

If Monkey Seats are still allowed in the same place (which I believe that they are) then the pipe exit is within this area, too. It must exit between 170mm and 185mm from the rear wheel centre line.

There is an imaginary cylinder around the exhaust pipe that excludes bodywork. That exclusion zone is extend well behind the car.

5.8.5 There must be no bodywork lying within a right circular cylinder which :
a) Shares a common axis with that of the last 150mm of the tailpipe.
b) Has a diameter 30mm greater than the tailpipe.
c) Starts at the exit of the tailpipe and extends rearwards as far as a point 600mm behind the rear wheel centre line.

If that's just a cylinder then, as long as the Monkey Seat is 15mm above the exhaust pipe (15mm gap to crash structure below = 30mm total), this design is legal. It's not like a cone shape that we had with the exhausts this year.

Unless I'm being stupid here...

[wuzak]

The 185mm will be from the reference plane.

The reference plane is 50mm above the step plane. There is a 10mm "plank" below the step plane.

Thus, with a 25mm ride height, the height of the nose will be 25 + 10 + 50 + 185 = 270mm. With the tyre diameter being 660mm the nose will, therefore, be 60mm below the wheel centreline.

I thought that the step plane was 50mm above the reference plane, with a 10mm plank attached beneath it?

Sorry - you are correct - I got it arse backwards.