2014 Design

[aleks_ader]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BbXrzcmCMAAGH-t.jpg:large

I think the tunnel is illegal:

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 :
[...]
c) The volume between the rear face of the cockpit entry template and 450mm forward of the rear face of the cockpit entry template, which is more than 350mm from the car centre line and more than 100mm above the reference plane.

Once the 'tunnel' is open at the front and back, the surfaces of the tunnel become 'external' surfaces, and must therefore be continuous with the outer surface of the sidepod.

You make paper slit and it is done. But anyway why you would do that? Nose design really restrict airflow underneath so cooling so low on very dirty air is very uneffective or unpractical....

[theWPTformula]

i didnt understand
are you talking about single pylon or both?

25mm thick per pylon and a total surface area of 5000mm^2 (both pylons combined). Sorry for the confusion.

[theWPTformula]

On the subject of sidepods I can't see a clear reason for under-tunnels or extreme undercutting (e.g. STR7). The 'pods will need to be bigger anyway so using an undercut will require the whole assmebly and internals to be lifted upwards, presenting a greater surface area higher up on the car. Would this not increase drag?

In my opinion I would concentrate more on the airflow around the sidepod. As mentioned above, the low nose heights limit the potential of an undercut sidepod anyway.

Could sidepod turning vanes and further enhancements to vortex generators be a significant area for development? VGs could help achieve some slightly ambitious sidepod designs to allow flow to remain attached longer.

[ringo]

I feel it's possible to see a top mount intercooler right above the engine with cooling air coming through the roll hoop.

[eyalynf1]

I feel it's possible to see a top mount intercooler right above the engine with cooling air coming through the roll hoop.

With the addition of the turbos relatively high in on the chassis, I think that teams will be looking to minimize center of gravity penalty, and maybe not placing an fluid filled heat exchanger this high. Or were you thinking of an air-to-air unit? Either way, I would try to find some place lower.

[djos]

I feel it's possible to see a top mount intercooler right above the engine with cooling air coming through the roll hoop.

With the addition of the turbos relatively high in on the chassis, I think that teams will be looking to minimize center of gravity penalty, and maybe not placing an fluid filled heat exchanger this high. Or were you thinking of an air-to-air unit? Either way, I would try to find some place lower.

I suggested tiny TEC powered Intercoolers with heat-pipes back to the main radiator over here:

http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... 55#p468855

I wonder if that would provide any packaging and/or CoG advantages?

[eyalynf1]

I feel it's possible to see a top mount intercooler right above the engine with cooling air coming through the roll hoop.

With the addition of the turbos relatively high in on the chassis, I think that teams will be looking to minimize center of gravity penalty, and maybe not placing an fluid filled heat exchanger this high. Or were you thinking of an air-to-air unit? Either way, I would try to find some place lower.

I suggested tiny TEC powered Intercoolers with heat-pipes back to the main radiator over here:

http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... 55#p468855

I wonder if that would provide any packaging and/or CoG advantages?

I think this is a possible packaging solutions, but not necessarily a lightweighting solution. Interested in running the numbers with a sample TE component?

I've also got another idea that I may as well let out, as I'll never be able to develop it myself...

Why are they still using aluminum fin tube slab radiators? This tech is over 100 years old. In F1 they should be using custom formed, 3D printed, polymer heat exchangers. They would be lighter, optimized to actually provide some downforce and reduced drag, and shaped in three dimensions to fill an irregular volume as defined by an aero optimized exterior.

Anyone know if this has been looked into?

[aleks_ader]

I think this is a possible packaging solutions, but not necessarily a lightweighting solution. Interested in running the numbers with a sample TE component?

I've also got another idea that I may as well let out, as I'll never be able to develop it myself...

Why are they still using aluminum fin tube slab radiators? This tech is over 100 years old. In F1 they should be using custom formed, 3D printed, polymer heat exchangers. They would be lighter, optimized to actually provide some downforce and reduced drag, and shaped in three dimensions to fill an irregular volume as defined by an aero optimized exterior.

Anyone know if this has been looked into?

I belive that was already looked into, but its in my opinion to fragile and very unreliable. So i don't remember better or proper material with that heat, mass, anti-corosive and strength qualities like Aluminum. Sometimes is better go straight way and don't complicated to much... Even in rules most be some words or limitations about that.

[djos]

Most of the big F1 teams are using custom made radiators from Australian company PWR - they must be pretty damn high tech to steal business from the big European companies!

[langwadt]

I feel it's possible to see a top mount intercooler right above the engine with cooling air coming through the roll hoop.

With the addition of the turbos relatively high in on the chassis, I think that teams will be looking to minimize center of gravity penalty, and maybe not placing an fluid filled heat exchanger this high. Or were you thinking of an air-to-air unit? Either way, I would try to find some place lower.

I suggested tiny TEC powered Intercoolers with heat-pipes back to the main radiator over here:

http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... 55#p468855

I wonder if that would provide any packaging and/or CoG advantages?

TECs are useless for almost anything more than a few watts, the efficiency is very low

[eyalynf1]

I think it would be more appropriate to address the efficiency issue in terms of watts of cooling per mass unit of the TEC components, that is assuming that sufficient electrical input would be available from the kinetic and turbo recovery sources.

[wuzak]

Why are they still using aluminum fin tube slab radiators? This tech is over 100 years old. In F1 they should be using custom formed, 3D printed, polymer heat exchangers. They would be lighter, optimized to actually provide some downforce and reduced drag, and shaped in three dimensions to fill an irregular volume as defined by an aero optimized exterior.

My question is how well do polymers transmit heat? After all, we are talking heat exchangers, and it would be pointless to use a material with poorer heat trasmission properties than what is done now.

In any case, it is now possible to 3d print metal. I don't think there are machines that can do the size required, though.

The advantage would not be in better heat transfer, but it optimising the weight (ie reducing it) for the cooling capacity.

[Holm86]

Why are they still using aluminum fin tube slab radiators? This tech is over 100 years old. In F1 they should be using custom formed, 3D printed, polymer heat exchangers. They would be lighter, optimized to actually provide some downforce and reduced drag, and shaped in three dimensions to fill an irregular volume as defined by an aero optimized exterior.

My question is how well do polymers transmit heat? After all, we are talking heat exchangers, and it would be pointless to use a material with poorer heat trasmission properties than what is done now.

In any case, it is now possible to 3d print metal. I don't think there are machines that can do the size required, though.

The advantage would not be in better heat transfer, but it optimising the weight (ie reducing it) for the cooling capacity.

Polymers have bad heat exchange. Thats why they are often used as insutaion.

Heat exhangers for F1 has been done in 3D printing. But I think that was an oilcooler. Don't know if radiator size are avalible yet. But I cant see a problem in going bigger. You just need a larger "tank" of sintered metal.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zApmGFDA6ow[/youtube]

[Ferraripilot]

Most of the big F1 teams are using custom made radiators from Australian company PWR - they must be pretty damn high tech to steal business from the big European companies!

It's my understanding Mercedes partnered with a US company to aid in design and produce their 'ultra efficient' systems since W03.

[theWPTformula]

Most of the big F1 teams are using custom made radiators from Australian company PWR - they must be pretty damn high tech to steal business from the big European companies!

It's my understanding Mercedes partnered with a US company to aid in design and produce their 'ultra efficient' systems since W03.

Yes, apparently they are as much as 30% lighter than the previous system the team produced. Pretty impressive.