F1 Nose Designs

[N12ck]

I just thought I would start a discussion about the F1 nose designs of now and then,

after looking back a couple of years I have wondered what would be the benefit of this design:




The sudden slope nose design, I have always wondered what are its merits over a gradual slope upwards?
In contrast to this design:



Nick

[krisfx]

I've not really looked at the top of the noses in terms of their design,

I know in 2009 the humped nose on the red bull was used to house the top of the suspension and assumption says that they probably used the channel in the middle to put airflow where they want it in a much easier way.

What I do know, though is that the noses are high because the bottom of the nose needs to be higher to get more airflow to the T-Tray and floor etc.

I'm sure someone can provide us with more details,

I'm off to Red Bull right now, so I can even ask when I get there

Kris

[raymondu999]

If you're talking of the V-nose, it's basically to get the nose higher (for more undernose airflow) but not having the entire nose too high (as it hurts CofG, and visibility). Thus Newey raised the sides instead, to keep in line with the nose cross-sectional area regulations.

[krisfx]

Ah, I thought so, am I right in saying they had a curved underside to assist airflow too?

I don't know if the 08 cars were running this, my guess is they were but it wasn't as prominent at the time?

You guys are giving me good ammo for questions today, though so that's good

[raymondu999]

If you looked at the underside, it would be able to sort of "interlock" with the top. ie it's like both ends were "pushed upwards" from the bottom. Like a shear effect. I hope I'm making myself clear...

The benefit of the V-nose wasn't really the ridges along the top, it was these raised bits at the bottom, which then allowed more airflow through to the underfloor. Mind you someone also said in 2009 that the V-ridges potentially helped prevent spillage of airflow from above the nose.

As for the "upside down checkmark" shape of the 2009 Red Bull/2010 Mercedes n12ck mentioned, I believe what they were trying to do was introduce a low pressure zone right below that lowered nose, which would help suck more air through to then feed the diffuser. I think. Don't quote me on this

[bhall]

I was under the impression that the v-nose was implemented to reduce the drag penalty inherent to having such a high nose, i.e. a larger frontal area. The raised sides won't guide more air underneath car, because it just spills off to the side.

Ferrari had a v-nose in 2008 - other cars in previous years, even from other manufacturers, may have also had one - to lessen drag caused by the upwash of the front wing's center section. That evolved into the duct in the F2008's nose.

[krisfx]

Yeah I get you, and it's a smart idea!

I initially thought that's what they were trying to prevent, if you don't have spillage I assume you can better control flow over the top of the chassis and that's obviously a major benefit, however in recent years they have gotten smaller, although the regs have changed too so that may be why..

[raymondu999]

I was under the impression that the v-nose was implemented to reduce the drag penalty inherent to having such a high nose, i.e. a larger frontal area. The raised sides won't guide more air underneath car, because it just spills off to the side.

I'm under the impression that you have the wrong impression

Here: http://scarbsf1.com/2010/vnoses.html

Ferrari had a v-nose in 2008 - other cars in previous years, even from other manufacturers, may have also had one - to lessen drag caused by the upwash of the front wing's center section. That evolved into the duct in the F2008's nose.

I remember that duct. It was the massive slot that ran through the nose you're talking about, yes? I don't remember seeing V-ridged noses though.

[bhall]

Yeah, I was just about to say that the v-nose, at least as implemented lately, would also help collect the wake from the front wheels.

EDIT:
You can see the v-shape of the nose just after the trailing edge of the wing.

[krisfx]

Ah right yeah,

It makes more sense to me now at least

the raised centre section of the 2009 cars wouldn't in theory do as much as the 2008 one then, as the central span has to be neutral, right?

On a none related note, the 2008 Ferrari nose looked amazing!

[raymondu999]

I see it. But I'm not convinced it's about frontal area, because 2009 had a fixed minimum cross sectional area, which they would have to fulfill anyways. (ie a V-nose and a non-V nose would have identical cross sectional areas)

Speaking of that massive F2008 nose duct, didn't that appear mostly in circuits which required a "pointy" front anyways? Monaco, Canada, Spa and the like?

How do you propose to collect the wake with the V-nose? And why would you want to collect it?

[bhall]

The F2008 nose wasn't about reducing frontal area. That v-nose was all about reducing the drag caused by the upwash of the front wing. I just posted the pic to illustrate my previous comment on the F2008.

As far as current v-noses go, you have to consider that the frontal area isn't just the cross-section of the nose. It's the also underside of the nose up to and including the splitter, side pods, barge boards, etc; that's all exposed to oncoming air flow.

EDIT:

Speaking of that massive F2008 nose duct, didn't that appear mostly in circuits which required a "pointy" front anyways? Monaco, Canada, Spa and the like?

How do you propose to collect the wake with the V-nose? And why would you want to collect it?

They used the nose duct on circuits that required a front wing with a high AoA.

That today's v-noses collect wake from the front wheels would have probably been better phrased by saying that they help guide it under the car. It takes the wake from the front wheels and guides it downward to be introduced into the stream headed aft.

EDIT 2:

On a none related note, the 2008 Ferrari nose looked amazing!

I think it looked better on the previous year's Toyota.

[krisfx]

Did not know the 07 toyota used that wing!

[bhall]

I'm under the impression that you have the wrong impression

Here: http://scarbsf1.com/2010/vnoses.html

This cracks me up.

Aside from the “V” nose, the RB5 soon found itself unsuited to the rise of the double diffuser. Its low line sidepods, pull rod suspension, gearbox and rear crash structure, all actually hindered the cars being as good as it could be. These rear end design features are not likely to be copied by other teams 2010

[raymondu999]

This cracks me up.

Aside from the “V” nose, the RB5 soon found itself unsuited to the rise of the double diffuser. Its low line sidepods, pull rod suspension, gearbox and rear crash structure, all actually hindered the cars being as good as it could be. These rear end design features are not likely to be copied by other teams 2010

It wasn't. They were copied for 2011.