Pretty close. The diff has to be between 250 and 260mm from the car floor, and between 60mm fore or aft of the rear axle line. The drive shaft can then be shrouded by the fairing for one of the suspension members. This member can be up to 150mm long (other susp arms may only be 100mm long) with the thickness ratio of 3.5:1 (so ~42mm thick).
The angle lowers power transmission efficiency? By generating more heat? Can that effect be harnessed?jjn9128 wrote: ↑08 Jan 2022, 20:53Pretty close. The diff has to be between 250 and 260mm from the car floor, and between 60mm fore or aft of the rear axle line. The drive shaft can then be shrouded by the fairing for one of the suspension members. This member can be up to 150mm long (other susp arms may only be 100mm long) with the thickness ratio of 3.5:1 (so ~42mm thick).
Using the max height and moving the diff forward frees a bit more space above the tunnel, but adds an angle to the drive shaft.
It might have saved Leclerc’s gearbox in Monaco…Zynerji wrote: ↑08 Jan 2022, 21:00The angle lowers power transmission efficiency? By generating more heat? Can that effect be harnessed?jjn9128 wrote: ↑08 Jan 2022, 20:53Pretty close. The diff has to be between 250 and 260mm from the car floor, and between 60mm fore or aft of the rear axle line. The drive shaft can then be shrouded by the fairing for one of the suspension members. This member can be up to 150mm long (other susp arms may only be 100mm long) with the thickness ratio of 3.5:1 (so ~42mm thick).
Using the max height and moving the diff forward frees a bit more space above the tunnel, but adds an angle to the drive shaft.
Harnessed? What u mean? Loss is cause of bearing friction and then formed into heat. That is lost for ever. Williams experiment with high shaft AoA in 2012ish combined with very low gearbox ended poorly. So yeah i guess if there would be a serious gain is hard to guess. Firstly i dont have rules measurement and proportions at hand to judge more precisely. But I would guess beam wing is still there to correct any negative effect from shaft and other elements. So yeah any play with extra geometry positions could be "engineered" around problem at hand.Zynerji wrote: ↑08 Jan 2022, 21:00The angle lowers power transmission efficiency? By generating more heat? Can that effect be harnessed?jjn9128 wrote: ↑08 Jan 2022, 20:53Pretty close. The diff has to be between 250 and 260mm from the car floor, and between 60mm fore or aft of the rear axle line. The drive shaft can then be shrouded by the fairing for one of the suspension members. This member can be up to 150mm long (other susp arms may only be 100mm long) with the thickness ratio of 3.5:1 (so ~42mm thick).
Using the max height and moving the diff forward frees a bit more space above the tunnel, but adds an angle to the drive shaft.
High angle driveshafts with flexture u joints that lower at speed could be a way of getting heat back into the rim after the brake duct changes!aleks_ader wrote: ↑09 Jan 2022, 01:29Harnessed? What u mean? Loss is cause of bearing friction and then formed into heat. That is lost for ever. Williams experiment with high shaft AoA in 2012ish combined with very low gearbox ended poorly. So yeah i guess if there would be a serious gain is hard to guess. Firstly i dont have rules measurement and proportions at hand to judge more precisely. But I would guess beam wing is still there to correct any negative effect from shaft and other elements. So yeah any play with extra geometry positions could be "engineered" around problem at hand.Zynerji wrote: ↑08 Jan 2022, 21:00The angle lowers power transmission efficiency? By generating more heat? Can that effect be harnessed?jjn9128 wrote: ↑08 Jan 2022, 20:53
Pretty close. The diff has to be between 250 and 260mm from the car floor, and between 60mm fore or aft of the rear axle line. The drive shaft can then be shrouded by the fairing for one of the suspension members. This member can be up to 150mm long (other susp arms may only be 100mm long) with the thickness ratio of 3.5:1 (so ~42mm thick).
Using the max height and moving the diff forward frees a bit more space above the tunnel, but adds an angle to the drive shaft.
Merc-style inverted rear lower wishbones will be hard to implement then (or less useful, because they would pass very close to the tunnel?).. (but their extremely high pull rods will remain useful)jjn9128 wrote: ↑08 Jan 2022, 17:27I don't think the tunnel height is a limiting factor (very much WIP)Stu wrote: ↑08 Jan 2022, 16:05Which makes going to pull rods awkward. I’ve thought of another drawback. The teams are all using pushrod offset to control low speed weight distribution; limited for this year, but there will still be a benefit to using pushrods.
Tunnel sizes may now put an end to pull rods at the rear too.
https://db3pap006files.storage.live.com ... pmode=none
Interaction between the wishbones and beam wing could result in interesting development opportunities.Blackout wrote: ↑09 Jan 2022, 16:56Merc-style inverted rear lower wishbones will be hard to implement then (or less useful, because they would pass very close to the tunnel?).. (but their extremely high pull rods will remain useful)jjn9128 wrote: ↑08 Jan 2022, 17:27I don't think the tunnel height is a limiting factor (very much WIP)Stu wrote: ↑08 Jan 2022, 16:05Which makes going to pull rods awkward. I’ve thought of another drawback. The teams are all using pushrod offset to control low speed weight distribution; limited for this year, but there will still be a benefit to using pushrods.
Tunnel sizes may now put an end to pull rods at the rear too.
https://db3pap006files.storage.live.com ... pmode=none
https://i.imgur.com/l9CkFmQ.jpg
Gorgeously stunning!
Not much of the detail stuff on there is legal no. The raised nose, the S-duct is illegal, the wheel arches are wrong, the dive plane on the FWEP is too short, looks like there's a J-vane under the nose?!, the suspension arms have to join the upright above 40mm below the axle line so certainly the front suspension lower wishbones look too low, and it looks like the upper wishbone knuckles are outside the face of the drums on the front and rear wheels, slots ahead of the rear tyre are illegal, the beam wing looks wrong, and the rear impact structure is far too short... otherwise very nice.
Sure is purdy though ehjjn9128 wrote: ↑09 Jan 2022, 22:24Not much of the detail stuff on there is legal no. The raised nose, the S-duct is illegal, the wheel arches are wrong, the dive plane on the FWEP is too short, looks like there's a J-vane under the nose?!, the suspension arms have to join the upright above 40mm below the axle line so certainly the front suspension lower wishbones look too low, and it looks like the upper wishbone knuckles are outside the face of the drums on the front and rear wheels, slots ahead of the rear tyre are illegal, the beam wing looks wrong, and the rear impact structure is far too short... otherwise very nice.
Oh yeah!!!CMSMJ1 wrote: ↑09 Jan 2022, 22:42Sure is purdy though ehjjn9128 wrote: ↑09 Jan 2022, 22:24Not much of the detail stuff on there is legal no. The raised nose, the S-duct is illegal, the wheel arches are wrong, the dive plane on the FWEP is too short, looks like there's a J-vane under the nose?!, the suspension arms have to join the upright above 40mm below the axle line so certainly the front suspension lower wishbones look too low, and it looks like the upper wishbone knuckles are outside the face of the drums on the front and rear wheels, slots ahead of the rear tyre are illegal, the beam wing looks wrong, and the rear impact structure is far too short... otherwise very nice.
