Jaguar F1 Team in Schools Challenge

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
manchild
manchild
12
Joined: 03 Jun 2005, 10:54

Post

mjmurphy wrote:Ok, well do the endplates reduce drag? Also, if I am going to make a cockpit, should I use something similar to the front 'ears' used on the Renault R25 to provide better airflow management around the cockpit area? Also should I use front barge boards like those on the Ferrari F2005 so that the air that passes through the front wing is diverted under and outside the chassis to increase the efficiency of the bottom of the car? Also, will the shape of the bottom of the car influence drag? Also, should the rear wing be placed as low and far back as possible or opposite? And should I use rear-wing endplates like those on the Renault R24? Another thing, should I use front axle barge boards like those on the Ferrari F2004? It seems like airflow management will play a vital role in drag....
Regulations for your racer say that car body must be made in one piece using CAD and CNC while only the wings are to be added later. If you'd go into bargeboards, ears, endplates and other things that would require that all of those elements to be designed using CAD simultaneously with car body (as integral parts) and later produced using CNC which would be very complicated to achieve (unless you're using that secret TIP I've PM to you :wink: ).

Some of those elements you mentioned are used for simply for aero(no downforce, or cooling) but great majority of them considers speeds 4-5 times greater that what these racers make. Additionally, since only the front and rear wing can be added afterwards/separately, regulations would prevent you from adding bargeboards and all other "out of the body" aero elements.

That is why the best option is to make car resembling to F1 from the ‘80s or early ‘90s where there weren’t that many additional aero elements fixed on cars body and you’d have sidepods big enough to pass the regulations. You can make more modern car too but without making all of the mentioned additions.

mjmurphy
mjmurphy
0
Joined: 28 May 2005, 16:24

Post

Since the rear wing is used to increase downforce, would it benefit me any to direct the air away from the rear wing? What I want is the lowest drag car and would a rear wing not increase drag, so if I could find a way to direct the airflow under the car and around/under the rear wing, could I decrease drag? Also, since the rear wing increases downforce by creating drag, how should I design the front wing in comparison to the rear....more front wing means less downforce on the rear right?

manchild
manchild
12
Joined: 03 Jun 2005, 10:54

Post

mjmurphy wrote:Since the rear wing is used to increase downforce, would it benefit me any to direct the air away from the rear wing? What I want is the lowest drag car and would a rear wing not increase drag, so if I could find a way to direct the airflow under the car and around/under the rear wing, could I decrease drag? Also, since the rear wing increases downforce by creating drag, how should I design the front wing in comparison to the rear....more front wing means less downforce on the rear right?
Make them both as small as allowed, neutral and position them horizontally 100% - parallel with the track.

mjmurphy
mjmurphy
0
Joined: 28 May 2005, 16:24

Post

I have been researching the use of front swept wings on aircraft and their advantages in reducing drag by directing the turbulence vortices caused by the wings inward therefore allowing me to place control surfaces at the wing tips. These control surfaces (barge boards, endplates, ears...) will then direct the air around the cockpit and under the car for effiecent airflow in hope to reduce overall drag. I am going to model the car in Solidworks and use CFD software (FloWorks) to test my design. I am really looking for an aerodynamic design that will be unique throughout the challenge. I like the idea of using the cartridge cylinder but I do not want to exactly copy the design of an already existent F1 car. This method of engineering seems too easy and I do not think it will go well with the judges. I will like to use certain features of already existent F1 cars, but I would like to come up with some new ideas. I am definitely going to use the wheels suggested, but I am going to have to pay close attention to the flow of air over the wheels since they produce as much as 40% of the total drag on an F1 car. I guess what I am really looking for are ingenious ways that will decrease drag, increase power/acceleration, and catch the eyes of the judges. Thanks again for all of your support,

Mitch

manchild
manchild
12
Joined: 03 Jun 2005, 10:54

Post

Good luck and show us the photo of racer once you finish it.

mjmurphy
mjmurphy
0
Joined: 28 May 2005, 16:24

Post

One more question.....I have been thinking about the wheels, and will it really matter how well they spin, I mean the car will finish the race in under 1.5 seconds, so as long as the wheels are the smallest they can be and slick as possible shouldnt they be fine? Im thinking what will give me the edge here is the aero and the cartridge cylinder you suggested. Thanks again,

Mitch

manchild
manchild
12
Joined: 03 Jun 2005, 10:54

Post

mjmurphy wrote:One more question.....I have been thinking about the wheels, and will it really matter how well they spin, I mean the car will finish the race in under 1.5 seconds, so as long as the wheels are the smallest they can be and slick as possible shouldnt they be fine? Im thinking what will give me the edge here is the aero and the cartridge cylinder you suggested. Thanks again,

Mitch
Yes, they should be smallest as possible, slick as possible, narrow as much as allowed and slipstreamed. Having in mind slickness, what kind of surface do these racers run on? I mean if it is something very smooth than too slick wheels could slide instead of turning and that would be bad.

BTW, you can find small ball bearings on some better quality computer cooler fans too.

Regarding that cylinder, make sure that it is in compliance with regulations before doing anything.

Guest
Guest
0

Post

Just a note on that thing you wanted to attach behind the CO2 cartrage. If you over-expand the gas there will be a lower pressure behind the car, which will 'suck it backwards' - not what you want.

mjmurphy
mjmurphy
0
Joined: 28 May 2005, 16:24

Post

Thanks, how should I know if I am over-expanding the gas?

manchild
manchild
12
Joined: 03 Jun 2005, 10:54

Post

mjmurphy wrote:Thanks, how should I know if I am over-expanding the gas?
Guest is right and what he wanted to say is that if you make this cylinder too wide or too long effect will be negative to performance of your car. Perhaps some aero/propulsion pro here could help you.

Guest
Guest
0

Post

Can someone help me in determining the size of the cylinder that will maximise propulsion? The CO2 cartridge has a burst pressure of around 7000 psi.

Guest
Guest
0

Post

Well

Firstly we have to decide if the flow will be supersonic, which i feel it would be, with an internal pressure of about 50MPa! (Huuuuuge)

Basically there is an optimal expansion ratio, which is the ratio of throat area and exit area. We want this optimal ratio so that the pressure is reduced from the internal pressure to exit (atmospheric pressure) in a controlled manor.

using k = 1.4 for air, atmospheric pressure as 95KPa, p internal 50MPa
the optimal expansion ratio is 149

So the area of the exit needs to be 149 times larger than the throat area.

Would it be possible to make a smooth tansition between the canister exit and the proposed nozzle? (in terms of regulations)

manchild
manchild
12
Joined: 03 Jun 2005, 10:54

Re: Jaguar F1 Team in Schools Challenge

Post

mjmurphy, give the dimensions of the cartridge to Guest so that he can calculate this propulsion stuff.

BTW, Guest, when you inquire about smooth transition do you actually mean that rear end of the cartridge should be exiting in the middle of cup shaped nozzle - something like those things on space rockets? I get the point but can't seem to figure out that in regulations.
http://www.f1inschools.us/misc/F1_Rules_2005.pdf

mjmurphy
mjmurphy
0
Joined: 28 May 2005, 16:24

Post

Here are the regulations regarding the cartridge.

CO2 cartridge chamber diameter - Min. of 19 / Max. of 20
Depth of hole Min. of 50 / Max. of 52

I believe it will be an 8 gram cartridge, similar to the 8g one found here at Leland Ltd.
http://www.lelandltd.com/

CO2 Cartrigde diameter - 18.5928mm
CO2 Cartrigde length - 6.4008mm
Burst Test Min. (psi) - 7250 psi

manchild
manchild
12
Joined: 03 Jun 2005, 10:54

Post

CO2 Cartridge length - 64.008mm (not 6.4008mm) that was a typo obviously...
So, the cartridge is meant not to be dipped fully into chamber and it will stare out between 14 and 12mm