MIKEY_! My F1 car 2011

[MIKEY_!]

OK I'm 16 and interested in F1 so i decided to give building my own car a go (that was last year) and i spent the rest of the year learning and trying out different things. This year I've done a proper job and my car complies (mostly i think) with the current regs. I'll put some pics up of the Silverstone car soon and will be happy for any comment from you guys who actually know what your doing. Any tips you can give and anything on the car that is illegal or could be improved would be great.

PS this is not a project done on a computer. My skills in that area are not up to the job. It's a clay model and all my measurements are approx.

[MIKEY_!]

Soz if the pics are a bit out of focus. If you want detail of another part of the car just ask.

[Callum]

Hi Mikey, it's nice to see something made physically!

One question, though. I do not see any kind of exit at the rear of the car for the exhaust/radiators?

[MIKEY_!]

Ah good observation. What I have come up with is having the sidepod air exit behind the bargeboards along with the exhausts (I'm running an extreme version of Renaults FEE). The idea is that both flow under the step plane and the high speed flow of the exhaust (only at high revs now) will help suck air through the radiator system. Thus the cooling is improved allowing for smaller sidepod openings, 'cleaner' air reaches the beam wing and more hot air flows beneath the car and through the diffuser ... is this actually legal.

[Callum]

I kind of understand but how do you expect the hot air which has passed through the radiators to exit around the same forward facing hole they came from?

[elrumo]

COMPLIMENTS !!!
but, i suggest to think at another material.

[MIKEY_!]

Callum, try getting a bit of U shaped tubing and blow into one end, air still comes out the other end. The exit actually faces backwards slightly despite the "forward facing" part of the name. Air can't flow backwards through the system because of this. The exits are also angled downward at about 45 degrees to get the flow under the whole length of the step plane.

[MIKEY_!]

Thx elrumo. Yes this clay has its downsides but it gives me more freedom to make odd shapes than my current computer skills allow. Structurally its not great, this is why the car lacks the step plane that is required by the rules. Also why the measurements are so imprecise. Everything has to be quite thick just to support itself.

[MIKEY_!]

Here is the updated front wing for the German GP. Uses slots to give a four plane wing. I did this because almost all the downforce is created at the outer edge of the wing ahead of the tire(for better flow to the underbody).



Also there is a new upper element (a cascade i think correct me if I'm wrong). It is cleaner than the old one and more for getting air past the tires than downforce. There's also new turning vanes with a Ferrari style wing between.


Note the unorthodox nose cone profile.

Here is some detail of the endplate. The rear outer panel is new and the slots are designed to increase airflow under the wing while removing airflow from above, taking mclaren's concept further. (there are 'in' and 'out' slots just behind the leading edge of that flap too)



Grateful for any feedback. I'm planning to do aerospace engineering at Uni.

[MIKEY_!]

Ok an idea for next year...

A roll blade but with a very tall, narrow intake/airbox. To meet the required width to avoid digging into a gravel trap, use force India shape but with the back of their airbox removed so that the air flows cleanly to the wing.



Hope this pic helps... The existing airbox is cut away behind this line (red arrow) and a new opening created in the blade itself (red box).

This is effectively a roll hoop again but much narrower than anything else.

[Javert]

my car complies (mostly i think) with the current regs.

Pongo isn't in the list of allowed materials for exhausts exit. You're illegal

Great idea, I am always wondering if I could do a thing like this

[MIKEY_!]

Ah its not too hard if your good with practical stuff. I use this method cause im useless with CG programs but of course they are more accurate... this car isn't even symmetrical LOL

[Lurk]

The idea is good, but you need air for the engine and a tiny airbox as shown wouldn't pass the crash test I think.

[MIKEY_!]

The airbox would have to be wider than this blade but this is just and example. A large part of the structural integrity would come from the side supports anyway.

[matt21]

But do you then not have an airbox like everybody else, as you require a minimum inlet area?