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.
they should also lower the height of the body at the front tires thus lowering wishbone and suspension. that way the decrease would not be that extreme
Speaking about the pelican, I thought about this design earlier this season but it seems it's not very legal.
The idea was to 'hide' the real nose/crash structure (its tip is shown by the arrow) in a higher pelican shaped false nose/vanity panel
: P
Astracrazy, you deserve a -1 for not showing us your drawing
(it's not me who gave you -1)
About Blonchimont's cut nose, is it possible to place two ''bananas' on each side of the bulckhead instead of only one placed in the middle (the nose would look similar to the Fw-26) ? would it be legal under the rules that concern the front section of the nose cone ?
Last edited by Blackout on 16 Oct 2013, 01:02, edited 1 time in total.
I wouldn't say that. Back then it was just a solution to the diffuser being cut away 40% in volume. Other teams used other solutions. A low nose was ultimately better in that ruleset, due CoG and other means to feed the diffuser. It also more looks like a compromise between CoG and air volume under the nose, while a similar solution would come out of a compromise between air volumr under the nose and regulations.
Btw, we've seen a lot of updates on the pilons of the mclaren, both shape and placement. Definitely looks like they want to continue with the broad nose, but then lower positioned. The big issue with the ant-bear nose is that it makes the turning-vane-alike pylons less effective (less air between the turning vanes -> less air straightened in yaw).
For all that ask if a certain design is possible ( upside down u shape, two bananas, v shape, duct as the 2008Ferrari ), i'll collect the most important rules that influence the 2014 nose design. Please correct me if i got anything wrong.
Section 50mm behind the nose tip
§15.4.3
An impact absorbing structure must be fitted in front of the survival cell. This structure need not be an integral part of the survival cell but must be solidly attached to it. No part of this structure may lie more than 525mm above the reference plane.
It must have a single external cross section, in horizontal projection, of more than 9000mm² at a point 50mm behind its forward-most point.
Furthermore :
a) No part of this cross-section may lie more than 250mm or less than 135mm above the reference plane.
b) The centre of area of this section must be no more than 185mm above the reference plane and no less than 750mm forward of the front wheel centre line.
Section A-A (front of the survival cell)
§15.4.4
"...No part of sections taken at the lines A-A and B-B may lie more than 525mm and 625mm respectively above the reference plane. ..."
TV cameras
§20.3.1
"...Referring to Drawing 6, all cars must carry (i) a camera in position 4 and (ii) a camera or camera housing in positions 2 (both sides), 3 and either 1 or 5. ..."
§20.3.4
When viewed from the side of the car, the entire camera (or dummy camera) in position 2 shown in Drawing 6 must lie within a box formed by two vertical lines 150mm and 450mm forward of the front wheel centre line and two horizontal lines 325mm and 525mm above the reference plane.
Any camera or camera housing fitted in the left hand position 2 shown in Drawing 6 must be mounted in order that its major axis where passing through the centre of the camera lens (or corresponding position for a camera housing) does not intersect any part of the car lying forward of the camera or camera housing.
Definition of sections
§1.20
Open and closed sections :
A section will be considered closed if it is fully complete within the dimensioned boundary to which it is referenced, if it is not it will be considered open.
Only a single section allowed
§3.7.8
"...Only a single section, which must be open, may be contained within any longitudinal vertical cross section taken parallel to the car centre line forward of a point 150mm ahead of the front wheel centre line, less than 250mm from the car centre line and more than 125mm above the reference plane. ..."
Height limitation
§3.7.9
"No bodywork situated forward of the line A-A referred to Drawing 5 may extend above a diagonal line from a point on A-A and 625mm above the reference plane to a point 50mm rearward of the forward-most point of the impact absorbing structure defined in Article 15.4.3 and 300mm above the reference plane. No bodywork situated forward of the forward-most point of this diagonal line may be more than 300mm above the reference plane. ..."
So what does this mean if we put them together?
§3.7.8 is limiting the shape of the nose in the following sense, if i interpret it correctly. Once there is bodywork that belongs to the nose at a certain width when viewed from the front, it is not possible to have bodywork closer to the car center line that this width if you move further rearwards to the section A-A of the survival cell. This rule also forbids ducts as that in the 2008 Ferrari. Such a duct would result in a closed section in front of the duct, which is not allowed.
§15.4.3 states that the section 50mm behind the nose tip must consist of a single external cross section. This outlaws having two bananas. The two bananas would need to be connected at that point. But if they are connected at this point it would result in a closed section as in §3.7.8.!
A v shape or inverted u shape 50mm behind the nose tip are possible, but the problem here to me seems that they both shift the center of area upwards. And as the center of area is fixed at 185mm this limits the freedom of design compared to a simple rectangle.
The pylons as shown in the pictures of the Jordan and the Benetton would also result in closed sections. The pylons next year aren't allowed to be near the nose, they have to be below the nose IMO.
Dear FIA, if you read this, please pm me for a redesign of the Technical Regulations to avoid finger nose shapes for 2016! :-)
Blackout wrote:
Astracrazy, you deserve a -1 for not showing us your drawing
(it's not me who gave you -1)
I know sorry guys i forgot again, that will teach me for coming on here whilst at work. Here is my version of a 2014 nose. Its not quiet the cut version on the other page
