- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
Continuing our series analysing the biggest changes in the 2019 bodywork regulations changes, we take a look at the new restrictions for the front brake cooling ducts.
Yeah I'm expecting the slots to grow a bit with more geometry around the edges, similar to the leading edge of Mercedes W floor but rotated 90.godlameroso wrote:I still think that the new rear wing has much more potential to create downforce, given it's placement and geometry of the diffuser, and the wider floor.
There is definitely the possibility to exploit this area, especially given the wider floor and higher possibility for undercut or using ducts that pass through the side pod to enhance the potential of this area.I think the slotted floors (in front of the rear wheel) are a small but underrated 2016 development feature.
Anyone know if the impact of the wider floor + unchanged side pod width will increase the efficacy of slotted/serrated floors?
The challenge would be stabilizing the flow structures in that area, because it could cause chassis problem if they're sensitive to pitch for instance.
Truth be told there's so much that can be developed that the teams are scrambling for time, even those that got a head start.
Even now that teams are in the process of passing the crash tests, and have their chassis signed off for manufacturing, they're kicking themselves because there's not enough time to implement neat new things they've learned.
roon wrote:The area between the rear wheels, and beneath the rear wing, and above the diffuser, is actually smaller in these new regs. (The wing is lower, the diffuser is higher, and the space between the inside faces of the rear wheels will be about the same.)
This may influence radiator exits & monkey seats. If I read the regs correctly, I don't see any changes to the area which permits the monkey seat, so it will be closer to the underside of the rear wing if kept, although no closer than 50mm, which is stipulated.
Regarding slotted floors: the slots will remain 50mm wide, the regs defining continuous floor surfaces have scaled according to the new 1600mm floor width. The rule defining the shape of the floor periphery has one change: it can be radiused 100mm, increasing from 50mm. But I think that has more influence on the flip-ups around the floor's leading edges & corners.
Where is this open area on the engine cover? Towards the intake or towards the rear wing?"I don't. The rules are quite prescriptive. There is an area on the engine cover where we might see a few variations and things," he said.
"There is a bit more of an open area, and a bit more of an open area there but you don't really notice it to be honest. Once again, if you painted them all black you would struggle to notice.
http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/2017- ... ms-858775/
I believe he is referring to the rear end of the engine cover. Some small changes were made to the minimum-radius bodywork rules that define the smooth engine covers. Article 3.8.4. There is now an enlarged free zone at approximately the same location where we saw Merc's engine-cover-guide-vanes. It's an area between the rear wheels, which is now 75mm taller (relative to the floor). My guess is this should allow bodywork development around & above the throat of the diffuser, which for 2017 will begin rising through that same area—between the wheels and ahead of the rear axle.SectorOne wrote:Where is this open area on the engine cover? Towards the intake or towards the rear wing?"I don't. The rules are quite prescriptive. There is an area on the engine cover where we might see a few variations and things," he said.
"There is a bit more of an open area, and a bit more of an open area there but you don't really notice it to be honest. Once again, if you painted them all black you would struggle to notice.
http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/2017- ... ms-858775/
The gap between rearwing endplates and tyres looks too small if it osciliates it will hit the tyre. Maybe he got something wrongFrukostScones wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZ-zFw6H320
The rears look a bit toooo Fat in this new animation imo, but apart from this and the (too plain) Bargeboardery it looks ass
What about the side crash structures, do they have to extend to 1,600mm from the car centerline?roon wrote:I believe he is referring to the rear end of the engine cover. Some small changes were made to the minimum-radius bodywork rules that define the smooth engine covers. Article 3.8.4. There is now an enlarged free zone at approximately the same location where we saw Merc's engine-cover-guide-vanes. It's an area between the rear wheels, which is now 75mm taller (relative to the floor). My guess is this should allow bodywork development around & above the throat of the diffuser, which for 2017 will begin rising through that same area—between the wheels and ahead of the rear axle.SectorOne wrote:Where is this open area on the engine cover? Towards the intake or towards the rear wing?"I don't. The rules are quite prescriptive. There is an area on the engine cover where we might see a few variations and things," he said.
"There is a bit more of an open area, and a bit more of an open area there but you don't really notice it to be honest. Once again, if you painted them all black you would struggle to notice.
http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/2017- ... ms-858775/
Also, that same reg has another change. The sidepod intake area isn't defined until 150mm farther back, so we may see more development there with fins, inlets, fine edges & apertures. I believe this is an enlargement of the zone which permits the familiar sidepod vortex generators seen on previous years' cars.
Good point. Side impacts structure regs look unchanged. The structures are generally in the same location across all the cars—the approved locations are narrowly defined. The wording is obtuse, so I'll spare you it, but basically the structures need to be covered in a way that makes them less apparent, not just an obvious spike with bodywork over it. You'll recall that the most we've seen of those structures, from the outside, is a small bump on the sidepod. This is specifically due to how the rules are written.godlameroso wrote:What about the side crash structures, do they have to extend to 1,600mm from the car centerline?
would be funny if someone came with 1400mm side pods (but maybe some secret (to meroon wrote:Good point. Side impacts structure regs look unchanged. The structures are generally in the same location across all the cars—the approved locations are narrowly defined. The wording is obtuse, so I'll spare you it, but basically the structures need to be covered in a way that makes them less apparent, not just an obvious spike with bodywork over it. You'll recall that the most we've seen of those structures, from the outside, is a small bump on the sidepod. This is specifically due to how the rules are written.godlameroso wrote:What about the side crash structures, do they have to extend to 1,600mm from the car centerline?
I can't rule out that teams will find ways around it if they need to, but this regulation seems like it will perpetuate the hourglass shape of the sidepods that we're used to seeing.
) paragraph is prohibiting this?)
