F1technical.net

roon wrote: ↑

26 Feb 2019, 22:31

Imagine this turbo formula if exhaust-blown diffusers had not been banned, and exhaust locations were still unspecified. Development would have gone crazy. I believe the 1.6 l units already flow something like 2.5x more air than the 2.4 l units? 4 bar at ~2/3 the revs. I wonder how much air they would have tried to move through the engine to energize the diffuser.

And if fuel flow and ignition limits were lifted, hot blowing would have been taken to a new level.

https://imgr2.auto-motor-und-sport.de/M ... 429628.jpg

godlameroso wrote: ↑

27 Feb 2019, 01:32

Regarding the front wings, are there any restrictions on the under wing strakes other than just having 2? I feel there is some untapped outwash potential with them. The wing, endplate, footplate, and strakes could all merge their vortices, and aim them at the same place on the outside of the tire. Then by their power combined you have outwash wing.

Or better yet, have one outwash strake, and one in-wash strake. Oh well, I'm sure the aero guys thought about this last year, and already ran the numbers to get what they got.

godlameroso wrote: ↑

27 Feb 2019, 01:32

Regarding the front wings, are there any restrictions on the under wing strakes other than just having 2? I feel there is some untapped outwash potential with them. The wing, endplate, footplate, and strakes could all merge their vortices, and aim them at the same place on the outside of the tire. Then by their power combined you have outwash wing.

Or better yet, have one outwash strake, and one in-wash strake. Oh well, I'm sure the aero guys thought about this last year, and already ran the numbers to get what they got.

Underwing Strakes
Bodywork underneath the wing, underwing strakes, are now limited to 2 (per side). Like the endplate, these pieces of bodywork require the creation of a virtual surface (Virtual Strake Surface, or VSS) upon which a whole set of regulations are defined to limit design freedom. When the visualisation is done, the strake must be applied so that it fully encloses the VSS and conforms to extremity limitations based on the VSS.

It's important to distinguish the virtual, 2-dimensional strakes from the actual, 3-dimensional (having a width) strake as not all rules apply to the final dimensions. Before being able to determine the form, let's first determine the area the 2 virtual strakes can sit in. That's simple enough: they must sit in a box underneath the wing between the Y500 and Y800 vertical planes.
Inside this box the 2 strakes can be applied in any position (disregarding the regulations on form for a moment), but the 2 virtual surfaces need to be at each and every point 50mm apart. Again, the virtual surfaces and not necessarily the actual strake (which is built around the virtual one). After that, we can determine the 'moveable' position of the VSS. It must sit in a 20mm box inside the bigger red box.

Now, the surface is not allowed to have an angle greater than 10° relative to the car centre plane. The next limiting factor is that it can only have one single curve in it. In order to have the final bodywork piece comply with 3.3.8 g) ( the strake has to fully enclose the VSS) and 3.3.8 h) (the strake cannot stick out of the wing element profiles), we'll now cut the VSS to the actual proportions and finalize the VSS:

With the VSS now finalized, we determine the maximum dimensions of the box the actual strake is allowed to sit inside:

Purple show the allowed dimensional extremities (6mm in- and outboard of the VSS) of the underwing strake, with the exception of the last 100mm, which have to be 3mm in - and outboard of the VSS (shown in blue). Yellow is just a box to help determine the extremities


Finally we define the strake. Note we optimize here. Even though the VSS is only allowed to have a maximum angle of 10°, we can squeeze a little bit extra out of it through playing with the width at the rear edge of the actual strake. The best way to illustrate this, is to show it from a birds eye view:

godlameroso wrote: ↑

27 Feb 2019, 12:54

So in simple terms the 2 strakes have to be parallel to each other and both must fit within a box. And its curvature and angle relative to the car is severly restricted. Right, thanks for clearing that up.

godlameroso wrote: ↑

27 Feb 2019, 13:19

In your very well done and informative post it says they must be 50 mm from each other at all points. I thought that meant they have to mirror each other's shape.

turbof1 wrote: ↑

27 Feb 2019, 13:36

godlameroso wrote: ↑

27 Feb 2019, 13:19

In your very well done and informative post it says they must be 50 mm from each other at all points. I thought that meant they have to mirror each other's shape.

No, the 50mm is a minimum. It's not fixed at 50mm, just that it needs to be at least 50mm.

Blackout wrote: ↑

27 Mar 2019, 11:12

We have no 2021 thread? Edit: we have one viewtopic.php?f=6&t=28009 Anyways AMuS claim they saw one of the latest 2021 concepts and interestingly it seems to have one of those old champ/indy car underbodies with a raised leading edge with multiple vanes/VGs, two long tunnels etc amongst some other features to enhance upwash at the rear etc...
https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... nterboden/

https://servimg.com/view/14795526/2474
https://i87.servimg.com/u/f87/14/79/55/26/62j0yh10.jpg
https://i87.servimg.com/u/f87/14/79/55/26/sebrin10.jpg
https://imgr2.auto-motor-und-sport.de/F ... 439389.jpg
https://imgr2.auto-motor-und-sport.de/F ... 439388.jpg
https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/F ... 439390.jpg