|
|
F1 Technical Specification Discussion Centre
[Copy link]
|
|
|
Reply 579# satusembilan
aku harap la..
team mclaren design tak mengecewakan..sbb mclaren la kete tercantik dlm F1..even ada platipus hidung tu |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cantik tue bonus...
tapi kalau keta tak laju tak guna gak... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply 582# satusembilan
kalo ikut sejarahnyer..kete mclaren cantik..laju plak tu |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
biasenye kete yg cantik mesti laju, kete ala2 huduh sket mesti makan asap |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In order to increase safety, for 2012 the FIA has decided to lower the height
of the car's front section, primarily to lessen the chance of one's car's nose intruding
into the cockpit of another in the event of a side-on collision. As can be seen in this
diagram, the height of the chassis immediately ahead of the cockpit can still be up to
625mm above the reference plane (PR), but then in the space of 150mm it must fall to
550mm. This is expected to lead to some rather awkward-looking, stepped-nose
designs on the 2012 cars, including Ferrari's new machine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pc aku mcm problem..tak bole load gambar..aiyoo  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In Jerez Sauber evaluated a chassis vent similar in style to the one Ferrari used
on the F2008's nosecone back in 2008. At the time it was a significant innovation,
allowing airflow from under the car to pass to the top of the chassis to improve the
car's overall aero balance. But the solution was banned by the FIA from 2009 when
holes in the nose's lower section were outlawed. Sauber's new take on the solution,
however, is perfectly legal thanks to its location and smaller size. The benefit of running
the vent is thus much diminished, but in theory it should help reattach the airflow as it
passes over the large step in the C31's nose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For 2012 McLaren have radically changed the shape of their sidepods. The unique
L-shaped design of last year's MP4-26, which split the airflow (see blue arrows), has
gone. In its place is a horizontal, square shaped solution (see main drawing), reminiscent
of that introduced by the team at Silverstone in 2008, which sees the air channelled
past the sidepod towards the rear of the car (blue arrow). The sidepods are also very
high off the ground, with a much wider, more dramatic undercut, an arrangement similar
to the double floor solution seen on Toro Rosso's 2011 car.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
McLaren MP4-27 / Ferrari F2012 - nose comparison
McLaren is the only team thus far not to choose a stepped nose for their 2012
car, with the British squad opting to keep the whole front end of their chassis lower
to comply with the new regulations on nose height. In contrast, Ferrari have increased
the height of the F2012's chassis to 625mm above the reference plane (RP), the maximum
height permitted in the rules. The Ferrari's nose then drops quite brutally, via a step and
within the required 150mm, to a height of 550mm, also specified in the regulations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Like Sauber, Red Bull have seemingly been inspired by the 2008-spec Ferrari,
which featured a vent on its chassis to improve aero balance. In line with current
FIA regulations (holes in the nose's lower section were outlawed after 2008), Sauber's
solution appears on the top of the C31's chassis, behind the car's stepped nose. Red Bull,
however, have opted for a different solution with their chassis duct positioned at the
step itself (yellow highlight). This opening allows air to flow into the chassis (blue arrows).
The official line is that this has been designed to help cool the driver in the cockpit, but
it's possible there could be an aerodynamic advantage, or that it could help cool the
front suspension's inerter damper.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's been 11 years since pull-rod front suspension has been used in Formula One
racing. Back then it was the Gabriele Tredozi-designed 2001 Minardi. This season it's
the 2012-spec Ferrari. Interestingly, both then and now one of the drivers at the wheel
is Fernando Alonso. This drawing compares the traditional push-rod suspension (left) with
Ferrari's pull-rod layout (right). With the pull-rod layout the springs and dampers are
positioned lower in the chassis, which reduces the front suspension's centre of gravity.
Also, in the case of the F2012 the pull-rod link (right-hand black arrow) is angled almost
horizontally, which may help aerodynamically. But there are drawbacks to this
arrangement. Even though in theory the pull-rod link can be thinner than a push rod,
its extreme angle here neutralises any potential weight gain. Furthermore, because
the pull rod is mounted to the top wishbone, greater loads are applied to the wishbone,
which hence has to be stronger - and heavier - than it would have been.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Red Bull chief technical officer Adrian Newey has seemingly designed the RB8's rear
suspension so it can be aerodynamically influenced by the air flowing from the newly-positioned
exhaust exits (see yellow arrows). All the suspension's components (red arrows) - even the
driveshaft - feature wing-section profiles with a thickness to width ratio of 3:5. It's interesting
to remember that Newey was the first engineer to introduce a large wing section on the wishbone
and driveshaft of the Williams FW16 back in 1994. At the end of the '94 season, however, the FIA
banned the solution by introducing the aforementioned 3:5 ratio rule.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pesal fia suh buat hidung camtu ha? takke effect aerodynamic keta? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply 594# mesinbasuh
untuk peraturan baru..buat la design mcm tu..
takde masalah utk aero sbb diaorng dah buat simulasi dan test dlm wind tunnel..
kalo ada problem aero ..dah lama team lain semua ikut design hidung team Mclaren tu.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Red Bull RB8 - revised exhaust positioning
After an FIA crackdown forced teams to reconsider how they position their exhaust
exits, Red Bull initially placed the RB8's quite far back so the air was efficiently directed
towards the beam wing and centre of the car. But, at the final pre-season test, designer
Adrian Newey surprised everybody with a heavily updated RB8, which to an extent mirrored
a rival exhaust positioning solution previously showcased by Sauber, Ferrari and McLaren.
The exhausts are now much further forward and the revised rear bodywork has been designed
to direct the hot exhaust air in a wider and lower direction towards the rear of the car
(yellow arrows), between the tyres and the diffuser. This solution relies on the Coanda effect,
which guides the flow of air by using an assortment of curved surfaces surrounding
the exhaust (red arrows). As the surfaces curve away from the flow of air, low pressure
builds, which in turn forces the air to stay 'attached' and modify its direction. Red Bull's
design is closest in character to Sauber's but is even more extreme and sophisticated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
With the FIA placing tight restrictions on exhaust-exit positioning for 2012 in a
bid to eliminate blown diffusers, teams' solutions in this area and how those solutions
influence their cars' aerodynamic set-ups is already a real talking point of the new Formula
One season. McLaren's engineers have opted to send the hot exhaust air in a wide and
low direction towards the rear of the car (yellow arrows), between the rear tyre and the
diffuser. This utilises a scientific concept called the Coanda effect, which helps divert the airflow
downwards and along, even though the exhaust exit is angled upwards (left-hand red arrow)
as required by the regulations. The hot air is guided by an assortment of curved surfaces
which surround the exhaust (see the other red arrows). As the surfaces curve away from
the flow of air, low pressure builds, which in turn forces the air to remain attached to those
surfaces. The Coanda effect has also been exploited by Sauber and Ferrari this year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is the development that had some of Mercedes' rivals up in arms in Australia,
and which could yet cause controversy in Malaysia next weekend. Here we can see the
hole in the rear-wing endplate (purple arrow) that is exposed when the DRS is activated
(inset, red arrow). Beyond that, the exact workings of the system are speculation. The
most complex theory is that when the holes are 'opened', air is sucked into channels in the
endplates and routed via thin pipes down to the beam wing and then all the way through the
chassis until it reaches the nosecone. There it is channelled down through the two front-wing
pillars to the front-wing flaps, where it is released, stalling the wing in F-duct fashion, cutting
drag and boosting top speed. It is effectively the same F-duct system used by the team two
years ago (with air flowing from the nose, through the chassis, to the rear wing), but in
reverse. In simple terms, it acts as a front-flap adjuster, reducing drag and downforce at
the front of the car, balancing it with the loss of drag provided by the DRS at the rear. A far
simpler theory is that the system acts like an F duct, but purely on the rear wing. Either
way, the grey areas in terms of legality are whether it is considered to be passive in its
operation (legal) or driver operated (not legal), and whether it is acceptable for the
driver-operated DRS mechanism to have such a secondary function. Red Bull and
Lotus have requested clarification from the FIA and hope to have it before
the Sepang weekend.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
isyh isyh pandai tol depa ni carik lubang yek |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Post time 27-1-2012 09:20 AM
