Jump to content


Photo

Increase in sidepod height (1989 to 1996)


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 Ali_G

Ali_G
  • Member

  • 18,157 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 06 December 2011 - 21:30

Anyone explain to me why sidepods became so much taller between 89 and 96.

The only reason I could possibly think of would be a need for increased cooling. However, there would have only been a marginal increase the heat being developed by the engines over the period due to increased revs. The sidepods by 1995 and 1996 were enourmous compared to those at the very beginning of the decade.

1989 Leyton House
Posted Image


1995 Williams
Posted Image

Edited by Ali_G, 06 December 2011 - 21:39.


Advertisement

#2 cheapracer

cheapracer
  • Member

  • 10,388 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 07 December 2011 - 06:33

Have you actually checked the rulebook dimensions of those years as it may be as simple as that?

#3 jimjimjeroo

jimjimjeroo
  • Member

  • 1,411 posts
  • Joined: December 08

Posted 07 December 2011 - 07:05

Side impact protection for the drivers in the wake of the Italian GP May 1994

#4 Ali_G

Ali_G
  • Member

  • 18,157 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 07 December 2011 - 12:27

1994
Posted Image

1993
Posted Image

1992
Posted Image

Seems to be progressional, with a big jump between 1993 and 1994 on the Williams. If anything, there is no increase in height between 1994 and 1995 after the Senna crash.

The sidepods also appear to start much further back on the car for 1994.

Edited by Ali_G, 07 December 2011 - 12:34.


#5 mariner

mariner
  • Member

  • 1,368 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 07 December 2011 - 16:05

Two possible reasons

Firstly, the regulations changed to limit car overall width and it may be that narrowing the pod width to match the narrower tyre width was the best thing for aero. That would require the pods to get higher to keep up the total radiator area.

Secondly ,The growing use of CFD may have let the designers ( or aero men anyway) to be more adventuruos with sidepod shape. Historically anything with a curve or camber down on the car upper body was viewed with suspicion as it could induce lift . With CFD it is possible to model or visualize much more complex shapes so higher pod heights and downward sloping bodywork to get space under the wing , as in today's cars, is more feasible.

Something similar happened between the F-117 stealth fighter and the B-2 stealth bomber. The strange multi angled facets on the F-117 were not what the designers wanted for aero performance , it was just that ( apparently) the computer modelling of the day coudn't resolve too many angles for optimum stealth so flat surfaces were used. By the time the B-2 came along they had improved the modelling so it is much smoother shape ( i.e many, many facets) to help the aero performance.

#6 Powersteer

Powersteer
  • Member

  • 2,460 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 07 December 2011 - 21:37

Trying to get more air to the diffuser....just like raised nose which kept getting more and more snobbish that does the same thing, more diffuser air feed.

:cool:

#7 Ali_G

Ali_G
  • Member

  • 18,157 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 08 December 2011 - 15:08

Two possible reasons

Firstly, the regulations changed to limit car overall width and it may be that narrowing the pod width to match the narrower tyre width was the best thing for aero. That would require the pods to get higher to keep up the total radiator area.


Didn't realise this happened. The only time I remember something similar was for 1998 when the width of the car from wheel to wheel was narrowed.

Any idea what season this came in ?

#8 Fat Boy

Fat Boy
  • Member

  • 1,841 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 08 December 2011 - 17:47

Secondly ,The growing use of CFD ...


Whatever the reason, I think we can safely rule out early 90's CFD.

#9 Ali_G

Ali_G
  • Member

  • 18,157 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 11 December 2011 - 13:30

Trying to get more air to the diffuser....just like raised nose which kept getting more and more snobbish that does the same thing, more diffuser air feed.

:cool:


The difference there is that a high nose forces more air through the underside of the diffuser.

Have a higher sidepod with an undercut, force more air above the diffuser.

#10 DrProzac

DrProzac
  • Member

  • 1,894 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 11 December 2011 - 14:10

According to f1technical they've increased cockpit area side test load (from 2000daN to 3000daN) for 1994. It may be related. Though it probably didn't affect the sidepods.

#11 One

One
  • Member

  • 6,527 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 21 December 2011 - 10:19

An arm chair thinking that:

Air flow behind the front wheel has bad current, and it disturbs flow towards the rear wings?

As engine revved higher and huger, operating temp of engine raised as engine start to run hot, thus more air to radiator? Till Ferrari exploiting new metal block where engine could run hotter, was 2004?

Getting to know more about how to sort air flow around the rear wheel, by placing higher side pods it reduced the bad current and sorted out better?

Found Down wash behind the side pods actually created more down force on top side of the rear end body shell??

Started under cut, so whole thing got lifted?