Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

2014 Cars


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 alexbiker

alexbiker
  • Member

  • 583 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 07 January 2014 - 13:12

Quick question:

Will 2014 cars need an airbox?

ATM_Andy is trailing his coat in the Racing Comments forum - apparently the MP4-29 is very different, so different we'll be able to tell before the drapes come off. . . .

 

Forced induction, electrically spun turbos - will an airbox still be needed?



Advertisement

#2 desmo

desmo
  • Tech Forum Host

  • 13,231 posts
  • Joined: January 00

Posted 07 January 2014 - 13:50

I think the name changes to "plenum chamber" as soon as a supe is fitted.



#3 RogerGraham

RogerGraham
  • Member

  • 135 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 07 January 2014 - 15:44

Surely there'll still be a roll-hoop for safety reasons, even if there isn't an airbox opening as we know them today - therefore the silhouette will be similar, at least?  We'll see soon enough :-)



#4 MatsNorway

MatsNorway
  • Member

  • 2,088 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 07 January 2014 - 19:35

Not that i believe it but perhaps the knife blade roll-hoop is back. I liked that stuff. it looked good.

 

 

 

Are they allowed to tilt the engine on the side?      


Edited by MatsNorway, 07 January 2014 - 19:36.


#5 Ali_G

Ali_G
  • Member

  • 18,447 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 08 January 2014 - 00:02

The rules for 2014 sadly essentially force the air intake to remain above the drivers head. The primary reason being the teams wanting a nice large area on the sides of the car for advertising. The turbo intake cold easily be placed in a better area for aero if it was allowed.

#6 bigleagueslider

bigleagueslider
  • Member

  • 898 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 08 January 2014 - 05:36

An airbox feeding the turbo compressor inlet provides similar benefits that an airbox feeding the inlets of a N/A engine does. The increased dynamic air pressure created by the airbox diffuser effect helps the turbo compressor performance. And the trade-off between improved compressor performance and aero-drag likely favors the existing intake location at the roll hoop.



#7 murpia

murpia
  • Member

  • 344 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 08 January 2014 - 21:14

You can see the Caterham 2014 roll hoop in this video, complete with airbox entry:

 

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=QhTObVI2C8M

 

Regards, Ian



#8 RogerGraham

RogerGraham
  • Member

  • 135 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 10 January 2014 - 01:32

From http://plus.autospor...ines-explained/:

 

"Aside from Renault's early F1 turbo engine, a single centrally mounted turbo has not been employed in F1, so we're used to seeing the turbo's air inlet protrude snorkel-like upwards from the sidepod.

 

With the 2014 turbo being mounted slightly behind the engine, there's space for the airbox to reach up to the current roll-bar inlet, so in many respects the cars will not look so different.

 

But this is not regulated, so teams may find better places to package one or two inlets, the only stipulation being that they must be above the ground by some 20cm.

 

This might open up aerodynamic possibilities for not having a large roll-hoop or make some aerodynamic use of the negative pressure the inlets produce."



#9 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 3,604 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 12 January 2014 - 12:53

But this is not regulated, so teams may find better places to package one or two inlets, the only stipulation being that they must be above the ground by some 20cm.


The rules also state that the intake must lie on a vertical plane which is perpendicular to to the logitudinal centreline of teh car and that the intake must be visible from the front.

Realsitically, is there any better position on the car for an intake?

#10 RogerGraham

RogerGraham
  • Member

  • 135 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 12 January 2014 - 14:47

Someone at Autosport needs to re-read the rulebook!  But it shows how mind-bogglingly prescriptive F1 rules are now.  Why on earth do they regulate that?  And that's just the very tip of a ginormous iceberg.  

 

You'd think the good designers would walk away from such prescriptive rules, but apparently the challenge of being the best at interpreting such rules overcomes any frustration at being so constrained.



#11 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 3,604 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 12 January 2014 - 20:56

Just to show that I am not making that up:

5.14 Engine intake air :
5.14.1 With the exception of incidental leakage through joints or cooling ducts in the inlet system (either into or out of the system), all air entering the engine must enter the bodywork through a maximum of two inlets which are located :
a) Between the front of the cockpit entry template and a point 500mm forward of the rear wheel centre line longitudinally.
b) No less than 200mm above the reference plane vertically.
c) On vertical cross-sections normal to the car centre line.
Furthermore, any such inlets must be visible in their entirety when viewed from the front of the car and without the driver seated in the car.

5.14.2 Other than engine sump breather gases, exhaust gas recirculation, and fuel for the normal purpose of combustion in the engine, the spraying of any substance into the engine intake air is forbidden.


I would say that they are trying to prevent the teams from using the engine systems to provide aerodynamic aid.

#12 demet06

demet06
  • Member

  • 121 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 14 January 2014 - 19:42

From what I've seen so far with the engine regs and chassis regs is that the FIA would like every car to be identical. They seem to be trying to take the innovative designer out of the equation. Why don't they just employ a company to make all the engines and another to make all the chassis and be like all the rest of the one make series? That's not what F1 is about as far as I'm concerned. The fact that teams could come up with ground effect, or an F Duct or exhaust blown diffusers and many other countless devices to make the cars go faster. That's what makes F1 what it is, the freedom (within the rules) to design the fastest car possible. 

I feel that this seasons cars might not give us the visual thrill of years gone by but there may be compensations in unreliability to give us some exciting racing.



#13 Catalina Park

Catalina Park
  • Member

  • 5,783 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 15 January 2014 - 05:23

I think that control aero and make everything else free would be the way to go.