35 replies to this topic

[Top Fuel F1]

Re:

http://nhra.com/2002...ages/scelzi.jpg

The new (not fully finished paint job) Alan Johnson/Gary Scelzi Toyota F/C looks quite swoopy. Especially unique in the rear wing area. Another F/C that had a rather unique overall aero treatment was the Schumacher/Bazemore car that got a lot of help from Reynard Motorsport LTD.
The rear wing on that car created a lot of controversy among the competition.

Rgds;

[AdamLarnachJr]

Wow? Toyota bodied drag cars in NHRA? Whats next? Thats pretty awesome, isn't that the Celica? That would explain the rather odd shape for the rear quarter panels in the body work, it looks almost as if it has an hour glass shape if you were to look at it from the top.

Very interesting.

[Top Fuel F1]

Originally posted by AdamLarnachJr
Wow? Toyota bodied drag cars in NHRA? Whats next? Thats pretty awesome, isn't that the Celica? That would explain the rather odd shape for the rear quarter panels in the body work, it looks almost as if it has an hour glass shape if you were to look at it from the top.

Very interesting.

Adam:

Keep in mind that the Firebird and Camaro will not be produced in 2003. That would leave only the Mustang as the only American made type of car emulated in this class of T/F F/C. So owner's that are on their toes would be looking for alternatives although that may be an import. It's not just a body, it's big time advertising.

Rgds;

[Powersteer]

When are Toyota going to release the road version? Its the best Toyota i've seen ever

[Top Fuel F1]

Originally posted by Powersteer
When are Toyota going to release the road version? Its the best Toyota i've seen ever



:cool:

My Supra doesn't look too bad; but certainly does not sound as good as this.

[AdamLarnachJr]

No I meant that it a positve way:) It would be great to see all manufactureres represented by both shells and powerplants:) A Toyato TF V8 sounds good to me:) Turbocharged DOHC Nitro engine? Its a winner in my book.

One might think however why GM wouldn't market the Impala, Monte Carlo, or even their Corvette FC bodies.

[Top Fuel F1]

Originally posted by AdamLarnachJr

One might think however why GM wouldn't market the Impala, Monte Carlo, or even their Corvette FC bodies.

The Impala and Monte Carlo form factors are seen in NASCAR. Corvette form factors have shown up in Drag Racing, however there currently isn't any in T/F F/C.

[AdamLarnachJr]

On the contrary, I saw a C5 body on a FC in IHRA competition a few months ago, also smaller grass roots organizations have them as well.

[Top Fuel F1]

Originally posted by AdamLarnachJr
On the contrary, I saw a C5 body on a FC in IHRA competition a few months ago, also smaller grass roots organizations have them as well.

I should have qualified that with "NHRA". That's all I generally get around to watching.

[imaginesix]

I guess they had to find a new use for the batmobile. It could only tour the monster truck circuit for so long before it wore out it's welcome amongst that crowd. :

On a more technical note, is it possible that the rear wing and greenhouse were designed such that downforce would be reduced as speed increased (presumably to the benefit of reduced drag). This might be accomplished by using the greenhouse as a 'launch ramp' for the airflow, over the top of the rear wing, at high speeds?

[AdamLarnachJr]

I don't know if they would want downforce reduced on the rear tires though, I've seen the things break loose at 270+mph like it was nothing so removing downforce would possibly increase the risk of loosing traction.

TF? Any thoughts on that?

[Top Fuel F1]

Originally posted by AdamLarnachJr
I don't know if they would want downforce reduced on the rear tires though, I've seen the things break loose at 270+mph like it was nothing so removing downforce would possibly increase the risk of loosing traction.

TF? Any thoughts on that?

Adam:

An Aero person would have to try to analyze the geometry of these new F/C tail treatments. Most of the first line race teams don't know much about them themselves. As evidenced by the Schmacher/Bazemore T/F F/C of 2001. They had Reynard Ltd. do the design of the body. I'm yet to hear who designed the one (Pic) at the top of this Thread. I have to check on this but I think the T/F dragster's wing exerts about 7K Lbs downward force. Don't currently have the drag value near the finish line. They can adjust those wings before the race. All I know is when one of these loses a wing, the car launches like a rocket.

Rgds;

[Top Fuel F1]

Originally posted by Top Fuel F1


Adam:

I have to check on this but I think the T/F dragster's wing exerts about 7K Lbs downward force. Don't currently have the drag value near the finish line. They can adjust those wings before the race. All I know is when one of these loses a wing, the car launches like a rocket.

Rgds;

Adam:

This data is several years old; but I believe it is approximately accurate for today's Top Fuel car:
1. The size of the rear wing is limited to 1,500 Square inches (0.96 sq. m.)
2. The main wing can have a max. of three elements
3. It can not be adjusted during the run
4. It can generate up to 7,000 Lb. (3,175 Kg) of downforce
5. Aggressive teams ajust to get as much downforce as early in the run as possible to keep the tires planted
6.The difference between an aggressive set-up and a conservative one is substaintial
7.A wing adjusted for max. downforce can produce 1,700 Lb (770 Kg) of drag, while a more moderate setting may only produce 1,100 Lb (500 Kg) of drag.
8. Full-size wind tunnel tests revealed that a Top Fuel dragster's total aerodynamic drag is approximately 4,000 Lb (1,815 Kg) at 300 mph (482 kph). Of course many runs are 320-330 mph today
9. 1 deg. change in the wing angle produces a 1.5 to 2 % change in downforce
10. The main wing and it's elements can be idividually adjusted
11. There are volumes of data on the slot geometry of multiple-flap airfoils; but the combination of wings foils used in this application have to be optimized in a wind tunnel
12. The interaction between the hot exhaust gases from the up-swept exhaust pipes and the wing is also a factor in the car's areo performance

Rgds;

[Top Fuel F1]

Re:

http://www.caselab.o.../tmb_thesis.pdf

This Is Titled: "Top-Fuel Dragster Wing Design Using CFD and it's Influence on Vehicle Dynamic Performance" You'll need the Adobe Acrobat (PDF) Reader to get it. I just found it, so I need to explore it myself.

[AdamLarnachJr]

Mucho gracias amigo... That's quite an article and I'm sure I'll be busy reading it.

Is there someway you the airstream can "flip" when certain pressures are exerted from different forces?

[Top Fuel F1]

Originally posted by AdamLarnachJr
Mucho gracias amigo... That's quite an article and I'm sure I'll be busy reading it.

Is there someway you the airstream can "flip" when certain pressures are exerted from different forces?

Adam:

I'm noy sure I understand your question, and even if I did I don't know if I'd be able (not being very studied on aero yet) to answer it.

Anyway getting back to T/F F/C: In qualifying at Pomona CA yesterday they were interviewing John Force's full time aero guy. Using the Lockeed Aircraft wind tunnel in Atlanta GA he developed a body (an a accumulation of many little improvements) that he believed would be much better than last years. On this car they had the same spoiler as last year. It's essentially a big rectangular box, having only three sides. On a subsequent run, and at the end, of the run the spoiler just caved in. The reaction to this was that that was a good sign. That is that so much more air was efficiently following over and around the cab into the spoiler, that it gave way. Simple solution: reinforce the spoiler.

Rgds;

[Top Fuel F1]

Originally posted by Top Fuel F1


Adam:

This data is several years old; but I believe it is approximately accurate for today's Top Fuel car:
1. The size of the rear wing is limited to 1,500 Square inches (0.96 sq. m.)
2. The main wing can have a max. of three elements
3. It can not be adjusted during the run
4. It can generate up to 7,000 Lb. (3,175 Kg) of downforce
Rgds;

On the TV coverage of the Pomona CA race yesterday they mentioned that the Rear Wing can exert up to 8,000. Lbs of down force. I checked my 2001 Rule Book and the limit of area for the rear wing was still 1,500 sq. in. So possibly the 2002 rules allows more square inches. By the way, the square area number is arrived at: " The combined total area (total of all stages and/or elements) canads and airfoils mounted/located behind the front wheel spindals is restricted to 1,500 Sq. In. Max." This is what the 2001 Rule Book says.

By the way, the front wing can exert up 3,500 Lbs of downforce.

[AdamLarnachJr]

Very interesting... what I was trying to say was that when the speed of the vehicle reaches a certain point, could the airflow coming off certain structures can significantly enhance, or reduce drag on certain parts of the vehicle, much like those two horn like shapes on the nose of Scelzi's FC?

[Top Fuel F1]

Originally posted by AdamLarnachJr
Very interesting... what I was trying to say was that when the speed of the vehicle reaches a certain point, could the airflow coming off certain structures can significantly enhance, or reduce drag on certain parts of the vehicle, much like those two horn like shapes on the nose of Scelzi's FC?

A possible comparison to your thought might be similar to the function that the large bulb (seen just below the water line at the bow) seen on large Ocean Liners or Tankers. I don't know if that is just for stability or something to do with releaving water friction along the hull behind it. Anyway I knew I was not going to be able to answer your question. We need an Aero guy.

Rgds;

[Top Fuel F1]

Originally posted by Top Fuel F1
Re:

http://nhra.com/2002...ages/scelzi.jpg

The new (not fully finished paint job) Alan Johnson/Gary Scelzi Toyota F/C looks quite swoopy. Especially unique in the rear wing area. Another F/C that had a rather unique overall aero treatment was the Schumacher/Bazemore car that got a lot of help from Reynard Motorsport LTD.
The rear wing on that car created a lot of controversy among the competition.

Rgds;

I was talking to a crew member of the Toyota T/F F/C at the NHRA Gainsville, FL race last week and found out that Swift Engineering (Re: http://www.swiftengineering.com/ ) designed (and possibly built) this body. Reportedly Swift is also involved with work in CART and at some time with F1.

[RiverRunner]

Jaguar used the Swift tunnel for aero work until their's was built.
I have a bud that is CC of Tollivers ride,next time I see him I'll pump him on aero and how he uses it.
He's just stepped up from Rick Santos' Alky rail so he's probably in a steep learning curve on the FC aero.

[Top Fuel F1]

Originally posted by RiverRunner
I have a bud that is CC of Tollivers ride

RiverRunner:

As of the Gator Nationals in Gainsville Jerry Toliver has had to park the car due to the lack of sponsorship. He ran the first two races out of pocket; but that was getting just too expensive.

Rgds;

[ray b]

Originally posted by AdamLarnachJr
No I meant that it a positve way:) It would be great to see all manufactureres represented by both shells and powerplants:) A Toyato TF V8 sounds good to me:) Turbocharged DOHC Nitro engine? Its a winner in my book.

One might think however why GM wouldn't market the Impala, Monte Carlo, or even their Corvette FC bodies.

BET there is not one toyato part in that car
Donvan Motors are a NEW al alloy block desended
from Mopar Hemi with all custom guts and al alloy heads
all top fuel cars use same motors no matter what body/brand/sponcors

only gas super/stocks [doorslamers] are limited to same co motors by rules
and they can't turbo or use fuel but run 200mph not funnycars +320 mph

[RiverRunner]

They never intended to go to Gainesville,their next race is Vegas.
He's still getting some WWF $$$ but not much.
His Vegas sponsor is a bordello!
I'll post the name which,slips my mind at the moment,when I talk to Norm.
Oughta see the new TF ride shaping up in the GSM shop,a twin prop Kurtis Kraft 501 hydro

[Top Fuel F1]

Originally posted by ray b


BET there is not one toyato part in that car
Donvan Motors are a NEW al alloy block desended
from Mopar Hemi with all custom guts and al alloy heads
all top fuel cars use same motors no matter what body/brand/sponcors

only gas super/stocks [doorslamers] are limited to same co motors by rules
and they can't turbo or use fuel but run 200mph not funnycars +320 mph

ray b:

Your right about the absence of any Toyota parts. I don't think there are many Donovan blocks around these days. You are right about the engine being a derivative of the stock Chrysler Hemi of the late fifties, with KB and Donovan being the main participants in the evolution to what exists today. I believe most blocks are either Keith Black (KB) or Rodeck currently. In any event, the CNC heads in the Toyota T/F F/C are made by Alan Johnson's Co. He is also the owner and Crew Chief of that team and sells heads to other teams. Another CNC head I see a lot of is from BAE (Brad Anderson Engineering), although you can still get KB heads. There is some variety of suppliers; but your basically correct in that there is a narrow avenue of sources. For instance the rear ends are all either from Chrisman or Strange. The clutch packs (I believe) are all from AFT (Applied Friction Technology). I don't know of anyone using other than MSD ignitions. There may be one or two Blower suppliers. It seems everyone is using fuel pumps from the same company. I'm not totally sure about that one.

In any event the F/Cs get sponsors like Ford, Camero, Firebird, Dodge, etc. and are some times refered to as such even though they supply none of the parts.

[Top Fuel F1]

Originally posted by RiverRunner
They never intended to go to Gainesville,their next race is Vegas.
He's still getting some WWF $$$ but not much.
His Vegas sponsor is a bordello!

RiverRunner:

Glad to hear that! Toliver was really on a roll at one time! He had good reason to stick with his CC of last year, in that he (Dale Armstrong) is famous in his own right and well know for being a great innovator over the years. However last year he just seemed to have lost the touch and the whole team (2 cars) was destroyed as a result. I really could not figure out what was going wrong and thought for sure they were trying to phase in a six disc clutch. I had RPM2DAY/Cruz P. check on this and they said that that was not the case.

Rgds;

[AdamLarnachJr]

Originally posted by ray b


BET there is not one toyato part in that car
Donvan Motors are a NEW al alloy block desended
from Mopar Hemi with all custom guts and al alloy heads
all top fuel cars use same motors no matter what body/brand/sponcors

only gas super/stocks [doorslamers] are limited to same co motors by rules
and they can't turbo or use fuel but run 200mph not funnycars +320 mph

Oh Im well aware of that:) My neighbor used the Rodeck TFX water block with Alan Johnson heads on a street car, didn't work too well, but was quite unique to say the least.

I was simply throwing ideas around, I would like to see some diversity in terms of powerplants, but getting a level playing field with things like that is close to impossible, and I doubt the NHRA would really give a rats *** about it.

I hope NHRA gives Pro Mod some playing room though, Gale Banks is working on a twin turbocharged V12 Mercedes drag car, titanium everything, carbon body, really trick.

[Top Fuel F1]

Regarding the Rodeck T/F block:

http://www.cinmach.c...stec-Rodeck.htm

I don't know why they emphasized "Dragster". The same block would also be used in a "Funny Car" as well.

Rgds;

[AdamLarnachJr]

What is the major difference between TF and FC? Is it a cylinder head provision or what? To me, after seeing and hearing the both in person (gotta love those pit revs!), I can find no real difference, is it a fuel mixture?

[Top Fuel F1]

Originally posted by AdamLarnachJr
What is the major difference between TF and FC? Is it a cylinder head provision or what? To me, after seeing and hearing the both in person (gotta love those pit revs!), I can find no real difference, is it a fuel mixture?

Adam:

Fundamentally the only difference between T/F and F/C is the chassis, the body and the wings/air foils. There is kind of a misnomer involved with this. Actually the Dragsters and the Funny Cars are both Top Fuel in that they both use approximately 90% nitromethane and 10% methanol. In the Dragster the driver is in front of the engine (in a very long car) and in Funny Car they are behind it (in a relatively short car, due to the need to comply with the body styling). Due to the characteristics of the difference in the aerodynamics (between T/F and F/C), there is some slight differences in the tuning of the cars. However the engine and drive train parts (including the rear wheels/tires) are absolutely the same parts. Also all the technical rules concerning these parts are the same as well as the method of tuning.

Rgds;

[Top Fuel F1]

Originally posted by Top Fuel F1

Due to the characteristics of the difference in the aerodynamics (between T/F and F/C), there is some slight differences in the tuning of the cars.

The fundamental reason I say this is that typically the F/C has a slightly slower E.T. Say on a day when the T/F does a 4.55 sec. run, a F/C might do a 4.85 sec. run (just as a rough example). As such, by definition the pneumatic timers controling the fuel feed and the clutch engagement would have to be set to different values in that things will occur at different times during a run from the T/F to the F/C.

There are two basic reasons that contribute to the difference in E.T.s. The least of which is that the F/C's minimum weight is 200 Lbs. more than the T/F's. This is without considering the weight of the drivers. The more important reason involves aerodynamics. The T/F's shape is like a dart and the F/C's shape is like a ball. No matter how aerodynamic the ball is, the dart cuts through the air better (even though it has several things sticking out in to the slip stream). Also the wings (both front and rear) of the T/F can much more effectively control and contribute to down force than the F/C's body/spoiler can.

Rgds;

[Bluehair]

TFF1, I have to disagree with you on the aerodynamics of a dragster vs. a funny car. Overall, I would be willing to bet that a funnycar, with its fully covered wheels, has less drag than a dragster. I think the dragster ends up with more downforce, at least during the first 1/2 of the run. Also, the dragster benefits from the leverage of the rear wing. As the wing "levers" the car, it is placing even more downforce on the rear tires than what the rear wing, alone generates (this is actually available from the front wing, otherwise the car would simply flip over). I think another advantage that a dragster has is its high percentage of static weight on the rear tires (hence better 60 ft times). If you look at the half-track speeds, it becomes clear that a funny car actually accelerates harder from half-track to the finish line. A funny car frequently gains as much as 70mph from half track to the finish line, vs 55-60mph for a dragster. I've read about several theories that attempt to explain this, one of which is the funny car's cleaner flow to the intake. My best guess is that the drag is actually lower on a funny car, and that a funny car gets a slight ground effect, leading to higher speeds than those ever recorded back when dragsters were lucky to run 4.70's. The funny car's ET. suffers from it's slower 60 ft times, and lack of downforce in the first half of the track.

By the way, a lot of funny car bodies are getting wind tunnel development, but I never hear of a dragster getting any wind tunnel time. Also, I'm still waiting to hear about the first guy to wind tunnel test either car with taller "growth simulated" tires.

Lastly...would it be legal to blend a funny car body onto a dragster to clean up the airflow around the driver, engine, and tires? With or without the rear wing? I think the penalty is about 60lbs of carbon fiber (the body) + whatever the manditory fire bottles weigh.

[Top Fuel F1]

Originally posted by Bluehair
TFF1, If you look at the half-track speeds, it becomes clear that a funny car actually accelerates harder from half-track to the finish line. A funny car frequently gains as much as 70mph from half track to the finish line, vs 55-60mph for a dragster. I've read about several theories that attempt to explain this, one of which is the funny car's cleaner flow to the intake. My best guess is that the drag is actually lower on a funny car, and that a funny car gets a slight ground effect.

By the way, a lot of funny car bodies are getting wind tunnel development, but I never hear of a dragster getting any wind tunnel time. Also, I'm still waiting to hear about the first guy to wind tunnel test either car with taller "growth simulated" tires.

Lastly...would it be legal to blend a funny car body onto a dragster to clean up the airflow around the driver, engine, and tires? With or without the rear wing? I think the penalty is about 60lbs of carbon fiber (the body) + whatever the manditory fire bottles weigh.

Bluehair:

1. Interesting observation you have made on the F/C's 2nd 1/2 track peformance. I've never seen a compilation/matrix of times for different sections of the track. Nor have I heard or read any comments on this. So this was not obvious to me. Again an interesting observation! Also in general I believe ground effects are not allowed in the NHRA. In fact I can think of one F/C that has two good size flaps on the back to allow air to escape as it goes down the track.

2. Yes some of the monied F/C teams are using wind tunnels. As well, some of these teams (with cars with the most unique aerodynamics) have employed some expert help like Reynard and Swift Engineering to design the bodies. I, like you, have not heard about "tire growth" being factored in to the wind tunnel testing. Although it's quite possible that companies like Reynard and Swift would think about that. Fundamentally they would gradually increase the car's angle of attack and at the same time narrow the wheel width. No, I haven't heard of any T/F tunnel testing either.

3. Regarding the stream lining of T/F Dragsters: Here's an article concerning this, which also has some good pictures of some T/F cars with enhanced aerodynamics that were actually used in compitition some time ago. One not shown is Don Garlit's latest car that he was running at the Gator Nationals a couple of weeks ago. It's the same car that he had another driver drive just after he had retired from full time racing. I'm generally not a fan of stream lining T/F cars. However Garlits' latest car had some features I liked. In addition to the enclosed canopy it has a rear wing like an aircraft. Actually a "T" shape with a very wide vertical airfoil strut. It seems it would be a very stabilizing factor, especially in the middle of the track when these cars tend to move around.
Anyway take a look at the article:

http://www.nitronic.com/ratliff/

Anyway some other things that affect the aero go on in today's T/F cars. At the beginning of the run the frame actually arches in the middle. How much depends on the chassis builder and on some recent cars I notice that there are some diagonal turnbuckel members included within the chassis frame (adjustable in the pits) to adjust the amount of arching that takes place. On a good run more arching takes place and as well the car can carry the front wheels a few inches off the ground, for a good distance at times. All of this is at the same time affecting the angle of attack of both the front and rear wing members (which are at fixed angles set in the pits). Generally the max down force on the front wing can be around 3,500 Lbs. and the rear wing from 7,000 to 8,000 Lbs. Although this must be a great drag near the finish line, the T/F cars have got in the 332 MPH area at the finish as opposed to the 326 MPH range for the F/C.

Rgds;

[RDV]

TFF1 , any frontal area figures? FD & FC ,would love to do some simulation on these devices.... icing on the cake would be power curves and speed matrix(ces)...

[Top Fuel F1]

Originally posted by RDV
TFF1 , any frontal area figures? FD & FC ,would love to do some simulation on these devices.... icing on the cake would be power curves and speed matrix(ces)...

Re:
http://www.caselab.o.../tmb_thesis.pdf

RDV:

Other than the (Re: URL) I haven't seen much technical data published on the aero of T/F and F/Cs. It's a 159 page PDF and I haven't gone thru it all yet. I'll check the NHRA rule book to see if there are any min/max dimensions listed. I'm yet to search the SAE papers for anything on this. I doubt they have anything on this.

Rgds;

[Top Fuel F1]

Originally posted by RDV
TFF1 , any frontal area figures? FD & FC ,would love to do some simulation on these devices.... icing on the cake would be power curves and speed matrix(ces)...

RDV:

I assume you mean T/F & F/C. The NHRA Rule Book does have a lot of regulations on body dimensions and aero. It's probably too much to type and I don't have the faucilities to scan it. Unfortunately the NHRA doesn't post the rules on the Net. They want to get their $10. in the mail for it. If you want the data you could contact me by PM and give me your postal address so I could mail you a copy of the section on body dimensions and aero.

Rgds;