Red Bull Racing arrived at
Melbourne on the back foot, problems during the pre-season tests
curtailed the mileage covered by the team, scuppering their
assessment of aerodynamic solutions.
One of the standout exclusions by the
team during pre-season testing was the placement of the FOM camera's
on the side of the nose. Several conclusions had been drawn but
although I'd thought about what we now see as Red Bull's plan I
scoffed at the morality of it. However as we have seen over the
years if the rules are ambiguous the teams will take advantage. The
regulations that pertain to the new nose camera positions were to
create further aero neutrality than had been seen in recent years,
with teams using the camera housings over the last few seasons to
make gains.
For instance teams would mount the
camera housings in between the pylons and behind the mainplanes
neutral centre section. This is an area of the car that the FIA have
desperately tried to limit the aerodynamic capability of due to the
net effect that can be seen downstream at the diffuser. Placing the
cameras in a certain way offered some teams an advantage. Red Bull
played with the housings in several positions throughout the last
ruleset with the aforementioned one of these an option, whilst the
'hammerhead' position (placed either side of the noses tip) was
another favourite. This not only created a desirable aero structure
off their outer edge but also created a little more front end
downforce with which to balance the car.
As we have seen in Melbourne, Red Bull
have chosen to run their cameras mounted within the nose, which for
many will be seen as a clear smack in the face to the regulations.
However I can confirm the legality of what has been done by the team
as 20.3.1 (technical regulations) states:
Referring
to Drawing 6, all cars must carry (i) a camera in position 4 and (ii)
a
camera or camera housing in positions 2 (both sides),
3 and either 1 or 5.
Article 20.3.4 takes care of the new
dimensional constraints designed to limit the placing of the cameras:
20.3.4
When
viewed from the side of the car, the entire camera (or dummy camera)
in position 2 shown in Drawing 6 must lie within a box formed by two
vertical lines 150mm and 450mm
forward
of the front wheel centre line and two horizontal lines 325mm and
525mm above the
reference
plane.
What this article fails to take into
account is the positioning of the camera(s) from the cars centreline
and therefore allows the placement of the cameras within the nose
itself.
I guess you're wondering why only one
camera has been made visible by the team and I refer you to the rest
of article 20.3.4:
Any
camera or camera housing fitted in the left hand position 2 shown in
Drawing 6 must be
mounted
in order that its major axis where passing through the centre of the
camera lens (or
corresponding
position for a camera housing) does not intersect any part of the car
lying
forward
of the camera or camera housing.
The opening in front of the left hand
camera therefore brings the team inline with this regulation, whilst
the regulations mean the right hand side can be covered minimising
any additional aero deficiencies.
Lastly I suspect you're wondering how
it's possible for the team to have a hole placed in this position on
the nose, this falls under the regulations pertaining to vanity
panels (a remnant of the 2013 regulations to hide step noses).
You'll note a small bump has appeared on the RB10's nose just ahead
of the camera peephole and this is due to the inclusion of the vanity
panel. The bump isn't a dramatic aerodynamic issue for Red Bull due
to their inclusion of the rear facing 'S' duct which will aid in the
re-attachment of the airflow as it passes over the bodywork (Coanda
effect).
Whilst it would be easy to imagine that
the team would have to place the entire camera housing within the
nose, all they need do is place the camera's within, this will also
have a marginal weight saving (1.2kgs in total or 0.6kgs per
housing).
I'm quite sure some of the other teams
will be looking at this as a means of disposing of their own camera
housings but this will rely heavily on if they are trying to leverage
an aerodynamic advantage from their current position (Mercedes and
Ferrari).
many thanks for yet another excellent series of posts, i was just wondering if you could clarify what would happen if the fia wanted to fit one of the 180 degree steerable cameras like the ones they had on the williams?
ReplyDeleteAs for the rotating element, it's only necessary for the team to have 5 camera's on the car and so they don't have to have position 2 with a forward and rearward facing camera. Just to add to this I'd suggest an agreement was struck between FOM and RBR anyway:
Delete[i]20.3.1 Any decision as to whether a camera or camera housing is fitted in those positions will be by agreement between the relevant Competitor and the Commercial Rights Holder[/i]
Thats a very rare informative post. Thats why I visit your site for knowing such kind of excellent news and tips.
ReplyDeletehttp://bdtechone.blogspot.com/