MECH5030M Individual Project Report Team 27 Tarass Gorevoi (SID: 200 566 920) Supervisor: Prof. Martin Priest Examiner: Prof. Tim Cockerill “Formula Student Engine: Design and Construction of F15 Cooling System" Date: 1st May 2014
SCHOOL OF MECHANICAL
ENGINEERING
TITLE OF PROJECT PRESENTED BY IF THE PROJECT IS INDUSTRIALLY LINKED TICK THIS BOX AND PROVIDE DETAILS BELOW THIS PROJECT REPORT PRESENTS OUR OWN WORK AND DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY UNACKNOWLEDGED WORK FROM ANY OTHER SOURCES. SIGNED DATE
Design and Construction of F15 Cooling System
Tarass Gorevoi
COMPANY NAME AND ADDRESS:
N/A
INDUSTRIAL MENTOR:
MECH5030M TEAM PROJECT 60 credits
Abstract
Engine overheating issues are of a high importance for Formula Student (FS) competition;
therefore, it is essential to understand every aspect of the cooling system. This report is mainly
focused on the analysis of the air flow through the side pod with various angles of attack of
radiator and design analysis of the side pod. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) was a main tool
for this study and all simulations were based on the University of Leeds F15 prototype. The report
also highlights the main cooling system areas which needs developments.
During this study the side pod 3D CAD model was build first, along with the radiator 3D model. For
the analysis, the speed of flow was used as a top speed at FS competition which was taken as 27.78
m/s in the CFD package ANSYS 14.5. Five different designs were produced to choose the optimal
one for our particular case. Flow inside the side pod, pressure distribution on the radiator and
aerodynamic coefficients (Cd, Cl) were recorded. Using the optimum side pod, the radiator angle of
attack was changed vertically from 0 to 45 degrees in order to determine the most efficient
position. It was found that the angular setup of the radiator at 10 degrees showed the best cooling
performance as well as aerodynamic characteristics. The heat transfer rate was 12% higher rather
than 45 degree setup, which was used on last year’s LFRT car.
Acknowledgements
I would not have been able to finish my individual project without the academic and practical input
of the following people:
Professor Martin Priest - for guidelines and support throughout the project.
Dr Carl Gilkeson - for help given during my CFD simulation setup.
Mr. Jonathan Stephenson, Tony Wise – for all their assistance in practical work.
I would also like to thank everyone in the University of Leeds Formula Student Team 2014 for
contribution into building F15 race car.
Page | 1
Table of Contents Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................. 1
Table of Symbols ................................................................................................................................... 3
1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 4
1.1 Aims and objectives .................................................................................................................... 5
1.2 Formula Student ......................................................................................................................... 5
2. Literature Review.............................................................................................................................. 6
2.1 Liquid-cooled combustion engine system .................................................................................. 6
2.2 Thermostat .................................................................................................................................. 7
2.3 Water Pump ................................................................................................................................ 8
2.4 Radiator ....................................................................................................................................... 8
2.5 Cooling Fan ................................................................................................................................ 10
2.6 Coolant sensors ......................................................................................................................... 11
2.7 Aerodynamics ........................................................................................................................... 12
2.8 CFD ............................................................................................................................................ 13
3. Methodology .................................................................................................................................. 14
3.1 Critical Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 14
3.1.1 Thermostat ......................................................................................................................... 15
3.1.2 Water pump cover ............................................................................................................. 15
3.1.3 Cooling Fan ......................................................................................................................... 16
3.2 Side Pod Design ......................................................................................................................... 17
3.2.1 Mesh Dependency Study, CFD Setup ................................................................................. 17
3.2.2. Side Pod Design Analysis ................................................................................................... 21
3.2.3 Radiator Angle of Attack .................................................................................................... 22
Page | 2
3.3 Manufacture, Assembly and Testing ........................................................................................ 23
4. Results ............................................................................................................................................. 24
4.1 Side Pod .................................................................................................................................... 24
4.2 Radiator Angle of Attack ........................................................................................................... 27
5. Discussion ....................................................................................................................................... 28
6. Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................... 30
6.1 Recommendations for future works ......................................................................................... 31
7. References ...................................................................................................................................... 32
Appendix A: Enclosure dimensions and boundary conditions ........................................................... 34
Appendix B: Radiator top mounting bracket drawing ....................................................................... 35
Appendix C: Radiator bottom mounting bracket drawing ................................................................. 36
Appendix D: Side pod design final renderings on F15 Chassis ........................................................... 37
Appendix E: Cooling system final assembly 3D CAD model renderings ............................................. 38
Page | 3
Table of Symbols
Cd - Drag Coefficient
Cl - Lift Coefficient
3D - three-dimensional
CFD - Computational Fluid Dynamics
CPU - central processing unit
SAE - Society of Automotive Engineers
FS - Formula Student
LFRT – Leeds Formula Race Team
IC - Internal Combustion
SI - Spark Ignition
ECU - Engine Control Unit
CFM - cubic feet per meter
Page | 4
1. Introduction
Engines running on gasoline do not convert all the energy from combustion into useful work. The
majority of the heat has to be dissipated using a cooling system. This has to be done effectively, as
the engine has to run at its optimum temperature to provide the most efficient performance.
Furthermore, the cooling system should dissipate enough heat even under maximum loading
conditions (1). On the other hand, the cooling system should not be excessively big as this would
result into a considerably higher cost, unnecessary weight gain and could result in the engine
overcooling. However, some form of a cooling system is essential for the engine to run at its
optimal ability and the design of the cooling system itself is usually built on optimization and
careful analysis of every cooling system component.
The main task for this project is to build a working cooling system for the F15 Leeds Formula Race
Team car, which uses a KTM 450EXC single-cylinder engine which was constructed in 2009. The
cooling system for this engine was previously modified from a default one because it is used on a
car which is heavier than a bike for which this engine is used. Furthermore, the engine sits behind
the driver’s seat which restricts the air flow around the engine meaning that more heat needs to
be rejected using a radiator with a fan. In addition to that, Formula Student competition has a low
average speed, which means that sufficient flow rate still has to be provided by a fan. Among many
other small factors, packaging of all cooling system components has to be made wisely, due to the
fact that a well packaged system will weigh less.
This report mainly focuses on the CFD analysis undertaken to increase efficiency of the previous
cooling system by building an efficient side pod for the particular radiator and by changing the
angle of attack of the radiator. In the analysis rotating wheels and a moving road track were set up
in the CFD package ANSYS 14.5 for a more realistic simulation. Apart from CFD, all components of
the cooling system were critically analysed to determine the areas of improvement, particularly
paying attention to a weight saving factor.
Page | 5
1.1 Aims and objectives
The aim of this project is to build a working cooling system for F15 LFRT car, which uses a KTM
450cc single-cylinder engine.
The design of the Formula Student car according to FSAE rules should meet certain requirements
and when talking about cooling systems of a FS car, packaging is the one of the most important
parts. According to the task the CFD model of the cooling system is to be built and used in order to
investigate the most efficient position of the radiator, and design of the side pod.
Project objectives are as followed:
1) Complete full literature review with the purpose of createing background knowledge of
cooling systems and to understand the key areas which affect engine performance.
2) Perform a critical analysis of the current cooling system and identify areas for
improvement.
3) Create a 3D design model of the investigated system in CAD software.
4) Produce a detailed Computational Fluid Dynamics model to understand flow characteristics
for developing the cooling system.
5) Build the full cooling system and test it on the track, taking part failures and quick solutions
into consideration.
6) Draw conclusions from the above ultimately assessing the effectiveness of the new design
and suggesting any further potential areas for development.
7) Prepare a full project report documenting the completion of all mentioned points and pass
all details to a future team.
1.2 Formula Student
Formula Student (FS) is the most popular educational motorsport annual contest ran by Institute of
Mechanical Engineers (IMechE) held in Silverstone circuit. Teams from all over the world compete
between each other in three ‘static events’ (Cost analysis, Presentation, Engineering Design),
where teams are judged on their presentation, costing skills, and their design justification. There
are also five ‘dynamic events’ (acceleration, skid pan, autocross, efficiency, endurance) where the
performance of the car is tested as well as the student drivers (2). The LFRT is competing in FS this
year with its 15th formula car, F15.
Page | 6
2. Literature Review
Nowadays everybody is using automotive transport in one way or another, which is powered by
the engine. In most cases it is an internal combustion engine, where the temperature in the
combustion chamber reaches 2000oC (3). Without the cooling system these kind of temperatures
would lead to overheating of the engine components and as a consequence would lead to
functional failure. For this reason, air or water cooling is necessary. For an air-cooled system a
radiator, hoses and water pump is not needed because engine is cooled just by airflow around the
engine unit. Direct cooled engines were popular in the motorcycling industry and were rarely used
in automotive engineering, due to the size of the engines and the bodyworks structure. Even
though the water pump reduces engine efficiency and a radiator with hoses adds weight, it is
necessary for most of the modern IC engines to use liquid-cooling systems to produce enough heat
release.
2.1 Liquid-cooled combustion engine system
The FS car engine is only allowed to be cooled by water (2), and due to that a liquid-cooled system
had to be investigated in detail.
In liquid-cooled systems water or antifreeze is
circulated in a closed circuit. Liquid takes heat
from the cylinder walls and their heads and
transmits it through the radiator into the
environment by circulating in passages of the
engine and hoses with a radiator. In some cases,
the direction of flow can be controlled and water
can circulated first through the most heated parts
(valves, spark plugs, the combustion chamber
walls). Chamber walls heat due to the conversion
of a fuel energy, and almost one third of it has to
be dissipated by a cooling system (4). Heat from chamber walls is then transferred to the liquid in
passages by convection. The convection heat transfer system is shown on Figure 1, where hot
gases inside a chamber (red) are transferring heat through the chamber wall (grey) to liquid inside
Figure 1: Convection heat transfer in IC engine.
Page | 7
the cooling passage (blue). Therefore, directly by the temperature of the coolant we can control
the temperature at which the engine operates at.
In more detail with graphical representation, a liquid-cooled closed circuit system of a standard IC
engine is described below.
Figure 2: Standard cooling system of IC engine (5).
Figure 2 shows a big circuit which consists of thermostat, radiator and two coolant hoses. There is
also a small circuit, which is a coolant not passing through the radiator but returning straight back
into engine. This circuit is used for quicker warming at the start of the engine and is controlled by a
thermostat. The working process of thermostat is described in depth in chapter 2.2.
2.2 Thermostat
The thermostat automatically regulates the
temperature of liquid for a quicker engine warm up
after starting. The thermostat decides which circuit is
going to be used, small or big, in order for the cooling
liquid to pass through. The principle of the operation
of the thermostat is very simple: a sensor is placed
inside it, which is usually made from a wax pellet
element. The wax pellet thermostat valve is activated
by a temperature sensitive wax power element containing a mixture of wax and various other
Figure 3: Thermostat structure and flow direction (3).
Page | 8
substances. The power element expands, when the temperature of a cooling liquid reaches a
certain temperature, usually about 80oC (6). The expansion of the power element opens the valve
and allows fluid to flow to the radiator. Figure 3 points out that when the thermostat valve is
closed, cooling liquid is going straight to the water pump. When the valve opens, then all the
cooling liquid from the engine will go to the radiator, and passage leading to the water pump will
be closed by the thermostat.
2.3 Water Pump
Water pumps used in the modern IC engines are either mechanically or electrically driven. The
engine used by LFRT is installed with a mechanical pump which circulates the coolant through all
cooling system parts, and helps to overcome any pressure losses occurring in the system. A
detailed description regarding pumps is beyond the scope of this project.
2.4 Radiator
The efficiency of the vehicle cooling system strongly depends on the air flow through the heat
exchanger. The flow through the heat exchanger in turn depends on the specific size and core
design of the radiator. The basic radiator design is shown below:
Figure 4: Basic radiator design with components highlighted.
Page | 9
Today, there are three basic types of heat exchangers used in the automotive industry (7):
a) Flat plain tubes with parallel plate fins.
b) Cylinder tubes mechanically bonded with parallel plate fins.
c) Flat tubes with corrugated fins.
Figure 5: Basic automotive heat exchanger design options (7).
Different designs have different advantages and disadvantages taking the cooling performance
efficiency, ease of manufacturing, packaging and overall cost into consideration. Fins are used in all
of the modern radiators as the most efficient way of increasing surface area of a heat exchanger
(8) without blocking the airflow passing through the radiator.
The cross flow radiator available to the Leeds Formula Race Team has design C shown on Figure 5.
In order to calculate the cooling performance of this type of heat exchanger, the ε-NTU approach is
used (7). The ε-NTU analysis is based on simple calculations of the heat loss and heat gain taking
place between cooling liquid and air.
Heat loss by a coolant: ( )
Heat gain by air: ( )
Where - overall heat transfer (kW), - mass flow rate (kg/s), - specific heat capacity (kJ/kgK),
T - temperature, h - hot fluid (coolant), c - cold fluid (air), i - inlet, o - outlet.
From the above the ability of fluid to absorb heat is represented as a capacity rate for both hot and
cold fluids:
;
Page | 10
Capacity ratio C* is then defined as: C*=Cmin/Cmax, where Cmin is the lowest value out of two capacity
rates and Cmax is highest value.
The number of transfer units (NTU) is found by:
, where A - total heat transfer area,
overall heat transfer coefficient.
Maximum heat transfer rate possible: ( )
Considering that effectiveness ε is just a ratio of actual heat transfer to the maximum, therefore it
can be concluded that: ( )
With an established effectiveness, the process of obtaining heat dissipation for a given heat
exchanger becomes relatively straight forward. To conclude, such a relationship was proven by
several researchers (8, 9, 10): ( ).
Also, inclination of the radiator against the vertical
axis helps without increasing drag. It also improves
cooling performance as it is used in Formula 1 due
to an increase of the heat exchanger surface area,
where the inlet area stays the same. Setup of
radiators in one of the 2008 Formula 1 cars is shown
on Figure 6.
2.5 Cooling Fan
A cooling fan is used to control the airflow subsystem in order to achieve a sufficient air mass flow
rate, taking power consumption and aerodynamic noise into consideration.
For the Formula Student competition, implementation of a cooling fan is very important due to low
speeds of the car and long idling time at some of the competitions. The main suggestion is to use
the biggest fan possible (12), but not to overlap the radiator tanks, which will mean that fan is
running against a flat surface. Apart from the fan diameter, the size of the motor and the blade
design are other important characteristics. All of them define the speed of a fan responsible for
volumetric flow rate through the radiator, which in the automotive industry is often measured in
Cubic Feet per Metre (CFM). The established Fan Laws (7) help to compare fan performance using
Figure 6: Scuderia Toro Rosso radiator layout (11).
Page | 11
more than just one parameter. There are two dimensionless parameters: flow coefficient and
pressure coefficient
Where is volumetric flow rate, Afan is swept area of fan and Vtip is fan tip velocity.
Where is air density, is total pressure. All unknown value could be found using three other
equations, data of which is usually given on a fan manufacturing technical characteristics sheet.
Volumetric flow rate (m3/s):
Total pressure:
Fan swept area is approximately:
Fan tip velocity:
Flow coefficient and pressure coefficient when plotted produce a pressure-flow curve, which helps
to compare the size of different speed fans, or compare the performance of different sized fans.
The position of the fan is crucial, but for the FSAE competition where there is free flow around the
car and the radiator is not placed under the bonnet, like on modern cars, the fan will always be
placed behind the radiator not interrupting the flow, thus decreasing drag force. No shroud is
generally used on FS racing cars due to additional weight and air blockage at speeds over 60 km/h
(13).
2.6 Coolant sensors
An engine coolant temperature sensor could be found in all modern IC engines, which records the
temperature of the coolant. The coolant sensor is directly connected to ECU, which receives
readings from the sensor in resistance and then in ECU it is converted to temperature in oC. When
the engine is overheating, that means that the coolant temperature is too high and usually a signal
from the sensor is led to a light which comes up on a dashboard. The coolant inside cooling system
Page | 12
is not allowed to run either too hot or too cold, so with control of the fan speed from 0 to
maximum, the optimum operating temperature can be achieved.
2.7 Aerodynamics
Adequate cooling in automotive industry is
achieved by controlling the airflow around the
engine and cooling system components. For
the FS competition where open wheel race
cars are involved, it is more important to lead
the flow most efficiently into the heat
exchanger (radiator). In this case, efficient
means that flow should provide a sufficient
amount of air flux and have a low drag. The
LFRT car has a steel space frame chassis with
bodyworks made from composite material
which gives plenty of aerodynamic modifications.
There are several publications available, covering the improvement of flow through the side pod,
which is directly connected to the cooling system performance. In most cases CFD was used to run
an essential numerical simulation solving aerodynamic problems. Kamath (14) suggests to use side
pod converged from both ends, increasing the effective time for the heat transfer to take place,
increasing the heat rejection efficiency. Such a design enables to reduce the air velocity at the core,
which reduces drag force created by a radiator, shown on Figure 7. Data on Figure 7 is based on
experiments done before World War II (15). Important factors for the inlet design of the side pod
are area, edge radius and location. Location of the side pod is more or less fixed by FSAE rules (2),
as it has to be further than 70mm (size of a tennis ball) from the front wheel, and logically it has to
be as close as possible to the engine and cooling components inlet/outlet to save piping length,
thus saving weight. The optimum edge radius could be found using CFD to insure the air flow is
evenly distributed inside the side pod, thus covering the whole size of the radiator. The inlet area is
also usually determined by simulations, but Carroll Smith (15) showed that it has to be no smaller
than 60-75% of the cross-sectional area of the radiator. A smaller inlet area will decrease cooling
efficiency at yaw conditions when cornering. It was proven in several studies (16, 17) that sealing a
Figure 7: Advantage of using side pod for cooling system (15).
Page | 13
gap between the radiator and the side pod increase the turbulence, thus increasing the drag force
without the improvement of the heat exchanger performance. Also, an inclined radiator increases
cooling efficiency of the radiator with the decrease of drag (17). Overall it could be said that a more
complex side pod design reduces the overall drag of the car, especially the one created by wheels
and lead the airflow further around the engine, providing additional cooling.
2.8 CFD
As mentioned above, today, most of the aerodynamic problems are solved using CFD, which allows
us to produce a realistic model of interaction between an object and a fluid. Computers run such
simulations and millions of operations could be performed simultaneously, saving time and
financial resources. CFD involves three steps: pre-processing, solving partial differential equations
and post-processing. The middle step is always the most time consuming operation due to the
complexity of the air flow and object in many cases. It is also very much linked to the quality of pre-
processing, which involves parameters input and CAD model of an object.
Many racing teams choose to use CFD software because no actual construction has to be made in
order to solve aerodynamic problems, which saves the cost of building and experimenting on an
actual race car. On the other hand accuracy and validity of the results must be considered when
analysing software simulations. Most of the CFD results have to be compared to experimental
prototype results from wind tunnel testing. Testing has shown that CFD results are pretty accurate
and lay within 10% of the experimental data (18).
The ANSYS FLUENT version 14.5 software which is widely used for CFD Analysis is available for use
at University of Leeds. It is a well-known tool for modelling fluid flow, heat transfer and different
turbulence models. Workflow on the FLUENT is similar to all other CFD packages (Figure 8).
Figure 8: CFD analysis workflow using SolidWorks and ANSYS Workbench.
Page | 14
3. Methodology Last year’s LFRT car did not make it to the
competition, which shows the complexity of the
whole project which involves tight timescales for
subprojects. In order to complete all objectives
stated in Contract Performance Plan (CPP) for
cooling system work package on time it was
decided to use spiral sequence engineering
model. This model helps to work on a complex
product within a team with shared objectives
and it was chosen because several prototypes
have to be tested in CFD with importance of
continuous improvement before the final design
could be produced. Spiral sequence model is shown on Figure 9, where customer requirements are
taken from CPP, and at the very top of the model a critical analysis of the current cooling system
and identification of areas for improvement can be added.
3.1 Critical Analysis
There was plenty of work done for F14 LFRT car cooling system with usage of two standard KTM
EXC450 radiators equipped by small fans, showing the heat transfer coefficient to be 67.8W/m2K,
which is higher than usual for the same sized radiator (19), highlighting fin efficiency and good
design. Last year it was agreed that one radiator would be implemented only on one side of the
driver into side pod. The decision was made simply by the radiator size and a similar fin design. The
KTM 450EXC two standard radiators combined frontal area is equal to 0.0587 m2 whereas the race
spec radiator manufactured by Pace Products (PP) in 2010 has a total area of 0.0588 m2. Also, both
radiators have similar thickness. With assumption of a better core design than the standard KTM
450EXC radiators it could be easily said that the use of one PP radiator is enough to provide
sufficient cooling for the 450cc engine. Another factor which supports moving to one radiator
rather than two is better packaging, as piping should lead only to one side of the car. Furthermore,
one PP radiator weights 70% of two KTM 450EXC radiators. The radiator is equipped with a 7.5”
fan, characteristics of which are unknown, probably due to loss of the technical description sheet.
Figure 9: Spiral sequence engineering approach. (7)
Page | 15
Another important part of the cooling system is the thermostat which is sometimes removed from
the engine as it was done last year. However, due to insufficient documented information, this
area is yet to be reviewed. As packaging and weight saving are very important for any race car
performance, piping routes and modifications of the engine water pump cover were also reviewed
below. Following the critical review, it was found that there is no data for the previous side pod
designs and a radiator angle of attack simulation was not undertaken, which was the deciding
factor of the area this report will be focused on. Optimization of the air flow through the radiator
directly improves the heat exchanger performance. Furthermore, the overall drag and lift forces
could be reduced - perfecting the aerodynamic characteristics of a car (16).
3.1.1 Thermostat
In order to validate the operating temperature of the thermostat, a small experiment was set up to
check temperature at which the thermostat is actually fully opening and fully closed. With this
experiment the optimum coolant temperature stated by KTM engineers was validated. For the
experiment the thermostat was submerged in a glass of water with a thermometer. The glass was
then placed on an electrical hob. By gradual increase of temperature the thermostat was observed
and the following results were recorded: the thermostat valve activated at 68oC which reached its
fully open condition at 78oC. Technical specifications state that the operating temperature of the
thermostat used in KTM450 EXC engine is 70oC.
As the thermostat is designed for a quicker warm up and considering the fact that operating
conditions at Silverstone during July have a relatively high temperature with the engine sitting at
the back of the driver which limits airflow cooling, there should be no problem with overcooling
the engine at the beginning. Therefore, thermostat is not going to be used this year, but could be
easily implemented if needed as all spare parts are available. Removing the thermostat will save
weight gain as thermostat weights 41g and extra piping with water is around 273g more. Whilst it
is important with such a small engine to keep the overall weight of the car as small as possible,
every gram counts.
3.1.2 Water pump cover
The water pump cover is designed in such way that inlet is facing left hand side of the vehicle
(looking from the back), meaning that the piping should go straight under the exhaust manifold.
This setup will be accompanied by unnecessary heat of coolant, thus modification of water pump
Page | 16
cover was investigated in order to lead the piping straight into side pod situated in right hand side
of the car.
There are several possibilities of improving the design:
Weld 180 degree bend to the water pump cover short
inlet pipe of same diameter made from aluminium.
Cut the short inlet pipe and weld it from the other side.
Cap the existing short inlet pipe and a drill a hole from the
other side of the water pump cover attaching the necessary
piping.
Use bigger diameter short 180 degree bend silicone hose
attached to the end of the inlet.
Manufacture a new water pump cover.
Due to complex geometry, drastic modifications will decrease the water flow rate and increase
piping loss. Considering that the water pump cover is made from aluminium alloy the welding
option becomes unavailable, as stated by University of Leeds technician. Manufacturing a new
water pump cover was considered to be unnecessary with the high cost and small weight saving
point of view. A bigger diameter 180 degree silicone hose will be used as the cost-effective solution
to weight reduction and unnecessary heating of coolant problem.
3.1.3 Cooling Fan
There are three different types of fans available for LFRT this year: 4” KTM 450EXC standard fans,
8.5” fans used on F12 car and 7.5” fan. The optimum size for a chosen radiator is 8”, as it will cover
all of the core area without overlapping radiator side tanks. A problem was faced as no technical
characteristics were available for the 7.5” fan. With the help of a tachometer RPM was recorded
and then converted to CFM, using a formula:
. The results showed that the fan
is very similar to the SPAL Automotive 7.5” fan producing
437 CFM (20). Considering the age and characteristics of
the old fan, it was decided to buy a new high performance
8” fan which provides 1400 CFM.
Table 1: Old and new cooling fan specifications.
7.5” fan 8” fan
Performance 437 CFM 1400 CFM
Weight 814g 825g
Cost 96.22 £ 22.96 £
Power 80 W 80 W
Figure 10: 3D CAD model of KTM450EXC water pump cover.
Page | 17
With only a small change in weight, we experienced a big advantage in performance. Taking into
account that there is an assessed Cost Report at the Formula Student competition, the cost of the
fan in comparison to the previous fan came at 75% cheaper.
3.2 Side Pod Design
In order to create an efficient side pod for cooling purposes of LFRT car several factors need to be
considered:
Radiator size with ability to change its angle from 0 to 45o relative to vertical plane
Heat transfer rate of radiator
Inlet/Outlet size analysed in literature review
Airflow characteristics
Radiator pressure profile, to validate even distribution of air flow through radiator
Drag and lift forces to analyse aerodynamic characteristics of radiator
The first step is to model a side pod and radiator as 3D CAD models. The SolidWorks 2013 edition
was used to create an assembly of simple geometry, which could then be easily imported into
ANSYS Fluent 14.5 as the main CFD software used during this report. All CFD analysis undertaken
during this project is based on 3D problem simulations.
3.2.1 Mesh Dependency Study, CFD Setup
Baseline model was first built in order to carry out mesh dependency study which is necessary in
providing consistent results with smaller possibility of errors in future simulations. The baseline
model is clearly shown on Figure 11.
Figure 11: Side pod baseline model for CFD simulation.
Page | 18
Geometry of the side pod was checked against the F15 chassis CAD model, making sure it fits
between the wheels and follows the rules mentioned in chapter 2.7.
Geometry of the radiator is simplified and all
surfaces are rounded to reduce the risks of
errors as well as save computational time. With
such a setup (Figure 11), the side pod inlet is
72.5% of the size of the radiator. The outlet of
the side pod is made 15% bigger than size of the
radiator in order to decrease the pressure and
lead the flow around the rear tires. The gap
between the radiator and side pod is not sealed,
the radiator is floating in air 100mm from the
back of the side pod, as the optimum position for
further inclination, so that radiator stays inside a
side pod at all times. It was also found that creating an enclosure around the side pod with the
radiator fitted is much easier in SolidWorks rather than ANSYS Workbench. The size of an
enclosure was taken to be standard for the CFD automotive engineering problems: 3 object lengths
at the front and 5 lengths behind as suggested by Lanfrit (21). The size of the radiator:
length=530mm, width 290mm front, 180mm back and height 305mm. Thus, overall length of the
domain is then 4770mm. The enclosure geometry could be seen in more detail in Appendix A, as
well as named selections used during all CFD simulations. Named selections help to specify
boundary conditions making the CFD analysis close to real life conditions.
Successfully importing the full 3D CAD model of the side pod with the radiator assembly in an
enclosure, the meshing procedure has to be undertaken. The first step was to do a mesh
dependency study to find the optimum mesh size in order to provide the most accurate results as
well as save computational time. Under the mesh setup, sizing on proximity and curvature with a
medium relevance centre and medium smoothing was selected. Due to a curved and relatively thin
radiator plates the fine span angle centre was used as well. In order to control the mesh of the side
pod and the radiator, face sizing for both objects was added with an element size of 70mm and
Figure 12: F15 Radiator CAD model for CFD with dimensions.
Page | 19
7mm respectively to keep the ratio of 1:10, suggested by Lanfrit, between two objects for
automotive CFD applications (21). All other settings were left as default.
The next step was to specify all parameters in FLUENT in order to run the simulation and receive
the data for drag and lift force, so that the mesh dependency study could be undertaken. The main
component which needs to be prioritised is accurate prediction of flow separation in the CFD
simulation involving smooth surfaces. As for the automotive industry standards, shear stress
transport (SST) k-omega turbulence model is best known for problems involving separating flows
which gives highly accurate results compared to other turbulence models used in FLUENT. Also, as
flow is going close to the walls involving boundary layer, it is suggested in experiments of Bardina
(22) to use the SST k-omega model. Furthermore, in ANSYS FLUENT 14.5 User’s Guide it is
recommended to use smaller turbulence intensity for velocity inlet (1%) and pressure outlet (5%)
boundary conditions (23). Due to the fact that heat transfer rate of the radiator has to be recorded
in FLUENT the energy equation parameter was turned on. Also, aluminium had to be added into
FLUENT as a material to be specified for the radiator. The following properties of aluminium were
used: density 2719 kg/m3, specific heat 879 j/kg.K and thermal conductivity 202.4 W/m.K (24).
Velocity inlet was specified to be 27.78 m/s, as the highest possible speed of the FS car at the
competition. Same velocity was selected for the bottom wall parameter, in order to simulate the
moving road characteristics. The temperature of the air flow coming from the inlet was picked to
be the highest average recorded at Silverstone race circuit in July in between 1981 and 2010 –
21.7oC (25). The temperature of the radiator was fixed at the starting point to be 90oC because it is
the optimum operating temperature for internal combustion engines (26). At this temperature:
Lubricant is at its optimum state, as it has lower viscosity. Meaning, that metal parts will
wear less with overall reduction of the mechanical losses.
Fuel vaporizes completely, which provides better combustion with a less emissions.
The bias factor of 50 was chosen in solution controls and the minimum size of an element was
decreased to 0.00001 m, in order to minimize the possibility of an error during the simulation. The
Pressure-Based Coupled Solver (PBCS) was selected as a solution method, as it reduces
convergence time by five times with a small increase of the computational time. Coupled solutions
help to solve two different equations at the same time: pressure-based and momentum, thus
Page | 20
decreasing the convergence time (27). Increased computational time by PBCS model could be
neglected as high performance computers are used in for all of the simulations during this project.
All other settings in FLUENT were left as default.
Finally, the CFD simulation was ran under different meshing setting using same baseline model.
Mesh dependency study as the analytical graph is presented below:
Figure 13: Mesh dependency study for radiator in side pod assembly for F15 LFRT car.
As shown in Figure 13, after around 1,700,000 elements the results are almost stop changing,
therefore any mesh with a size over 1,700,000 elements could be used during this project,
assuming that the results are going to have minimal risk of error. Nevertheless, the closer the value
of elements to 1,700,000, the less time will be needed to complete the CFD analysis in FLUENT 14.5.
The decision was made to use a mesh
size of 1,750,000 elements with ±10%
limit in order to receive the most
accurate results for future simulations.
The final mesh of the baseline is
demonstrated in Figure 14, and will
be used in further studies of this
project.
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
23.0
24.0
25.0
26.0
27.0
28.0
3 995 092 2 573 676 1 706 466 1 226 080 784191
Lift
Fo
rce
(N
)
Dra
g Fo
rce
(N
)
Number of Elements
Mesh Dependency
Drag Force Lift Force
Figure 14: Baseline mesh visualisation.
Page | 21
3.2.2. Side Pod Design Analysis
Having the ready model with a setup, geometry of the side pod was changed without changing any
positional settings of the radiator inside it. The spiral sequence model was used to improve the
side pod design after every simulation in order to find the optimum. Both aerodynamic
characteristics (drag, lift coefficients) were analysed as well as cooling properties of the radiator
(heat transfer rate, pressure distribution). For each modification a simulation was ran and
comparison of the results gave a transparent answer to all the objectives of this project.
Modifications to the side pod design could be clearly seen in the visualisation plots in Table 3,
where all the graphical results are presented for each design. The inlet and the outlet areas were
slightly varied, but the main point of interest was the curved face of the side pod which plays a role
of a duct, as well as being responsible for even distribution of the air flow through every part of the
radiator. It is clearly demonstrated on Figure 15, where the baseline design is compared to the
modified version of the side pod. Also, due to the inclination of the face which lies between the
chassis top and bottom bar, it was decided to test the side pod inner and outer walls parallel and
outer wall just perpendicular to the ground.
Figure 15: Modified side pod design (A) and baseline model (B).
A B
Page | 22
Only final side pod CFD analysis was ran with the
rotating wheels implemented as well as the
chassis side of the radiator exactly taken by
coordinates from the CAD model of the F15 LFRT
chassis, in order to assure certainty concerning
the manufacturing of the side pod and fitting it
onto the actual car. The wheel’s angular rotating
speed inputted into the FLUENT settings was
equal to 111.12 rad/s, which is exactly 27.78 m/s
– the velocity at which the car was running in all the CFD simulations during this project. There was
also a curved flat plate added on top of the side pod (dark grey on Figure 16) to test if that would
make any difference to aerodynamic performance.
3.2.3 Radiator Angle of Attack
After finding the optimum design of the side pod, the position of the radiator was tested to
understand the influence of the radiator angle of attack. The radiator was tilted from 0 to 45
degrees. The distance between the outlet edge and the radiator was kept constant at 50mm. Also,
clearance between the side pod floor and radiator was kept as close as possible (1mm) due to the
process of mounting in real life, whereas the side pod floor is supporting the radiator. The setup of
3D analysis in FLUENT where the radiator is angled at 45 degrees is demonstrated on Figure 17.
Figure 17: Variable angle of attack CFD simulation setup.
Figure 16: Addition flat plate on a side pod, leading to the back of the chassis.
Page | 23
3.3 Manufacture, Assembly and Testing
After the finalisation of the side pod
design, a CAD model was passed to Ben
Cross, who was responsible for the F15
bodywork manufacturing process. The
side pod was made from carbon fibre
based on the fifth design shown in this
report. The entire manufacturing process
could be found in related report (31). The
actual side pod is shown on Figure 18.
The cooling system was partly tested during the rolling road test, which showed that there were no
issues with engine warm up, as well as the absence of any overheating issues. Taking into account
that during the rolling road testing the car is not moving, it could be said that new more efficient
fan provides enough air flux. The temperature of the coolant during testing was recorded to be
mainly around 80 degrees, which is optimum for that engine.
The radiator mounting brackets were manufactured in the laser cutting process, using 2mm
stainless steel. They were designed in such a way that the angular setup of the radiator could be
varied between 0 and 15 degrees. Such a design will give an easy solution for a quick change of
angular attack during track testing, which will help to validate the CFD experiment results. The
design of such brackets is shown below, as well as detailed drawings available in the Appendices B
and C.
Figure 18: Manufactured side pod with cooling system subassembled.
Figure 19: Radiator mounting brackets with variable setup of the angle of attack.
Page | 24
4. Results The main purpose of the CFD analysis was firstly to find the optimum side pod design for the F15
LFRT car, and secondly to identify the optimum positional settings of the radiator, especially the
radiator angle of attack. For all analysis several parameters were recorded: drag and lift
coefficients, heat transfer rate, as well as visualisation of the results in order to examine pressure
distribution on the radiator and air flow behaviour.
4.1 Side Pod
As described in chapter 3.2.2. several side pod designs were considered, in order to find the
optimum design. Results for all runs are shown below:
Design Model Drag Force (N) Cd Lift Force (N) Cl Heat Transfer Rate of Radiator (W)
Baseline (1st) 20.1877 0.4543 4.4960 0.1012 3023.4640
Second 20.2758 0.4563 4.7728 0.1074 3009.9960
Third 21.9170 0.4933 5.2906 0.1191 3031.6196
Fourth 23.7779 0.5351 4.8039 0.1081 3126.6180
Fifth 25.0701 0.5606 2.4200 0.0545
Table 2: Different side pod design CFD results.
For a clearer comparison of the aerodynamic and cooling characteristics received after every
design CFD simulation, Lift/Drag ratio was plotted against the heat transfer rate.
Figure 20: Aerodynamic and cooling characteristics comparison for different side pod designs.
5th
4th
3rd
2nd
1st
3000.000
3020.000
3040.000
3060.000
3080.000
3100.000
3120.000
3140.000
3160.000
3180.000
3200.000
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
He
at T
ran
sfe
r R
ate
(W
)
Lift/Drag Ratio
Lift/Drag Ratio vs. Heat Transfer Rate
Page | 25
Visualisation plots of the results for all five different designs are available below:
Flow around the sidepod (velocity streamlines) Pressure distribution profile on a radiator
Baseline
2nd (parallel walls, smaller radii of inlet wall)
3rd (inlet 3% bigger, smaller radii of inlet)
Page | 26
4th (outlet smaller by 3%, minimum to fit the radiator, changed angle between the radiator and the chassis to fit)
5th
(modified
3rd design
with inlet
15%
bigger)
Table 3: Comparison of flow around a side pods and pressure distribution profiles of a radiator for all five simulations.
Final side pod design CFD results, with exact side wall and rotating wheels:
Drag Force (N) Cd Lift Force (N) Cl Heat Transfer Rate for Radiator (W) Lift/Drag Ratio
32.10 0.5523 8.03 0.1382 2862.84 0.2502 Table 4: Final side pod design CFD results.
Percentage change of aerodynamic parameters with addition of a curved flat plate onto side pod:
Figure 21: Drag (Cd) and lift (Cl) coefficients percentage change with flat plate addition.
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
Percentage Change with flat plate
Cl
Cd
Page | 27
4.2 Radiator Angle of Attack Same parameters as for side pod design were recorded for analysis of angle of attack (α) of the radiator.
α (deg) Heat Transfer Rate (W) Drag Force (N) Downforce (N) -Cl Cd Cl/Cd
0 2650.29 34.21 -15.48 -0.2609 0.5765 -0.00763
5 2751.98 32.81 4.23 0.0723 0.5607 0.002203
10 2820.973 38.31 18.64 0.3185 0.6548 0.008314
15 2796.487 39.16 22.50 0.3845 0.6693 0.009818
20 2768.975 39.95 24.83 0.4243 0.6826 0.010623
25 2731.863 40.22 26.31 0.4496 0.6990 0.011179
30 2591.44 40.91 22.72 0.3882 0.6873 0.009491
35 2550.279 42.44 23.74 0.4057 0.7252 0.00956
40 2513.9 42.46 23.42 0.4002 0.7256 0.009424
45 2484.247 43.31 21.92 0.3839 0.7234 0.008863
Table 5: Radiator angle of attack variation CFD results.
Velocity streamlines through the radiator angled at 0 and 10 degrees and pressure distribution
profile across the radiator are shown in Table 6 located below.
0 Degrees 10 Degrees
Table 6: The flow visualisation and pressure profile through the radiator angled at 0 and 10 degrees respectively.
Page | 28
5. Discussion The results confirm that slight modification to the
initial side pod design could decrease drag force by
25%, with the cooling performance increasing at the
same time by 5%. Moreover, aerodynamic flow
characteristics improve with much smoother ducting
of the inlet, rather than straight curved which is
clearly seen in Table 3 (Design 1 and 5). During
research it was also found that making the outer side pod wall parallel to the chassis wall
decreases drag coefficient, as well as decreasing the heat transfer rate. Therefore, the frontal inlet
area is reduced if walls are parallel, rather than one wall perpendicular to the ground. Furthermore
it was recorded that with the increase of inlet size (Table 3, Design 5), pressure distribution profile
on the radiator is more even, showing that when inlet area constitutes the 90% of the frontal area
of the radiator then cooling performance and aerodynamic characteristics are at their best.
Identical observations were obtained by Da Silva (28) in his CFD analysis of the Melbourne
University Racing car side pod - with the increase of the inlet, heat transfer rate increased up to 2%
of the baseline model.
Also, it can be observed clearly on Figure 22
that the flow around the side pod goes
smoothly around the rear wheel, thus
helping to reduce the drag force acting on
the tyre. This design is numbered as 5th in
this report and validates the benefits of using
wide side pods similar to the ones used on
Formula-E cars.
Figure 22: Flow visualisation around the side pod.
Figure 23: Formula-E 2014 design (29).
Page | 29
In order to analyse the radiator angle of attack effect on cooling performance, the graph was
created based on the results presented in Table 5.
Figure 24: Heat Transfer rate of radiator for different angle of attack.
We could clearly see a peak when the radiator was angled at 10 degrees from the vertical plane,
giving us the highest heat transfer rate equalling to 2821 W, which is 12% higher than previous
years setup for LFRT car, when the radiator was angled at 45 degrees to the flow. Considering that
flow characteristics drastically change due to angle adjustment, aerodynamic forces should be
analysed when making decision at which the angle of the radiator should be placed for most
efficient performance.
Figure 25: Aerodynamics forces change with radiator angle of attack variaton.
2400
2500
2600
2700
2800
2900
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
He
at T
ran
sfe
r R
ate
(W
)
Angle of Attack (deg)
Angle of Attack vs. Heat Transfer Rate
-20.00
-10.00
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Ae
rod
ynam
ic F
orc
e (
N)
Angle of Attack (deg)
Angle of Attack vs. Aerodynamic Forces
Drag Force Downforce (Negative Lift Force)
Page | 30
Figure 24 clearly represents aerodynamic forces acting on the radiator inside the side pod, where
lift force was converted into down force with simple multiplication by -1, as this parameter is
better for visual analysis. It can be observed that there is high increase of drag and down force
from 0 to 10 degrees and after that only a slight increase could be recorded. At 0 degrees down
force is negative meaning that radiator will only produce lift force which is bad for aerodynamics of
a car as a whole. Above 10 degrees, down force is varied only within 8N, which is about 800g of
additional weight on side pod, and that could be neglected taking into account the overall weight
of the F15 car (~180kg), meaning it will constitute only to a small amount of the whole
aerodynamic performance of the car. Drag force is only increasing with increase of the angle of
attack, meaning that the lower the angle is, the less drag you receive. When analysing the flow
characteristics shown in Table 6, it could be said that there is no big difference in aerodynamic
components, as the radiator is placed close to the side pod outlet, which does not create any flow
blockage. The radiator pressure profiles do not change drastically either.
6. Conclusion The effect of a different side pod design on the cooling performance and aerodynamic
characteristics of the LFRT F15 race car was studied using the CFD model simulation with
assumption that the car is running at 100km/h or 27.78m/s taking into account the average
maximum temperature recorded in July at the Silverstone circuit, where the FS competition takes
place this year. Overall, the study was performed for investigation of different side pod designs
with variation of radiator angles of attack, construction of the cooling system 3D CAD model
components based on FSAE 2014 rules and adjustment of the side pod design established by
research in literature and further analysis in CFD package ANSYS FLUENT. The judgement on the
cooling efficiency of the radiator was limited to Heat Transfer Rate, as this is the main analytical
characteristic of any heat exchanger (7), as well as aerodynamic characteristics such as drag and lift
coefficients were recorded with visualisation plots of the flow around the 3D model.
The study involved 3D analysis in ANSYS FLUENT CFD system which took a lot of effort in order to
first create necessary 3D CAD models in SolidWorks; Secondly, to import needed geometry to
ANSYS package, with further addition of a fluid domain around the object. Further selection of the
right mesh settings in order to reduce the possibility of an error and improving the speed of
Page | 31
simulation is necessary. Additionally, selection of the appropriate turbulence model and the
specification of the relevant settings for the boundary conditions is required, after which the setup
is sent to a high performance computer and the data received from the output is closely analysed.
During the study, angular settings of the radiator and the design of the side pod were found, as
well as whole cooling system for LFRT F15 car which was built including the radiator mounting
brackets with a new shorter piping route. Results showed that the 5th design of the side pod was
optimum for a chosen radiator. All necessary information was commissioned to a person
responsible for the body work manufacturing process and was subsequently made out of carbon
fibre. The radiator angular settings will be validated during later track testing where the angle of
attack will be changed from 0 to 15 degrees and the cooling performance will be recorded. Based
on that testing, a decision will be made on the setup with which we can proceed onto the
competition.
6.1 Recommendations for future works
Due to the fact that at the time of this study the engine was not in running condition, some of the
experiments could not be undertaken: volumetric flow rate of water pump of KTM450 EXC, which
would help to understand the cooling system of this particular engine much better, as well as
understanding the efficiency of the given radiator (Tin and Tout). Considering the size of PP radiator
and performance of new RaceSpec Performance cooling fan, it is suggested that implementing
cooling system at the back of the chassis just next to the engine would be more beneficial. Such a
setup will reduce weight gain, eliminating the need of the side pod and less piping. It should
therefore show, better aerodynamic characteristics, alternatively reducing the drag force created
by the radiator in side pod. Careful analysis is needed in order to validate such setup. In addition,
further investigation of the radiator positional settings could be undertaken with the change in
horizontal plane.
The side pod design could be further modified with
a more complex design in order to increase the
aerodynamic performance of the car. The
suggested design could be similar to the FS Team
Weingarten (Figure 26). Figure 26: FS Team Weingarten side pod design (30).
Page | 32
7. References
1. CALLISTER, J., COSTA, T., and GEORGE, A., The Design of Automobile and Racing Car Cooling
Systems. In: SAE Technical Paper 971835, 1997.
2. SAE. 2014 Formula SAE® Rules [online]. 2013. [Accessed 20 October 2013]. Available from:
http://students.sae.org/cds/formulaseries/rules/2014_fsae_rules.pdf.
3. LINDE, A. How your car works, Veloce Publishing Ltd, 2001, pp. 47-48.
4. STAMM, C.A. and MCCRAVEY, W.E. Cooling System Performance of Liquid Cooled Engines.
In: Paper no.440009 Engineering Department of Chrysler Corporation, 1944.
5. IGNATOV, A. and KOSAREV S., VAZ 2108-2109. Manual. Operation and maintenance,
Moscow, 1998.
6. CHIANG, E. and KELLER, J. The Thermostat Characteristics and Its Effect on Low-Flow Engine
Cooling System Performance, In: SAE Technical Paper 900904, 1990.
7. KANEFSKY, P., NELSON, V., and RANGER, M. A Systems Engineering Approach to Engine
Cooling Design. In: SAE Technical Paper 1999-01-3780, 1999.
8. KAYS, W. and LONDON, A. Compact Heat Exchangers (3rd ed.), McGraw-Hill, 1955, pp. 2-22.
9. HOLMAN, J.P. Heat Transfer (5th ed.), McGraw-Hill, 1992.
10. INCOPERA, F.P. et al. Fundamentals of heat and mass transfer. John Wiley & Sons
Incorporated, 2011.
11. SCARBOROUGH, C., Toro Rosso: Radiator layout [online]. 2008. [Accessed 12 January 2014].
Available from: http://scarbsf1.com/blog1/2011/05/19/toro-rosso-radiator-layout/.
12. HOYT G., Radiator Cooling Fans, Society of Automotive Engineers, 190041.
13. BEATENBOUGH, P., Engine Cooling Systems for Motor Trucks. In: SAE Technical Paper
670033, 1967.
14. KAMATH, S. CFD and Experimental Optimization of Formula SAE Race Car Cooling Air Duct.
Training. 2008, pp.08-14.
15. CARROLL, S. Tune to Win, Aero Publishers Inc., 1978, pp.97-107.
16. CHRISTOFFERSEN, L., SÖDERBLOM, D. and LÖFDAHL, L. Improving the Cooling Airflow of an
Open Wheeled Race Car. In: SAE Technical Paper 2008-01-2995, 2008.
Page | 33
17. KAMATH, S., DAMODARAN, V. et al., CFD and Experimental Optimization of Formula SAE
Race Car Cooling Air Duct. In: SAE Technical Paper 2013-01-0799, 2013.
18. MAHON, S.A. and ZHANG, X. Computational analysis of pressure and wake characteristics of
an aerofoil in ground effect. In: Journal of Fluids Engineering, 2005.
19. PITTS, A., HODGSON, S., BARRETT, J., WRIGHT, C., MEADOWS, T. FSAE Engine 2010/11.
School of Mechanical Engineering: University of Leeds, 2010.
20. SPAL Automotive, 12 volt suction fans [online]. 2013. [Accessed 5 December 2013].
Available from: http://www.spalautomotive.co.uk/acatalog/12_VOLT_SUCTION_FANS.html
21. LANFRIT, M. Best practice guidelines for handling. In: Automotive External Aerodynamics
with FLUENT, 2005.
22. BARDINA, J.E., HUANG, P.G. and COAKLEY, T.J. Turbulence Modelling Validation Testing and
Development. In: NASA Technical Memorandum 110446, 1997.
23. ANSYS Inc. Turbulence modelling In: ANSYS FLUENT 14.0 User’s Guide, 2011.
24. Engineering Toolbox, Aluminium thermal characteristics [online]. 2009. [Accessed 20
December 2013]. Available from: http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/
25. MetOffice, Silverstone Motor Racing Circuit climate [online]. 2010. [Accessed 20 December
2013], Available from: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/public/weather/climate/silverstone-
motor-racing-circuit-northamptonshire#?tab=climateTables
26. DIAMANT, N.S., Engine Cooling Systems and Radiator Characteristics. In: SAE Technical
Paper 240013, 1924.
27. KEATING, M. Accelerating CFD Solutions. In: ANSYS Advantage Volume V, Issue 1, 2011.
28. DE SILVA, C.M. Computation flow modelling of Formula-SAE sidepods for optimum radiator
heat management. In: Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, Vol. 6, No. 1, 2011.
29. Formula-E, Reveal of the Formula-E 2014 design [online]. 2013. [Accessed 20 April 2014],
Available from: http://www.fiaformulae.com/multimedia/
30. Exotic Cars At Formula Student Germany, Formula Student Team Weingarten [online].
2013. [Accessed 10 January 2014], Available from: http://www.coolage.in/photos/formula-
cars-designed-by-undergrad-students/#!slide=1023012
31. CROSS, B. Formula student bodywork design and manufacture. School of Mechanical
Engineering: University of Leeds, 2014.
Page | 34
Appendix A: Enclosure dimensions and boundary conditions
Figure 27: Detailed domain geometry for 3D analysis of a radiator within a side pod.
Page | 35
Appendix B: Radiator top mounting bracket drawing
Figure 28: Radiator top mounting bracket drawing.
Page | 36
Appendix C: Radiator bottom mounting bracket drawing
Figure 29: Radiator bottom mounting bracket drawing.
Page | 37
Appendix D: Side pod design final renderings on F15 Chassis Final 3D CAD Model renderings of side pod (flat plate on top to be removed) on a F15 Chassis.
Figure 30: Isometric view on 3D designed side pod model on F15 chassis.
Figure 31: Top view on 3D designed side pod model on F15 chassis.
Page | 38
Appendix E: Cooling system final assembly 3D CAD model renderings
Figure 32: Cooling system 3D CAD model (view from the back).
Figure 33: Cooling system 3D CAD model (view from the front).