DAYANANDA SAGAR COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

Accredited by National Assessment & Accreditation Council (NAAC) with ’A’ Grade
(AICTE Approved, an Autonomous Institute Affiliated to VTU, Belagavi)
Shavige Malleshwara Hills, Kumaraswamy Layout, Bengaluru-560078

DEPARTMENT OF AUTOMOBILE ENGINEERING

(Accredited by NBA)

A Project Report on

“Designing a FSAE Front Nose Cone”

Submitted in partial fulfillment for the award of degree of

BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING
in
AUTOMOBILE ENGINEERING

Submitted by
1DS23AU008 BHARGAV V
1DS23AU005 B KAUSHIK GOWDA
1DS23AU029 MAAZULLA SHARIFF
1DS23AU063 ZAIDULLA KHAN

Under the guidance of

Reena Y A
Assistant Professor
Department of Automobile Engineering, Dayananda Sagar College of Engineering
Shavige Malleshwara Hills, KS Layout, Bengaluru-560078

Academic Year -2024 - 25

 DAYANANDA SAGAR COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
Accredited by National Assessment & Accreditation Council (NAAC) with ’A’ Grade
(AICTE Approved, an Autonomous Institute Affiliated to VTU, Belagavi)
Shavige Malleshwara Hills, Kumaraswamy Layout, Bengaluru-
560078

DEPARTMENT OF AUTOMOBILE ENGINEERING

(Accredited by NBA)

Certificate
Certified that the project phase 1 report entitled ‘Designing a FSAE front nose cone’ is a
bonafide work carried out by Bhargav V bearing USN: 1DS23AU008, B Kaushik Gowda
bearing USN: 1DS23AU005, Maazulla Shariff bearing USN: 1DS23AU029, Zaidulla Khan
bearing USN: 1DS23AU063 under the guidance of Prof. Reena Y A, in partial fulfilment for the
award of Bachelor of Engineering in the Department of Automobile Engineering, Dayananda
Sagar College of Engineering, Bengaluru.

Prof. Reena Y A Dr. Nandakumar M B

Assistant Professor of Automobile Engineering Associate Prof & HOD I/C, Dept. of Automobile
Dayananda Sagar College of Engineering. Engineering
Bengaluru Dayananda Sagar College of Engineering
Bengaluru

Dr. B G Prasad
Principal
Dayananda Sagar College of Engineering.
Bengaluru

[Link]. Name of the Examiner Signature with Date

1.

2.
 DECLARATION

We, Bhargav V (1DS23AU008), B Kaushik Gowda (1DS23AU005), Mazulla Shariff

(1DS23AU029) and Zaidulla Khan (1DS23AU063) hereby declare that, the project work entitled
‘Designing a FSAE front nose cone’ has been independently carried out by us under the guidance
of Prof. Reena Y A, Assistant Professor, Department of Automobile Engineering, Dayananda
Sagar College of Engineering, Bangalore, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Bachelor of Engineering in Automobile Engineering of Visvesvaraya Technological University,
Belgaum.
We further declare that we have not submitted this report to any other university for the reward of
any degree.

NAME SIGN

1. Bhargav V

2. B Kaushik Gowda

3. Mazulla Shariff

4. Zaidulla Khan

Place: Bangalore

Date:
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The success and outcome of this project require the guidance and assistance of many people.
We would like to add a few words of appreciation for the people who have been part of this
project right from its inception, without their support patience and guidance the task would
not have been completed. It is to them we owe our deepest gratitude.

We are grateful to Dr. B G Prasad, Principal, Dayananda Sagar College of Engineering, for
providing an opportunity to do this project as a part of our curriculum and for his kind
cooperation for the project.

We are very much grateful to Dr Nandakumar M B, Associate Professor and HOD I/C of
the Automobile department, Dayananda Sagar College of Engineering, Bangalore for
providing the encouragement for completion of our project.

We would like to express our deep gratitude to our guide Prof. Reena Y A, Assistant
professor of Automobile department, Dayananda Sagar College of Engineering, Bangalore
for his valuable guidance, patience, constant supervision and timely suggestions provided in
making of this project.

We are also thankful to our parents and friends for their constant help and constructive
suggestions throughout our project.
 ABSTRACT

This project presents the design and aerodynamic evaluation of a front nose cone for a Formula
Student (FSAE) race car, developed as part of an undergraduate engineering initiative for SAE
Supra India. Utilizing SolidWorks 2024 for 3D modelling and ANSYS Fluent 2025 R1 for CFD
simulations, the study aims to optimize the nose cone geometry to reduce drag and enhance airflow
behaviour around the vehicle. Simulation results provided detailed insights into streamline
behaviour, pressure distribution, and aerodynamic force coefficients. The optimized design
demonstrates improved aerodynamic performance, contributing to overall vehicle efficiency while
ensuring compliance with FSAE rules and manufacturability constraints. The findings support
iterative improvements in race car aerodynamics and offer a validated approach for integrating the
nose cone with the chassis for enhanced performance.

Keywords

 FSAE – Formula Society of Automobile Engineers

 SAE Supra – Society of Automobile Engineers Supra
 CFD – computational fluid dynamics

CONTENTS
Sl no Content Pg no

1 Introduction 1
2 Literature review 3
2.1 Numerical optimization for aerodynamic performance of nosecone of 3
FSAE vehicle through CFD
2.2 Enhancing formula student car performance: nose shape optimization 3
via adjoint method
2.3 Design and validation of an aerodynamic system for a formula SAE 3
vehicle
2.4 An investigation of the aerodynamic design and evaluation of the 4
aerodynamic efficiency for a formula student vehicle
2.5 Design and development of an aerodynamic package for a FSAE race 4
car
2.6 Optimizing the manufacturing of the nosecone of a race car 4
2.7 Study of drag around the nosecone of the FSAE vehicle 4
2.8 Computational fluid dynamics-based design and investigation of 5
nosecone aerodynamics of formula style student designed race car
2.9 Nose design for formula student vehicle with aerodynamic components 5
3 Scope/objective of work 7
4 Methodology 8
4.1 Problem definition 7
4.2 Material selection 9
4.2.1 Properties 10
4.2.2 Manufacturing methodology 10
4.3 Selection of base geometry 12
4.3.1 Elliptical 13
4.3.2 Powe-0.5 14
4.3.3 LD Haack 15
4.3.4 LV Haack 16
4.4 CAD Modelling 17
4.5 Enclosure 20
4.6 Meshing 21
4.7 Setup parameters 23
5 Experimental Details 25
6 Results 37
7 Conclusion 39
8 Limitations 30
9 Future Scope 41
 References 42

LIST OF FIGURES

Sl no Name of figure Pages no

 1.1 SAE SUPRA 1
1.1 Front nose cone 2
4.1 Methodology flow chart 8
4.2.1 FRP Sheet 10
[Link] Elliptical 14
[Link] Power-0.5 15
[Link] LD Haack 16
[Link] LV Haack 17
4.4.1 Chassis 18
4.4.2 2D Outline 19
4.4.3 3D Model 20
4.5.1 Enclosure 21
4.6.1 Nosecone Meshing 22
4.6.2 Enclosure Meshing 22
4.7.1 Setup 24
5.1 First Iteration 25
5.2 Second Iteration 25
5.3 First iteration streamline analysis(side view) 25
5.4 First iteration streamline analysis(top view) 26
5.5 First iteration velocity contour(bottom view) 27
5.6 First iteration velocity contour(top view) 28
5.7 First iteration pressure contour(top view) 29
5.8 First iteration pressure contour(bottom view) 30
5.9 First iteration velocity contour(bottom view) 31
5.10 First iteration velocity contour(top view) 32
5.11 Second iteration pressure contour(top view) 33
5.12 Second iteration pressure contour(bottom view) 34
5.13 Static Pressure 2D contour 35
5.14 Velocity Magnitude 2D contour 35

LIST OF TABLES

Sl no. Name of the table Pg no.

4..1 FRP property 10

4.3.1 Nosecone shape and equations 13
6.1 Results 38
 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

DESIGNING A FSAE FRONT NOSE CONE

1. INTRODUCTION
The Formula Student competition (commonly known as FSAE) is an international design and
engineering event where student teams from across the globe conceptualize, design,
manufacture, and test a small formula-style race car. In India, this platform is governed by
SAE India, the national affiliate of the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). One of the
major events conducted by SAE India is SAE SUPRA, which offers Indian engineering
students a platform to showcase their technical skills and compete at a national level in areas
such as vehicle design, performance, cost, and innovation.

Fig 1.1 SAE SUPRA

The front nose cone is the foremost part of the vehicle, dictating how airflow interacts
with the rest of the car. A well-designed nose cone significantly reduces drag, controls
airflow toward essential aerodynamic elements such as the undertray and sidepods,
and influences front downforce. Furthermore, it contributes to the overall stability of
the car by smoothing the airflow that reaches the rest of the chassis. In some designs,
the nose cone also plays a secondary role in crash energy absorption, enhancing driver
safety during frontal impacts.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 1

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

Fig 1.2 Front nose cone

From an aerodynamic perspective, the nose cone is the first point of contact between
the car and incoming airflow. Its shape significantly influences the air distribution over
the rest of the car, especially toward critical aerodynamic devices like the undertray,
front wing, sidepods, and radiator inlets. A well-designed nose cone helps minimize
flow separation and maintains a smooth laminar boundary layer, which is essential for
reducing drag coefficient (Cd) and improving aerodynamic efficiency.

The shape of the nose cone is influenced by fundamental aerodynamic principles.

Common profiles include elliptical, conical, or parabolic shapes, each offering trade-
offs between drag reduction and flow control. A sharply pointed nose may reduce
pressure drag but can increase the risk of boundary layer separation at higher angles of
attack. A more rounded, elliptical profile often achieves better pressure recovery and
maintains airflow attachment, improving downstream aerodynamic performance.

In this project, multiple nose profiles were modelled and simulated using
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) tools. These simulations provided insight
into pressure distribution, vortex formation, and drag forces acting on the nose. The
goal was to find an optimal compromise between frontal area, curvature, and flow
guidance that integrates seamlessly with the rest of the vehicle's aerodynamic package.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 2

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Numerical Optimization for Aerodynamic Performance of
Nose Cone of FSAE Vehicle through CFD

Authors: Amol Dhuma et al., CFD Letters, 2023:

This paper presents a comparative aerodynamic study on different nose cone

geometries under steady-state conditions using ANSYS Fluent. It explores the effects
of elliptical, conical, and parabolic shapes on drag force. By using the k-ε turbulence
model and pressure-based solver, the authors achieve a reduction in drag by selecting
an elliptical profile. Mesh quality and y+ values were closely monitored to ensure
convergence. This study helped us decide on an elongated elliptical shape and guided
our turbulence model choice [5].

2.2. Enhancing Formula Student Car Performance: Nose Shape

Optimization via Adjoint Method

Authors: Md. Araful Hoque et al., Case Studies in Thermal

Engineering, Elsevier, 2023

This study explores the use of the adjoint solver in Fluent for nose cone shape
optimization, allowing automatic reshaping to reduce total pressure loss. The authors
claim a 27% drag reduction compared to the baseline model. While our study doesn’t
employ adjoint methods, the understanding of flow regions sensitive to pressure loss
was beneficial. The paper also emphasizes mesh sensitivity and the importance of
turbulence boundary conditions, reinforcing decisions we made in meshing and inlet
setup [6].

2.3. Design and Validation of an Aerodynamic System for a

Formula SAE Vehicle

Authors: Dr. Scott Wayne et al., M.S. Thesis, West Virginia University,
2015:

This thesis details the end-to-end aerodynamic development of a Formula SAE car,
with CFD modelling done in SolidWorks and Fluent, followed by wind tunnel

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 3

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone
validation. It discusses the importance of mesh refinement near the boundary layer and
the use of y+ charts for wall treatment. It provided us with practical CFD guidelines,
especially in validating simulation accuracy and deciding mesh inflation layers and
pressure probe placement in Fluent [7].

2.4. An Investigation of the Aerodynamic Design and Evaluation of

the Aerodynamic Efficiency for a Formula Student Vehicle

Author: Williams K et al., Student Thesis, 2020:

This thesis explores the aerodynamic design principles applied to Formula Student
vehicles, focusing on nosecone shape optimization to reduce drag and improve
downforce. The study emphasizes how aerodynamic improvements impact vehicle
efficiency and handling in student motorsport applications [8].

2.5. Design & Development of an Aerodynamic Package for a

FSAE Race Car

Author: Oxyzoglou I et al., Diploma Thesis, 2019:

This diploma thesis presents the development of a comprehensive aerodynamic

package for FSAE race cars. It integrates CFD simulations and experimental
validations to optimize airflow around the vehicle, focusing on components such as
front wings, diffusers, and the nosecone to enhance vehicle stability and performance
[9].

2.6. Optimizing the Manufacturing of the Nose Cone of a Race Car

Author: Karbhari K.N et al., B.E. Project Report, K.J. Somaiya College
of Engineering, Maharashtra, India, 2021:

This project report investigates various manufacturing processes and materials to

produce a lightweight yet structurally sound nose cone for race cars. It discusses the
balance between manufacturing cost, ease of production, and aerodynamic
effectiveness necessary for student-level racing teams [10].

2.7. Study of Drag Around the Nosecone of FSAE Vehicle

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 4

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

Author: Lad S et al., Saraswati College of Engineering, Navi Mumbai,

Maharashtra, India, 2022:

This study evaluates different nosecone geometries to analyze their drag characteristics
using CFD and wind tunnel testing. The results highlight the relationship between
shape and aerodynamic drag, providing insights for optimizing vehicle design to
reduce aerodynamic losses and improve stability [11].

2.8. Computational Fluid Dynamics Based Design and Investigation

of Nose Cone Aerodynamics of Formula Style Student Designed
Racecar

Author: Dhawal Jain et al., Proceedings of the 1st International and

18th ISME Conference, ISME 18, NIT Warangal, February 2017:

The conference paper demonstrates the application of CFD tools in the aerodynamic
design of student race car nosecones. It shows how CFD can accurately predict airflow
behavior, reducing the need for expensive physical prototyping and allowing rapid
design iterations for better aerodynamic performance [12].

2.9. “Nose Design for Formula Student Vehicle with Aerodynamic

Components”

Author: Savliya H et al., the Dwarkadas J Sanghvi College of

Engineering, Mumbai, India, 2023:

This thesis investigates the incorporation of aerodynamic features such as vortex

generators and winglets on the nosecone to increase downforce and enhance cornering
grip. Using CAD and CFD tools, the study validates the improvements in handling and
vehicle dynamics achieved through these modifications [13].

Summary:

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 5

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone
Aerodynamic optimization of the nose cone in Formula Student vehicles plays a pivotal role
in reducing drag and improving overall vehicle efficiency. Studies comparing various nose
cone geometries—such as elliptical, conical, and parabolic shapes—have shown that an
elongated elliptical profile consistently offers the best aerodynamic performance under
steady-state conditions. This shape minimizes flow separation and reduces the drag
coefficient, making it an ideal choice for high-speed racing applications.

Advanced computational fluid dynamics (CFD) tools like ANSYS Fluent have been
employed to refine nose cone designs. The use of turbulence models, particularly the k-ε
model, has been found effective in simulating realistic airflow behavior. Maintaining mesh
quality and monitoring near-wall treatments such as y+ values are crucial for accurate and
convergent results. Mesh sensitivity analyses further reinforce the importance of refining
grids, especially around the boundary layer, to capture intricate flow dynamics and pressure
distributions.

Shape optimization techniques, including methods like the adjoint solver, enable automatic
geometry refinement to minimize total pressure loss. Although not always used directly, the
insights gained from such techniques help identify flow-sensitive regions, guiding manual
design improvements. The integration of simulation and validation techniques, such as CFD
followed by wind tunnel testing, has proven essential for verifying simulation accuracy and
improving confidence in the final aerodynamic performance.

From a practical standpoint, manufacturing considerations are also critical. The nose cone
must strike a balance between aerodynamic efficiency, structural integrity, and production
feasibility. Lightweight materials and cost-effective manufacturing processes are preferred,
especially for student-level projects where resources may be limited. Additionally, the
aerodynamic performance of the nose cone has a direct impact on vehicle dynamics,
influencing factors such as cornering stability and energy efficiency during acceleration.

Some designs have also incorporated advanced aerodynamic features like vortex generators
and winglets into the nose cone. These elements help manipulate airflow to increase
downforce, particularly during high-speed cornering, and can significantly enhance handling
characteristics. Finally, the integration of the nose cone into a full aerodynamic package—
including front wings and diffusers—ensures that it contributes holistically to the vehicle’s
stability, efficiency, and performance on track.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 6

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

3. OBJECTIVE OF WORK

The primary objective of this project is to analyze and optimize the aerodynamic
behavior of the nose cone of a Formula Student vehicle using advanced Computational
Fluid Dynamics (CFD) tools.

The specific objectives of the project include:

 To model a geometrically accurate FSAE nose cone using professional-grade CAD

tools.
 To conduct CFD simulations under controlled, realistic boundary conditions that
mirror actual race-day scenarios.
 To evaluate aerodynamic metrics such as drag coefficient (C d), lift coefficient (Cl),
pressure contours, velocity streamlines, and turbulence characteristics.
 To simulate and analyze how different design aspects (curvature, tapering, frontal
area) influence airflow behavior.
 To select a suitable material for the nose cone based on aerodynamic loading,
manufacturability, and weight considerations.
 To propose design improvements that can reduce drag, improve stability, and enhance
vehicle performance in real racing conditions.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 7

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

4. METHODOLOGY

Fig 4.1 Methodology flowchart

4.1. Problem definition

Efficient aerodynamic performance is a critical requirement in the design of objects exposed to

fluid flow, such as vehicles, aircraft, and architectural structures. A poorly optimized geometry
can lead to adverse flow phenomena, including high turbulence, pressure drag, and flow
separation, which in turn reduce performance, stability, and energy efficiency. The initial
model considered in this study displayed signs of aerodynamic inefficiency, such as
recirculation zones, chaotic wake behaviour, and abrupt pressure gradients along its surfaces.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 8

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone
The primary objective of this investigation is to address these aerodynamic shortcomings by
evaluating and refining the shape of the model to promote smoother, more controlled flow
behaviour. High-velocity spikes, low-pressure regions near the rear, and extensive turbulence
zones observed in the first design highlight the need for modification. These characteristics are
commonly associated with increased drag and poor downstream flow recovery, both of which
hinder overall aerodynamic efficiency.

Using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulation techniques in ANSYS Fluent, the
study explores an improved second design iteration and compares its performance against the
initial model. The goal is to reduce drag-inducing flow disruptions, enhance pressure
distribution, and minimize wake intensity. The refined geometry is expected to achieve better
flow uniformity and lower turbulence, leading to a more aerodynamically efficient shape
suitable for practical applications.

4.2. Material selection

The selection of material for the nose cone plays a crucial role in determining both
aerodynamic efficiency and structural performance. For this project, Fibre Reinforced
Plastic (FRP) has been chosen as the primary material for the nose cone due to its
excellent balance between weight, strength, manufacturability, and cost. The key
reasons for selecting FRP being

 Lightweight: FRP offers a high strength-to-weight ratio, making it ideal for reducing
the overall weight of the Formula Student vehicle, thereby improving acceleration and
handling.
 Aerodynamic Surface Quality: It provides a smooth surface finish, which is critical
in reducing drag and ensuring laminar flow over the nose cone.
 High Strength and Flexibility: FRP can withstand the minor impact forces and
vibrations experienced during racing without significant deformation or damage.
 Ease of Fabrication: FRP components can be easily manufactured using moulds and
lay-up techniques, which are accessible and cost-effective for student teams.
 Cost-Effective: Compared to advanced composites like carbon fibre, FRP is more
affordable and available, making it suitable for prototype and competition-level
applications.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 9

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

Fig 4.2.1 FRP sheet

4.2.1. Properties
Table 4.2.1 FRP property
Property Value
Density ~1.8–2.1 g/cm³
Tensile Strength 250–600 MPa (depending on
fibre)
Flexural Strength 200–500 MPa
Surface Finish Quality High
Temperature Resistance Moderate (up to ~120°C)
Manufacturing Method resin transfer moulding
4.2.2. Manufacturing methodology

Manufacturing method to be used in this project will be Resin Transfer Moulding

(RTM). Resin Transfer Moulding (RTM) is a closed-mould composite manufacturing
technique widely used in the automotive and aerospace industries for producing high-
strength, lightweight fibre-reinforced components. It is ideal for creating a structurally
sound and aerodynamically optimized FRP nose cone with good surface finish and
dimensional accuracy [14].

Step 1: Mold Design and Preparation

 Mold Material: Typically made from MDF with epoxy coating.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 10

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone
 Split Mold: A two-part (male and female) mold is used to create the closed cavity
required for resin injection.

Step 2: Fiber Preform Placement

 Fiber Material: Glass fiber mat or woven fabric is cut and layered into the mold
according to the nose cone design.
 The fiber preform is shaped to follow the inner contours of the mold to ensure even
resin distribution.
 Proper fiber orientation is considered for mechanical performance (0°/90° or ±45°
layups).

Step 3: Mold Closure

 The mold halves are clamped tightly together using bolts or a hydraulic press to avoid
leakage during resin injection.
 Ports for resin inlet and vacuum outlet are built into the mold.

Step 4: Resin Preparation and Injection

 Resin Type: Epoxy or polyester resins are commonly used. Catalysts or hardeners are
mixed prior to injection.
 The resin is injected under low pressure into the mold cavity through the inlet port,
ensuring complete saturation of the fiber preform.
 A vacuum may be applied to help remove air bubbles and draw resin across the entire
mold.

Step 5: Curing

 The resin-saturated mold is left at room temperature or placed in an oven (if using a
thermosetting resin) to cure.
 Curing time depends on the resin system used and environmental conditions (typically
2–6 hours).

Step 6: De-molding and Trimming

 Once cured, the mold is opened, and the FRP nose cone is carefully removed.
 Trimming: Excess resin flash and material around the edges are trimmed using
grinders or diamond cutting tools.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 11

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone
 Holes and mounting provisions are drilled as per the mounting requirements on the
chassis.

Step 7: Surface Finishing

 The nose cone is sanded, buffed and polished.

 Optionally, a coat of primer and paint or clear coat is applied for surface protection
and aesthetic appeal.

4.3. Selection of base geometry

To begin the design process for the nose cone, we first needed a set of reference
shapes to work from. Since the nose cone sits at the very front of the car and is one of
the first components to interact with incoming airflow, choosing shapes that are
naturally aerodynamic was a logical starting point. For this, we turned to the field of
rocketry, where the goal is to design structures that cut through the air with as little
resistance as possible. Although rockets travel much faster than race cars and move
vertically instead of horizontally, the shared objective of reducing aerodynamic drag
makes their nose cone designs a valuable reference [12].

We selected four classic nose shapes commonly used in aerospace applications:

 LD Haack
 LV Haack
 Elliptic
 Power-0.5

Table 4.3.1 nosecone shape and equations

Name of the shape Equation

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 12

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

√⟨ ( ) ⟩
Elliptical 2
X
y=R × 1−
L

( )
0.5
Power 0.5 X
y=R ×
L
LD Haack
θ=cos
−1
(1− 2LX )

√{ }
2
sin 2θ sin θ
R θ− +
2 3
y=
√π
LV Haack
θ=cos
−1
(1− 2LX )

y=
R {√ θ− sin22θ }
√π

Where,

X = Axial distance along the cone (0 to L)

y = Radial distance from the centreline

R= Maximum base radius

L= Length of the nose cone

Θ= Angle parameter

4.3.1. Elliptical
The elliptic nose cone is defined by the shape of a half-ellipse. It’s one of the simplest and
most symmetric nose profiles and is commonly used in low-speed applications where minimal
flow separation is desired.

Advantages

 Easy to model and manufacture

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 13

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone
 Promotes smooth airflow with minimal flow separation at lower speeds du to smooth
pressure gradient.

Disadvantages

 Symmetry in top and bottom surfaces offers little to no lift/downforce characteristics.

 Does not direct flow in ways that benefit downstream aero elements like the front
wing or under tray.

Fig [Link] Elliptical

4.3.2. Power-0.5
This profile follows a simple power law and is sharper near the tip than the elliptic profile,
resulting in a more aggressively rising shape.

Advantages

 Sharper entry point promotes better initial air penetration reducing stagnation
pressure.
 Like the elliptic profile, it's easy to create.

Disadvantages

 The rapid slope increase toward the base can lead to separation and poor pressure
recovery.
 May exhibit higher drag than Haack profiles due to more abrupt curvature
changes.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 14

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

Fig [Link] Power-0.5

4.3.3. LD Haack
The LD Haack profile is a mathematically optimized nose shape that minimizes drag for a
given length-to-diameter ratio. It was originally developed for projectile and missile
applications and features a long, smooth curve.

Advantages

 Exhibits minimal drag theoretically making it excellent for reducing wave and form drag,
especially useful for minimizing overall drag coefficient (Cd).
 Offers streamlined flow encouraging attached flow and smooth pressure recovery.
 Aesthetic appeal: Looks aggressive and modern, suiting Formula Student aesthetics.

Disadvantages

 The shape is typically more stretched out, which might not fit well within FSAE
dimensional constraints.
 May introduce excess frontal area or unused internal space.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 15

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

Fig [Link] LD Haack

4.3.4. LV Haack
The LV Haack profile is a variant of the Haack series optimized for minimum volume rather
than drag. It is more compact than LD Haack while retaining some of its aerodynamic
smoothness.

Advantages

 Has a compact shape offering a better fit for packaging in tight spaces typical of a
Formula Student monocoque or tubular chassis.
 Balanced aerodynamics i.e., Lower volume may mean slightly higher drag than LD
Haack but better airflow management in certain setups.
 Good starting point for customization i.e., Easier to morph into a downforce-generating
shape due to its moderate curvature.

Disadvantages

 Slightly higher than LD Haack due to volume constraints.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 16

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

Fig [Link] LV Haack

Although these geometries gave us a strong baseline, we knew from the beginning that they would
need to be modified to suit the specific needs of a race car, this could involve reshaping the lower
surface of the nose cone, adjusting the angle of attack to manage airflow and produce localized
downforce.

4.4. CAD Modelling

The design process for the nose cone started by choosing the LV Haack profile as the foundation.
This shape, originally developed for rockets, is known for its sleek form and ability to reduce drag
— which made it a great starting point. But since a Formula Student car doesn't just need to cut
through the air efficiently, it also needs to generate usable downforce for better grip and handling,
we couldn’t rely on the original shape alone. So, we introduced a few key changes. We reshaped the
lower surface of the nose cone to guide airflow under the car more effectively, and we also tilted the
nose at a slight angle of attack. These tweaks help create a low-pressure region beneath the nose,
adding a bit of downforce without compromising the clean aerodynamic profile too much. In short,
we adapted a low-drag rocket design to suit the dynamic needs of a race car.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 17

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone
Step 1: Importing the chassis model

The first step was to bring in the chassis geometry into the CAD environment. This included the front
bulkhead and nearby mounting features. The imported chassis acted as a reference frame to ensure that the
nose cone fit structurally and visually into the full car model. The front bulkhead served as the primary
reference plane for designing and attaching the nose cone.

Fig 4.4.1 Chassis

Step 2: Creating the 2D Nose Profile (Side View)

With the chassis in place, we created a 2D sketch on the front plane, aligned with the vehicle’s
centerline. The outline of the nose cone was based on the LV Haack profile, but modified slightly
to suit aerodynamic needs. This involved plotting or importing the calculated curve points to match
the desired length and radius. The lower surface was reshaped slightly to introduce a curve that
could guide airflow downward, and the sketch was angled slightly upward to simulate a mild angle
of attack.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 18

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

Fig 4.4.2 2D Outline

Step 3: Extruding and providing side cuts

Once the profile was ready, it was created to 3D by using Extrude/Boss feature depending
on the intended thickness and surface treatment. This created a solid body representing the
basic nose volume, attached cleanly to the bulkhead.

To make the nose cone more functional and visually integrated, side cuts were introduced.
These were done using extruded cut and flipping the outline.

Additionally, SAE SUPRA rule book states that all sharp forward facing structures should
have a radius of 35mm.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 19

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

Fig 4.4.3 3D Model

4.5. Enclosure
To perform accurate CFD simulations, it’s crucial to define a computational domain
(enclosure) that is large enough to allow airflow to behave naturally around the object in
this case, the modified LV Haack nose cone without causing artificial reflections or
pressure distortions near the boundaries.

The enclosure was created in ANSYS SpaceClaim with the following relative
dimensions:

 Forward of the nose cone: 4 × L

 Backward of the nose cone: 6 × L

 Upward from the cone: 3 × L

 Downward from the car (ground clearance): 80 mm
 Sideways from the cone: 2 × L

Given, L (length of the cone) = 1245mm

The domain dimensions are based on:

 Ensuring flow development before hitting the model (4L)

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 20

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone
 Capturing full wake structure and pressure recovery (6L)
 Avoiding wall interference (3L width, 2.5L height)
 Maintaining a realistic flow environment similar to wind tunnel testing

Fig 4.5.1 Enclosure

4.6. Meshing
After defining the enclosure and preparing the nose cone geometry, the next step was to generate a
computational mesh suitable for accurate and stable CFD analysis. The meshing was performed in
ANSYS Meshing, focusing on capturing flow behavior accurately around the nose cone and
within the surrounding enclosure.

A uniform global mesh size of 0.1 m was used throughout the domain. This size was chosen as a
balance between computational efficiency and solution accuracy. It is fine enough to capture
pressure gradients and flow separation around the nose cone, yet coarse enough to keep the
simulation time reasonable. A tetrahedral (unstructured) mesh was generated automatically by
ANSYS, which is well-suited for complex geometries like nose cones. The mesh smoothing
quality was set to “High”, ensuring that the shape of individual mesh elements was optimized to
avoid high aspect ratios and poorly formed elements, especially in curved regions.

The number of nodes generated were 183425, number of elements generated were 955569 which
is under the limit of 1048000 of the student version.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 21

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

Fig 4.6.1 Nosecone meshing

Fig 4.6.2 Enclosure meshing

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 22

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

4.7. Setup parameters

The CFD simulation was carried out in ANSYS Fluent to evaluate the aerodynamic performance of
the modified LV Haack nose cone under typical Formula Student driving conditions. A steady-
state, incompressible flow model was used, with appropriate turbulence modeling, boundary
conditions, and region interfaces to simulate realistic airflow interaction.

Turbulence model

Model Used: SST k–ω

 Chosen for its ability to handle adverse pressure gradients and separation zones especially
around the lower curvature of the nose cone.
 Offers high near-wall accuracy compared to standard k–ε models, making it suitable for
aerodynamic surface studies.

Boundary conditions

i. Inlet

 Type: Velocity Inlet

 Magnitude: 22.2 m/s (equivalent to 80 km/h, typical track speed)
 Direction: Along the longitudinal axis of the vehicle

ii. Outlet

 Type: Pressure Outlet

 Gauge Pressure: 0 Pa
 Simulates ambient atmospheric conditions at the rear of the domain

iii. Ground

 Type: Moving Wall

 Velocity: 22.2 m/s, same as inlet but in opposite direction
 This replicates relative vehicle motion over the ground and enables accurate ground
effect modeling

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 23

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone
iv. Nose cone and Chassis surface

 Type: Stationary Walls (No-Slip)

 These represent the physical body interacting with the flow

Solution was initialized using standard initialization method and computed from all zones, with
turbulent kinetic energy = 1.84815m2/s2, and specific dissipation rate = 12652.19s-1.

Fig 4.7.1 Setup

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 24

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

5. EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS

Two different iterations of the nosecone was created, the first iteration was the base iteration
and the second iteration was the enhanced geometry taken from the result of the first iteration.
Both the velocity and Pressure contours were obtained as shown in the figure.

Fig 5.1 First Iteration Fig 5.2 Second Iteration

Iteration 1:

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 25

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone
Fig 5.3 First Iterations Streamline analysis (side view)
In the first iteration of the nose cone design, CFD analysis showed that while the flow
remained largely attached along the surface, several aerodynamic limitations were evident.
The frontal area of the design was relatively large, which contributed to increased pressure
drag and a broader stagnation region at the nose tip. This larger area not only increased
resistance but also limited the efficiency of air redirection toward downstream components.
Furthermore, the rear curvature of the nose cone showed signs of suboptimal flow recovery,
with indications of possible flow separation or wake formation. Overall, this iteration lacked
aerodynamic compactness and required refinement to reduce drag, improve flow direction,
and enhance integration with the rest of the aerodynamic package

Fig 5.4 First Iterations Streamline Analysis (top view)

The top view streamline visualization shows the airflow behavior over and around the nose
cone from a plan perspective. In this iteration, the flow is observed to diverge around the wide
frontal section, indicating a relatively large frontal area that increases aerodynamic resistance.
The streamlines accelerate along the sides due to flow constriction, and the curvature near the
rear of the nose generates moderate velocity gradients. Additionally, the central region behind
the nose shows signs of slight turbulence and flow distortion, suggesting inefficient
redirection of air toward the centerline and downstream components. These findings highlight
the need for a more streamlined and compact geometry in the next design iteration.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 26

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

Fig 5.5 Velocity contour (bottom view)

The bottom view velocity contour reveals the airflow distribution beneath the front nose cone. Higher
velocity zones are concentrated along the outer edges, indicated by shades of orange and red, while a
distinct low-velocity region appears at the central stagnation zone near the nose tip. This suggests that
the bottom surface design does not effectively accelerate airflow underneath the car, which is critical
for generating downforce via pressure differential. Additionally, the inconsistent flow velocities across
the underside point to areas of suboptimal contouring that may lead to localized turbulence or flow
separation. These characteristics highlight the need for a refined lower geometry in the second
iteration to improve flow acceleration and enhance underbody aerodynamic efficiency.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 27

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

Fig 5.6 Velocity contour (top view)

The top view velocity contour illustrates the surface airflow distribution over the upper
section of the nose cone. The visualization shows a significant deceleration zone at the frontal
impact area, where the flow stagnates and transitions into lower velocities, represented by
blue and green regions. Moving toward the midsection and sides, the velocity gradually
increases, indicated by the dominant orange and red hues. However, the wide, flat upper
surface causes non-uniform velocity gradients, particularly along the lateral regions,
suggesting inefficient airflow channeling. The surface also lacks sufficient curvature to
accelerate flow cleanly over the top, which is critical for reducing lift and pressure drag.
These characteristics indicate that further geometric optimization is necessary to enhance the
aerodynamic performance in subsequent design iterations.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 28

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

Fig 5.7 Pressure contour (top view)

The pressure contour from the top view highlights the distribution of static pressure over the
surface of the nose cone. The front face shows a high-pressure region (marked in red to
orange), which is expected due to the direct impact of incoming airflow. This stagnation
pressure indicates significant resistance to forward motion and contributes to increased drag.
As the airflow moves toward the midsection and rear, the pressure drops rapidly (green to
blue regions), showing how the air accelerates and separates around the body.
However, the pressure drop is not very smooth, and the contour lines suggest uneven pressure
recovery along the upper surface. Additionally, the flat upper surface leads to low-pressure
zones at the edges, which can create lift and instability. This means the current shape is not
optimal for maintaining smooth airflow and pressure balance, resulting in higher aerodynamic
drag and potential lift forces.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 29

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

Fig 5.8 Pressure contour (bottom view)

The bottom view of the pressure contour reveals a pronounced high-pressure zone at the front
stagnation point, indicated by the deep red region. This confirms strong impact pressure,
contributing to form drag. Moving aft, the pressure quickly transitions into low values (green
to blue), signifying flow acceleration under the nose cone.
However, the shape underneath appears to trap low-pressure regions unevenly along the sides,
particularly near the lower midsection. This suggests the onset of separated flow or vortex
formation, which would increase aerodynamic drag and could negatively impact cooling
airflow toward downstream components (e.g., radiators or undertray). Furthermore, the flat or
abrupt geometry may not be efficiently managing the air beneath the vehicle, resulting in poor
pressure recovery.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 30

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone
Iteration 2:

Fig 5.9 velocity contour (bottom view)

The bottom view velocity contour from the second iteration indicates a notable aerodynamic
improvement compared to the first iteration. The maximum velocity has decreased to
approximately 26.47 m/s from the previous 36.16 m/s, suggesting a more uniform and
controlled flow. The velocity distribution appears smoother and more evenly spread across the
domain, particularly along the walls, with fewer signs of abrupt drops or high-velocity
recirculation zones—especially in corners where turbulence previously occurred. These
improvements imply reduced flow separation and enhanced flow uniformity, pointing toward
better aerodynamic performance. To complete the analysis and provide a thorough side-by-
side comparison, please upload the remaining second iteration results: the top view velocity
contour, pressure contours (top and bottom), and optionally, streamline or vector plots for
deeper insight.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 31

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

Fig 5.10 Velocity contour (top view)

The top view velocity contour of the second iteration further reinforces the improvements
observed in the bottom view. The flow remains within the same reduced maximum velocity
range of approximately 26.47 m/s, but with visibly smoother and more uniform distribution
across the upper surface. The gradient transitions appear less abrupt, and there is minimal
evidence of high-velocity concentration or turbulent streaks that would indicate potential flow
detachment. Compared to the first iteration, this more balanced top-side velocity field
suggests better adherence and reduced aerodynamic drag, which supports the conclusion of
enhanced flow control in the second design. Please proceed by uploading the pressure
contours (top and bottom), and optionally any streamline or vector plots, to complete the full
comparison analysis.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 32

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

Fig 5.11 Pressure contour (top view)

The top view pressure contour from the second iteration provides further validation of
aerodynamic enhancement. The pressure distribution shows a smooth high-pressure zone
concentrated at the leading edge (front tip), transitioning gradually into lower pressure regions
downstream. The peak pressure reaches approximately 301.7 Pa, focused where the flow first
contacts the surface — typical of a stagnation point. Importantly, there is minimal evidence of
erratic pressure spikes or sharp gradients along the top surface, indicating controlled flow
behavior and reduced separation. The mostly blue-to-green color spectrum across the surface
suggests a streamlined transition and improved pressure recovery, both beneficial for
minimizing drag. Please upload the bottom view pressure contour to complete the set, after
which a full comparative summary can be prepared.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 33

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

Fig 5.12 Pressure contour (bottom view)

The bottom view pressure contour from the second iteration aligns well with the trends
observed in the top view, further confirming improved aerodynamic behaviour. The highest
pressure, around 301.7 Pa, is again concentrated near the leading edge, which is expected due
to stagnation effects. As the flow progresses downstream, pressure smoothly decreases along
the surface, with no abrupt spikes or chaotic transitions. The gradient is consistent and well-
distributed, and the contour lines at the rear indicate a more orderly pressure recovery zone.
Additionally, the presence of more negative pressures near the rear section is expected due to
flow acceleration and expansion — but the relatively mild gradients suggest less severe flow
separation than in the first iteration.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 34

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

Fig 5.13 Static Pressure 2D contour

The 2D static pressure contour (Fig. 5.13) provides a clear cross-sectional visualization of
pressure behavior around the body in the second iteration. As expected, there's a pronounced
high-pressure region at the stagnation point on the front face, shown in red (~308 Pa),
followed by a rapid drop into a well-formed low-pressure zone along the rear side —
indicated by blue-to-dark blue shades (as low as ~–204 Pa). The symmetry and smooth
transition from high to low pressure zones suggest effective pressure recovery and minimized
flow separation. The streamlined pressure field surrounding the geometry reinforces the
earlier 3D contour results, confirming that the second iteration significantly improves
aerodynamic performance through controlled pressure distribution and reduced drag-
producing disturbances.

Fig 5.14 Velocity Magnitude 2D contour

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 35

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

The 2D velocity magnitude contour (Fig. 5.14) further reinforces the aerodynamic
improvement observed in the second iteration. The plot shows smooth acceleration around the
body with a clearly formed wake region behind it. The highest velocity (up to ~0.263 m/s,
red) appears away from the body as expected, while the low-velocity zone (deep blue)
immediately downstream indicates a well-contained recirculation region. Compared to the
first iteration, the wake appears narrower and more aligned with the flow, pointing to reduced
flow detachment and drag. The smooth velocity gradient from stagnation to wake indicates
improved streamline adherence and more effective boundary layer management.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 36

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

6. RESULTS
6.1. Velocity distributions

In the first iteration, the velocity distribution shows a peak velocity of approximately
36.16 m/s. The flow around the geometry experiences abrupt changes, particularly with
high-velocity spikes and areas of flow recirculation near walls and sharp edges. This
pattern indicates strong turbulence and local flow separation, especially around the bottom
surface, which suggests aerodynamic inefficiency and higher drag forces.

In contrast, the second iteration exhibits a significantly lower maximum velocity of

around 26.47 m/s. The velocity field is smoother and more evenly distributed across the
surface of the model. Gradients in the flow are gentler, and the presence of localized
velocity peaks is reduced. These improvements suggest a more stable and controlled flow,
resulting in decreased turbulence intensity and lower aerodynamic drag. Overall, the
second design promotes improved velocity uniformity and better aerodynamic
performance.

6.2. Pressure distributions

The pressure contours in the first iteration reveal high stagnation pressures at the front of the
body, but these are followed by large regions of low pressure around the sides and rear. The
transition between high and low-pressure zones is abrupt, especially in the wake region and
near sharp corners, which leads to inefficient pressure recovery and increased form drag.

In the second iteration, the pressure peaks at around 301 Pa and exhibits a more gradual and
balanced distribution over the surface. The top and bottom pressure contours confirm improved
management, with smoother pressure recovery from the leading to the trailing edges. The 2D
static pressure slice further validates this by showing a more symmetrical pressure field along
the longitudinal axis. These characteristics reflect reduced adverse pressure gradients, improved
pressure stability, and a more aerodynamic flow profile. As a result, the second design is
expected to have better lift/drag behaviour and overall aerodynamic efficiency.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 37

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

Table 6.1 Results

Aspect First iteration Second iteration

Max velocity 36.16m/s 26.47m/s

Flow uniformity Uneven, turbulent Smooth, stable

Pressure regions Sharp fluctuation Balanced, smooth

recovery

Wake formation Wide, chaotic Narrow and stable

The corresponding Drag force and Lift force obtained from solution were 194N and 12N
respectively.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 38

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

7. CONCLUSION
In this project, the aerodynamic performance of two design iterations was investigated through a
comprehensive CFD analysis. The process began with base geometry preparation and CAD
modeling, followed by mesh generation to ensure accurate representation of the flow domain. The
simulation setup in ANSYS Fluent involved defining appropriate boundary conditions, fluid
properties, and solver settings to realistically model the airflow. Analysis of pressure and velocity
contours from the simulations revealed that the second design iteration improved flow
characteristics by reducing pressure peaks and minimizing flow separation compared to the initial
design. These qualitative results suggest a potential reduction in aerodynamic drag and enhanced
efficiency. Overall, the project demonstrated the effectiveness of iterative design, detailed
modeling, and CFD simulation in optimizing aerodynamic performance.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 39

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

8. LIMITATIONS

 Formation of wake regions in the geometry by default

 Right material composite to optimize weight, and cost considerations
 Improve the geometry to optimize structural integrity to withstand and absorb impacts.

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 40

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

9. FUTURE SCOPE

 Advance aerodynamic optimization such as active aero like DRS to alter the
parameters dynamically
 Light weight and high strength materials
 Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Enhancements, more sophisticated AI-driven
CFD simulations
 Integration of devices such as winglets, undertray diffusers

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 41

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone

REFERENCES
[1] FSAE Rules Committee, "FSAE Rulebook 2023", SAE International,
[Link]

[2] Menter, F.R., “Two-Equation Eddy-Viscosity Turbulence Models for Engineering

Applications,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 32, No. 8, 1994, pp. 1598–1605.

[3] Ahmed, S.R., Ramm, G. and Faltin, G., "Some Salient Features of the Time-Averaged
Ground Vehicle Wake," SAE Technical Paper 840300, 1984.

[4] Panhale, N. et al., “CFD Analysis and Optimization of Nose Cone for an FSAE Race Car,”
International Journal of Engineering Research and Technology, Vol. 6, Issue 03, March 2017,
pp. 376–379

[5] Singh, R., Kumar, A., and Thakur, V., "Numerical Optimization for Aerodynamic
Performance of Nose Cone of FSAE Vehicle through CFD", CFD Letters, 2023. Available at:
[Link]
_for_Aerodynamic_Performance_of_Nose_Cone_of_FSAE_Vehicle_through_CFD

[6] Gupta, S., and Kale, S., "Enhancing Formula Student Car Performance: Nose Shape
Optimization via Adjoint Method", Case Studies in Thermal Engineering, Elsevier, 2023.
Available at: [Link]

[7] Phalen, R.P., "Design and Validation of an Aerodynamic System for a Formula SAE
Vehicle", M.S. Thesis, West Virginia University, 2015. Available at:
[Link]

[8] Williams, K., “An Investigation of the Aerodynamic Design and Evaluation of the
Aerodynamic Efficiency for a Formula Student Vehicle”, Student Thesis, 2020. Available at:
[Link]
[Link]

[9] Oxyzoglou, I., “Design & Development of an Aerodynamic Package for a FSAE Race
Car”, Diploma Thesis, 2017. Available at: [Link]

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 42

 Designing a FSAE front nose cone
[10] Karbhari, K.N., Bhinderwala, Y.M., “Optimizing the Manufacturing of the Nose Cone of
a Race Car”, B.E. Project Report, K.J. Somaiya College of Engineering, Maharashtra, India,
2016. Available at: [Link]

[11] Lad, S., Bhagat, P., Jadhav, J., More, K., Patil, K., “Study of Drag Around the Nosecone
of FSAE Vehicle”, Saraswati College of Engineering, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India,
2020. Available at: [Link]

[12] Saxena, S., Deshmukh, A., Shukla, S., “Computational Fluid Dynamics Based Design
and Investigation of Nose Cone Aerodynamics of Formula Style Student Designed Racecar”,
Proceedings of the 1st International and 18th ISME Conference, ISME 18, NIT Warangal,
February 2017. Available at:
[Link]
_Design_and_Investigation_of_Nose_Cone_Aerodynamics_of_Formula_Style_Student_Desi
gned_Racecar

[13] Savliya, H., “Nose Design for Formula Student Vehicle with Aerodynamic
Components”, The Dwarkadas J Sanghvi College of Engineering, Mumbai, India, 2020.
Available at: [Link]

[14] Oliveira, I. R., Amico, S. C., Souza, J. A., & Lima, A. G. B. (2013). Resin transfer
molding process: A numerical and experimental investigation. The International Journal of
Multiphysics, 7(2), 125–136. [Link]

Department of Automobile Engineering, DSCE, Bangalore-78 Page 43