Ferrari F1-75

[godlameroso]

Having hot radiator air come out of the top of the sidepods like that will allow air to stick to the surface. Believe it or not, the kinematic viscosity of air increases with temperature, you can see this as the boundary layer on the ground increases on hot days.





It's not a huge change in kV, but may make enough of a difference to delay detachment.

[organic]

Not conviced about new Ferrari's sides.
https://i.postimg.cc/kgQDPYPd/Senza-titolo.jpg

Aston seems have more space to flow the air from the front to the rear by the "slim zone" beneath radiators

I see what you mean with this. Anyone more skilled to comment please do so, but to me it looks like the Ferrari solution would energise the air and potentially spool up a vortex through the small undercut and over the top of the rear floor surface, where the Aston appears to have a natural airflow across that area.

Anyone?

Aston airflow may look more natural but to me it *feels* to me like there is more development potential with solutions without the massively undercut sidepods (à la Ferrari/McLarn). Take the Aston idea: the airflow is already about as clean as you can achieve with the huge undercut when it arrives at the rear; where can you achieve more gains substantially with this idea? Can always achieve better airflow over/around sidepods however with an idea like McLaren. On the other hand it seems difficult for the big undercut cars especially with the less controlled cooling louvres of AR/AM to change their bodywork much to achieve a lot better flow to the beam wing with the same concept. It looks as though it'd be easiest to find early performance but harder to develop to my untrained eye. Of course I'm happy to be wrong as it'll be an opportunity to learn!

[Hoffman900]

Having hot radiator air come out of the top of the sidepods like that will allow air to stick to the surface. Believe it or not, the kinematic viscosity of air increases with temperature, you can see this as the boundary layer on the ground increases on hot days.

https://www.engineersedge.com/images/air-viscosity.png

It's not a huge change in kV, but may make enough of a difference to delay detachment.

It’s inconsequential, or you’d have to model the cars at different times of day / cloud cover, etc.

Airflow mass and velocity out of the louvers is going to be the whole game, and it will be going much slower exiting the louvers as the air passing over it. There is a drag penalty there as well as changing the direction and additional surface area of those channels. Maybe Ferrari feels the engine has enough stonk to offset, but that assumes they didn’t under estimate what Mercedes and Honda have done with their PU’s either.

Ferrari, I believe, is quoted that this had a positive effect in the wind tunnel, which wouldn’t account for any of that.

[godlameroso]

Having hot radiator air come out of the top of the sidepods like that will allow air to stick to the surface. Believe it or not, the kinematic viscosity of air increases with temperature, you can see this as the boundary layer on the ground increases on hot days.

https://www.engineersedge.com/images/air-viscosity.png

It's not a huge change in kV, but may make enough of a difference to delay detachment.

It’s inconsequential, or you’d have to model the cars at different times of day / cloud cover, etc.

Ferrari, I believe, is quoted that this had a positive effect in the wind tunnel, which would account for any of that.

Dude, the air coming off the engine is ~140c, different times of day/cloud cover, etc is inconsequential if anything. 140c vs 30c = 180% increase in kV.

[Hoffman900]

Having hot radiator air come out of the top of the sidepods like that will allow air to stick to the surface. Believe it or not, the kinematic viscosity of air increases with temperature, you can see this as the boundary layer on the ground increases on hot days.

https://www.engineersedge.com/images/air-viscosity.png

It's not a huge change in kV, but may make enough of a difference to delay detachment.

It’s inconsequential, or you’d have to model the cars at different times of day / cloud cover, etc.

Ferrari, I believe, is quoted that this had a positive effect in the wind tunnel, which would account for any of that.

Dude, the air coming off the engine is ~140c, different times of day/cloud cover, etc is inconsequential if anything.

Are you going to keep rating my post negatively for calling you out?

I can bet you damn sure that the temperature gradient over the whole car varies greatly, bottom / top / sides, and it varies depending on surface temp, proximity to internal parts, paint color, time of day, sun intensity, etc. thus kv is highly variable, and 60% scale models, which Ferrari said this arrangement worked well with, don’t model this either.

I haven’t been around F1 cars to know, but been around enough Formula Atlantic cars to tell you that.

[LM10]

One thing is for sure. Since it is one of the possible design philosophies that was actually given by the FIA, it must have definitely, at least, been considered/evaluated by the other teams.

Although it's obvious that Ferrari's concept is not 1:1 with the concept given by the FIA, so it is possible the other teams might have overlooked something.

I'm sure that teams would have looked at all these options anyway. I can't imagine them not thinking of such a design possibility, at least roughly.

The thing is that you need to build a working concept where all areas and parts of the car operate in synergy with each other. Little tweaks and changes can have a big impact on the overall performance.

[JPBD1990]

Not conviced about new Ferrari's sides.
https://i.postimg.cc/kgQDPYPd/Senza-titolo.jpg

Aston seems have more space to flow the air from the front to the rear by the "slim zone" beneath radiators

I see what you mean with this. Anyone more skilled to comment please do so, but to me it looks like the Ferrari solution would energise the air and potentially spool up a vortex through the small undercut and over the top of the rear floor surface, where the Aston appears to have a natural airflow across that area.

Anyone?

Aston airflow may look more natural but to me it *feels* to me like there is more development potential with solutions without the massively undercut sidepods (à la Aston&Alfa). The airflow is already about as clean as you can achieve with the huge undercut when it arrives at the rear; where can you achieve more gains substantially with this idea? Can always achieve better airflow over/around sidepods however. Seems difficult for the big undercut cars especially with the less controlled cooling louvres of AR/AM. It looks as though it'd be easiest to find early performance but harder to develop to my untrained eye.

Thanks for the reply! To clarify, you mean the Ferrari or AM has the more development potential to your eye?

[organic]

I see what you mean with this. Anyone more skilled to comment please do so, but to me it looks like the Ferrari solution would energise the air and potentially spool up a vortex through the small undercut and over the top of the rear floor surface, where the Aston appears to have a natural airflow across that area.

Anyone?

Aston airflow may look more natural but to me it *feels* to me like there is more development potential with solutions without the massively undercut sidepods (à la Aston&Alfa). The airflow is already about as clean as you can achieve with the huge undercut when it arrives at the rear; where can you achieve more gains substantially with this idea? Can always achieve better airflow over/around sidepods however. Seems difficult for the big undercut cars especially with the less controlled cooling louvres of AR/AM. It looks as though it'd be easiest to find early performance but harder to develop to my untrained eye.

Thanks for the reply! To clarify, you mean the Ferrari or AM has the more development potential to your eye?

I edited my previous post as I made a mistake or two shouldn't come on here so late. Personally I think Aston/Alfa undercut designs might offer less development potential than the other ideas we've seen but be easier to extract performance from immediately (reliably)

[RedNEO]

[jagunx51]

sidepod and rear wing shape
https://scontent.fbki2-1.fna.fbcdn.net/ ... e=62135189

[jagunx51]

A little different angle:

https://i.imgur.com/MuqaxeM.jpg

[JPBD1990]

A little different angle:

https://i.imgur.com/MuqaxeM.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/JWISCFn.jpeg

Radiators look outboard mounted. I wonder if, like is suspected of Williams in particular, the inboard portion of the inlet aims to drive fresh air straight through and out of the louvres? Would this help to energise the hot dirty air coming out of the radiator further back?

[f1316]

What’s the betting that if either Red Bull or Mercedes rock up with identical sidepods, Anderson and co. suddenly change their tune?

[Manfer]

What’s the betting that if either Red Bull or Mercedes rock up with identical sidepods, Anderson and co. suddenly change their tune?

ANSYS should ask how these journos have managed to develop CFD eyes.

[MachineCo.]

I don't think Ferrari came by this design lightly. regardless of what Gary says about it being designed by 2 different teams that didn't meet in the middle.... judging by the haas release, I'm pretty sure Ferrari are quite aware of the benefits of a slim style sidepod. And looking at Alfa, I'm pretty sure they have some idea of the benefits of the large undercut.
The side view of the sidepods remind me of the F2002. And that was a pretty good car.