Ferrari F1-75

[ryaan2904]

https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/F ... 876608.jpg

So Ferrari are ducting air through the side pods .. and they've chosen to use the suspension attachment point as the exit, straight onto the beam wing

[JPower]

A single turbo charger is a given, the rules don't allow more. The split turbo only adds a long shaft to that turbo, as far as I know.


That's not my impression of Ferrari. They're very secretive. They only recently showed a years old Power unit.
And these days are even more cautious about bold claims, engine or otherwise.
(It used to be more of a "we're gonna rule!" than two months later "we're focusing on next year's car" pattern, before the Binotto leadership)

Eh, I don't know about that. Ferrari can be a leaky faucet at times. We knew about the 2021 PU and its improvements very early as well as the new hybrid upgrade. We also knew that the 2022 engine would be using a new combustion process and "innovative" technology as far back as winter 2020.

Well... where else can you develop PU. It all starts with combustion.... neither of reporters know exactly what has being changed...

Starts.

[Vanja #66]

So Ferrari are ducting air through the side pods .. and they've chosen to use the suspension attachment point as the exit, straight onto the beam wing

Based on earlier photos of sidepod internals, this doesn't seem to be the case.

[vorticism]

Based on earlier photos of sidepod internals, this doesn't seem to be the case.
https://i.ibb.co/3SkMJgx/FMWeh-TAXs-Ac-Ko82.jpg

I wonder why their stationary cooler doesn't have a tube running in the inboard side, just an open hole. The air being pumped in would just flow back out through the inlet rather than the radiators. Unless...

[aMessageToCharlie]

Looking at these pictures I was thinking: Would it be within the rules to build the sidepots as big as possible and guide as much air as possible through them, using this tunnel within the sidepots as basically unrestricted aero zone? Add some wings in there. Maybe even shape the cars internals aerodynamically so it doest qualify as an aero device.

I assume sidepot inlet size is restricted to prevent this?

[ryaan2904]

https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/F ... 876608.jpg

Some interesting angles of the front sidepod corner:

https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/C ... 876635.jpg

https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/C ... 876804.jpg

https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/C ... 876818.jpg

Source: https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... icht-2022/

@Vanja#66 checkout the first image. Beside the cooling vents, there's a separate section that looks like its made to channel clean air. They've also put in effort to keep the flow uninterrupted.

[vorticism]

Looking at these pictures I was thinking: Would it be within the rules to build the sidepots as big as possible and guide as much air as possible through them, using this tunnel within the sidepots as basically unrestricted aero zone? Add some wings in there. Maybe even shape the cars internals aerodynamically so it doest qualify as an aero device.

I assume sidepot inlet size is restricted to prevent this?

AFAIK sidepod inlet size is not limited. You could duct air through the engine cover, but putting wings in a duct will not provide downforce. Ducts are often put to use effectively (S-ducts, F-ducts, for example) but they can be tricky. In LMP there were numerous examples of cars being designed with perhaps too much emphasis on flow through ducts as a main part of the aero performance, which were not successful.

[continuum16]

Looking at these pictures I was thinking: Would it be within the rules to build the sidepots as big as possible and guide as much air as possible through them, using this tunnel within the sidepots as basically unrestricted aero zone? Add some wings in there. Maybe even shape the cars internals aerodynamically so it doest qualify as an aero device.

I assume sidepot inlet size is restricted to prevent this?

AFAIK sidepod inlet size is not limited. You could duct air through the engine cover, but putting wings in a duct will not provide downforce. Ducts are often put to use effectively (S-ducts, F-ducts, for example) but they can be tricky. In LMP there were numerous examples of cars being designed with perhaps too much emphasis on flow through ducts as a main part of the aero performance, which were not successful.

If they have allocated a portion of the sidepod inlet to direct air straight through (i.e. not for cooling) then they certainly aren't the only team to see this as a possible advantage. Look at the Williams with its 'hole' in the back of the sidepods and comparatively large sidepod inlets. Much different execution but same general idea.

[JondoIramat]

A single turbo charger is a given, the rules don't allow more. The split turbo only adds a long shaft to that turbo, as far as I know.

Ahhh, thank you for the clarification (I'm not very savvy when it comes to turbos). I was under the impression that a "split" was indeed "twin".

So theoretically, it could be a split design.

It is a split turbo this year for Ferrari!!!

[AR3-GP]

Looking at these pictures I was thinking: Would it be within the rules to build the sidepots as big as possible and guide as much air as possible through them, using this tunnel within the sidepots as basically unrestricted aero zone? Add some wings in there. Maybe even shape the cars internals aerodynamically so it doest qualify as an aero device.

I assume sidepot inlet size is restricted to prevent this?

AFAIK sidepod inlet size is not limited.

There is probably a "rules box" where the sidepod must exist. You can see that based on the Aston Martin side pod shape. The inlet size is restricted by the dimensions of that regulations box.

[JPower]

Also, if you believe the official site... states it's a single turbocharger:

A single turbo charger is a given, the rules don't allow more. The split turbo only adds a long shaft to that turbo, as far as I know.

But seriously, I think the insiders would’ve made a huge deal if Ferrari had made that drastic a change to their architecture. You’re right to question my assertion based on no confirmation from Ferrari.

That's not my impression of Ferrari. They're very secretive. They only recently showed a years old Power unit.
And these days are even more cautious about bold claims, engine or otherwise.
(It used to be more of a "we're gonna rule!" than two months later "we're focusing on next year's car" pattern, before the Binotto leadership)

Just an update to this, the Italian show ChronoGP says that Ferrari has moved to a split turbo configuration. I guess we'll just have to wait for Binotto to confirm which way they decided to go.

[LM10]

Both, The Race and Mark Hughes in an article on the official homepage of Formula 1 wrote that Ferrari is believed to not have adopted the split turbo design.
Considering we’ve not heard a single word of Ferrari actually building a split turbo - while on the other hand it’s been long known that Renault was - I don’t see a reason why we should believe in Ferrari having one. That animation from ChronoGP out of nowhere does not change that, unless they’ve reliable insider information.

[shamyakovic]

Both, The Race and Mark Hughes in an article on the official homepage of Formula 1 wrote that Ferrari is believed to not have adopted the split turbo design.
Considering we’ve not heard a single word of Ferrari actually building a split turbo - while on the other hand it’s been long known that Renault was - I don’t see a reason why we should believe in Ferrari having one. That animation from ChronoGP out of nowhere does not change that, unless they’ve reliable insider information.

This video shows ferrari indeed has split turbo

[JPBD1990]

[Sevach]

I don't know what cooling has to do with that, but alright.