Ferrari F1-75

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter do not belong here.
ryaan2904
ryaan2904
36
Joined: 01 Oct 2020, 09:45

Re: Ferrari F1-75

Post

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
CFD Eyes of Sauron

JPower
JPower
43
Joined: 23 Feb 2021, 05:06

Re: Ferrari F1-75

Post

F1NAC wrote:
04 Mar 2022, 10:36
JPower wrote:
03 Mar 2022, 16:59
mzso wrote:
03 Mar 2022, 16:56

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.

User avatar
Vanja #66
1571
Joined: 19 Mar 2012, 16:38

Re: Ferrari F1-75

Post

ryaan2904 wrote:
04 Mar 2022, 14:03
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.

Image
And they call it a stall. A STALL!

#DwarvesAreNaturalSprinters
#BlessYouLaddie

User avatar
vorticism
323
Joined: 01 Mar 2022, 20:20

Re: Ferrari F1-75

Post

Vanja #66 wrote:
04 Mar 2022, 15:13
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...
𓄀

aMessageToCharlie
aMessageToCharlie
0
Joined: 09 Dec 2020, 14:28

Re: Ferrari F1-75

Post

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
ryaan2904
36
Joined: 01 Oct 2020, 09:45

Re: Ferrari F1-75

Post

@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.
CFD Eyes of Sauron

User avatar
vorticism
323
Joined: 01 Mar 2022, 20:20

Re: Ferrari F1-75

Post

aMessageToCharlie wrote:
04 Mar 2022, 17:27
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.
𓄀

User avatar
continuum16
49
Joined: 30 Nov 2015, 17:35
Location: Kansas

Re: Ferrari F1-75

Post

vorticism wrote:
04 Mar 2022, 18:27
aMessageToCharlie wrote:
04 Mar 2022, 17:27
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.
"You can't argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"
- Mark Twain

JondoIramat
JondoIramat
0
Joined: 31 Oct 2013, 20:00

Re: Ferrari F1-75

Post

codetower wrote:
03 Mar 2022, 18:15
mzso wrote:
03 Mar 2022, 16:56
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. :-k
It is a split turbo this year for Ferrari!!!

AR3-GP
AR3-GP
365
Joined: 06 Jul 2021, 01:22

Re: Ferrari F1-75

Post

vorticism wrote:
04 Mar 2022, 18:27
aMessageToCharlie wrote:
04 Mar 2022, 17:27
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.
A lion must kill its prey.

JPower
JPower
43
Joined: 23 Feb 2021, 05:06

Re: Ferrari F1-75

Post

mzso wrote:
03 Mar 2022, 16:56
codetower wrote:
03 Mar 2022, 16:28
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.
JPower wrote:
03 Mar 2022, 15:38
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
LM10
121
Joined: 07 Mar 2018, 00:07

Re: Ferrari F1-75

Post

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
shamyakovic
-2
Joined: 26 Dec 2013, 22:40

Re: Ferrari F1-75

Post

LM10 wrote:
05 Mar 2022, 00:20
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
JPBD1990
49
Joined: 22 Feb 2018, 12:19

Re: Ferrari F1-75

Post


Sevach
Sevach
1081
Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 17:00

Re: Ferrari F1-75

Post

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