2022 cars 'porpoising' at high speed

[Vanja #66]

The 180km/h limit blows my mind still. I was shocked to be reminded of that (must have forgotten).

I really do think with the wholesale changes, they should have allowed more on track testing this year.

Teams managed their time really well even so. A total of 4000km for Mercedes and Ferrari, that's a very decent number.

If F1 was about having huge resources before, now it's about being agile and efficient. I like that.

[Hoffman900]

The 180km/h limit blows my mind still. I was shocked to be reminded of that (must have forgotten).

I really do think with the wholesale changes, they should have allowed more on track testing this year.

Teams managed their time really well even so. A total of 4000km for Mercedes and Ferrari, that's a very decent number.

If F1 was about having huge resources before, now it's about being agile and efficient. I like that.

I’m mixed.

I agree but I also don’t want to see a field spread out because some cars are porpoising / have balance issues. It makes for a worst racing product

[maxxer]

The 180km/h limit blows my mind still. I was shocked to be reminded of that (must have forgotten).

I really do think with the wholesale changes, they should have allowed more on track testing this year.

Teams managed their time really well even so. A total of 4000km for Mercedes and Ferrari, that's a very decent number.

If F1 was about having huge resources before, now it's about being agile and efficient. I like that.

I’m mixed.

I agree but I also don’t want to see a field spread out because some cars are porpoising / have balance issues. It makes for a worst racing product

Give them more time on fridays anyway the people are there , they have to put the hours on the project but the cars only drive around for 2 hours the whole day. So as far as personal cost it doesnt matter they are there anyway boss has to pay them for 8 hours

[Hoffman900]

Teams managed their time really well even so. A total of 4000km for Mercedes and Ferrari, that's a very decent number.

If F1 was about having huge resources before, now it's about being agile and efficient. I like that.

I’m mixed.

I agree but I also don’t want to see a field spread out because some cars are porpoising / have balance issues. It makes for a worst racing product

Give them more time on fridays anyway the people are there , they have to put the hours on the project but the cars only drive around for 2 hours the whole day. So as far as personal cost it doesnt matter they are there anyway boss has to pay them for 8 hours

Yeah but that running counts towards their mileage, so teams are reluctant to put the wear on the drivetrain.

The braking complaints worry me, which is an aero problem considering the rule changes there to control wake.

[maxxer]

I’m mixed.

I agree but I also don’t want to see a field spread out because some cars are porpoising / have balance issues. It makes for a worst racing product

Give them more time on fridays anyway the people are there , they have to put the hours on the project but the cars only drive around for 2 hours the whole day. So as far as personal cost it doesnt matter they are there anyway boss has to pay them for 8 hours

Yeah but that running counts towards their mileage, so teams are reluctant to put the wear on the drivetrain.

The braking complaints worry me, which is an aero problem considering the rule changes there to control wake.

Ahh yes you are right about the milage didnt think of that so many limits in f1 now

[NtsParadize]

The 180km/h limit blows my mind still. I was shocked to be reminded of that (must have forgotten).

I really do think with the wholesale changes, they should have allowed more on track testing this year.

So this explains why they always put the speed limiter at 180-200 km/h during free practice and ask the drivers to run at constant speed

[vorticism]

Is the main straight bumpy in Bahrain or was that porpoising visible during the race?

[Stu]

Is the main straight bumpy in Bahrain or was that porpoising visible during the race?

They were still porpoising during the race (even though the car looks to have been raised a bit). Not seen their floor, but my best guess is that have chased peak downforce, rarely is that the most stable.

[Hoffman900]

James said porpoising isn’t caused by what the commentators on tv / the web are saying it is caused by (assuming he means stalled floor)

I’m still of the opinion it is caused by turbulent vortex shedding.

[Greg Locock]

So, work out the likely vortex shedding frequency and compare it with the observed frequency of the porpoising.

[Hoffman900]

So, work out the likely vortex shedding frequency and compare it with the observed frequency of the porpoising.

If Merc can’t, I can’t.

“Think” doesn’t mean it is.

[Stu]

By ‘vortex shedding’, do they mean that the vortices created in various critical areas are unstable and collapsing?

It would be a shame if the ‘on their side’-pods and SIS covers are creating this issue (or amplifying it).

It would be very interesting to see if the Barcelona spec pods do not suffer as much (was the final day ‘glory run’ just that, or is it actually better?).

[goatil]

Does anyone have the porpoising analysis graph they showed in the official F1 debrief with Kravitz and Palmer? I wanted to have a further look at it

[Tommy Cookers]

So, work out the likely vortex shedding frequency and compare it with the observed frequency of the porpoising.

If Merc can’t, I can’t. :lol:

ho-ho !
the F4 Phantom would shed alternating vortices from its nose at c.20 alpha - so disrupting weapon aiming
therafter noses were designed to avoid this

PIOs - another bs excuse for design incompetence
the 1970s Panavia Tornado's designers caused about 6 crashes because ......
they didn't know that pilots often pulse (cycle) the control inputs (like F1 drivers use dabs of opposite lock) ....
secretly they implemented software 'PIO detection by inference' treating any control cycling as a PIO so .....
the pitch control reversed after maybe 3 dabs of 'nose-up' stick just before touchdown so ....
any further 'nose-up' dabs produced a nose-down outcome ie a crash

perhaps they should do this eg to wannabee LHs or MVs ?
3 dabs of opposite lock and the steering reverses itself !
how many F1 designers can drive like eg Chapman, Uhlenhaut, or Remington could ?

[vorticism]

Which part would be shedding turbulent vortexes? Something occuring at greater than porpoising frequency (which seems to be about 2 or 3 Hz)? And why would they be considered turbulent?

My off the cuff hypothesis is that maybe there's a relationship between the inlet ramp and the middle section of the venturi tunnel. If floor downforce diminishes sufficiently to become overpowered by the inlet ramp lift, there might be a feedback loop occurring there. If so maybe the inlet size/shape is crucial, relative to the remainder of the tunnel.

McLaren seem to have the smallest tunnel inlets (both the narrowest and also not raising as high up as say, Ferrari). Perhaps they did that to prevent the inlet from being less of a source of lift, as they're trying to tune/understand how these two areas work together. By comparison the previous aero formulas had a flat floor continuously, the front of the floor could not really produce lift at the rake angles they were running.