Ferrari SF23

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.
Farnborough
Farnborough
102
Joined: 18 Mar 2023, 14:15

Re: Ferrari SF23

Post

Vanja #66 wrote:
01 May 2023, 22:14

Alternatively, you can also do another thing - you can design your floor for slightly less downforce on purpose. A floor that has a few tricks that help it not to choke, stall or otherwise get penalised when your car is running almost on the plank. A floor with a smaller throat length and a location for peak downforce, so you know exactly how it will behave during braking, acceleration and roll - because even slight roll causes a lot of difference in downforce between inside and outside halves...

So - you give up on a few floor downforce points knowingly. But you don't care that much, since you also have a suspension that allows you to run the car really low at all speeds, so you have a predicatable and stable platform that runs low both in Q and in Race. At all times. At all speeds. At all tracks, bumps or no bumps. On all tyres, no matter their stifness... In short - you design an RB18 floor and suspension and further improve it with RB19.
Certainly an interesting aspect.

I'd see an adaption in opposite direction though. Increased volume in underfloor chamber to increase air mass and the surface over which it's applied to underside of chassis. Pulled by a milder diffuser to give a "system" performance that changes more slowly which floor plane shifts relative to track surface. Also total change in effect shifts more lazily, subsequently giving a resonance within rznge of control by conventional damping ability.

The resulting peak may not be far off ideal but with much more manageable exponential rise and fall in acquiring negative presuures.

Xwang
Xwang
29
Joined: 02 Dec 2012, 11:12

Re: Ferrari SF23

Post

LM10 wrote:
02 May 2023, 11:39
Vanja #66 wrote:
01 May 2023, 22:14
jambuka wrote:
01 May 2023, 20:12
https://scuderiafans.com/ferrari-identi ... full-tank/
So the ridge height increases when there is heavy fuel load. Don't think only rear and front wing upgrades will solve this. Seems like definitely need the suspension upgrade ASAP.
I was hoping someone else would write about this pehnomena...
That's a really interesting post, Vanja. Let's see if I've understood this theory.

The F1-75 had decent amount of floor downforce and a soft suspension because the car didn't really care if it was porpoising or not - it kept stable in all conditions and generated enough downforce with higher ride heights.

This year, with the new floor edge rules, it is beneficial to run lower, thus Ferrari built the SF-23 to work with lower ride heights. At the same time the floor still produces decent amount of downforce, so Ferrari is forced to use a stiffer suspension than last year. A stiffer suspension is not a problem for the SF-23 in qualifying as with the high velocity during the lap the car produces enough downforce to keep the car low. But as soon as it's fueled for the race and get's heavy, the lower velocity means less generated downforce and this causes the car not only to be slower and understeery, but also slide around. The consequenses are weak lap times especially at the beginning of the race and less tyre life due to higher deg.

It makes sense because the SF-23 does not only have a tyre deg problem, but in the race it's significantly slower than the RB19 from the get go even on fresh tyres.

If that's actually the case, I'd try everything to keep the superior downforce and try to make the car work in the race too. If it means a complete suspension overhaul which can only be done next season, so be it. That's better than copying RedBull's solution because as you said, RedBull already has got much more knowledge and a car concept in line with that.
A stiffer spring should limit the height variation for a given load (F=kX). So if Ferrari problem is die to excessive height variation, that is given by a softer spring not a more rigid one, isn't it?

User avatar
bluechris
9
Joined: 26 Jun 2019, 20:28
Location: Athens

Re: Ferrari SF23

Post

Also a stiffer suspension will not make the tyre problems bigger because the car will loose grip in slow and medium corners more easily? All ready Ferrari is much stiffer than RedBull.

Andi76
Andi76
431
Joined: 03 Feb 2021, 20:19

Re: Ferrari SF23

Post

Vanja #66 wrote:
01 May 2023, 22:14
jambuka wrote:
01 May 2023, 20:12
https://scuderiafans.com/ferrari-identi ... full-tank/
So the ridge height increases when there is heavy fuel load. Don't think only rear and front wing upgrades will solve this. Seems like definitely need the suspension upgrade ASAP.
I was hoping someone else would write about this pehnomena, it was on my mind for a while. Last year, Ferrari controlled the bouncing, was right on the edge and "got away" with softest possible suspension setup, with a right combination of mechanical grip and ride height on the edge to prevent excessive plank wear. This year, they chose not to pursue this for one or several reasons, which might have to do with PU reliabilty since TD039 is no longer enforced basically. Also, they may have designed the car for slightly lower ride height to begin with, which leaves lot less room for bouncing without bottoming out (something that was often the case with F1-75 early in the season)

So in short, Ferrari is running a suspension which is quite stiff, however in Q they get to a point where they can extract the maximum from the car since they are running fast which increases downforce which lowers the car just right. With extra fuel, they can't run as fast, stiff suspension keeps the car higher then optimal and lap time is slower than usual. One way to get better would be to push much harder, but thanks to FIA, FOM, Ecclestone and Pirelli - you can't have a stint of 20-30 qualifying laps.

With extra fuel weight you can certainly never get to the apex speed you have in Q, no matter how much you push. So, insufficient speed leads to excessive ride height leads to insufficient downforce leads to insufficient speed... How to solve this? Softer suspension? Yes, but then you may have excessive squat, dive, heave and possibly also bouncing/porpoising - altogether and unstable aero platform. So, what do you need? Suspension geometry with more anti-dive and anti-squat to begin with.

Alternatively, you can also do another thing - you can design your floor for slightly less downforce on purpose. A floor that has a few tricks that help it not to choke, stall or otherwise get penalised when your car is running almost on the plank. A floor with a smaller throat length and a location for peak downforce, so you know exactly how it will behave during braking, acceleration and roll - because even slight roll causes a lot of difference in downforce between inside and outside halves...

So - you give up on a few floor downforce points knowingly. But you don't care that much, since you also have a suspension that allows you to run the car really low at all speeds, so you have a predicatable and stable platform that runs low both in Q and in Race. At all times. At all speeds. At all tracks, bumps or no bumps. On all tyres, no matter their stifness... In short - you design an RB18 floor and suspension and further improve it with RB19.

What can Ferrari do with their car right now? Beat Red Bull at their own game? Hardly, they are a year and a half ahead already. Try and redesing the floor and suspension to try and achieve these effects partially, while keeping slightly more floor downforce? Probably the only thing that can be done, since everything else requires complete car overhaul - so no sooner than next year. It will all be in vain if they don't sort out internal issues in strategy and operations department, as well as reaching reliability goals they set for themselves.
The suspension then... as I've been saying for months. But what I can't imagine is that Ferrari actually hadn't been able to determine for a long time that their non-linear suspension or rising Spring rates suspension was responsible for the car being higher in the race. That would mean a complete failure of several departments at once. I'm not entirely convinced by this theory that the Italian media is putting forward here. In addition, it looked to me as if the unsprung masses on the rear axle had been increased, which rather points to other problems.

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

Re: Ferrari SF23

Post

Andi76 wrote:
03 May 2023, 21:47
Vanja #66 wrote:
01 May 2023, 22:14
jambuka wrote:
01 May 2023, 20:12
https://scuderiafans.com/ferrari-identi ... full-tank/
So the ridge height increases when there is heavy fuel load. Don't think only rear and front wing upgrades will solve this. Seems like definitely need the suspension upgrade ASAP.
I was hoping someone else would write about this pehnomena, it was on my mind for a while. Last year, Ferrari controlled the bouncing, was right on the edge and "got away" with softest possible suspension setup, with a right combination of mechanical grip and ride height on the edge to prevent excessive plank wear. This year, they chose not to pursue this for one or several reasons, which might have to do with PU reliabilty since TD039 is no longer enforced basically. Also, they may have designed the car for slightly lower ride height to begin with, which leaves lot less room for bouncing without bottoming out (something that was often the case with F1-75 early in the season)

So in short, Ferrari is running a suspension which is quite stiff, however in Q they get to a point where they can extract the maximum from the car since they are running fast which increases downforce which lowers the car just right. With extra fuel, they can't run as fast, stiff suspension keeps the car higher then optimal and lap time is slower than usual. One way to get better would be to push much harder, but thanks to FIA, FOM, Ecclestone and Pirelli - you can't have a stint of 20-30 qualifying laps.

With extra fuel weight you can certainly never get to the apex speed you have in Q, no matter how much you push. So, insufficient speed leads to excessive ride height leads to insufficient downforce leads to insufficient speed... How to solve this? Softer suspension? Yes, but then you may have excessive squat, dive, heave and possibly also bouncing/porpoising - altogether and unstable aero platform. So, what do you need? Suspension geometry with more anti-dive and anti-squat to begin with.

Alternatively, you can also do another thing - you can design your floor for slightly less downforce on purpose. A floor that has a few tricks that help it not to choke, stall or otherwise get penalised when your car is running almost on the plank. A floor with a smaller throat length and a location for peak downforce, so you know exactly how it will behave during braking, acceleration and roll - because even slight roll causes a lot of difference in downforce between inside and outside halves...

So - you give up on a few floor downforce points knowingly. But you don't care that much, since you also have a suspension that allows you to run the car really low at all speeds, so you have a predicatable and stable platform that runs low both in Q and in Race. At all times. At all speeds. At all tracks, bumps or no bumps. On all tyres, no matter their stifness... In short - you design an RB18 floor and suspension and further improve it with RB19.

What can Ferrari do with their car right now? Beat Red Bull at their own game? Hardly, they are a year and a half ahead already. Try and redesing the floor and suspension to try and achieve these effects partially, while keeping slightly more floor downforce? Probably the only thing that can be done, since everything else requires complete car overhaul - so no sooner than next year. It will all be in vain if they don't sort out internal issues in strategy and operations department, as well as reaching reliability goals they set for themselves.
The suspension then... as I've been saying for months. But what I can't imagine is that Ferrari actually hadn't been able to determine for a long time that their non-linear suspension or rising Spring rates suspension was responsible for the car being higher in the race. That would mean a complete failure of several departments at once. I'm not entirely convinced by this theory that the Italian media is putting forward here. In addition, it looked to me as if the unsprung masses on the rear axle had been increased, which rather points to other problems.
I have expressed this opinion elsewhere. You mean to tell me Ferrari hadn't realized for almost a year now that the dynamic ride heights were higher in the race than qualifying?

Seems a bit unlikely.
A lion must kill its prey.

User avatar
Vanja #66
1572
Joined: 19 Mar 2012, 16:38

Re: Ferrari SF23

Post

Andi76 wrote:
03 May 2023, 21:47
The suspension then... as I've been saying for months. But what I can't imagine is that Ferrari actually hadn't been able to determine for a long time that their non-linear suspension or rising Spring rates suspension was responsible for the car being higher in the race. That would mean a complete failure of several departments at once. I'm not entirely convinced by this theory that the Italian media is putting forward here. In addition, it looked to me as if the unsprung masses on the rear axle had been increased, which rather points to other problems.
Actually, I'm sure the point of the article is that Ferrari did not pay enough attention to this and that Red Bull is able to put their floor as low as intended at much lower speeds, thus ensuring proper downforce coefficient of the car (since the force itself depends on velocity obviously). This was very clear even in pre-season testing in Bahrain, RB19 was low, soft and stable, while SF-23 did not like being too low and too soft at the same time. If suspension is too stiff in first part of the downward travel, you can't lower the car enough at lower speeds. Red Bull found an excellent way to combine all 3
AeroGimli.x

And they call it a stall. A STALL!

#DwarvesAreNaturalSprinters
#BlessYouLaddie

User avatar
SiLo
138
Joined: 25 Jul 2010, 19:09

Re: Ferrari SF23

Post

It seems like suspension is the new meta then. Which makes sense seeing as ride height and suspension changes are the biggest things that have changed across 2022 and 2023. TD039 and then lifting the floor edge.

I believe Ferrari will find pace in the car though.
Felipe Baby!

User avatar
hollus
Moderator
Joined: 29 Mar 2009, 01:21
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Re: Ferrari SF23

Post

Guys, this forum works in English.
Posting a link to an article in italian and adding “you guys use an auto translator” is not acceptable. Such cases are being deleted.

Posting a link to an article in italian and a adding either a summary or the key points, in english, is OK.

The effort must come from the poster, not the readers.

We are not suggesting that “you” do not post that link. We are asking that “you” (one person) write 5-6 short lines in a language you clearly can handle (English) to tell the readers (thousands) what awaits in the other side. Then the link. Interested people can then do the effort (only if they want to!) to access the rest of the content translated.

No, not everyone has an autotranslator one click away.
Rivals, not enemies.

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

Re: Ferrari SF23

Post

Image

Uncovered rear.
Last edited by Sevach on 04 May 2023, 16:26, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Ferrari SF23

Post

Sevach wrote:
04 May 2023, 16:21
https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/F ... 980512.jpg

Our old friend double support medium wing is back (which kinda surprises me).

https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/F ... 980492.jpg

Uncovered rear.
Miami?
A lion must kill its prey.

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

Re: Ferrari SF23

Post

AR3-GP wrote:
04 May 2023, 16:23
Sevach wrote:
04 May 2023, 16:21
https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/F ... 980512.jpg

Our old friend double support medium wing is back (which kinda surprises me).

https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/F ... 980492.jpg

Uncovered rear.
Miami?
No sorry my mistake, clicked the wrong thing on the AMUS site.

User avatar
codetower
6
Joined: 15 Sep 2020, 16:47

Re: Ferrari SF23

Post

some images of the Ferrari's front wing from Miami (courtesy of motorsport)

Image

User avatar
gordonthegun
254
Joined: 28 Mar 2019, 23:33
Location: Monza, Italy.

Re: Ferrari SF23

Post

The image that usually inaugurates a race weekend shows that nose and FW are the same, so upgrades are not in this area :wink: :

Image

Vinlarr89
Vinlarr89
13
Joined: 27 Feb 2023, 14:32

Re: Ferrari SF23

Post

Too and bottom are different no?

User avatar
codetower
6
Joined: 15 Sep 2020, 16:47

Re: Ferrari SF23

Post

Vinlarr89 wrote:
04 May 2023, 20:08
Too and bottom are different no?
I believe it's an optical illusion due to the angles. If you look at the top image post as well, they look very similar. If there is a difference, it's extremely minor.