Ferrari SF-26

[Just_a_fan]

Can anyone think of a reason why it might be beneficial to shed counter-rotating vortices onto a driver’s face?

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

Counter-rotating vortices cancel each other resulting so no vortex. But also help to settle turbulence coming from the interface of the halo and tub. Or the two vortices split and run either side of the helmet and thus tidy up the flow generally.

[Brahmal]

The video below is B-Sport's interpretation of why Mercedes can get away with putting the little "4th-elements" on the top corner edges of their rear-wing. He thinks it's a glitch or error in the legality-box rules that allows a team to put a mirrored aero surface a few centimeters long pretty much wherever they want on the car. I wonder if this is what Ferrari are using to allow these halo winglets; they appear to be a similar size.

[Luscion]

Ferrari have the rotating wing too but only declaring the halo winglet

[michl420]

The video below is B-Sport's interpretation of why Mercedes can get away with putting the little "4th-elements" on the top corner edges of their rear-wing. He thinks it's a glitch or error in the legality-box rules that allows a team to put a mirrored aero surface a few centimeters long pretty much wherever they want on the car. I wonder if this is what Ferrari are using to allow these halo winglets; they appear to be a similar size.

I thought they just use the 2 cm freedom for the HALO. Is it larger?

[DinkLv]

Ferrari's double-decker floor inlet in Shanghai

[venkyhere]

Ferrari's double-decker floor inlet in Shanghai

https://i.imgur.com/ImEYj6Y.jpeg

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

what's 'double-decker' about this ? a horizontal stick/bar cutting the daggers into two halves ? Is it going to produce double the number of vortices under the floor than if it didn't exist ?

[FrukostScones]

well it is Ferrari: "why-ferrari-didnt-use-its-rotisserie-rear-wing-after-fp1-at-chinese-gp"

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/why-f ... /10804749/

[typhson_lee]

Ferrari's double-decker floor inlet in Shanghai

https://i.imgur.com/ImEYj6Y.jpeg

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

what's 'double-decker' about this ? a horizontal stick/bar cutting the daggers into two halves ? Is it going to produce double the number of vortices under the floor than if it didn't exist ?

I would argue it acts like a Leading Edge Flap on a Wing (even though it doesn't really leade the edge). Helping guide air under the Floor. Distributing the load, so reducing the high pressure and load on the leading edge of the floor, making it a bit less likely to seperate at the point where it transitions to a flat floor. Overall I guess it results in slightly more air under the floor.
Also, since the Flap is closer to the ground than the part of the Floors roof it's under, the flaps underside should experience a bit more ground effect than the corresponding part of the floor above it.

More vortecies? I would say no.
Even if you don't necessarily need a wing edge to find vorticity in a flow field I would say, here the vorticies just form at the dagger tips, as they would without the leading edge flap. (Although I they might have used one of the daggers to form the leading edge flap? Like the flap is a horizontal lying dagger to make this complient with the rules?)

[AR3-GP]

Hamilton lost the rear (lockup) just after the wing closed entering T6 during FP1. It seems like Ferrari have problems with the stability of the car when the macarena wing closes. I'm not surprised. The wing has large hysteresis. I'm not even sure if we can call it hysteresis. There is a transient state where the wing is just generating a turbulent mess before it closes.

[PlatinumZealot]

A lot of us would remember when the first generation of DRS wings had turbulence issues when closing. Teams were playing around with size of flaps and gurneys etc.

[f1316]

Hamilton lost the rear (lockup) just after the wing closed entering T6 during FP1. It seems like Ferrari have problems with the stability of the car when the macarena wing closes. I'm not surprised. The wing has large hysteresis. I'm not even sure if we can call it hysteresis. There is a transient state where the wing is just generating a turbulent mess before it closes.

I read today that it’s more a question of balance since the front week closes at a different speed than the rear. Hard to know how much stock to put in it but there is some logic to it - if true, that seems very solvable.

[GrizzleBoy]

At around the seven second.mark in this video, the front of the car appears to hit a pretty hard "stop" point as it nose dives under braking, immediately followed by the rear breaking loose.

Could it be hitting the ground too hard since the front wing and rear wing are engaging at very different times and messing with floor aero/chassis balance?

[AR3-GP]

https://youtube.com/shorts/5mKYK8riqI4? ... V1S55kDVI6

At around the seven second.mark in this video, the front of the car appears to hit a pretty hard "stop" point as it nose dives under braking, immediately followed by the rear breaking loose.

Could it be hitting the ground too hard since the front wing and rear wing are engaging at very different times and messing with floor aero/chassis balance?

One of the big things that came out in Bahrain testing is how much the active aero causes the car to bottom out when it "slams shut" in the transition from straight mode to corner mode. So there is a complex dynamics problem that the teams have to work around. Using the springs, anti-dive, ride heights, and closing speeds to reduce pitching and bottoming without sacrificing downforce and grip under braking.

In the Mercedes thread they show that Mercedes has potentially slowed down the closure of the front wing, to better control the pitching motion and tire load (front and rear) fluctuations that occur when the wing closes abruptly.


I think Suzuka is a risky place to have any uncertainty. Braking into T1, spoon, and other areas are done with partial steering lock so it's very important to not have any instabilities.

[GrizzleBoy]

https://youtube.com/shorts/5mKYK8riqI4? ... V1S55kDVI6

At around the seven second.mark in this video, the front of the car appears to hit a pretty hard "stop" point as it nose dives under braking, immediately followed by the rear breaking loose.

Could it be hitting the ground too hard since the front wing and rear wing are engaging at very different times and messing with floor aero/chassis balance?

One of the big things that came out in Bahrain testing is how much the active aero causes the car to bottom out when it "slams shut" in the transition from straight mode to corner mode. So there is a complex dynamics problem that the teams have to work around. Using the springs, anti-dive, ride heights, and closing speeds to reduce pitching and bottoming without sacrificing downforce and grip under braking.

In the Mercedes thread they show that Mercedes has potentially slowed down the closure of the front wing, to better control the pitching motion and tire load (front and rear) fluctuations that occur when the wing closes abruptly.


I think Suzuka is a risky place to have any uncertainty. Braking into T1, spoon, and other areas are done with partial steering lock so it's very important to not have any instabilities.

Yes i noticed during the race that in the heavy braking zone at the end of the back straight, the merc front wing does not snap back into place but gradually goes back to its position.m

Meanwhile into turn 1, the front wing jumps back into place straight away.

Maybe its linked to the fact that heavy braking occurs in one instance, and just a lift or or tap of the brake is occurs in the other.

Either way, I dont knownhow theyll sort aero transition imbalance out without a similar thing, if they don't have it already.

[Brahmal]

Yes i noticed during the race that in the heavy braking zone at the end of the back straight, the merc front wing does not snap back into place but gradually goes back to its position.m

Meanwhile into turn 1, the front wing jumps back into place straight away.

Maybe its linked to the fact that heavy braking occurs in one instance, and just a lift or or tap of the brake is occurs in the other.

Either way, I dont knownhow theyll sort aero transition imbalance out without a similar thing, if they don't have it already.

The Merc wing closes slower at higher speeds simply because of increased air resistance. Whether that's intentional or not is unknowable, but if it's taking longer than 400ms the FIA would be well within their rights to make them fix it.