Andi76 wrote: ↑31 Dec 2022, 08:08
ing. wrote: ↑26 Nov 2022, 16:54
Great pic that also highlights how Ferrari were trying to reduce lift on the upper surface of the sidepods with the lateral “fences” and kick-up at the rear. Probably good for some local DF or lift reduction but likely not good for drag.
Alpine went the same way—scalloped upper surface—with their revised sidepods, but smashed the trailing edge of the sidepods down to the floor, most likely to better energize the diffuser and reduce drag for overall better efficiency.
Could you please explain why it should be not good for drag? I mean we have CFD simulation that says pretty much the opposite. Also the Ferrari was not a car that had any problems with drag. If you suggest this because of Red Bulls topspeed advantage, i do not think this would support your arguement, as without DRS, both cars were pretty close in terms of topspeed. What makes it highly likely that Red Bulls Topspeed advantage had more to do with DRS than with drag itself.
Agree that the overall design concept of the F1-75 is very good. It’s just my eyeball CFD having an issue with the inward-tapering “fences” on the top of the pylon and the little kick-up/radiator exit just ahead of the upper wishbone front leg.
I believe Ferrari were trying to reduce the lift normally induced by the downward tapering of the sidepod tops by creating the lick-up at the back, so basically defining an (inverted) wing profile.
So, while the lift may have been reduced, I would expect that the price for this is induced drag from any DF generated—especially since the flow coming off the trailing edge is probably not aligned with the downwash ahead of the RW—as well as what must be a vortex sheet rolling off the top of the rounded, raised sidepod edges trying to work like fences.
Also, from an overall aero efficiency point-of-view, I would expect that not driving more flow down to the floor to power the diffuser must be sacrificing some efficiency gains.