Ferrari SF-24

[Vanja #66]

Is water able to follow vortices closely anyway? I know if its mist it can but above a certain volume surely it's too heavy?

Yeah, it's not perfect, but some very rudimentary patterns and features can be observed. Having a stronger floor edge vortex is consistent with development of larger and larger floor inlets since 1st race of 2022, as well as learning from some statements that this vortex is one of the more important floor performance drivers.

[KimiRai]

More photos

[bananapeel23]

More photos

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 7.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 1.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 4.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 1.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 8.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 1.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 1.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... C_0829.jpg

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 1.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 1.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 1.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 0.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 0787-1.jpg

The Ferrari floor edge still looks so basic compared to Red Bull. Surely there is still a lot of headroom for development for Ferrari.

[CaribouBread]

More photos
...

Take a look at 2 tiny winglets on the rear crash structure right below the exhaust, in between the beam wings. Were they always there?




Very clear from the front view in this picture.

[Andi76]

More photos

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 7.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 1.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 4.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 1.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 8.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 1.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 1.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... C_0829.jpg

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 1.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 1.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 1.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 0.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 0787-1.jpg

The Ferrari floor edge still looks so basic compared to Red Bull. Surely there is still a lot of headroom for development for Ferrari.

You shouldn't assume that ornate and complex automatically means better and more advanced.

[Vanja #66]

Take a look at 2 tiny winglets on the rear crash structure right below the exhaust, in between the beam wings. Were they always there?

Nice catch, I think we failed to notice it last year Must have been invisible to us with other bigger problems the car had then

You shouldn't assume that ornate and complex automatically means better and more advanced.

Indeed, especially in this area where multiple flow structures interact in a very complex way. However, when we look at latest additions to diffuser complexity it seems RB, McLaren and Ferrari are ahead in this area. Small kicks and bumps in diffuser can bring small performance improvement and potentially increased local suction, which will propagate a bit forward in the floor as well. But, more importantly, these changes in diffuser geometry are likely not so sensitive to ride height changes like the throat and middle section of the floor. In other words, improving the diffuser might be a way to improve the whole floor without a big risk to reintroduce bouncing.

[AMG.Tzan]

Discussion on the features of the SF-24 diffuser along with other teams:
https://twitter.com/dr_obbs/status/1795120154927341719

Follow up comparison with the RB20 diffuser:

It’s probably the image angle but the diffuser throat on the RB20 is so much lower…

Which in turn means huge downforce at stable heights! It’s basically what Mercedes tried to do with the W13 but ended up porpoising! Also Ferrari’s floor doesn’t look to be lets say “3D” like Red Bull's…

[bananapeel23]

More photos

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 7.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 1.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 4.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 1.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 8.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 1.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 1.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... C_0829.jpg

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 1.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 1.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 1.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 0.jpg.webp

https://www.funoanalisitecnica.com/wp-c ... 0787-1.jpg

The Ferrari floor edge still looks so basic compared to Red Bull. Surely there is still a lot of headroom for development for Ferrari.

You shouldn't assume that ornate and complex automatically means better and more advanced.

I know more complex doens't automatically mean more better, but in the case of F1, the more complex solutions tend to correlate with better performance. Ferrari is vertianyl running a much more primitive floor edge than Red Bull in particular. That seems (at least to me) to mean that they haven't been able to fully explore that region to extract all of the performance that is on the table. Perhaps their floor edge is perfect despite its simplicity, but I kind of just doubt that given that the other teams keep pursuing ever more complex solutions. If simplicity is best, you owuld expect the other teams to also pursue simplicity.

[CaribouBread]

We have zero insight into one crucial element, that is Ferrari's system of development priorities and time/effort/money/computation expended to see gains. Perhaps in Ferrari's development model they think they could better spend their time on other parts of the floor and see more gains, or perhaps the floor edge requires too much effort to be expended to see gains for now.
Whatever it is, they'll get to it eventually after other avenues of easy performance (in their priority/order) are exhausted. All in due time

[Dream Theater]

The Ferrari floor edge still looks so basic compared to Red Bull. Surely there is still a lot of headroom for development for Ferrari.

You shouldn't assume that ornate and complex automatically means better and more advanced.

I know more complex doens't automatically mean more better, but in the case of F1, the more complex solutions tend to correlate with better performance. Ferrari is vertianyl running a much more primitive floor edge than Red Bull in particular. That seems (at least to me) to mean that they haven't been able to fully explore that region to extract all of the performance that is on the table. Perhaps their floor edge is perfect despite its simplicity, but I kind of just doubt that given that the other teams keep pursuing ever more complex solutions. If simplicity is best, you owuld expect the other teams to also pursue simplicity.

For example, if you look at Mercedes' floor edge seems more complex than the SF-24 one, but as of today they still can't make it work, it seems.

[Andi76]

The Ferrari floor edge still looks so basic compared to Red Bull. Surely there is still a lot of headroom for development for Ferrari.

You shouldn't assume that ornate and complex automatically means better and more advanced.

I know more complex doens't automatically mean more better, but in the case of F1, the more complex solutions tend to correlate with better performance. Ferrari is vertianyl running a much more primitive floor edge than Red Bull in particular. That seems (at least to me) to mean that they haven't been able to fully explore that region to extract all of the performance that is on the table. Perhaps their floor edge is perfect despite its simplicity, but I kind of just doubt that given that the other teams keep pursuing ever more complex solutions. If simplicity is best, you owuld expect the other teams to also pursue simplicity.

I understand what you're saying and that's certainly not wrong, but at the end of the day it's how the parts interact, whether they're complex or simple, that matters and the development of those parts is based on that. So you would have to come to the conclusion that Ferrari will soon be in the lead with a nice gap, because a lot of the Ferrari parts, especially in the important ground area, seem relatively simple compared to Red Bull. Therefore, the development potential would be significantly greater and easier to find. At the end of the day, however, it is neither simplicity nor complexity but how the parts interact, whether simple or complex. Of course, you are also right that in the course of development, many things simply become more complex. Nevertheless, the development status and development potential itself should not be determined by what is simple or complex and where. Because while one team is developing in one direction, the other team is developing in another and this always depends on necessity (especially in times of budget caps), as well as on the concept of the vehicle and its aerodynamics. So it may well be that this area promises less of a performance increase for Ferrari than it does for Red Bull or McLaren, for example. Therefore - what you say is certainly correct, but it is also true that an assessment based purely on complexity should generally be treated with caution.

[nico5]

The Ferrari floor edge still looks so basic compared to Red Bull. Surely there is still a lot of headroom for development for Ferrari.

You shouldn't assume that ornate and complex automatically means better and more advanced.

Perhaps their floor edge is perfect despite its simplicity, but I kind of just doubt that given that the other teams keep pursuing ever more complex solutions. If simplicity is best, you owuld expect the other teams to also pursue simplicity.

Yeah including teams that are a second off. <personal stuff removed>

[sucof]

You shouldn't assume that ornate and complex automatically means better and more advanced.

Perhaps their floor edge is perfect despite its simplicity, but I kind of just doubt that given that the other teams keep pursuing ever more complex solutions. If simplicity is best, you owuld expect the other teams to also pursue simplicity.

Yeah including teams that are a second off. <personal stuff removed>

I am 100% sure no real engineer sits down with the aim to make an aerodynamic surface simple. The aim is to make the car fast. Regardless how.
So analysing what we can see like this is futile.

[S D]

Perhaps their floor edge is perfect despite its simplicity, but I kind of just doubt that given that the other teams keep pursuing ever more complex solutions. If simplicity is best, you owuld expect the other teams to also pursue simplicity.

Yeah including teams that are a second off. <personal stuff removed>

I am 100% sure no real engineer sits down with the aim to make an aerodynamic surface simple. The aim is to make the car fast. Regardless how.
So analysing what we can see like this is futile.

Everyone starts from a simple design, runs some tests and makes mods as appropriate. No one starts from complexity as there is no reference to compare to.

[Henk_v]

From experience, the sculpting of surfaces, in the sense that we are discussing here, really has a second order effect. It does however take a lot of design effort. As design effort is limited, teams may have different strategies on where they think they can get the best performance from their limited resources. Alpine, AR, Merc an to some extend AM seem to be putting much more effort in the frontwing, compared to Red Bull. Ferrari thinks they win by decorating the halo and Red Bull obviously challenges michelangelo with their floor and edge wings.

Additionally, this may be a result of the tools available. Maybe Red Bull has some really good software to do these (i.e. diffusor) sculptings that others may not have.

Thirdly, it may indicate how close a team thinks they are towards endgame. If you are still developing on basic floor and diffuser geometries, you keep stuff simple and predictable.