Ferrari F2012

[amouzouris]

since the team is saying that they still have correlation issues....could the new exhaust with he slightly different angle brought in Hungary have been a downgrade??? and if it was a downgrade was it the main reason or just one of the reasons why the car didn't perform here...

If you are talking about those articles, they specifically talk about correlation issues with the front wing. Thats why they have tried many versions but never raced any of them. The Autosprint articles address what they believe are three reasons for the crummy performance of the car in Hungary.

1. The front wing wind tunnel -vs- track correlation issues.
2. McLaren's big update
3. Tires. The fact that in changing conditions the Ferrari is strong, but in stable, warm temperatures, the car struggles.

no no...im not talking about the articles... im just saying that they know that there is a correlation problem with he fw...im just saying that there MIGHT be problems with the slightly different exhaust they brought to hungary...

[Nando]

But if it´s a correlation problem with the front wing, what´s to say everything else is correlated?
And if the front wing essentially rules the aerodynamics over the car it must mean everything else probably isn´t working as
intended?

[hardingfv32]

..... mean everything else probably isn´t working as intended?

Chances are good that they are getting what they intended from the car, but that intention is not what is required by the tires at a particular track.

Brian

[Chuckjr]

I dunno....say about 100 or so pages back, was there not a number of posts/reports that Ferrari had actually resolved the correlation issues between the wind tunnels and actual track results? I thought that was a closed issue as there were many claims (on this forum) Ferrari had in fact figured out the problem and that's why the car had found so much time thereafter? Are those reports complete rubbish and all that actually occurred was that Ferrari had just gotten lucky?

Correct me if I am wrong, but is it now accepted fact that Ferrari actually has NOT resolved the issue, and possibly may be in an even worse condition than they thought? Building 3 esoteric one off front wings that do not translate to any time improvements is extremely costly in both financial terms, manufacturing limitations, and track time availability...

[bhallg2k]

I hate to even go here, but it could be an issue with the aerodynamics of the front suspension. Yes, pull rods have been used on the front before, but not like this. The very nature of the suspension means that everything the team is doing aerodynamically has never been done before in this area. So, it's natural there would be hiccups.

Of course, the Hungaroring, despite what's held as conventional wisdom, is the "most aerodynamic" circuit of the season. It's the bastard child of Monaco and Silverstone. That makes it a great venue to test solutions, because nowhere else are the aerodynamic demands so extreme. That testing, regardless of anything else, could easily be enough to set off the hyperactive Italian media. They see loads of FloVis and testing arrays and then assume the sky is falling when really the team is just gaining knowledge because of a circuit's unique aerodynamic characteristics.

That's not to say there's nothing wrong or even that something is definitely wrong. It's just to point out that not everything is always as it seems.

[amouzouris]

I hate to even go here, but it could be an issue with the aerodynamics of the front suspension. Yes, pull rods have been used on the front before, but not like this. The very nature of the suspension means that everything the team is doing aerodynamically has never been done before in this area. So, it's natural there would be hiccups.

Of course, the Hungaroring, despite what's held as conventional wisdom, is the "most aerodynamic" circuit of the season. It's the bastard child of Monaco and Silverstone. That makes it a great venue to test solutions, because nowhere else are the aerodynamic demands so extreme. That testing, regardless of anything else, could easily be enough to set off the hyperactive Italian media. They see loads of FloVis and testing arrays and then assume the sky is falling when really the team is just gaining knowledge because of a circuit's unique aerodynamic characteristics.

That's not to say there's nothing wrong or even that something is definitely wrong. It's just to point out that not everything is always as it seems.

i'd have to agree with you!

[superdread]

I hate to even go here, but it could be an issue with the aerodynamics of the front suspension. Yes, pull rods have been used on the front before, but not like this. The very nature of the suspension means that everything the team is doing aerodynamically has never been done before in this area. So, it's natural there would be hiccups.

That's not to say there's nothing wrong or even that something is definitely wrong. It's just to point out that not everything is always as it seems.

A front pull rod shouldn't have such an unexpected influence on aerodynamic.
The effects it has in comparison to a pushrod are:
- stronger vertical flow straightening, due to a higher AoA to any upswept flow so it directs more flow onto the sidepods
- no horizontal flow straightening, so less flow into the sidepods
- less drag

The real difficulty is to have a front wing that has the same ratio of downforce to the rear wing at all speeds (maybe a bit less at high and a bit more at low speeds). Still, as the rear wings-diffuser assemby a complex thing they might have problems to achieve balance over a large velocity range.

I think this rather lies in the endplates (but only because they changed them so often, having no concrete sense of how such holes or the rear would react to different speeds).

[bhallg2k]

I could be wrong, but I think the slots in the front wing end plates are more about air flow around the front tires, and that changes from circuit to circuit. The "real issue," for lack of a better term, with these "new" front wings is the flap.



Regardless of the end plates, the flap seen on the top wing is always present when tested, and the area downstream to that flap is the area of the car under such heavy scrutiny by the team these days. When the race comes around, the team always reverts to the lower wing with the indented flap.

The flow interactions between the flap, the suspension, the side pod inlets, the barge boards, etc, are all way above my pay grade. But, I think it's safe to say something is going on here.

[superdread]

I could be wrong, but I think the slots in the front wing end plates are more about air flow around the front tires, and that changes from circuit to circuit. The "real issue," for lack of a better term, with these "new" front wings is the flap.

The rear part of it does that, the openings increase flow under the wing elements by feeding air into it

Regardless of the end plates, the flap seen on the top wing is always present when tested, and the area downstream to that flap is the area of the car under such heavy scrutiny by the team these days. When the race comes around, the team always reverts to the lower wing with the indented flap.

I didn't know that they test the flap and don't race it for some weeks. The shape of the raced flag (with the indentation) makes me suspect, that it directs air around the tire in a rather steep angle. Maybe they try a smoother approach to have more air under the nose with little sideways momentum (i.e. more energy in longitudinal direction). That would point to your theory of aiming the flow the sidepods, bargeboards, floor beginning and turning vanes.

The exact correlation issue could then lie in aiming a a flow over such a distance, especially as the flow from the middle section and under-nose turning vanes complicate that even more. I still consider the argument that the pullrod has less aerodynamic influence on the flow than a pushrod (it being shorter and having no influence in the horizontal).

[bhallg2k]

I'm not saying the pull rod is detrimental or beneficial in this specific area either way. Just that it's different. Teams have years of CFD and wind tunnel data on push rod setups. Ferrari has a year of CFD and wind tunnel data on their pull rod setup.

Another thing to consider is the effect of the wing flap on brake cooling. Ferrari has scoopless brake ducts that may not get enough flow with the more rounded wing flap.

There's just a lot going on, and, sadly, all we have to rely upon is speculation. (But, we're pretty good at that. So, maybe it's not all bad.)

[superdread]

I'm not saying the pull rod is detrimental or beneficial in this specific area either way. Just that it's different. Teams have years of CFD and wind tunnel data on push rod setups. Ferrari has a year of CFD and wind tunnel data on their pull rod setup.

Another thing to consider is the effect of the wing flap on brake cooling. Ferrari has scoopless brake ducts that may not get enough flow with the more rounded wing flap.

There's just a lot going on, and, sadly, all we have to rely upon is speculation. (But, we're pretty good at that. So, maybe it's not all bad.)

I just meant, that the difference of pull/push rods is not that great. Together with the ever increasing concentration of aiming every flow precisely over a long distance, I don't think that the old data is so helpful. We will probably never know, could be some aftermath from the new-windtunnel-thingy (takes a few years to break them in to the extend that e.g. McLaren has).

Another thing could be a new barge board, sidepod package. They put on the new wing and a rake before the air hits anything else, let their drivers wrestle an unbalanced crappy car for a while. So when they change the middle of the car they at least have a front wing that does exactly what they want for their concept (changing sidepods and bargeboard should take a lot longer than clipping on a nose and a rake).

[Redragon]

Just to cheer you up.
Alonso on his interview on last race, not only said the car was the same for the last 4 races
also said that they are working in two ideas to improve the car in future and he is optimistic
about it.

[Chuckjr]

Alonso on his interview on last race, not only said the car was the same for the last 4 races
also said that they are working in two ideas to improve the car in future and he is optimistic
about it.

Crucial X, time to find out about those update options mate!

[Redragon]

Alonso on his interview on last race, not only said the car was the same for the last 4 races
also said that they are working in two ideas to improve the car in future and he is optimistic
about it.

Crucial X, time to find out about those update options mate!

Also Domenacelli said the major update will be at Singapure

[Matt89]

Alonso on his interview on last race, not only said the car was the same for the last 4 races
also said that they are working in two ideas to improve the car in future and he is optimistic
about it.

Crucial X, time to find out about those update options mate!

Also Domenacelli said the major update will be at Singapure

Let's hope track testing matches windtunnel data this time.