Scuderia Ferrari SF71H

[SiLo]

I just love how Ted andCo still keep saying that their purpose is to feed the top side of sidepod

Maybe it is. If they can make the inside of the mirror that small, why not just make it small and not bother with the gap or the larger outer surface?

Unless there is a stipulation on size in the regs?

I think it's a bit of both most likely.

[amr]

If you're going to do a CFD, make it as simpe as it gets.

Here it is.

What if it's not symmetrical and you have a 3 mm slot on the top side and a 1 mm slot on the bottom side? Or the other way around?

[Vanja #66]

What if it's not symmetrical and you have a 3 mm slot on the top side and a 1 mm slot on the bottom side? Or the other way around?

Oh, I love that idea! Hmmm, well, based on these results, you'd probably end up having slightly different pressure distribution on top and bottom part of the cone, which could lead to some small amount of lift or downforce created.

Just checked it, 3mm slot model created 17% more lift than 1mm model. It's a very very small amount (3N at 320kmh), but there could be room for exploitation other than drag reduction. Great idea amr!

[Snatch]

I am amased of all these ideas of ours, amateurs mostly in aero...and wonder if we came up with all these, we can only imagine what professionals are doing back in the factory. Just wow!

[amr]

Oh, I love that idea! Hmmm, well, based on these results, you'd probably end up having slightly different pressure distribution on top and bottom part of the cone, which could lead to some small amount of lift or downforce created.

Just checked it, 3mm slot model created 17% more lift than 1mm model. It's a very very small amount (3N at 320kmh), but there could be room for exploitation other than drag reduction. Great idea amr!

Thank you Vanja.
So, if the mirror is setup to create lift it will push the air slightly downwards towards the intake on top of the sidepods.
If the mirror is setup to create downforce it will push the air slightly upwards away from the sidepods.

I think the key is that we have to judge the mirror considering that on top of the sidepods there is probably a low pression area created by the sidepods top intake.

[Vanja #66]

Thank you Vanja.
So, if the mirror is setup to create lift it will push the air slightly downwards towards the intake on top of the sidepods.
If the mirror is setup to create downforce it will push the air slightly upwards away from the sidepods.

I think the key is that we have to judge the mirror considering that on top of the sidepods there is probably a low pression area created by the sidepods top intake.

No, there are practically no changes in airflow behind the mirror, it goes straight as an arrow, just with smaller turbulent wake most likely. This difference of 3N is very very very small for such high speeds. And intakes are high pressure zone.

[designf1]

[media]https://twitter.com/ImanHansra/status/9 ... 1778639874[/media]

[ScrewCaptain27]

This is probably the closest shot we’ve ever had of the mirror:
Via AMuS

[FW17]

That angle of the radiator is so extreme, the duct run is almost vertical

[amr]

No, there are practically no changes in airflow behind the mirror, it goes straight as an arrow, just with smaller turbulent wake most likely. This difference of 3N is very very very small for such high speeds. And intakes are high pressure zone.

Ok, the forward facing intake is indeed a high pressure zone. But i believe that the up facing intake, the one on top of the sidepod is creating a low pressure zone.I think that inside the sidepod, the two intakes are connected such that the fast high pressure air coming through the forward facing intake creates a venturi effect and sucks air through the up facing intake, this in turn creates a low pressure zone on top of the sidepod.
Maybe the mirror is design to create a downwash vortex to better feed the up facing intake, while reducing drag.

Based on the above picture and Vanja's simulation this is my totally uneducated guess, and I am probably very wrong. But this is why I love F1, it is so complicated it's almost magic.

[iulian_florea]

Interesting video comparison between '17 and '18 Ferrari:
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/ferr ... h-1017929/

You can se that the sidepod lower intake is actually not a great deal smaller in the current car. But in 2017 it was more centered on the sidepod and looked much larger than it actually was.
I am almost sure that the upper sidepod intake directs air on the other side of the radiator than the lower intake.
Anyone has a different opinion on that one?

[Vanja #66]

I am almost sure that the upper sidepod intake directs air on the other side of the radiator than the lower intake.
Anyone has a different opinion on that one?

Direct air on the other side in what way? Could you make a simple drawing?

Gents, we have missed a very obvious fact - radiators are no longer V-shaped like previous 2 years.

[Just_a_fan]

.I think that inside the sidepod, the two intakes are connected such that the fast high pressure air coming through the forward facing intake creates a venturi effect and sucks air through the up facing intake, this in turn creates a low pressure zone on top of the sidepod.
Maybe the mirror is design to create a downwash vortex to better feed the up facing intake, while reducing drag.

Fast air is low pressure.

[PlatinumZealot]

Great work! You are a true scientist and engineer.
First of all your good work rubbishes the air deflector to side-pod theory. Secondly I would have liked to have seen the model without any slot, and finally I am also interested in your last conclusion, with the turbulent factor value - in layman's terms was it good or bad?

[Vanja #66]

Great work! You are a true scientist and engineer.
First of all your good work rubbishes the air deflector to side-pod theory. Secondly I would have liked to have seen the model without any slot, and finally I am also interested in your last conclusion, with the turbulent factor value - in layman's terms was it good or bad?

Cheers mate!

Do you mean a "regular" mirror design or this same design with slot height 0?

The turbulent factor I was talking about is related to energy dissipation, meaning the bigger it is the faster the turbulence dissipates (in layman's terms). So by making it bigger than it should've been, ie bigger than it was for other (more realistic) simulations, the turbulence is "gone" faster. That's why the flow was so much different.