F1technical.net

NL_Fer wrote: ↑

19 Jul 2019, 21:45

I hope we don’t to much races ruined by a broken floor, after running wide over some curbs into the asphalted runoff area.

They did mention they are looking at how to give the floor enough flex and strength so that the car can still use the curbs without damage

Blackout wrote: ↑

19 Jul 2019, 20:07

The more I look to these tunnels, the more I find them complex and very different from the wing cars and the champ and Indy car tunnels.

I disagree.

The tunnel shape seems quite conventional and almost identical to the Swift Formula Nippon car to me, albeit with the "second kick" (extra reflex section) that is popular in modern day time attack cars and also seen on Newey's Aston Martin Valkyrie.



Formula Nippon Swift


Aston Martin Valkyrie

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zB1qy5YaEg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdZIkFSz0iI
Porsche 968 time attack car

The tunnel inlet seems almost identical to the conventional Champcar style with vortex generators.


Panoz DP01 Floor

The F1 car seems entirely consistent with conventions to me -- the inlet with vortex generators, and the "second kick" in the diffuser profile that is popular in modern time attack / hypercar design.

IMO it is exactly the design you would expect for an open-wheel venturi tunnel car targeting F1 downforce levels, with the only unexpected touches being the wheel covers and front wheel air guide (which are of course beneficial to tyre wake management, but sadly not for the aesthetics of the vehicle).

Well: at least it is exactly in line with the design I had imagined in my head for a hypothetical F1 rival series, using AER twin-turbo V8 engine with 1000hp (except I would use the classic Grand Prix 2.15m car width)!!! It would race at classic tracks like Sepang and other dropped F1 tracks, being primarily based in East Asia, because F1 it too Euro centric.

I must admit I hadn't consideration the extra divider apparently attached to the rear uprights to stop tyre squirt into the diffuser (as opposed to the more conventional diffuser-attached dividers to stop tyre squirt into central sections of th ediffuser) -- that's a clever idea which hadn't occured to me!

[The current Indycar is most definitely not designed for maximum downforce, that's why the diffuser angle is rather tiny, why there is no beam wing etc. While "wing cars" from F1 and Indy from the early 80's are from many generations ago and surprassed by more modern designs (i.e., time attack, hypercar) and so cannot be used for comparison of modern expectations.]

Blackout wrote: ↑

19 Jul 2019, 20:07

Good analysis!

Like I said, the aggressive concave "kick" at the start of the final expansion is very common in modern time attack and hypercar diffuser design.

The other apparent concave section further up might just be an adjustment to the profile to get the pressure distribution / centre of pressure how they want it.

I think some of the apparent "strange" shape might just be the perspective of the render too.

if we are going to ground effect will we also be using active suspension and sealing skirts as this would make the car safer for the drivers to drive on the limit by control the ride heights and floor sealing.

Smokes wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2019, 23:12

if we are going to ground effect will we also be using active suspension and sealing skirts as this would make the car safer for the drivers to drive on the limit by control the ride heights and floor sealing.

Sealing skirts arenot safe, those are the dangerous aspect which caused it to be banned in the dirst place if my history is correct. The moment the skirt is slightly damaged or raises a little higher than expected for whatever reason you lose a extreme percentage of downforce very suddenly. Without the skirt there is less chance of this, there is already constant leakage/spillage so the changes are less extreme percentage wise when some more spills or leaks,

On another note, why the change to less wide front tyres? This creates more natural understeer and less frontal mechanical grip, which is going to hurt a car following closely. Seems counterintuitive if they want cars to follow closely.

Pyrone89 wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2019, 23:59

Smokes wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2019, 23:12

if we are going to ground effect will we also be using active suspension and sealing skirts as this would make the car safer for the drivers to drive on the limit by control the ride heights and floor sealing.

Sealing skirts arenot safe, those are the dangerous aspect which caused it to be banned in the dirst place if my history is correct. The moment the skirt is slightly damaged or raises a little higher than expected for whatever reason you lose a extreme percentage of downforce very suddenly. Without the skirt there is less chance of this, there is already constant leakage/spillage so the changes are less extreme percentage wise when some more spills or leaks,

This was never an issue for the Lola Champ Cars as the outer edge of the floor was designed to be durable. F1 would be wise to do the same.

Pyrone89 wrote: ↑

23 Jul 2019, 00:02

On another note, why the change to less wide front tyres? This creates more natural understeer and less frontal mechanical grip, which is going to hurt a car following closely. Seems counterintuitive if they want cars to follow closely.

Narrower front tire lengthens braking zones I believe.

Pyrone89 wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2019, 23:59

Smokes wrote: ↑

22 Jul 2019, 23:12

if we are going to ground effect will we also be using active suspension and sealing skirts as this would make the car safer for the drivers to drive on the limit by control the ride heights and floor sealing.

Sealing skirts arenot safe, those are the dangerous aspect which caused it to be banned in the dirst place if my history is correct. The moment the skirt is slightly damaged or raises a little higher than expected for whatever reason you lose a extreme percentage of downforce very suddenly. Without the skirt there is less chance of this, there is already constant leakage/spillage so the changes are less extreme percentage wise when some more spills or leaks,

Skirts wern't the problem it was the ride height dropping to zero that stalled the cars ground effect wing which cause sudden loss of grip.

Do you think this will reduce th cost of aero development on the f1 car?

Smokes wrote: ↑

23 Jul 2019, 08:41

Skirts wern't the problem it was the ride height dropping to zero that stalled the cars ground effect wing which cause sudden loss of grip.

Jammed skirts were a real problem - there's an excellent article in a free racecar engineering issue ("Lifting the skirts
on ground effect by Simon McBeath") where they looked at pressure lost under the floor with a skirt jam. It's significant! The tunnel height could never drop to zero because of the centre of the floor.

Smokes wrote: ↑

23 Jul 2019, 08:43

Do you think this will reduce th cost of aero development on the f1 car?

No but the more strict wind tunnel and CFD limits probably will. The $175m/year cost cap will limit spend too.

If we can't have skirts that are safe then I guess the aero development cost will be high as every one will be spending a lot of time sealing the floor with vortexes.

Smokes wrote: ↑

23 Jul 2019, 13:25

If we can't have skirts that are safe then I guess the aero development cost will be high as every one will be spending a lot of time sealing the floor with vortexes.

Not with a $175m budget cap.

Smokes wrote: ↑

23 Jul 2019, 13:25

If we can't have skirts that are safe then I guess the aero development cost will be high as every one will be spending a lot of time sealing the floor with vortexes.

Can't seal with floor with vortices. They can't do it now. They can't do it with the new regulations.

i thought the Y250 vortices had a sealing "effect " around the current raked floor.