Ferrari F14T

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter does not belong here.
User avatar
hollus
Moderator
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 12:21 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

Interesting that the strakes in the rear wing are not parallel to the direction of movement, but approach the end plates as they move back.. I don't recall seeing this in other teams. Also, the V cuts at the trailing edge (where the strakes go) are further out than for any other team, are they not? Nope, the Sauber has them just as much away from the center, but still parallel to the car's centerline.
Image
Image
I would like to see a paleontologist.

User avatar
F1.Ru
21
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 2:40 pm

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

Ferrari F14 T - new front wing
ImageImage

In the final Bahrain test Ferrari introduced a completely new front wing, different in all details from the previous version (inset). The endplate (1) is simpler, with a thin vertical slot, while the main plane is more complex - beside the endplate (2) it is more curved, with two slots to better direct airflow on the outside. The new upper flap (3) is an updated version of the one introduced last year in Hungary, while the new main flap (4) and the other two flaps also have a different shape. Finally, the horizontal plate (6) is different, wider but still with the middle slot.

© Formula1.com
Formula One is a game.............. but not any ordinary game for me

User avatar
atanatizante
89
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 2:33 pm

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

Image

Those vents were before?
"I don`t have all the answers. Try Google!"
Jesus

zioture
zioture
453
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2013 11:46 am
Location: Italy

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

some more pictures of the different sidepod
Image

myurr
myurr
8
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 8:58 pm

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

max_speed wrote:
.poz wrote:
eslam1986 wrote: i think FERRARI tend this year for less drag set up(more max speed) to save fuel .
I don't think it's always a good strategy: higher down force means higher speed in turn so less energy to (re)accelerate the car.
i think that is where role of aero will come in , if updates help them in increasing the value L(downforce)/D(Drag) value then ,it will benefit them in corners as well as on straights.i think that may be the reason why the aero mapped full car in past three tests , they have faith in this less drag design and with correlation data matching with wind tunnel data , we have finally something to cheer about. their development pace has been good fr years , only issue was updates they brought did not work , lets hope aero updates remain reliable and effective and we will have some serious things to discuss across full year
Personally I think it's more likely that their under car aero just isn't quite as good. The run visibly less rake than the Mercedes and Red Bull, and whilst their nose design is no worse than most of the grid I believe the Mercedes and Red Bull solutions are getting more air under the car. They may be compensating but then chasing top speed over downforce, not realising how much additional downforce the fastest cars would have.

The rest of their performance deficit (if they have one, insert usual caveats about testing) appear to be down to the engine. The Merc engine seems more powerful but also more fuel efficient along with having better power delivery from the ERS. The Ferrari still looks mighty twitchy at the back, possibly not helped if they still have a little bit more turbo lag than the Mercedes and the MGU-K isn't quite as smooth when it kicks in.

Mostly speculation but we don't have a lot of information to go on yet.

bhall
bhall
244
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 8:26 pm

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

.poz wrote:
eslam1986 wrote: i think FERRARI tend this year for less drag set up(more max speed) to save fuel .
I don't think it's always a good strategy: higher down force means higher speed in turn so less energy to (re)accelerate the car.
I recently made this mistake, too.

Because drag squares with speed, and the power required to overcome that drag cubes at the same time, drag is far more detrimental to fuel efficiency. For instance, a car using 10 bhp to travel at 50 MPH will encounter 4x more drag at 100 MPH, and it will require 8x more power to get there. Scale the figures up to F1 levels, where drag coefficients can be as much as 4-5x higher than road cars and speeds can reach 200+ MPH, then it becomes easy to see how even a small drag reduction can have a significant impact on performance. The limitations on fuel this year mean such aerodynamic gains have never been more critical.

timbo
timbo
108
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:14 am

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

I remember Rory Byrne went for low-drag cars in 2003-4.

Snelle Eddy
Snelle Eddy
2
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2014 11:28 am

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

bhallg2k wrote:
.poz wrote:
eslam1986 wrote: i think FERRARI tend this year for less drag set up(more max speed) to save fuel .
I don't think it's always a good strategy: higher down force means higher speed in turn so less energy to (re)accelerate the car.
I recently made this mistake, too.

Because drag squares with speed, and the power required to overcome that drag cubes at the same time, drag is far more detrimental to fuel efficiency. For instance, a car using 10 bhp to travel at 50 MPH will encounter 4x more drag at 100 MPH, and it will require 8x more power to get there. Scale the figures up to F1 levels, where drag coefficients can be as much as 4-5x higher than road cars and speeds can reach 200+ MPH, then it becomes easy to see how even a small drag reduction can have a significant impact on performance. The limitations on fuel this year mean such aerodynamic gains have never been more critical.
But isn't it true that more downforce also always equals more drag? Or is this what you meant? That it might be better to sacrifice high speed cornering in favor of drag reduction and therefore speed? Otherwise I'm confused...

eslam1986
eslam1986
6
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:02 am

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

.poz wrote:
eslam1986 wrote: i think FERRARI tend this year for less drag set up(more max speed) to save fuel .
I don't think it's always a good strategy: higher down force means higher speed in turn so less energy to (re)accelerate the car.
but more downforce mean high drag and high fuel use in straight + may be they use ERS for re-accelerate car .

bhall
bhall
244
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 8:26 pm

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

Snelle Eddy wrote:But isn't it true that more downforce also always equals more drag? Or is this what you meant? That it might be better to sacrifice high speed cornering in favor of drag reduction and therefore speed? Otherwise I'm confused...
I think the challenge is to make downforce efficiently. In and of itself, creating downforce is actually quite simple if that's all you want to do: bolt on big-ass wings wherever they'll fit, using angles of attack as high as they'll withstand, and presto, you've got downforce. Reducing drag is similarly just as easy. The trick is to somehow combine the two, and that's a far more daunting proposition.

The neverending search for better lift-to-drag ratios is what previously led teams to develop double-diffusers and exhaust-blown diffusers and F-ducts and double-DRS and flexible wings. Now we have outwash wings that create more downforce in turns than they do on straights.

What's next?

(I have no idea.)

Image

.poz
.poz
37
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 3:44 pm

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

I think Ferrari problems are in the Hybrid part of the engine.

Things we knows for sure:
overheating of cables in Jerez
overheating of MGU-H electric motor; they switched to a bigger one in Bahrain

we also know that in test #2 Raikonen was able to complete his planned program only by tuning down something

Let's hope that a bigger cooling and a better software can solve it

f1316
f1316
70
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 5:36 pm

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

.poz wrote:I think Ferrari problems are in the Hybrid part of the engine.

Things we knows for sure:
overheating of cables in Jerez
overheating of MGU-H electric motor; they switched to a bigger one in Bahrain

we also know that in test #2 Raikonen was able to complete his planned program only by tuning down something

Let's hope that a bigger cooling and a better software can solve it
Alonso also talked about having to do various things (he didn't say what) during his race run in order to get to the end. In a way, it's encouraging that they have good workarounds to do that without blowing up, but also that there should be plenty of potential left in the car.

I'd also suggest that the laps he put in at the end - which were on par with Mercedes and really grabbed the eye, supposedly - might have been once they were out of the woods in terms of reliability.

User avatar
motobaleno
11
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 12:58 pm

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

Kansas wrote:top speed could be rear wing and gear setting..........
noway gear setting.
with fixed ratios and 8 gears every gearbox now has the capability to reach 340 without hitting limiter.

User avatar
turbof1
Moderator
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 8:36 pm
Location: MountDoom CFD Matrix

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

Currently working on illustrations for an upcoming article about the new ferrari front wing. Ferrari has quite an unique ethos concerning the wingtips: the 4th tier and first full wing element reconnects back to the main plane at its tip just outside the neutral centre zone, while the 2 elements above are connected to eachother, again at the wingtip along the Y250 axis.

Anybody having a clue about the reasoning behind this concept? Another solution against wing stalling? Or something else?
#AeroFrodo

User avatar
Kiril Varbanov
147
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 2:00 pm
Location: Bulgaria, Sofia

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

turbof1 wrote: Anybody having a clue about the reasoning behind this concept? Another solution against wing stalling? Or something else?
To be honest, I haven't had the time to decode what they were thinking, but as a general forensics method you can draw (by hand, pencil or whatever) the freestream air, along with the interaction air flows - different colors. Then spot the usual low and high pressure zones given the widespread properties of air and solid bodies, called Aerodynamics. Then, look at the shapes, consider the Kutta condition, the vortex fomations, where the air is supposed to go. Then, use your own nomenclature of predicted downforce points to spot the obvious places. Finally, do the math, look at the car as a whole and I'm sure you'll be able to come up with pretty decent answer. That's not a nuclear physics.

P.S. I know it sounds like the obvious thing to do, but that's what I can offer apart from CFD-ing the wing :)