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 do not belong here.
Post Reply
User avatar
turbof1
Moderator
Joined: 19 Jul 2012, 21:36
Location: MountDoom CFD Matrix

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

Personally I feel they have to do that else they have stalling issues at the wing tips. Under load the upper tip could be pressed in the lower one, choking air there and dissipating the crucial Y250 vortex.

Normally strakes underneath the front wing should take care of this, giving enough rigidity to the elements. It could be they are using the strakes different. But that's difficult to tell since there are no pictures of the underside of the FW.

Or it could be something else. I can draw lines and vortices in my head. Having an idea about the patterns isn't the issue.
#AeroFrodo

User avatar
aleks_ader
90
Joined: 28 Jul 2011, 08:40

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

turbof1 wrote:Personally I feel they have to do that else they have stalling issues at the wing tips. Under load the upper tip could be pressed in the lower one, choking air there and dissipating the crucial Y250 vortex.

Normally strakes underneath the front wing should take care of this, giving enough rigidity to the elements. It could be they are using the strakes different. But that's difficult to tell since there are no pictures of the underside of the FW.

Or it could be something else. I can draw lines and vortices in my head. Having an idea about the patterns isn't the issue.
In my opinion it must be Y250 vortex generator. And if i assume right you could also know its way of rotaion in its very possible direction of rotation (anti direction like diffuzor vortex). That parameters is pretty easy to guess. According my reading of many articles, tech analysis, fluid dynamics etc. they use it in control of tire wake and it helps managing unsteady (when car is in yaw and tow) flow toward floor (prevent stall diffuzor from side=more consistent downforce).

Further interaction of Y250 vortex on F14T with combination of that low nose and strakes under monoque which contributes crucial role in shaping of flow and also vortices's toward under pullrod, bargeboards=> sidepods, floors... That must be also take into account and be mentioned.

But how EXACTLY it interact with rest of the car i had no knowledge or courage to take that statement. So @F1Turbo, try do wonders.. Bv. nice work. :D
"And if you no longer go for a gap that exists, you're no longer a racing driver..." Ayrton Senna

User avatar
Kiril Varbanov
147
Joined: 05 Feb 2012, 15:00
Location: Bulgaria, Sofia
Contact:

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

turbof1 wrote:
Normally strakes underneath the front wing should take care of this, giving enough rigidity to the elements. It could be they are using the strakes different. But that's difficult to tell since there are no pictures of the underside of the FW.
Just checked the team's media site: nothing is available, which is somewhat expected.
Here's one from AMuS:
Image

User avatar
turbof1
Moderator
Joined: 19 Jul 2012, 21:36
Location: MountDoom CFD Matrix

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

Kiril I really appreciate the effort, and I'm sorry to say this, but that's the old FW.
#AeroFrodo

User avatar
Kiril Varbanov
147
Joined: 05 Feb 2012, 15:00
Location: Bulgaria, Sofia
Contact:

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

turbof1 wrote:Kiril I really appreciate the effort, and I'm sorry to say this, but that's the old FW.
Ah, I thought you need any :) But, yes, for the sake of being correct, that's the old front wing used in Bahrain tests. Generally, the design of the front wing 'underbody', if I can use the term, should not differ that much. Judging from the previous incarnations, the FW features again three vertical equal interval strakes, but the initial spec was 6-ties one (2013). Here's the F138 being prepared for Australia last year:
Image

User avatar
turbof1
Moderator
Joined: 19 Jul 2012, 21:36
Location: MountDoom CFD Matrix

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

Interesting.

The interval inbetween remains largely the same, so that atleast gives a good idea on the starting position.

I do noticed they used in 2013 very different strakes in terms of length and size. The '2014 starters' FW featured strakes which are shape like identical and length-like follow a curve.

I'm going to conclude my first idea about the wingtips being a solution for structural rigidity, isn't correct. I now believe this an attempt to correctly bend the Y250 vortex towards the turning vanes underneath the chassis. In light of previous windtunnel issues, they might have gotten this wrong last year and tried to solve it this way.
#AeroFrodo

Richard
Moderator
Joined: 15 Apr 2009, 14:41
Location: UK

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

A quick reminder that the car threads are meant to focus on the actual features of the actual car.

Discussion of lap times & tyres belong in the respective race and test threads.

Yin-yang posts about engine bhp have their own dustbin :arrow: http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... =4&t=15352

For the avoidance of doubt, these threads are for posts about things you can touch or see - ie "what is it?" or "how does it work?"

Crabbia
9
Joined: 13 Jun 2006, 22:39
Location: ZA

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

Stumbled across this...

Honeywell is suuppling the turbos to the Ferrari engines:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/honeyw ... 2014-03-05

Not much technical detail, more of a press pack, but i thought it would be interesting none the less.
A wise man once told me you cant polish a turd...

Ganxxta
3
Joined: 06 Feb 2010, 22:09
Location: Germany, NRW

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

About that... I checked their website and one of their "regular" products is this:
http://turbo.honeywell.com/our-technolo ... ochargers/

Is this possible with F1 rules or has a conventional design to be used?
If they used the same idea for their F1 Turbo and their numbers are more or less adoptable, this would be a big advantage compared to a conventional turbo design for F1 terms.

I'm surprised that they are sharing so many technical details, have fun:
http://turbo.honeywell.com/assets/pdfs/ ... tation.pdf

What do you guys think?

User avatar
scuderiafan
11
Joined: 06 Nov 2010, 15:14
Location: United States

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

Ganxxta wrote:About that... I checked their website and one of their "regular" products is this:
http://turbo.honeywell.com/our-technolo ... ochargers/

Is this possible with F1 rules or has a conventional design to be used?
If they used the same idea for their F1 Turbo and their numbers are more or less adoptable, this would be a big advantage compared to a conventional turbo design for F1 terms.

I'm surprised that they are sharing so many technical details, have fun:
http://turbo.honeywell.com/assets/pdfs/ ... tation.pdf

What do you guys think?
28.4 b) For the purposes of this Article 28.4 the power unit will be deemed to comprise six separate elements, the engine (ICE), the motor generator unit-kinetic (MGU-K), the motor generator unit-heat (MGU-H), the energy store (ES), turbocharger (TC) and control electronics (CE).

Says nothing about turbo design.
"You're so angry that you throw your gloves down, and the worst part is; you have to pick them up again." - Steve Matchett

Patiently waiting...

User avatar
aero_engineer
0
Joined: 06 Mar 2014, 16:08

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.
I couldn't agree more, it makes more sense to dump the drag than adding more HP at least at this stage of the season. I would still expect Ferrari to operate at a slightly higher rake than in testing. Curious to see if RB continue with that.
Aerodynamics are for people who can't build engines.

R_Redding
54
Joined: 30 Nov 2011, 14:22

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

scuderiafan wrote: Says nothing about turbo design.
Any Turbo will be limited by the Varible Geometry rule 5.9.1

Which essentially limits the choice to a big old dumb turbo.

Rob

User avatar
aleks_ader
90
Joined: 28 Jul 2011, 08:40

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

scuderiafan wrote:
Ganxxta wrote:About that... I checked their website and one of their "regular" products is this:
http://turbo.honeywell.com/our-technolo ... ochargers/

Is this possible with F1 rules or has a conventional design to be used?
If they used the same idea for their F1 Turbo and their numbers are more or less adoptable, this would be a big advantage compared to a conventional turbo design for F1 terms.

I'm surprised that they are sharing so many technical details, have fun:
http://turbo.honeywell.com/assets/pdfs/ ... tation.pdf

What do you guys think?
28.4 b) For the purposes of this Article 28.4 the power unit will be deemed to comprise six separate elements, the engine (ICE), the motor generator unit-kinetic (MGU-K), the motor generator unit-heat (MGU-H), the energy store (ES), turbocharger (TC) and control electronics (CE).

Says nothing about turbo design.
I made nice research on that area in here http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... 66#p458366 on "Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula" topic.

We discused in very construtive way. What are pros and cons, and talk about its legality (all aspect were discused, gear ratio, singlke/multiturbine, radial vs. axial etc.). Please read also carefully the rules and whole ongoing topic and make own conclusions.

Before also the user "Holm86" proposed that type of technology so you are no the first and last who ask this. So PLEASE read linked topic. Cheers!
"And if you no longer go for a gap that exists, you're no longer a racing driver..." Ayrton Senna

User avatar
Postmoe
15
Joined: 23 Mar 2012, 16:57

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

aleks_ader wrote: Before also the user "Holm86" proposed that type of technology so you are no the first and last who ask this. So PLEASE read linked topic. Cheers!
SORRY but this very polite suggestion has been formulated in a way that seems to imply that we are NOT ALLOWED to participate in this forum if not guided properly. I got that from your USE OF CAPS LOCK.

Not everybody has the same knowledge or, more critically, the enormous amounts of time needed to know everything that was discussed before. PLEASE note that.

Revenant discussion topics in several posts are not a bad thing if they aren't breaking forum rules.

PS: I apologise If I misinterpreted the meaning of the post. As I said, it is perhaps the use of caps that made me perceive the post as an order.

User avatar
turbof1
Moderator
Joined: 19 Jul 2012, 21:36
Location: MountDoom CFD Matrix

Re: Ferrari F14T

Post

Ferrari 2nd Bahrain test front wing spec:
Image

Analysis will hopefully be published this weekend. It wasn't easy to draw this one, and I did got some dimensions wrong. Hopefully not too noticable.
#AeroFrodo

Post Reply