F1technical.net

A great article from Willem Toet , about Double Diffusers.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/mysterie ... title-like

Rare glimpse inside the F1 secrets!

It's a great read that gave some pretty great insight in the loopholes they used

Very pertinent portion of that article is here:

Amateurs think they can explain technical things like diffusers and front wings, but clearly have no idea what is behind the engineering side. Their well-meaning and often seemingly plausible offerings proliferate and become folklore. Professional journalists are not often engineers, are not told the truth by the teams. Race engineers rarely know about aerodynamics in detail anyway and they’d rather invent a plausible story than convey the truth because the teams don’t want the truth to be told in case it gives away an advantage.

giantfan10 wrote:Very pertinent portion of that article is here:

Amateurs think they can explain technical things like diffusers and front wings, but clearly have no idea what is behind the engineering side. Their well-meaning and often seemingly plausible offerings proliferate and become folklore. Professional journalists are not often engineers, are not told the truth by the teams. Race engineers rarely know about aerodynamics in detail anyway and they’d rather invent a plausible story than convey the truth because the teams don’t want the truth to be told in case it gives away an advantage.

Just remember, the above statement only applies to the past not the future. Current fans and race engineers always know what they are talking about.

It's adorable that you think the complex world of fluid and aerodynamics can be explained in a few short words. The fans know the gist of the story and a bunch of journalists cannot comprehend the technical aspects of F1. They write what they are told, which is an extremely dumbed down version of what is happening on the car. What annoys me the most is how a bunch of armchair experts with zero technical knowledge can challenge the designs and developments of people who have infinitely more knowledge and expemsive equipment to justify their findings. I have been studying aerodynamics for a while now and have been using simulations in my academic and as a hobby. Every time I'm awestruck at how small changes have such different results downstream or upstream of the flow. To simply look at an image of an object and to predict that car A works better because it looks complicated is just insulting to the engineers who work on it. It is impossible for us fans to even have our wildest guesses justify how exactly the component works because we clearly do not have all the important bits of knowledge necessary to do it.

The issue is the general lack of information, which I believe was what Toet laments the most. The world of aerodynamics is infinite fascinating, but the secretive nature of F1 means every small bit of hard information remains inside the team, even if that information has long been past its relevance date.

Are you then surprised people form wrong opinion on things they are not getting information on? F1 is still a public sport. You are still showing the culmination of solutions to the public. They don't get the individual pieces however that lead to the solution which is sad.

I also very much lament the culture of real engineers with genuine understanding where those engineers angrily lash out at "armchair experts" under the words of "you can't possibly undersrand" or "you have zero technical knowledge". There is a word for such attitude: condenscending.

It's perfectly fine to point out when people are wrong, but if you are going to do that, you should also point out why. It's the responsibility of the criticaster. Else your critique will have no other result then insulting. And how many are going to listen then?

That's the difference btw between these so called engineers here and Toet: Toet made an astounding effort to explain what really is going on.

I also stumbled on this article while I was deleting my Linkedin account. I enjoyed it a lot, and as turbof1 noted that kind of detail is sorely missing.
One of the best books ever was the Ferrari Formula 1 by Peter Wright - even that was embargoed for several years.

It must be an easy marketing win to release a few of these kinds of articles once the technology is past its use by date and at the same time clear up a lot of misinformation amongst fans.

turbof1 wrote:The issue is the general lack of information, which I believe was what Toet laments the most. The world of aerodynamics is infinite fascinating, but the secretive nature of F1 means every small bit of hard information remains inside the team, even if that information has long been past its relevance date.

Are you then surprised people form wrong opinion on things they are not getting information on? F1 is still a public sport. You are still showing the culmination of solutions to the public. They don't get the individual pieces however that lead to the solution which is sad.

I also very much lament the culture of real engineers with genuine understanding where those engineers angrily lash out at "armchair experts" under the words of "you can't possibly undersrand" or "you have zero technical knowledge". There is a word for such attitude: condenscending.

It's perfectly fine to point out when people are wrong, but if you are going to do that, you should also point out why. It's the responsibility of the criticaster. Else your critique will have no other result then insulting. And how many are going to listen then?

That's the difference btw between these so called engineers here and Toet: Toet made an astounding effort to explain what really is going on.

Willem Toet is a nice guy with loads of real life experience and most of his knowledge comes from what he has learned during his time in F1 and other motorsport sectors. He is quite helpful and loves to teach that is why he does the occasional blogs for people to read. I have met him several times and have asked him several questions which he has answered satisfactorily and you can tell he is no bullshitter.

The technical side of F1 needs more people like Toet. He explained the whole picture of the double diffuser, even the political side by stating an orally given technical directive did not act as precedence, which would have made the double diffuser not workable.

Also allot of information cannot be told in public because of intelectual property. For example the seamless shift was patented by a few companies, if an f1 team published their gearbox designs, they could be sued for usage of other companies patents. So they rather not talk about it.