2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

[Just_a_fan]

The leading edge floor fences seem to have a best design, with only minor variations to work with the rest of the aero package. You want the outer fences to build as much pressure as possible, which is why the teams have a downward sloping outer edge. It gives you more surface area for the outer fence, and helps channel more air over the floor, it also helps raise the pressure on the outer strakes creating a greater pressure difference in the wider more open section. Then an inner strake that hugs the legality box to guide that fast low pressure air into the tunnel.

https://i.imgur.com/ZDfXxHI.jpeg

https://i.imgur.com/NESgzRr.png

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FL4NOGnXEA4 ... name=large

Be cool if you referenced your sources where quoting others.

[OO7]

Looks like it's been deleted from the latest version of the sporting regs

31.5 The bodywork (excluding radiators) of each car as presented for initial scrutineering will establish the Reference Specification and, with the exception of work permitted by Articles 5.4.2 j and v to x, the car must be returned to this specification before the start of P3. The procedure to establish conformity with this article is described in the Appendix to the Technical and Sporting Regulations.

The 2022 regs have been a bit of a moving target to be honest.

[Pandamasque]

Is there a reason why regulations aiming to eliminate vortex generation and outwash didn't limit the front wing width at something like 1800 mm to ensure the endplate is facing the centre of the tyre with minimal chance of shedding a vortex around it?

[godlameroso]

The leading edge floor fences seem to have a best design, with only minor variations to work with the rest of the aero package. You want the outer fences to build as much pressure as possible, which is why the teams have a downward sloping outer edge. It gives you more surface area for the outer fence, and helps channel more air over the floor, it also helps raise the pressure on the outer strakes creating a greater pressure difference in the wider more open section. Then an inner strake that hugs the legality box to guide that fast low pressure air into the tunnel.

https://i.imgur.com/ZDfXxHI.jpeg

https://i.imgur.com/NESgzRr.png

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FL4NOGnXEA4 ... name=large

Be cool if you referenced your sources where quoting others.

Not quoting anyone, but others may have quoted me. Would be cool if you got over yourself. I believe I mentioned the strake geometry before any of the cars were even revealed.

[godlameroso]

I wonder if the real tunnels curve up like this.

[djones]

Something I'm struggling to understand....

The front and rear wings changed a lot in 2021 depending on the track. Monza vs Monaco for example.

If most of the downforce is now ground effect (?) then how will they adjust to such extremes based on track?

[jjn9128]

Something I'm struggling to understand....

The front and rear wings changed a lot in 2021 depending on the track. Monza vs Monaco for example.

If most of the downforce is now ground effect (?) then how will they adjust to such extremes based on track?

Most of the downforce is not ground effect is why - or at least no more so than last year. Ground effect is bad for following because the wake gets stuck at ground height.

[Stu]

Is there a reason why regulations aiming to eliminate vortex generation and outwash didn't limit the front wing width at something like 1800 mm to ensure the endplate is facing the centre of the tyre with minimal chance of shedding a vortex around it?

I had thought exactly the same (and maybe even go to 1600mm), at the time making the rear wing 1800 wide, but reducing the height to a minimum/maximum of 600/850mm would help to deal with rear tyre wake (and also pull that upwards if keeping a similar overall rear wing design). This would also have the happy benefit of somewhat regulating the amount of rear downforce that can be generated!!

[Pandamasque]

Given these regs were almost a clean sheet redesign, there must have been some rationale there. Were the stakeholders afraid of cars being "too slow"? Recent statements from the teams suggest those fears were unfounded.

[PhillipM]

I don't know but given we went with narrow wings because of all the trouble knocking wings off when battling, having wide front wings with regs meant to let cars run closer seems like asking for the same trouble again.

[nzjrs]

I don't know but given we went with narrow wings because of all the trouble knocking wings off when battling, having wide front wings with regs meant to let cars run closer seems like asking for the same trouble again.

I wonder if the shape of the end planes and the less rake will make them less 'stabby' and 'cutty' on tires? Although it looks like most of the teams are running this ski-jump shape on the outboard endplate - which looks perfect for cutting tires.

[PlatinumZealot]

Something I'm struggling to understand....

The front and rear wings changed a lot in 2021 depending on the track. Monza vs Monaco for example.

If most of the downforce is now ground effect (?) then how will they adjust to such extremes based on track?

We might see is a Monaco floor and like-wise a Monza floor. I suspect at slower speeds a more ramped floor would be more efficient and at higher speeds a shallower floor to prevent separation..??

The new regs front wings look like they could be making the same downforce as last year if I use CFD eyes.. But the rear wings definitely look more gentle. You also have the beam wings there to add some downforce. So maybe the DF from wings is not much lower.

We know for sure the wake of the cars will be clearner though.

[Pandamasque]

I don't know but given we went with narrow wings because of all the trouble knocking wings off when battling, having wide front wings with regs meant to let cars run closer seems like asking for the same trouble again.

I wonder if the shape of the end planes and the less rake will make them less 'stabby' and 'cutty' on tires? Although it looks like most of the teams are running this ski-jump shape on the outboard endplate - which looks perfect for cutting tires.

I've heard the regs even stipulate certain kind of kind of carbon layup to prevent them breaking too easily, in order to minimise debris.

[MIKEY_!]

I don't know but given we went with narrow wings because of all the trouble knocking wings off when battling, having wide front wings with regs meant to let cars run closer seems like asking for the same trouble again.

I wonder if the shape of the end planes and the less rake will make them less 'stabby' and 'cutty' on tires? Although it looks like most of the teams are running this ski-jump shape on the outboard endplate - which looks perfect for cutting tires.

I've heard the regs even stipulate certain kind of kind of carbon layup to prevent them breaking too easily, in order to minimise debris.

I recall there are some minimum radii around the endplate to help prevent sharp edges cutting tires, but I agree, it would have made sense to make the front wing slightly narrower to help prevent front wing breakages (there's a cost saving) and remove the ski ramp to make cuts even less likely... there must be a reason they didn't... I don't know if it's a good aerodynamic reason or just because the teams complained.

[Zynerji]

I don't know but given we went with narrow wings because of all the trouble knocking wings off when battling, having wide front wings with regs meant to let cars run closer seems like asking for the same trouble again.

I wonder if the shape of the end planes and the less rake will make them less 'stabby' and 'cutty' on tires? Although it looks like most of the teams are running this ski-jump shape on the outboard endplate - which looks perfect for cutting tires.

I've heard the regs even stipulate certain kind of kind of carbon layup to prevent them breaking too easily, in order to minimise debris.

Kevlar instead of carbon fiber would be the trick there. It doesn't shatter when broken.