2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.
User avatar
Stu
Moderator
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 9:05 am
Location: Norfolk, UK

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

godlameroso wrote:
Fri Jul 22, 2022 8:19 pm
Ferrari keeps extending their central section, this one is extended past the one you showed. If you chop off the diffuser fences below the crash structure, the diffuser is of the same style you said I was wrong about. Furthermore, I said I understood you'd be giving up diffuser area with a partition. I have no problem saying things to you here where you can debate back, or to your face IRL. We can act like kids or we can act like men, I'm down either way.
The Ferrari tunnels APPEAR to have some outwash feature in the upper, outer corner. This alone does not mean that it becomes “an outwash diffuser”; it is still an upwash diffuser, the small amount of outwash generated will also still be retained by the general upwashing nature of the rear wing (unlike previous generations).
What you are seeing is them taking the diffuser back to full volume after a feature that reduces the CSA that is only there to allow greater droop in the rear suspension.
Last edited by Steven on Sat Jul 23, 2022 8:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Removed personal comments
Perspective - Understanding that sometimes the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.

mzso
mzso
50
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:52 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

dialtone wrote:
Fri Jul 22, 2022 9:55 pm
Thanks RZS10!

How does Brawn start the season complaining about rake and then suggests a change that is worse than the rake we came from?
What do you mean? I don't remember Brawn proposing anything recently.

OO7
OO7
170
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 4:49 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

LM10 wrote:
Fri Jul 22, 2022 10:05 pm
Some tweets from tami quoting Autosport:

A number of teams are especially fearful that the scope of the floor changes being introduced by the FIA are playing into rival Mercedes’ hands – and the tweaks both this season and for 2023 are being framed in such a way that they could benefit them.

It is understood that a core team of six– believed to include Ferrari, Red Bull, AlphaTauri, Alfa Romeo, Haas & Williams – are ready to challenge the changes amid questions about whether or not the FIA’s claims it is a safety matter are legitimate.

Sources with good knowledge of the situation have suggested that there is even support from eight teams – which would be enough for a super majority.

It is suggested that teams could accept more minor tweaks – such as the floor edge being raised by around 10mm – as that would not require such a fundamental rethink of car designs at this late stage.

Quoting Binotto (AMuS):

Binotto: "There is no reason to classify it as a safety problem. Most teams have the bouncing under control. Fixed limits will be set for the race in Spa anyway. If the cars comply with the spec, they should also be safe."

Binotto: "And if there is no safety argument, the normal voting process must be followed when changing the rules."

Binotto also said that the new floor rules would be protested if they were pushed through so easily with the safety argument.
I agree with Binotto. The fact that teams have started to get on top of the bouncing, coupled with the introduction of the AOM in Belgium, should be sufficient.

dialtone
dialtone
60
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 12:31 am

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

mzso wrote:
dialtone wrote:
Fri Jul 22, 2022 9:55 pm
Thanks RZS10!

How does Brawn start the season complaining about rake and then suggests a change that is worse than the rake we came from?
What do you mean? I don't remember Brawn proposing anything recently.
He's in charge of the technical development of F1, while FIA is the body, the change in rules is agreed upon with the F1 team with Tombazis and Brawn. FIA doesn't just come across like that with F1.

User avatar
JordanMugen
68
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2018 12:36 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

LM10 wrote:
Fri Jul 22, 2022 10:05 pm
Binotto: "There is no reason to classify it as a safety problem. Most teams have the bouncing under control. Fixed limits will be set for the race in Spa anyway. If the cars comply with the spec, they should also be safe."

Binotto: "And if there is no safety argument, the normal voting process must be followed when changing the rules."

Binotto also said that the new floor rules would be protested if they were pushed through so easily with the safety argument.
Yes, it seems the changes (25mm raised edge & the strake) are more significant than casual observation would suggest?

If so, it would seem unreasonable to make such large regulation changes to 2023 cars that are already well under development (as evolutions of 2022 cars in all likelihood). It seems teams view that the changes would be more akin to a new set of regulations again and another reset, which seems an overreach from the FIA.

Just as these new generation cars are getting refined and perfected, the idea of sweeping aerodynamic regulation changes after just one season seems very excessive indeed! :o

Also the cars look kind of cool with the floor edges scraping along the ground 8) , it would be such a shame to lose that almost immediately in what is supposed to be an exciting new ground effects era.

OO7 wrote:
Sat Jul 23, 2022 4:43 pm
...coupled with the introduction of the AOM in Belgium, should be sufficient.
Yes, the metric to limit vertical Gs should be more than sufficient, it will already prevent the teams running their cars in a dangerous manner.

mzso
mzso
50
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:52 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

retracted
Last edited by mzso on Sun Jul 24, 2022 5:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
JordanMugen
68
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2018 12:36 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

mzso wrote:
Sun Jul 24, 2022 11:16 am
Large? Sweeping? You take a dremel-esque tool and saw off 25mm of the floor edges and the regulation changes are satisfied.
There are also changes to the tunnel height which not all current floors will meet... I don't see how teams could achieve a competitive design by modifying the existing part and avoiding designing an entirely different floor. It is a large change in aerodynamic concept.

It is a 25mm change in height not width by the way, the floor edge slots and outer floor edge would need to be remanufactured at the new height... While the difference in underbody venturi height would tend to indicate a requirement for entirely new moulds anyhow... Not just cutting off the old floor edge and gluing on a new one 25mm higher.
Last edited by JordanMugen on Sun Jul 24, 2022 12:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Vanja #66
685
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 3:38 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

mzso wrote:
Sun Jul 24, 2022 11:16 am
Large? Sweeping? You take a dremel-esque tool and saw off 25mm of the floor edges and the regulation changes are satisfied.
I think people let themselves be manipulated by Horner and that lot who think they would be disadvantaged. (Which they often do wrongly, as we know from the cut floors from last year)
This change doesn't take away 25mm from sides, but from height. And it is a big change which would, arguably, suit only one team. The one which had trouble sorting bouncing and now lacks outright downforce because their sidepods leave the floor flapping when loaded too much.
And they call it a stall. A STALL!

#Aerogimli
#DwarvesAreNaturalSprinters
#BlessYouLaddie

User avatar
RZS10
327
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 12:23 am

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

mzso wrote:
Sun Jul 24, 2022 11:16 am
[...] You take a dremel-esque tool and saw off 25mm of the floor edges [...]
Others have pointed out that it's about raising the edges up not slimming them down, look at the pics on the previous page, it's roughly how much higher they would be

BlueCheetah66
BlueCheetah66
8
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2021 7:23 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

mzso wrote:
Sun Jul 24, 2022 11:16 am
JordanMugen wrote:
Sat Jul 23, 2022 10:50 pm
If so, it would seem unreasonable to make such large regulation changes to 2023 cars that are already well under development (as evolutions of 2022 cars in all likelihood). It seems teams view that the changes would be more akin to a new set of regulations again and another reset, which seems an overreach from the FIA.

Just as these new generation cars are getting refined and perfected, the idea of sweeping aerodynamic regulation changes after just one season seems very excessive indeed! :o
Large? Sweeping? You take a dremel-esque tool and saw off 25mm of the floor edges and the regulation changes are satisfied.
I think people let themselves be manipulated by Horner and that lot who think they would be disadvantaged. (Which they often do wrongly, as we know from the cut floors from last year)
The confidence to question people's decision-making when you are just plain wrong is very funny

mzso
mzso
50
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:52 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

Vanja #66 wrote:
Sun Jul 24, 2022 12:28 pm
This change doesn't take away 25mm from sides, but from height. And it is a big change which would, arguably, suit only one team. The one which had trouble sorting bouncing and now lacks outright downforce because their sidepods leave the floor flapping when loaded too much.
In my memory the floor edges were closer to vertical rather than horizontal. From the sides or the height would have essentially meant the same.
Wouldn't the quick and dirty solution of shifting everything up by 25mm work? Would be much the same as raising the ride height, only the center plank would remain low, so better center of gravity.

But how do we know Mercedes would lose less performance than other teams who have more at the moment?

On the other hand, since it's about the floor touching the ground why not limit the suspension movement to have a safety margin, by some simple shock absorber travel regulation? (Which would only entail a different stopper, if I'm not mistaken)

BlueCheetah66
BlueCheetah66
8
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2021 7:23 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

mzso wrote:
Sun Jul 24, 2022 5:32 pm
Vanja #66 wrote:
Sun Jul 24, 2022 12:28 pm
This change doesn't take away 25mm from sides, but from height. And it is a big change which would, arguably, suit only one team. The one which had trouble sorting bouncing and now lacks outright downforce because their sidepods leave the floor flapping when loaded too much.
In my memory the floor edges were closer to vertical rather than horizontal. From the sides or the height would have essentially meant the same.
Wouldn't the quick and dirty solution of shifting everything up by 25mm work? Would be much the same as raising the ride height, only the center plank would remain low, so better center of gravity.

But how do we know Mercedes would lose less performance than other teams who have more at the moment?

On the other hand, since it's about the floor touching the ground why not limit the suspension movement to have a safety margin, by some simple shock absorber travel regulation? (Which would only entail a different stopper, if I'm not mistaken)
That literally is what the proposed changes are for 2023

User avatar
Vanja #66
685
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 3:38 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

mzso wrote:
Sun Jul 24, 2022 5:32 pm
In my memory the floor edges were closer to vertical rather than horizontal. From the sides or the height would have essentially meant the same.
Wouldn't the quick and dirty solution of shifting everything up by 25mm work? Would be much the same as raising the ride height, only the center plank would remain low, so better center of gravity.

But how do we know Mercedes would lose less performance than other teams who have more at the moment?

On the other hand, since it's about the floor touching the ground why not limit the suspension movement to have a safety margin, by some simple shock absorber travel regulation? (Which would only entail a different stopper, if I'm not mistaken)
With venturi tunnels and other floor features depending on ground effect, things are much more dependant on ride height than earlier. Floor edges now and being 25mm higher would likely have a lot of difderent flow structures and, especially, pressure distribution. Floor/tunnel sealing would work much differently with higher floor, as teams suggested 10mm change instead, we know that 25mm is too much.

As for Mercedes, their exposed floor surface is not rigid enough to handle higher downforce level than what they have now. Their Barca floor took away some downforce so the bouncing could get better. With higher floor edges, floor sealing, which some of us see as a critical problem for Mercedes, would get less strong and this would bring down other two teams more than it would Merc with their current design.
And they call it a stall. A STALL!

#Aerogimli
#DwarvesAreNaturalSprinters
#BlessYouLaddie

User avatar
Stu
Moderator
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 9:05 am
Location: Norfolk, UK

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

I’m amazed that they haven’t said that the plank thickness will increase by 10mm for next year….
Perspective - Understanding that sometimes the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.

User avatar
JordanMugen
68
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2018 12:36 pm

Re: 2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

Post

Stu wrote:
Mon Jul 25, 2022 1:34 pm
I’m amazed that they haven’t said that the plank thickness will increase by 10mm for next year….
=D>

That would be a very elegant solution with minimal redesign work.