Ferrari Rear Wheel Lip

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
User avatar
flynfrog
Moderator
Joined: 23 Mar 2006, 22:31

Post

or a shorter driver i think it had to do with the main purpose of the mass damper be to improve area
manchild wrote:
Tp wrote:So then, what's the advantages of having the outlet on the inside of the wheel as opposed to exiting through the wheel spokes and outwards?
Than you can put carbon fiber fairing on rim and improve aerodynamic efficiency of the car :mrgreen:



-----------------------------------
Thanks for the info Reca. I might seam biased but illogical things make me suspect that there's something fishy espeically when such things harm one party and bring advantage to another.

I'm also keen to find out how did FIA vs. stewards case was ended? Anyone with info?

ginsu
ginsu
0
Joined: 17 Jan 2006, 02:23

Post

It’s a few years since I read the paper I referred to in the previous post but I recall that the advantage (hence the difference between rear wheel and cylinder of same dimension) was rapidly getting smaller way more than linearly with the increment of the aspect ratio (big difference with thin bike tyres, almost nothing with F1 tyres). That doesn’t mean that there’s no advantage, just that it’s so small to be negligible because the drag generation mechanism with big aspect ratio tyres is dominated by the counter-rotating vortices generated in the wake, way more than by the vortices generated inside the rim, so the drag changes very little with face open or closed.
Yes, this may be true when the airflow is coming straight onto the car, but when it's in a corner the airflow is coming at an angle, and the wheel shields would surely help reduce drag in this type of situation. Sure, we don't have a wind tunnel to test it, but it seems logical to me. I think, overall, there is going to be less drag with the shields.
What I find puzzling is that many people scream “murder” seeing the fairings on the rear wheels but you hear very few complains about these winglets, I guess it must be because they aren’t as visible. Personally I find them way more questionable, although obviously they are absolutely legal for the very same reason the fairings are.
I agree, I was under the impression that the FIA really despised any aerodynamic parts attached to the unsprung part of the car. While I don't think the little Ferrari wings are unsafe, it's been technically illegal (barring the brake duct exception) since the introduction of wings, because I know it is very unsafe to have a big wing mounted there.

Again, it really upsets me that other teams aren't running these brake-duct wings...if I was designing an F1 car it would have like 5 brake duct wings per hub :)
I love to love Senna.

ginsu
ginsu
0
Joined: 17 Jan 2006, 02:23

Post

So then, what's the advantages of having the outlet on the inside of the wheel as opposed to exiting through the wheel spokes and outwards?
The hot air exhaust can be used to help drive the flow around the wings. Similar to the placement of the engine exhausts, they help make the rear wing more effective. It's possible that this is the reason that Ferrari exhaust the hot air from the brakes on the inside of the wheel.
I love to love Senna.

manchild
manchild
12
Joined: 03 Jun 2005, 10:54

Post

I guess there is also huge difference in effect of hot air from brakes on tyre temperature.

Guest
Guest
0

Part time work online

Post

Part time work online, $2000/week or more. Read more info at
http://filthyloaded.com/nt

DaveKillens
DaveKillens
34
Joined: 20 Jan 2005, 04:02

Post

Wow, I was under the mistaken assumption the air flowed from the wheel rim closest to the chassis outwards, and exited away from the car. So if the cooling air is drawn in through this wheel/duct fairing, I wonder if there is a high pressure zone there.
As fas as questioning the legality and steward's interpretations of the regulations, to me this is just a clever way of exploiting the wording. This is part of the racing game, to use the rulebok to your advantage, to take advantage of any grey areas in the wording. I consider any team that does that as having done a good job.

bhall
bhall
244
Joined: 28 Feb 2006, 21:26

Post

DaveKillens wrote:This is part of the racing game, to use the rulebok to your advantage, to take advantage of any grey areas in the wording. I consider any team that does that as having done a good job.
Amen.

manchild
manchild
12
Joined: 03 Jun 2005, 10:54

Post

DaveKillens wrote:So if the cooling air is drawn in through this wheel/duct fairing, I wonder if there is a high pressure zone there.
I don't think that wheel/duct fairing can draw in any air becaue genuine air intake duct is filling the inside of the rim with much more hot air than what could get in trough wheel/duct fairing.

I think that system works like this - cold air enters the intake duct, goes trough the disc, exits, fills the rim, warms up the tyres via rim and than exits next to the rear wing endplate. Wheel/duct fairing itself has dual purpose - to hold hot air a bit until it warms up the rim and tyres and to improove aerodynamic efficiency killin' two flies with one illegal stroke.

User avatar
mini696
0
Joined: 20 Mar 2006, 02:34

Post

Reca wrote:What I find puzzling is that many people scream “murder” seeing the fairings on the rear wheels but you hear very few complains about these winglets, I guess it must be because they aren’t as visible. Personally I find them way more questionable, although obviously they are absolutely legal for the very same reason the fairings are.
Well the winglets are within the box allowed for brake ducts so the teams know they cant complain about them.

Before the clarification about the devices allowed inside the 'box' Ferrari (amongst others) used to make these winglets with a tiny hole in them to circumvent (sic) the rules. They had a hole, ergo, they are a brake duct. The FIA changed the rules to stop teams complaining, and to make scrutinizing (sic) them easier.

ginsu wrote:Yes, this may be true when the airflow is coming straight onto the car, but when it's in a corner the airflow is coming at an angle
This isnt right. The car, no matter if its going straight, or around a corner, is still punching through the air head on. They only help because the car is slipping sideways (inertia) through a corner.

ginsu
ginsu
0
Joined: 17 Jan 2006, 02:23

Post

This isnt right. The car, no matter if its going straight, or around a corner, is still punching through the air head on. They only help because the car is slipping sideways (inertia) through a corner.
Umm, sorry, but when a car is cornering it is undergoing 'yaw'. The car is changing direction, and therefore the airflow is coming in at a different angle from the car's centerline, granted it's not much, maybe just a few degrees, esp at high speed.

Have you ever driven through a corner with your windows down, and noticed how the air flows through your car? Same principle.

BTW, Racecar Engineering had an interesting article about this, and I sent them an email regarding our findings...hopefully they will be checking out our forum very soon!
I love to love Senna.

Reca
Reca
93
Joined: 21 Dec 2003, 18:22
Location: Monza, Italy

Post

ginsu wrote: Yes, this may be true when the airflow is coming straight onto the car, but when it's in a corner the airflow is coming at an angle, and the wheel shields would surely help reduce drag in this type of situation. Sure, we don't have a wind tunnel to test it, but it seems logical to me. I think, overall, there is going to be less drag with the shields.
How many corners in F1 have aero drag as limiting factor of cornering speed ?
mini696 wrote:
Reca wrote:
What I find puzzling is that many people scream “murder” seeing the fairings on the rear wheels but you hear very few complains about these winglets, I guess it must be because they aren’t as visible. Personally I find them way more questionable, although obviously they are absolutely legal for the very same reason the fairings are.
Well the winglets are within the box allowed for brake ducts so the teams know they cant complain about them.

Before the clarification about the devices allowed inside the 'box' Ferrari (amongst others) used to make these winglets with a tiny hole in them to circumvent (sic) the rules. They had a hole, ergo, they are a brake duct. The FIA changed the rules to stop teams complaining, and to make scrutinizing (sic) them easier.
I know, my point was about the people on the various F1 forums on the web. There are hundreds of messages about the fairings with people discussing them being “movable aero devices” and against the “spirit of the rule” but if that was the point (and as repeated several time it’s not), then the winglets would be lot more questionable. Yet nobody cares about them. I consider it somehow funny.

Sometimes I wonder what would happen if Ferrari guys added on top of the sidepods a carbon bulge, absolutely empty inside, painted in fluorescent pink and with the writing “mass damper fairing”. I suspect internet wouldn’t survive.
Next time I’ll met a Ferrari engineer I’m going to suggest it...
manchild wrote: I think that system works like this - cold air enters the intake duct, goes trough the disc, exits, fills the rim, warms up the tyres via rim and than exits next to the rear wing endplate. Wheel/duct fairing itself has dual purpose - to hold hot air a bit until it warms up the rim and tyres and to improove aerodynamic efficiency killin' two flies with one illegal stroke.
Tyres you have troubles to warm up are usually the front ones, at the rear if anything the problem would be the opposite.
Ferrari brake duct at the front is completely wrapped around the disc and the hot air never makes direct contact with the rim, while at the rear it does. That’s the opposite of what one would expect if the hot air from brakes had the positive influence on tyre temp you suggest.
Besides, once the air fills the volume between the rim spokes and the element of the brake duct attached to the wheel (that I will never call fairing again because some people would take a word used exclusively for brevity and make of it the definite proof that it has to be merely an aerodynamic device...), there’s really no way it could go back and exit from the outlet on the inside of the wheel, not even if the outer side of the wheel was completely closed (it wouldn’t simply get there in that case). If hot air from disc arrives in that space, it will surely go out thru the central hole. The part of air exhausted from the outlet on the inside of the wheel, that I believe includes all the carbon dust generated by pads and disc wear, never passes thru the wheel spokes.

manchild
manchild
12
Joined: 03 Jun 2005, 10:54

Post

This is what I had in mind...

Image

ginsu
ginsu
0
Joined: 17 Jan 2006, 02:23

Post

These are all 'low-drag' vehicles:

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image
To improve airflow over the exposed wheels, the aluminum wheels have a flat-faced design.
Rear wheel wells enclosed by fender skirts and disk-shaped wheels aluminum alloy wheels smooth airflow around the wheel openings
Notice anything about the wheels? Rear in particular!
I love to love Senna.

User avatar
joseff
11
Joined: 24 Sep 2002, 11:53

Post

[quote="manchild"]This is what I had in mind...

Uhh... wouldn't that result in rear tires overheating?

manchild
manchild
12
Joined: 03 Jun 2005, 10:54

Post

joseff wrote:
manchild wrote:This is what I had in mind...

Uhh... wouldn't that result in rear tires overheating?
What I added on original drawing is just a sketch. It just shows the principle and direction of flow not exact positions and dimesions. Outlet duct could have various directions - upwards, sideways, back...

Image

Check the pics ginsu posted:

Image