Ferrari F2012

[Crucial_Xtreme]

F2012 Diffuser



maybe

[Arunas]

F2012 Diffuser

it seams beam wing is not incorporated in rear crash structure?

[timbo]

It's f150, pushrod.

[myurr]

I think that's last years car. Unless I'm very much mistaken that has a pushrod.

[hardingfv32]

Ferrari is betting that the pull rod front suspension's potential aero/CG advantage, however slight, is worth risking reliability.

1) While I appreciate everything matters, do you think relocating a 15oz/.425kg rocker, say about 15cm, is that significant? There is no reason that other parts of the system would not have similar placement to a push rod system.

2) What are the risks to reliability? Are they different than a push rod system?

Brian

[Arunas]

It's f150, pushrod.

nah, silly me

[myurr]

Ostensibly more air underneath to feed the rear of the car.

But they don't conjure air out of thin err... air. There are other routes that you can take to get air to the rear of the car. Ferrari have chosen one philosophy, McLaren have gone another route, everyone else is somewhere in between. Time will tell who has managed to get it right - but my hunch is that ultimately there will be bigger contributors to overall performance than the philosophy used on the nose.

[hardingfv32]

Ostensibly more air underneath to feed the rear of the car.

A thin nose accomplishes the same goal. No, there is something very odd about putting a flat ramp in your top nose surface. If this upper nose ramp had aero benefit we would have seen it years ago.

Could this be the old chassis, maybe the new one has not been tested?

Brian

[Pierce89]

Can someone explain me the meaning of Aggressive???

Aggressive means taking chances. Ferrari is betting that the pull rod front suspension's potential aero/CG advantage, however slight, is worth risking reliability.

They're betting that getting air under the car is more important than having an aerodynamic nose, which is, in a way, placing a high premium on downforce even if it sacrifices top speed. In that arena, perhaps they've developed the first car that will absolutely rely on DRS.

From the looks of things, they're also gambling that their exhausts will aid flow to the rear, or produce downforce on the brake duct wings, without cooking the brakes.

It also appears that they're taking the chance that the exhaust housings will help direct air flow from the sidepods to the rear wing/beam wing, etc.

They've split the radiators into three locations to shrink the sidepods.

All of these things could work and produce a glorious car. Or, they could blow up, and render 2012 a useless year.

This Ferrari is all or nothing, and that's aggressive. At least that's how I see it.

=D>
My thoughts exactly

[Pierce89]

Ostensibly more air underneath to feed the rear of the car.

A thin nose accomplishes the same goal. No, there is something very odd about putting a flat ramp in your top nose surface. If this upper nose ramp had aero benefit we would have seen it years ago.

Could this be the old chassis, maybe the new one has not been tested?

Brian

actually theoretically the bump could cause stagnation and increase pressure on top of the nose tip in front of it

but obviously comes at the price of the drag of a bluff surface right at the front.

[donskar]

Can someone explain me the meaning of Aggressive???

Aggressive means taking chances. Ferrari is betting that the pull rod front suspension's potential aero/CG advantage, however slight, is worth risking reliability.

They're betting that getting air under the car is more important than having an aerodynamic nose, which is, in a way, placing a high premium on downforce even if it sacrifices top speed. In that arena, perhaps they've developed the first car that will absolutely rely on DRS.

From the looks of things, they're also gambling that their exhausts will aid flow to the rear, or produce downforce on the brake duct wings, without cooking the brakes.

It also appears that they're taking the chance that the exhaust housings will help direct air flow from the sidepods to the rear wing/beam wing, etc.

They've split the radiators into three locations to shrink the sidepods.

All of these things could work and produce a glorious car. Or, they could blow up, and render 2012 a useless year.

This Ferrari is all or nothing, and that's aggressive. At least that's how I see it.

Very well said (and I'm not saying that just because we're both from Houston.)

Also, IMHO, it's WAY too early to predict performance of ANY 2012 F1 car from a few photos of what is NOT the car that will actually compete. We can assert that Ferrari is trying very hard and apparently taking some risks -- good on them.

[donskar]

Ferrari is betting that the pull rod front suspension's potential aero/CG advantage, however slight, is worth risking reliability.

1) While I appreciate everything matters, do you think relocating a 15oz/.425kg rocker, say about 15cm, is that significant? There is no reason that other parts of the system would not have similar placement to a push rod system.

2) What are the risks to reliability? Are they different than a push rod system?

Brian

You have answered your own question ("everything matters"). An obsessive attention to detail -- every detail -- is a hallmark of a guy named Newey. Or put another way, imagine one detail is worth only .01 seconds per lap. Not worth it? Now imagine finding that insignificant .01 in ten or 20 or 30 or 50 different apparently insignificant details.

[amouzouris]

i was thinking about why ferrari are using pullrod at the front..apart from the CoG...they said that it had an aero effect... could this be it?? its just my own idea...i dont have any special knowledge....only by reading some books and following this forum for quite a time...i tried to illustrate it...what do you think???

http://imageshack.us/f/51/possibleairflowf2012.jpg/
the pushrod would obstruct that flow...which will eventually end up on the beam wing and diffuser..

[yace]

i don't belive the exhausts will stay there because they will destroy the tyres

That's not true, if you look at the pictures earlier in this thread from the rear of the car you will see the exhausts are actually angled inwards. I doubt they will cause any negative effect on the tyres assuming this position does not change.

upwards too. The exhausts have to be angled upwards don't forget.

Could Ferrari be aiming to accelerate the airflow over the side pods, and over the downwards exhaust cover, so that at higher speeds it pushes the plume down, and possibly getting aimed at the "brake duct" fins? It could be the reason they have the canards in front of the side pods

i couldn't find a picture with a good view of exhausts. but i don't belive the cover in this area is a coincidence

[raymondu999]

The exhaust is in the bit of the engine cover that points down. I asked Craig what he thought about the Ferrari potentially doing what I described above, and he agreed 100%.