Ferrari F14T

[stefan_]

Damnit, stefan_, you are far and away the MVP of this forum. I just want you to know that.

[zioture]

F14T Car destroyed interesting photo to see details

[Redragon]

F14T Car destroyed interesting photo to see details

https://scontent-a-mxp.xx.fbcdn.net/hph ... 9665_n.jpg

I am amazed with such double hit, the car still nearly intact.

[Morteza]

Formula1.com

[turbof1]

Alonso apperently had rear wing stalling issues:

“Unfortunately we had the battle in the wrong moment of the race, probably. We had even discussed with the team two laps before the battle when Sebastian went out of the pit if we retire the car because we had some aerodynamic problems.

“The rear wing was stalling and it was causing a lot of problems in the car.

It's interesting to know how this is possible. I readed somewhere that the tail wind caused this a bit up and down the field, but looks like the F14T was hit harder by this since they actually considered retiring. Did they perhaps pushed the 'spectrum' too much in how far you can open DRS? So too short of a chord?

[bhall II]

[...]

It's interesting to know how this is possible. I readed somewhere that the tail wind caused this a bit up and down the field, but looks like the F14T was hit harder by this since they actually considered retiring. Did they perhaps pushed the 'spectrum' too much in how far you can open DRS? So too short of a chord?
http://i.imgur.com/sChxZOp.jpg

At first, it sounded to me like a bullshit excuse from the team. But, actually considering it, I wonder if the lack of strong upwash from a combined beam wing/diffuser combo makes the rear wing more susceptible to good, old-fashioned flow separation on the back of the flap.

[lombers]

I thought I noticed some shots during the coverage last night where the wing elements were separated, almost like DRS was half or a third open... Not sure if I was seeing things, would love to see if a photo exists of this.

Perhaps it was another issue with the DRS system?

[turbof1]

[...]

It's interesting to know how this is possible. I readed somewhere that the tail wind caused this a bit up and down the field, but looks like the F14T was hit harder by this since they actually considered retiring. Did they perhaps pushed the 'spectrum' too much in how far you can open DRS? So too short of a chord?
http://i.imgur.com/sChxZOp.jpg

At first, it sounded to me like a bullshit excuse from the team. But, actually considering it, I wonder if the lack of strong upwash from a combined beam wing/diffuser combo makes the rear wing more susceptible to good, old-fashioned flow separation on the back of the flap.

If they openly claim that it made them consider to retire (no doubt other things were involved, but still), I don't believe they were looking for an excuse.

The lack of diffuser-rear wing interaction certainly plays its part, but doesn't explain why others seemly were less affected. It either has to be something with their DRS flap having rather extreme dimensions pushing the wings operational spectrum without stalling, to the limit, OR that their Y100 winglet/exhaust combo isn't comensating as much as rival teams.

[bhall II]

Anyone can claim anything. For instance, I'm a millionaire. Honest.

I agree that the problem would be structural, though. It just seems a peculiar problem to have in context.

My first guess would be AoA and/or camber. Ferrari asks a lot more of its rear wing than does Red Bull. The main plane is much more cambered, and the flap is set at an appreciably higher AoA.


Silverstone 2014

Maybe they've gone a bit too far in trying to maximize downforce under the new regulations. Last year's Silverstone wing didn't appear nearly as aggressive, despite rules that allowed for more surface area and for the assistance of a beam wing.


Silverstone 2013

EDIT: I just realized that angle of attack and camber are probably the most "Thank you, Captain Obvious" reasons for why any wing might stall. Nonetheless, the above is an excellent representation of my obviously exquisite(ly absurd) insight into the mysterious world of aerodynamics. If anyone would like for me to elucidate the wetness of water or why women always be shoppin', just let me know.

EDIT for the sake of brainstorming: Maybe...just maybe my cockamamie idea about reducing drag with the airbox wing wasn't far off the mark, even if it was completely wrong.



Quick recap with broad strokes: the airbox wing, circled above, appears to be cambered to produce lift rather than downforce. If so, tip vortices from it will rotate opposite to those shed by the rear wing. I'm pretty sure that's correct regardless of any further implications. As for those implications...

1. What happens when/if those opposing sets of vortical flows interact? Will they sort of cancel each other out, or will they merge to form larger vortices?

2. Is it possible to direct vortical flow from the airbox wing to the underside of the rear wing to "energize" flow? If so, could that allow the use of a larger AoA on the rear wing? How difficult would it be to manage (might the rear wing stall if it goes wrong)?

3. The roots of the airbox wing are sharply angled down, presumably to direct air flow over cooling inlets on top of the engine cover. Could it be possible that any interaction between the airbox wing and the rear wing is a completely unintended side-effect of this cooling solution? If so, what could cure it?

4. A totally unrelated attempt to appease Bill Ockham: maybe the slot-gap just got clogged with something. --- looks pretty dirty, yo.

[atlantis]

Looking at the shape of Ferrari's (and RedBull's too) RW pillar: do you think it may be used as a duct for ddrs?

[bhall II]

Looking at the shape of Ferrari's (and RedBull's too) RW pillar: do you think it may be used as a duct for ddrs?

Nah, I doubt it. The so-called "swan neck" support, writ large on Audi's R15 below, seeks to maintain a smoooooooth surface along the underside of the wing to prevent flow separation.

[aleks_ader]

Looking at the shape of Ferrari's (and RedBull's too) RW pillar: do you think it may be used as a duct for ddrs?

That is banned in any form around DRS flap. Only pasive one will be allowed, but i don't know if someone make it work on the car property.

Even if we look RAI crash picture we could 99% disprove that. Because crossection of ripped pillar show of no indication of existence "hollow" form in that area. So no purpose build duct there.

[atlantis]

Looking at the shape of Ferrari's (and RedBull's too) RW pillar: do you think it may be used as a duct for ddrs?

That is banned in any form around DRS flap. Only pasive one will be allowed, but i don't know if someone make it work on the car property.

Even if we look RAI crash picture we could 99% disprove that. Because crossection of ripped pillar show of no indication of existence "hollow" form in that area. So no purpose build duct there.

Absolutely agree, as far as I can see there's only the cable used to activate the drs.
It was an hypothetical question

[trinidefender]

Here is another theory. The little wing on top the airbox looks like it changes the airflow slightly downward flow down toward the rear wing. This downward flow would increase the apparent angle of attack that the wing sees. Maybe the values of slightly higher than normal expected density density altitudes plus the slight addition of increase in apparent angle of attack was enough to cause this wing to start stalling slightly.

It honestly does look like they really pushed the rear wing as far as they could.

Btw using this link http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/public/weat ... /gcr20zz56 and the correcting graphs to work out density altitude it shows the silver stone circuit to be at about 1600 to 1700 ft density altitude. Density altitude is the altitude that the wing actually "sees". It is altitude corrected for non-standard temperature and temperature differences.

[bhall II]

If Keith Collantine is correct, Bill Ockham would indeed be proud.

...But [Alonso] put an excellent move on Vettel at Abbey and stayed ahead for 13 laps despite debris lodged in his rear wing causing balance problems.

I am interested in the potential interaction between the airbox wing and the rear wing, though. We haven't seen airbox wings for a while, and I've been curious about the one on the F14T since it showed up in winter testing.