2017 front wings downforce compared to 2010

[Javert]

I saw in another topic of this forum this picture about 2017 front wings:



However, they seem to me (much) less loaded than 2010 front wings as example this:




2017 was to be the year with most downforce in the history .. It isn't true? Had 2010 cars more downforce at front and rear? Or are 2017 front wings able to generate more downforce than the 2010 ones?

[trinidefender]

2017 wings are much wider. Larger wing span = more downforce

[Javert]

I believed the front wing span was 1800 mm in 2010 and then reduced to 1650 mm in 2014, and it is taken back to 1800 mm this year

Are they really wider?

[OO7]

I believed the front wing span was 1800 mm in 2010 and then reduced to 1650 mm in 2014, and it is taken back to 1800 mm this year

Are they really wider?

Due to the narrower track of the pre-2017 cars, the front wing footplate of the 2010 cars was wider, which meant a smaller span for the actual main wing elements.

[wesley123]

I believed the front wing span was 1800 mm in 2010 and then reduced to 1650 mm in 2014, and it is taken back to 1800 mm this year

Are they really wider?

Due to the narrower track of the pre-2017 cars, the front wing footplate of the 2010 cars was wider, which meant a smaller span for the actual main wing elements.

2017 wings use much more wing area to create the outwash, which means the footplate is also much larger. 2010 cars simply use more of the possible wing area, but on the other hand, they do lack the FW developments that started in 2011.

[Just_a_fan]

Bear in mind that the current cars make a fair amount of downforce from the leading edge of the floor below the sidepod. The car as a whole makes more downforce even if the front wing might not make massively more.

[Dipesh1995]

Does anyone have an estimate of how much downforce these 2017 wings produce at 240 km/h? It would be quite interesting to know.

[Andres125sx]

Does anyone have an estimate of how much downforce these 2017 wings produce at 240 km/h? It would be quite interesting to know.

That must be one of the parameters of F1 cars with a higher confidentiality rank

[Nickel]

I think you're confusing individual element size with total downforce created. In 2010 front wings were largely 3-4 element designs whereas we now have 5-6 element wings. Smaller individual elements can be run with a more aggressive AOA without inducing stall. You might not have the same peak downforce (although I suspect that too has gone up) but you get a more consistent downforce, less prone to flow detachment.

[jjn9128]

Does anyone have an estimate of how much downforce these 2017 wings produce at 240 km/h? It would be quite interesting to know.

I'd estimate somewhere between 2.5-3.0kN at 240km/hr (quite a big margin of error there). Assuming the whole car is ~14kN and the front wing is 20% of total downforce.

[Dipesh1995]

Does anyone have an estimate of how much downforce these 2017 wings produce at 240 km/h? It would be quite interesting to know.

I'd estimate somewhere between 2.5-3.0kN at 240km/hr (quite a big margin of error there). Assuming the whole car is ~14kN and the front wing is 20% of total downforce.

Hmm, that would equate to approx 300 kg which seems a bit too low to me. I was asking because I'm currently designing a wing which has similar dimensions and identical concepts as used in F1: Venturi effect and Edge vortices (Vortex tunnel). I've put it through CFD (STAR CCM+) and it generates 350kg even with significant flow extraction issues in the vortex tunnel which leads to very premature break down of the edge vortex when in ground effect (foot plate 50mm off the ground). I thought F1 wings would generate between 5-6 kN at those speeds but then again I'm not sure so I thought I'd ask here.

Thanks for your suggestion anyway though!

[jjn9128]

Does anyone have an estimate of how much downforce these 2017 wings produce at 240 km/h? It would be quite interesting to know.

I'd estimate somewhere between 2.5-3.0kN at 240km/hr (quite a big margin of error there). Assuming the whole car is ~14kN and the front wing is 20% of total downforce.

Hmm, that would equate to approx 300 kg which seems a bit too low to me. I was asking because I'm currently designing a wing which has similar dimensions and identical concepts as used in F1: Venturi effect and Edge vortices (Vortex tunnel). I've put it through CFD (STAR CCM+) and it generates 350kg even with significant flow extraction issues in the vortex tunnel which leads to very premature break down of the edge vortex when in ground effect (foot plate 50mm off the ground). I thought F1 wings would generate between 5-6 kN at those speeds but then again I'm not sure so I thought I'd ask here.

Thanks for your suggestion anyway though!

What speed did you test at? 240km/hr equates to 150mi/hr so that's a medium-high speed corner. Remember too that the more downforce your front wing generates the thicker it's wake will be and the more it will affect downforce produced by the floor and diffuser. So to that the front wing must balance the downforce generated at the rear of the car, F1 teams could probably more than double their front wing downforce but the result would be a very oversteery car as they couldn't balance that at the rear. A modern front wing is as much a flow conditioner as it is a downforce generating device.

EDIT: sorry I just looked back and you said at 240km/hr

[Dipesh1995]

I'd estimate somewhere between 2.5-3.0kN at 240km/hr (quite a big margin of error there). Assuming the whole car is ~14kN and the front wing is 20% of total downforce.

Hmm, that would equate to approx 300 kg which seems a bit too low to me. I was asking because I'm currently designing a wing which has similar dimensions and identical concepts as used in F1: Venturi effect and Edge vortices (Vortex tunnel). I've put it through CFD (STAR CCM+) and it generates 350kg even with significant flow extraction issues in the vortex tunnel which leads to very premature break down of the edge vortex when in ground effect (foot plate 50mm off the ground). I thought F1 wings would generate between 5-6 kN at those speeds but then again I'm not sure so I thought I'd ask here.

Thanks for your suggestion anyway though!

What speed did you test at? 240km/hr equates to 150mi/hr so that's a medium-high speed corner. Remember too that the more downforce your front wing generates the thicker it's wake will be and the more it will affect downforce produced by the floor and diffuser. So to that the front wing must balance the downforce generated at the rear of the car, F1 teams could probably more than double their front wing downforce but the result would be a very oversteery car as they couldn't balance that at the rear. A modern front wing is as much a flow conditioner as it is a downforce generating device.

EDIT: sorry I just looked back and you said at 240km/hr

Yep the front wing has more than one purpose. It's the most important aerodynamic device of the whole car since it's the first thing that hits air. At the moment my wing has a pretty "clean" wake anyway (apart from the vortex tunnel issue) which is further aided by turning vanes and the barge boards. Also, I agree with the aero balance comment but at the moment I'm just trying to get the wing as efficient as possible whilst also generating good downforce since I can't test the rest of the car due to a lack of computational resource.

That's what the wing looked like a week or so ago anyway:
https://photos.app.goo.gl/no5oRvJX9xFZUbyb2

[dans79]

2017 wings use much more wing area to create the outwash, which means the footplate is also much larger. 2010 cars simply use more of the possible wing area, but on the other hand, they do lack the FW developments that started in 2011.

Don't forget that the 2017 wings are swept back, so that increases their effect size.

[jjn9128]

I would say it looks like you are loading the wing more than a F1 team would. From the images it looks like your wing is quite tall, though I think that is the perspective in the images. I would also say the vane behind the 'neutral' section is illegal, if that's in your simulation then you'll be getting downforce on the centre of the wing that isn't possible in the regulations. Likewise the neutral wing looks a bit thin, is it the correct profile?

Some questions: Did you run half car or full car? Did you run the wing in isolation or with a nose and front wheels? Did you do a mesh independence study, if not how do you know you can trust your results? What's your boundary layer mesh like, so what is your y+?

Hopefully seems constructive as intended rather than overly negative.