2019 Aerodynamic Changes & Solutions

[Tzk]

As the DRS flap height inscreased, the drs effect will get stronger. So you finally can expect the front runners to be able to pass each other on long straights.

My guess is that especially the mercs will benefit of this change, because they usually had the most agressive rearwings attached. And the opposite for the redbulls, as they usually have the least DF from their rearwing.

[Shakeman]

Overall aero philosophy of cars has barely changed, other than the front wing. Rakes are still there etc. FIA knee-jerk reaction again?

Wondering if they will sit down now, see that their rule change (and the associated costs) didn't really do anything and make another rushed decision for 2020? Or is it possible that Ross Brawn and the team learn something from this? That F1 cannot change the rules on a yearly basis but needs to have greater overhaul in one go? It could still be that these 2019 regs work the way intended, but still I wouldn't call it a success.

Liberty are finding a lot of push back from the teams I don't think 2020 will be all that radical when all said and done.

Thinking out loud I'd like to see these huge ugly expanses of floor disappear or at least only allow floor if there's car above it. That should spur some variation in car design.

[godlameroso]

There's a video in the Liberty 2021 thread of an interview with Pat Symonds from the autosport show, they made these changes expecting racing to get better - or worst case be equivalent to last year. They think if they hadn't intervened the racing would get worse.

Certainly the word coming out is that balance is about the same but the rear wing is like a parachute compared to last year. This means the DRS effect will certainly be stronger - so there will be more overtaking at least even if it is DRS flyby's

I remember saying often that drag would increase this year, and it has. 2021 changes should focus on reducing both aero and weight of the cars, and keep the 80kg ballasted driver rule. It would reduce the dependence on aero without affecting lap times too much.

[strad]

Thinking out loud I'd like to see these huge ugly expanses of floor disappear or at least only allow floor if there's car above it.

Boy I can agree with that. If you're gonna call it the floor it should be the "floor"

[holeindalip]

There's a video in the Liberty 2021 thread of an interview with Pat Symonds from the autosport show, they made these changes expecting racing to get better - or worst case be equivalent to last year. They think if they hadn't intervened the racing would get worse.

Certainly the word coming out is that balance is about the same but the rear wing is like a parachute compared to last year. This means the DRS effect will certainly be stronger - so there will be more overtaking at least even if it is DRS flyby's

I remember saying often that drag would increase this year, and it has. 2021 changes should focus on reducing both aero and weight of the cars, and keep the 80kg ballasted driver rule. It would reduce the dependence on aero without affecting lap times too much.

i 100% agree with the weight of the cars, this need to be brought down drastically, youll need less aero load the lighter the car...

[PhillipM]

I'd drop the minimum weight 100kg and regulate the cars to be half a meter shorter.

[Sevach]

I haven't read things in detail, but is there a limitation to how you can shape and curve the FW elements?

Previously we had things like tunnels, large footplates, flaps that didn't connect with the endplate...
All designed to push the air out, and while now we have less elements i also find the way these elements have been shaped kinda... basic.

So is there such a thing on the rules?

[DiogoBrand]

I haven't read things in detail, but is there a limitation to how you can shape and curve the FW elements?

Previously we had things like tunnels, large footplates, flaps that didn't connect with the endplate...
All designed to push the air out, and while now we have less elements i also find the way these elements have been shaped kinda... basic.

So is there such a thing on the rules?

Looking from the front of the car, the elements can't have an angle greater than 15 degrees either direction relative to the main plane.

[jjn9128]

I haven't read things in detail, but is there a limitation to how you can shape and curve the FW elements?

Previously we had things like tunnels, large footplates, flaps that didn't connect with the endplate...
All designed to push the air out, and while now we have less elements i also find the way these elements have been shaped kinda... basic.

So is there such a thing on the rules?

Looking from the front of the car, the elements can't have an angle greater than 15 degrees either direction relative to the main plane.

Not quite - it's normal to a line perpendicular to the front edge of the floor, can't have an angle greater than 15°. A bit pedantic maybe, but there is a slight distinction.

[DiogoBrand]

I haven't read things in detail, but is there a limitation to how you can shape and curve the FW elements?

Previously we had things like tunnels, large footplates, flaps that didn't connect with the endplate...
All designed to push the air out, and while now we have less elements i also find the way these elements have been shaped kinda... basic.

So is there such a thing on the rules?

Looking from the front of the car, the elements can't have an angle greater than 15 degrees either direction relative to the main plane.

Not quite - it's normal to a line perpendicular to the front edge of the floor, can't have an angle greater than 15°. A bit pedantic maybe, but there is a slight distinction.

Thank you for the clarification. I think I understood the meaning of the regulation, just not the exact wording of it.
Just a question though: Does it start after a certain width? There seems to be a few teams with a greater angle on the inside edges of the wing:

[McMrocks]

On the Sauber, the Torro Rosso and the McLaren at least some elements appear to have a negative angle of attack (lift generating) near the end plates

Have you considered front rotating wheel downwash?

I think u over-estimate the boundary layer that is draged along the tyre. Surely there is some downwash ahead of the wheel because of that, and also because the air has to move around the tyre. But i wouldn't say that that area reaches to the most forward element

[McMrocks]

Looking from the front of the car, the elements can't have an angle greater than 15 degrees either direction relative to the main plane.

Not quite - it's normal to a line perpendicular to the front edge of the floor, can't have an angle greater than 15°. A bit pedantic maybe, but there is a slight distinction.

Thank you for the clarification. I think I understood the meaning of the regulation, just not the exact wording of it.
Just a question though: Does it start after a certain width? There seems to be a few teams with a greater angle on the inside edges of the wing:
https://imgr2.auto-motor-und-sport.de/K ... 429465.jpg

From FIA.com:
For the part of the profiles outboard of a plane that lies 400mm from the car centre plane :
i) The rearmost point of every closed section must be visible when viewed from below.
ii) With the exception of the rearmost closed section, the rearmost point of every closed section must not be visible when viewed from above.
iii) The normal to any point of the profiles’ surface must not subtend an angle greater than 15° to a vertical plane which is normal to the diagonal line described in Article 3.3.3(a).

so basically the from 250 to 400mm there is an exception to that rule

edit: the line described in 3.3.3(a) is the diagonal line that limits the leading edge of the front wing. So basically you can imagine a plane normal to the leading edge of the front wing. Then imagine normals to every surface on the wing and make sure those have not a greater angle to that imaginary plane neither in top nor in front view

[Sevach]

I haven't read things in detail, but is there a limitation to how you can shape and curve the FW elements?

Previously we had things like tunnels, large footplates, flaps that didn't connect with the endplate...
All designed to push the air out, and while now we have less elements i also find the way these elements have been shaped kinda... basic.

So is there such a thing on the rules?

Looking from the front of the car, the elements can't have an angle greater than 15 degrees either direction relative to the main plane.

Not quite - it's normal to a line perpendicular to the front edge of the floor, can't have an angle greater than 15°. A bit pedantic maybe, but there is a slight distinction.

Thanks to both of you.

Diogo might've confused main plane(of the wing) and reference plane (the floor), but transmitted the idea in a effective way.

[McMrocks]

Can someone explain to me where you read that "plane perpendicular to the front edge of the floor"? I just want to make sure i understood the rules and didn't miss something

[DiogoBrand]

Changing the subject a bit, I'm really interested to know what is the solution that every team will converge to. With the past regulation, I believe Brawn was one of the first teams to introduce outwash as a means of controlling tyre wake in 2009, and that idea went all the way up to outwash tunnels with wide footplates, cascades with endplates swooping to the outside, sectioned elements to reinforce the Y250 vortex and so on and so on. Now I believe we have two main paths:

The more conventional one like Red Bull, with the outer section being as tall as possible to create something similar to the outwash tunnels, and the one from Ferrari, McLaren, Alfa and so one, that use the full 15 degrees of angle on the outer part of the wing, to try and throw the air outwards and create some outwash. I'm guessing that at the end of the year everyone will be using one of the two, my guess being the Ferrari solution, and until the end of next year I think we can expect some more clever solutions. I'm really curious to know what those will be.

Two less significant ideas I think may be interesting are Renault and Williams' cut out at the tip of the endplate, and also Williams using the adjustment plate to throw some air outwards, perhaps we'll see some combinations of these three solutions as time goes by.