Scuderia Ferrari SF90

[f1316]

So here’s the direct comparison with DRS for both:




Edit: the way the Ferrari goes first back and then forward when the DRS closes speaks to just very softly sprung suspension to my eyes.

[David1976]

The gif was very interesting, I've merged two frames into one.


https://i.imgur.com/R6Xalyn.png

Very interesting indeed. I wonder how it's tuned?

[gandharva]

So here’s the direct comparison with DRS for both:

This is no direct comparison! DRS on RedBull was open! If you have some basic understanding of this cars you cannot use this as a baseline for comparison.

[motobaleno]

the way the Ferrari goes first back and then forward when the DRS closes speaks to just very softly sprung suspension to my eyes.

me too think that there is no particular magic going on: simply ferrari has quite soft suspension settings. The remarkable thing is that they managed such settings to work well with the other aspects of car dynamics during the whole lap

[Godius]

The gif was very interesting, I've merged two frames into one.

Nice comparison. The SF16-H already had this kind of RW flex under high speed load:
http://i.imgur.com/k3F89H8.gifv

[MartijnA3]

Nice comparison. The SF16-H already had this kind of RW flex under high speed load:
http://i.imgur.com/k3F89H8.gifv

Not sure if it's just rear wing flex with the SF90, I think the entire rear comes up.

Tried the same comparison with the RB15 gif.

[tranquility2k4]

The gif was very interesting, I've merged two frames into one.


https://i.imgur.com/R6Xalyn.png

Very interesting indeed. I wonder how it's tuned?

I remember reading something a year or two ago that a team was working on a suspension trick that allowed them to run the car lower, possibly with more rake too (e.g. lower at the front) because during the times at which the car would normally 'dive' and the plank would hit the ground they managed to raise the car up. This is my understanding in layman's terms. Am I right in thinking normally a car would drop at the front under heavy braking and therefore if they're able to raise the back of the car (lifting the front) along the straight they would get a reduction in drag for better straight line speed plus less of a 'dive' when they brake meaning they could run a lower ride height? Or am I getting this mixed up with something else.

Wasn't it going into 2017 that Merc and RB had to drop their trick suspension systems and then later in 2017, around Mexico, didn't RB find a new kind of system that significantly improved their performance around that time and I recall Toto complaining about it and then there was a clarification and it had to be removed, or was that around Mexico of 2018? I forget. Also I recall rumours of Ferrari having a flexible RW around testing in 2018 whereby there wing would lean back I think.

[Bandit1216]

Very strange this.

At the camera, it looks like it's 10 mm, jet at the wing it seems to be 50mm. Is it wing flex? Would that be against the rules as no aero part is supposed to move.

On the other hand. RB has DRS and Ferrari doesn't this means the redbull has increased downforce after the breaking point, which counteracts the weight transfer. The ferrari has the same downforce before and after breaking so no counter force working against weight transfer.

[Just_a_fan]

https://media.giphy.com/media/1yTgcCeZM ... source.gif

That looks like the suspension sits down at the rear as speed, and downforce, increases. That it "unloads" in a single "jump" might get them looked at by other teams. A protest on the basis that the suspension steps between two positions would be on the grounds that is doing so solely for aerodynamic reasons and so is illegal. If the rear sits in a single step and then lifts back up in a single step (as it appears to do in that gif) rather than doing both gradually and proportionately to the applied downforce, then they will get told to remove it.

[MartijnA3]

Very strange this.

At the camera, it looks like it's 10 mm, jet at the wing it seems to be 50mm. Is it wing flex? Would that be against the rules as no aero part is supposed to move.

I believe it's perspective. The further back, the stronger the effect with area around the driver being the pivoting point.

This would mean the front wing should drop lower lower, but that doesn't seem to happen. Could it be that the downforce reducing but the rake increasing causes the front wing to stay in the same position?

And to add, the car is closer to the camera, that changes perspective too.

[Cedo]

https://media.giphy.com/media/1yTgcCeZM ... source.gif

That looks like the suspension sits down at the rear as speed, and downforce, increases. That it "unloads" in a single "jump" might get them looked at by other teams. A protest on the basis that the suspension steps between two positions would be on the grounds that is doing so solely for aerodynamic reasons and so is illegal. If the rear sits in a single step and then lifts back up in a single step (as it appears to do in that gif) rather than doing both gradually and proportionately to the applied downforce, then they will get told to remove it.

Another sequence
https://imgur.com/gallery/kVpeiOP

[CroftysLeftSock]

Is it wing flex?

I don't think so; the t wing hops up too, and that sits on the shark fin. So it's the entire rear end that's "happy to see you".

[Bandit1216]

Off course we also don’t know the brake pressure built up. What if the RB is not pushing so much and brake is just aplied more gentle

[timbo]

I wonder if the trick to the front wing is to actually get less enhancement from the ground effect, i.e. make it less pitch sensitive.
The curved profile and the raised outer sections can be as much for that as for getting most outwash.

The dynamics of the car under braking reminds me of GT cars.

[LM10]

https://media.giphy.com/media/1yTgcCeZM ... source.gif

That looks like the suspension sits down at the rear as speed, and downforce, increases. That it "unloads" in a single "jump" might get them looked at by other teams. A protest on the basis that the suspension steps between two positions would be on the grounds that is doing so solely for aerodynamic reasons and so is illegal. If the rear sits in a single step and then lifts back up in a single step (as it appears to do in that gif) rather than doing both gradually and proportionately to the applied downforce, then they will get told to remove it.

Another sequence
https://imgur.com/gallery/kVpeiOP

What's so strange about that? Leclerc closes his DRS, but doesn't brake yet, meaning the airflow towards the RW makes the car lean back and at the point he starts braking it leans forward. Isn't that logical and can simply be explained by soft springs?
The purpose of that is to have less downforce on the straights and much downforce under braking.

Also have a look at this video. At 0:06 you can see 2 green lights on the steering wheel indicating that the DRS opens and at 0:17 the lights come on again, this time indicating the closage of DRS. At this point it's visible how the car leans back a bit because Leclerc is not braking yet, but as soon as he brakes the car leans forward. As said, soft springs would be a simple answer for this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iueQBrdPIyU