2019 Aerodynamic Changes & Solutions

[jjn9128]

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

A plane perpendicular to the front edge of the wing - I mis-typed The swept leading edge of the wing which is a line from 1225mm ahead of the front axle line on the centreline, and 1025mm from the front axle line at y1000mm from the centreline.

[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

A plane perpendicular to the front edge of the wing - I mis-typed The swept leading edge of the wing which is a line from 1225mm ahead of the front axle line on the centreline, and 1025mm from the front axle line at y1000mm from the centreline.

Alright, that's how i read it aswell

[McMrocks]

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.

Agree with you, it is very interesting to see different approaches in that area. And yes it will be very very very interesting to see which concept will be adopted by the teams. It could also be that the Ferrari/Torro Rosso approach works better in the first half of the year. But as soon as teams find rear downforce it could be hard for them to generate enough front downforce.



This front wing for example has "almost" less than half of the frontal area of RB's front wing*.
*a bit less exaggerating: its probably still 65-75% of the frontal area

If there was so much of the wing missing last year, it was because the car had crashed.

It will be interesting to see if the teams which opted for the Ferrari approach have to revert to normal wing designs as the year goes on

It will be a great season engineering-wise,

Cheers

[gandharva]

This front wing for example has "almost" less than half of the frontal area of RB's front wing*.
*a bit less exaggerating: its probably still 65-75% of the frontal area

If there was so much of the wing missing last year, it was because the car had crashed.

It will be interesting to see if the teams which opted for the Ferrari approach have to revert to normal wing designs as the year goes on

I also think the way RBR and Merc built their frontwings this year generates much higher downforce on the front of the car compared to a lot of the other teams. For RBR it should be even more df because of much higher rake. Only problem is that you then have to deal with more wake further back on the car. But if you are able to manage that wake despite using the high df frontwing, it could well be the better approach in long term. For example better tyre wear.

[CriXus]

The outwash on the front wings was more important than the double-deck diffuser in 2009 season!

[godlameroso]

What about flexing rear wings where they lower at speed?

[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.

Agree with you, it is very interesting to see different approaches in that area. And yes it will be very very very interesting to see which concept will be adopted by the teams. It could also be that the Ferrari/Torro Rosso approach works better in the first half of the year. But as soon as teams find rear downforce it could be hard for them to generate enough front downforce.

https://imgr3.auto-motor-und-sport.de/T ... 427965.jpg

This front wing for example has "almost" less than half of the frontal area of RB's front wing*.
*a bit less exaggerating: its probably still 65-75% of the frontal area

If there was so much of the wing missing last year, it was because the car had crashed.

It will be interesting to see if the teams which opted for the Ferrari approach have to revert to normal wing designs as the year goes on

It will be a great season engineering-wise,

Cheers

I don't think the front wings will have much trouble balancing the downforce, mainly for two reasons: First of all, up until this year, only a fraction of the front wing was used for downforce. Most of it was there just to condition the flow and help create downforce with the floor and diffuser. Secondly because the front wing is even wider this year.

[gandharva]

The outwash on the front wings was more important than the double-deck diffuser in 2009 season!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWRQDbB ... .be&t=2638

But nonetheless interesting insights from an F1 dinosaur.

[roon]

The outwash on the front wings was more important than the double-deck diffuser in 2009 season!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWRQDbB ... .be&t=2638

Unable to view. What's his non-DDD explanation for why BrawnGP won in 2009?

[Zynerji]

The outwash on the front wings was more important than the double-deck diffuser in 2009 season!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWRQDbB ... .be&t=2638

Unable to view. What's his non-DDD explanation for why BrawnGP won in 2009?

Outwash front wing.

[jjn9128]

The outwash on the front wings was more important than the double-deck diffuser in 2009 season!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWRQDbB ... .be&t=2638

https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/mob ... 19-238.jpg

But nonetheless interesting insights from an F1 dinosaur.

Slightly disrespectful about someone who's achieved more in F1 than many. Sorting the front wing has a significant cascade effect down the whole length of the car so I see no reason to not believe him - he's seen the data after all... you know, actual numbers on the aerodynamic effect rather than "CFD eyes" and a vague feeling about what's important.

[roon]

That the 2010-winning RB6 began using the familiar RB-type FW cascades in 2010 might lend credence to this view. But then, why did the 2010 Merc (with its BrawnGP FW) finish fourth? Were Ferrari and McLaren's front wings also accordingly improved? To me the '09 and '10 Ferrari front wings weren't radically different. Which makes me think the DDD was still pretty important.

[Just_a_fan]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWRQDbB ... .be&t=2638

Unable to view. What's his non-DDD explanation for why BrawnGP won in 2009?

Outwash front wing.

I remember at the time, when the teams and the media were getting very hot about the double diffuser, Brawn said in an interview trackside that "they're looking at the wrong end of the car" and smiled. As others had double diffusers at the start of the season, we can surmise that he was right.

[MtthsMlw]

I like how nearly everybody thought the new wing regulations were too restrictive to have differences between teams and now that's the biggest talking point of the season so far.

https://twitter.com/Vetteleclerc/status ... 31426?s=19

[hollus]

All this post-2009 hype about Brawn GP's outwash concept seems to be a bit blown out of proportion. Last night I was reading the relevant chapter in Adrian Newey's book and he explained how the RB5 was born as an outwash front wing car, which surprised me, followed by how once they made some sort of double diffuser, it immediately became the faster car at aero tracks.
Lo and behold, see this picture of the first corner in Melbourne 2009:

Almost everyone had some sort of outwash concept for the first race of the season. McLaren didn't and look where they are (other problems too, I know). In fact, thet McLaren endplate looks a lot like the current Mercedes one .
What Brawn had was a way more evolved, multi-element wing, with multiple elements in the end plate, way more aggressive outwash, with more area dedicated to the outwash and less to downforce. They even had the first cascade. But they were far from alone in having the outwash from the onset.