2019 Aerodynamic Changes & Solutions

[godlameroso]

Seems like RB is focusing on trying to seal the leading flanks of the floor.

[gdogg371]

K-Mag said on Sky Sports UK that the cars were 3.5 seconds a lap faster this year than last at Monaco. How is that possible? I thought with the new front wings they had lost a fair chunk of down force. Is it the monster rear wings?

[roon]

Front and rear wings are bigger. Tire changes. Continual car development.

The floor edge wings probably produce downforce on their own. Add up their surface area and they seem about as large as half a front or rear wing.

[godlameroso]

How important is this area to ensuring a strong Y250?

[jjn9128]

How important is this area to ensuring a strong Y250?

The region immediately adjacent to y = 250mm from the car centreline plays a vital role in the production of the Y250 vortex.

[godlameroso]

How important is this area to ensuring a strong Y250?

The region immediately adjacent to y = 250mm from the car centreline plays a vital role in the production of the Y250 vortex.

Right, commonly the flaps are used to create that vortex, I'm speaking about using the main plane to start the tunnel the way Ferrari and Mercedes have so prominently done. Other teams do it as well however Mercedes and Ferrari have the most aggressive tunnel in the y250 area.

[Just_a_fan]

The forward bit of the "tunnel" is an effect of the increased camber at this point. More camber means more downforce (others things being equal blah, blah). By having a region of increased camber here they'll also benefit from starting to draw air from under the central section earlier. This means more downforce from the central section as well as a stronger Y250 vortex.

RedBull have a prominent step at the junction of the centre and wing sections on both the upper and lower surfaces where the others tend to blend the upper surfaces as a single surface. I wonder why they do that.

[godlameroso]

The forward bit of the "tunnel" is an effect of the increased camber at this point. More camber means more downforce (others things being equal blah, blah). By having a region of increased camber here they'll also benefit from starting to draw air from under the central section earlier. This means more downforce from the central section as well as a stronger Y250 vortex.

RedBull have a prominent step at the junction of the centre and wing sections on both the upper and lower surfaces where the others tend to blend the upper surfaces as a single surface. I wonder why they do that.

I also noticed Red Bull do have some "tunnel" action going and the inner flaps look like they're trying to split the flow in 2 vortecies.

[roon]

Merc & RB front wing size may suggest their center of pressure is further forward than that of Ferrari or Torro Rosso. If not purely driven by criterion of drag and downforce, could this be about driveability and driver preferences?

Do Hamilton and Verstappen prefer oversteer? Does Vettel prefer understeer? Accordingly.

[PhillipM]

Generally, yes.

[Just_a_fan]

No driver in F1 wants oversteer. Don't confuse wanting a responsive front end with wanting oversteer.

[FPV GTHO]

Merc & RB front wing size may suggest their center of pressure is further forward than that of Ferrari or Torro Rosso. If not purely driven by criterion of drag and downforce, could this be about driveability and driver preferences?

Do Hamilton and Verstappen prefer oversteer? Does Vettel prefer understeer? Accordingly.

Could equally indicate they have paired the car with alot more rear downforce.

[JordanMugen]

No driver in F1 wants oversteer.

Are you sure?

By definition if you get rid of all the understeer, you are going to have some oversteer. It's impossible to make a car that is perfectly neutral.

The Alpine A110 oversteers in almost every corner (chassis balance, not power oversteer), and is considered an excellent handling road car: https://youtu.be/iigAQH8DR8g?t=99 It's a huge contrast to the similarly priced BMW M2 which has bulk understeer in every corner, and the driver really struggles to get the nose in at all.

The very act of tuning out most of the understeer, is going to create some oversteer... The only alternative is to leave some understeer in. But then the likes of Tschuyia will moan "under, under..." and that is hardly acceptable! https://youtu.be/1hg9774ARZg?t=39

My current front-wheel-drive car seems to have a lot of movement in the rear. There is a tendency to turn-in and then need to back off the steering angle a bit in higher speed corners. Running the same spring ratio as stock (about double in the low motion ratio rear than the front, which equates to 2.0Hz front, 2.3Hz rear), but different sway bar ratio to stock (Australia model had 23mm front, 19mm rear; Japanese model had 25mm front, 22mm rear; current running Australian 23mm front sway bar, Japanese 22mm rear sway bar). I may need to put a smaller rear sway bar on.

[Maritimer]

Understeer is preferable so drivers can get on the gas sooner after entering corners, maximising acceleration leading onto straights.

[FPV GTHO]

Understeer is preferable so drivers can get on the gas sooner after entering corners, maximising acceleration leading onto straights.

Most of what I've read suggests at high speed understeer is preferable, but at low speed it's more driver preference. Understeer may allow power to be applied sooner, but oversteer gets the car turned sooner as well.