2022 Aerodynamic Regulations Thread

[MtthsMlw]

Thanks for sharing that video.
Didn't know he dislikes the 2022 regs so much. I really don't want the cars to look too similar and less complex but I guess one has to live with that.

[jjn9128]

Didn't know he dislikes the 2022 regs so much. I really don't want the cars to look too similar and less complex but I guess one has to live with that.

I don't think anyone's enthused about the 2022 regulations from a design perspective.

[NL_Fer]

How standard is the floor of the 2022 car? Nobody can see how it looks like, so giving anybody a fair amount of downforce by default could be nice for racing?

[jjn9128]

How standard is the floor of the 2022 car? Nobody can see how it looks like, so giving anybody a fair amount of downforce by default could be nice for racing?

It's difficult to describe how standard it is. Unlike the current rules there's a volume where there cannot be bodywork (except at the front where they can have 3 vanes per side). At the front the leading edge radius will take up quite a bit of the height where bodywork is allowed. Towards the middle and rear there's a bit of freedom to play with height above the ground and radii of curvature, but mostly it'll converge towards a fairly standard shape because there's not a huge amount of leeway.



There's a misunderstanding that the floor will be producing more downforce - it'll be around the same as now. The rear wing design considerable tidying of bodywork (and loss of Y250 vortex) is doing the job of helping the racing.

[Noah Prandtl]

@jjn9128
You made that F1 2021 CFD simualtion ,do you get same results in fluent?

[jjn9128]

@jjn9128
You made that F1 2021 CFD simualtion ,do you get same results in fluent?

I made the car Vyssion runs the cfd. We use CFX because it's what we have.

[Noah Prandtl]

@jjn9128
You made that F1 2021 CFD simualtion ,do you get same results in fluent?

I made the car Vyssion runs the cfd. We use CFX because it's what we have.

Nice work,what PC(specs) do you use for run CFD and how long was softwear run this job?

[Noah Prandtl]

Nobody outside the teams really knows either. But I've estimated in the past current levels of downforce are between CzS~5.5 to 6 - so 26-29kN of downforce at 200mph.

CzS is lift cofficient x frontal area, 3.75 x 1.47m2=5.5

Downforce (2019 car at 320km/h)= 5.5(CzS) x 1.225kg/m3 x 89m/s (square) x 1/2 = 26924N = 2744kg!!

[jjn9128]

You choose airspeed=180km/h,can you give your data for expreesed downforce in Newtons?
For calculate that I need front/rear wings and floor area..

Downforce=1/2 x airspeed squre(50m/sec) x Cl x Area x air density(1kg/m3)

One tends not to express downforce in absolute because it's dependent on atmospheric conditions and the square of speed, but it's ~7500N at 50m/s.

In automotive and motorsport drag and downforce are non-dimensionalised by frontal area - and a fixed frontal area for all cases at that rather than calculating for every new geometry. Normally ~1.5m^2, though there is a legacy number of 1.47m^2 used a lot in F1, it really depends in the internal practices of a given team, some will even use the area coefficient (CzS) because it's more accurate.

The ISA (International Standard Atmosphere) air density at 15C at sea level is 1.225kg/m^3.

[Blackout]

There's a misunderstanding that the floor will be producing more downforce - it'll be around the same as now. The rear wing design considerable tidying of bodywork (and loss of Y250 vortex) is doing the job of helping the racing.

And the front fences assembly! They are quite overlooked in the medias, but as far as I understand they'll play a big role by creating a big low pressure area around the center of the car and by sucking a big amount of air there.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but they might be more powerful than the bargeborads. We should call this assembly "the aspirator" as opposed to the diffuser and they can be considered as a new/fourth DF generator IMO.
---

"The pressure distribution of the floor is reversed from a 2019/20 style car, with the greatest and largest region of suction generated towards the centre of the wheelbase, with a comparatively small low pressure spike at the diffuser kick. This is by design as the floor contributes to the balance shift experienced in another cars wake - shifting the centre-of-pressure to the middle of the floor should reduce the understeer effect when following another car, which should in turn help reduce some of the tyre overheating issues experienced over the past few seasons."
https://www.f1technical.net/features/22288

I guess these fences will also create vortexes but how the latter will work? and wont these fences also create a big outwash?

[Noah Prandtl]

In automotive and motorsport drag and downforce are non-dimensionalised by frontal area - and a fixed frontal area for all cases at that rather than calculating for every new geometry. Normally ~1.5m^2, though there is a legacy number of 1.47m^2 used a lot in F1, it really depends in the internal practices of a given team, some will even use the area coefficient (CzS) because it's more accurate.

Downforce (2021 car at 180km/h) = 3.36 x 1.225kg/m3 x 50m/s (square) x 1.47m2 x 1/2 = 7563N = 770kg

[Just_a_fan]

There's a misunderstanding that the floor will be producing more downforce - it'll be around the same as now. The rear wing design considerable tidying of bodywork (and loss of Y250 vortex) is doing the job of helping the racing.

It will be interesting to see how the teams approach ride height. Trying to run the floor as low as possible would seem to be sensible, or will a bit of rake still be beneficial?

[Zynerji]

There's a misunderstanding that the floor will be producing more downforce - it'll be around the same as now. The rear wing design considerable tidying of bodywork (and loss of Y250 vortex) is doing the job of helping the racing.

It will be interesting to see how the teams approach ride height. Trying to run the floor as low as possible would seem to be sensible, or will a bit of rake still be beneficial?

Probably fully dependent on edge sealing. If they can rake, they probably will, as I expect the cleanliness of the bodywork will probably lose several points of DF from the top side, so they would maximize what they have available on the bottom.

[JordanMugen]

https://qd1nqw.by.files.1drv.com/y4m617 ... pmode=none

There's a misunderstanding that the floor will be producing more downforce - it'll be around the same as now. The rear wing design considerable tidying of bodywork (and loss of Y250 vortex) is doing the job of helping the racing.

Seeing it like that, those venturi tunnels are tiny! Do you think the FIA should been more ambitious with specifying much larger venturi tunnels?

Though I guess it is also a misnomer that large venturi tunnels = less wake sensitive cars that can follow easily, so large tunnels may have been detrimental to racing?

The F1 tunnels seem to be a mere fraction of the size of the kind of thing seen on a time attack car or older Group C machines (though of course these vehicles are using much shallower rear wings):

[jjn9128]

CzS is lift cofficient x frontal area, 3.75 x 1.47m2=5.5

Precisely!

Downforce (2019 car at 200mp/h)= 5.5(CzS) x 1.225kg/m3 x 89m/s (square) x 1/2 = 26924N = 2744kg!!

Downforce (2021 car at 180km/h) = 3.36 x 1.225kg/m3 x 50m/s (square) x 1.47m2 x 1/2 = 7563N = 770kg

You see why we don't quote absolute? You've mixed mph and kph in two calculations, not compared at the same velocity, then converted the force to a mass. So you have force (then mass) at a particular speed..

The problem is air density is not a constant, and neither in gravity, so you always have to qualify that it's only true at a specific speed and atmospheric condition - being sea level at 15°C. This is why we publish CzS or Cz, not sure why we chose to publish Cz over CzS in the article - I recall there was a discussion and rationale at the time but I just can't remember it.