Williams FW43B

[variante]

Guys a friendly word of warning as I have now seen several people posting CFD analysis of the Williams CAD files on their own LinkedIn profiles...

For those of you with the goal of an F1 career, posting these simulations under your own name could seriously jeopardise your chances of ever working for an F1 team. The teams take IP breaches extremely seriously and will not risk the potential consequences of employing someone who has published analysis of these CAD files on a public forum!

If you have no interest working in F1 then by all means post away, it really is great insight for everyone else!

Thanks for the warning.

But let me say that i absolutely despise that alleged policy.
The CAD model is now public. Williams' competitors have surely run multiple simulations on it already. And what would Williams be supposedly enraged by? Random people who show curiosity towards F1 aerodynamics and run CFDs on their PC...? People in which you might potentially find talents to hire...?
Whoever thinks about banning them from F1 is miserable idiot, for whom i would never wish to work.

[DP_CFD]

Thanks for the warning.

But let me say that i absolutely despise that alleged policy.
The CAD model is now public. Williams' competitors have surely run multiple simulations on it already. And what would Williams be supposedly enraged by? Random people who show curiosity towards F1 aerodynamics and run CFDs on their PC...? People in which you might potentially find talents to hire...?
Whoever thinks about banning them from F1 is miserable idiot, for whom i would never wish to work.

Asking around, I don't think so. Here's what I've heard from talking to a few aerodynamicists on different teams:

• Mercedes: Aerodynamicists received a strongly worded email from higher up forbidding them from even looking at it, as it "breaks company policy".

• Red Bull: Any F1 team caught with the official work of another team is not allowed. Yes, we all received a reminder not to do that.

• Aston Martin: We can only be influenced by competitors from information obtained at FIA approved events (main testing, races, etc. - launch did not count). We wouldn't be allowed to use it because of the above.

[variante]

Thanks for the warning.

But let me say that i absolutely despise that alleged policy.
The CAD model is now public. Williams' competitors have surely run multiple simulations on it already. And what would Williams be supposedly enraged by? Random people who show curiosity towards F1 aerodynamics and run CFDs on their PC...? People in which you might potentially find talents to hire...?
Whoever thinks about banning them from F1 is miserable idiot, for whom i would never wish to work.

Asking around, I don't think so. Here's what I've heard from talking to a few aerodynamicists on different teams:

• Mercedes: Aerodynamicists received a strongly worded email from higher up forbidding them from even looking at it, as it "breaks company policy".

• Red Bull: Any F1 team caught with the official work of another team is not allowed. Yes, we all received a reminder not to do that.

• Aston Martin: We can only be influenced by competitors from information obtained at FIA approved events (main testing, races, etc. - launch did not count). We wouldn't be allowed to use it because of the above.

Ah yes, on an official level, they probably aren't allowed.

[nacho]

Is there even anything in this car that other teams would be interested in? It's still the slowest or the second slowest car on the grid. Probably slowest if you consider the engine advantage they have to Haas.

[spacehead3]

I see someone already posted a few of my images here, but here's the link to the rest of the results if you're interested: https://maxtayloraero.wordpress.com/202 ... ms-f1-cfd/

As for the LinkedIn concerns, I'm not worried about it. I understand why the teams can't use it given how tightly they are regulated by the FIA though. BTW, in my real aero job I spend a ton of time doing testing and analysis on competitor's cars - we take whatever info we can get!

[Owen.C93]

I see someone already posted a few of my images here, but here's the link to the rest of the results if you're interested: https://maxtayloraero.wordpress.com/202 ... ms-f1-cfd/

As for the LinkedIn concerns, I'm not worried about it. I understand why the teams can't use it given how tightly they are regulated by the FIA though. BTW, in my real aero job I spend a ton of time doing testing and analysis on competitor's cars - we take whatever info we can get!

That's truly fascinating work, well done!. Something that I think will be one of the best insights into an F1 car in many many years so I hope you're able to keep it up.

I think it will be great to take a look at how sensitive some parts are on the car with some modifications that I'm happy to support with in CAD. Things like floor slots, T-Wings, brake duct winglets will all be very interesting to trial to see what their true purpose is.

[Mr Brooksy]

I see someone already posted a few of my images here, but here's the link to the rest of the results if you're interested: https://maxtayloraero.wordpress.com/202 ... ms-f1-cfd/

As for the LinkedIn concerns, I'm not worried about it. I understand why the teams can't use it given how tightly they are regulated by the FIA though. BTW, in my real aero job I spend a ton of time doing testing and analysis on competitor's cars - we take whatever info we can get!

Really interesting info about the car you've shared there. Thanks for making the effort and sharing your conclusions with all of us.

I'm honestly not very knowledgeable about the insane amount of detail in F1 aero, but this analysis really helps those of us who don't play with CFD a bit more of an understanding of what's going on.

It's a shame us fans don't get access to these kinds of details even a few years after the cars are retired, so we can be amazed by designers hard work.

[DP_CFD]

Applying to a job, I wouldn’t show any F1 team my home analysis. Only show what you have to, any more, and you’re opening yourself up to more critique. Once inside, you might see you would have been pretty far off in some aspects of your modeling.

YMMV.

Personally, as long as I know why a simulation might have issues, I'd have no issues showing it off. My sample size is a bit low with this (N=1), but I had a technical interview that started off with a casual discussion of my portfolio with my CFD side projects in it. It opened up a lot of great discussions, let me talk about concerns and how I know about the accuracy issues at hand. I think it gave my then soon-to-be manager a good feel for me.

I think critique makes for a learning moment, and I'd love nothing more than to hear straight from the source on how to do better CFD!

[aerofoilf1]

[gavingav1]

Craig Scarborough Ananlysis of Williams nose construction from Imola crash wreckage

[aerofoilf1]

[aerofoilf1]

[aerofoilf1]

[aerofoilf1]

[wesley123]

Are the labels correct? I would assume that such parts would be (partially) designed together, now they're essentially testing two updates apart from each other.