[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Taxi645

I would propose those interested to read the below article to better understand the issue. I don't mean this in any condescending way, shape or form, but it does help to understand what's going on and thus keep the thread more on topic:

https://www.racecar-engineering.com/...ising-problem/

As the ground effect aerodynamic load comes on, the car gets lower to the ground, exponentially increasing the underfloor load. If the car’s floor gets too close to the ground or even hits the tarmac, the underfloor flow field is destroyed, suddenly shedding the load, and the car shoots back up to static ride height. Once the ride height goes up to a point where the flow field can recover, the aero load recuperates, and the process repeats.

Jody Egginton, Technical Director at Scuderia AlphaTauri, says, ‘With a ground effect floor, getting the most aerodynamic load means running the floors as close to the ground as possible – there’s an attractiveness in that, and there’s an aerodynamic benefit to do it. So, logically we all try to exploit that. The closer you get to the ground, the higher the risk of inducing instability from things like the floor choking.

Interestingly, that very article indicates that there is not really a significant problem, but a minor issue that can easily be addressed.

'Pat Symonds, Chief Technical Officer at F1, said, ‘F1 and the FIA don’t change rules. Anyone who’s worked in sportscars or worked in Formula 1 for a long while knows the phenomena. It’s fixable within the framework of the rules and the technology allowed on the cars now. As it always has been, the secret is to minimise the instability while keeping the performance.’'

In the context of this thread (from that article) - 'The consensus is that there is an aerodynamic solution to the porpoising issue.'