[Team] 2022 Car Launch and Testing Thread

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

forget masks, tin foil hats offer the best protection!

A long with a glass of Kool-Aid.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

But are those barge boards looking things behind the front wheel? Thought the new rules eliminated those so it’s a clever interpretation of the rules?

Maybe (and this is just a non-technical thought) the rules banning bargeboards defined them as being above the floor, and these W13 elements look (to me) like they are below the floor?

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Maybe (and this is just a non-technical thought) the rules banning bargeboards defined them as being above the floor, and these W13 elements look (to me) like they are below the floor?

If true, let’s just hope they aren’t too much of a performance advantage. The last thing we need is all that hard work to get these rules to work are spoiled by something as small as that

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by S griffin

If true, let’s just hope they aren’t too much of a performance advantage. The last thing we need is all that hard work to get these rules to work are spoiled by something as small as that

there is, i think, a new provision to ban something even if its technically legal but against the spirit of the rules?

either way, will be an interesting space to watch out for.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

Indeed another beauty!

But are those barge boards looking things behind the front wheel? Thought the new rules eliminated those so it’s a clever interpretation of the rules?

These are the bits you leave off if it’s just a show car no?

Also no gills. lol

Those aren't barge boards but vortex generators, as on this Lola Champ Car underfloor.

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Those aren't barge boards but vortex generators, as on this Lola Champ Car underfloor.

Well that’s a positive sign. We know how great Champ Car racing was, thanks to it’s technical regs

[Sodemo]

I’m surprised at the complexity of the front wings, considering they were meant to be “simplifying them”.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

But are those barge boards looking things behind the front wheel? Thought the new rules eliminated those so it’s a clever interpretation of the rules?

I don't think those fit the definition of a barge board. I think the general name for these would be "tunnel strakes". Some of the teams (particularly in their renders) are not showing theirs, or they don't push the inner ones so far forward as has Mercedes, or maybe the top of the inlet is not covered as much? I think most have some type of large outer strake that does extend forward.

Richard

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

I’m surprised at the complexity of the front wings, considering they were meant to be “simplifying them”.

It's all complex in the grand scheme, and there will always be small fiddley bits and details, but how do you feel they are not less complex than before? Previous wings has the center section missing which include lots of optimization for Y250 vortex generation. Crazy levels of elements and endplate complexity, etc. Now they have limited number of elements, only two elements can be adjusted, simpler end planes and maybe other simplification.

They do remain big however.

Look at the level of complexity that was previously permissible (8 elements, complex and multi part end plates, etc.)




Richard

[seanyb505]

Originally Posted by broadrun96

Ok, who sat on the sidepods during the design phase and no one caught it? MUCH harsher and deeper crease under the NAS of Petronas than others, may be the silver but interesting differences between cars....

Mercedes Factory, Monday February 14.

* FIA aren't going to reveal any changes at this time *

Toto foksmashes the closest thing he can find

"...ok well, that was the only one we had, so we'll have to use it on Friday I guess."

[Sodemo]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

It's all complex in the grand scheme, and there will always be small fiddley bits and details, but how do you feel they are not less complex than before? Previous wings has the center section missing which include lots of optimization for Y250 vortex generation. Crazy levels of elements and endplate complexity, etc. Now they have limited number of elements, only two elements can be adjusted, simpler end planes and maybe other simplification.

They do remain big however.

Look at the level of complexity that was previously permissible (8 elements, complex and multi part end plates, etc.)




Richard

I think it’s just the size of them plus also the number of elements.

If you compare it to a front wing from 20 years ago, the wings have about double the elements and are much bigger.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

I think it’s just the size of them plus also the number of elements.

If you compare it to a front wing from 20 years ago, the wings have about double the elements and are much bigger.

In 20 year increments:

1962:


1982:


2002:


2022:



IMHO - the biggest jump in complexity comes from 1982 to 2002...

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

IMHO - the biggest jump in complexity comes from 1982 to 2002...

Yeah, I think I read somewhere that this takes the front wings (roughly) back to about the early 2000's. To go back even earlier, they would have had to do things like mandate a uniform and straight chord across the entire element (to effectively create old school straight wings). So instead of being that drastic, they reduced the element count and put them into box, but lets them have more modern organic shapes (just like the rest of the car).

I hope the wings are just cheaper to manufacture so that under budget caps, teams are not running out of them over the duration of the season because they are too expensive to make.

Richard

[Adam43]

Some of the tropes about the state of F1 and the cars are now decades old. Nearly reaching their half century.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

IMHO - the biggest jump in complexity comes from 1982 to 2002...

You're overlooking these bits which were popular when they were briefly permitted for 2-3 seasons due to a loophole in the bodywork rules unintentionally allowing bodywork in that area...



There are a lot of reasons the front wings used to be more simple:

• less designers to work on them (the main reason, a design shop of one or two engineers and one or two draftspersons drawing a whole F1 car in '77 is obviously going to produce a less complex design than a team of hundreds)
• much, much more rearwards weight and downforce distribution, so there is no need for as much front downforce, and
• less sophisticated testing and simulation tools (indeed just a wind tunnel rented once a month and no computational simulation tools for most teams until probably the early to mid 80's)...

But ultimately the priorities of car design of getting the maximum performance out of the downforce generating surfaces (which mainly involves dealing with the turbulent wake of the big rotating tyres and minimising the airflow spent on trivial things like cooling the engine instead of making downforce ) remained the same through all ages of the downforce era of Grand Prix racing to the present day.

Regarding the rearwards weight distribution, a Ferrari 126C4 may have had a simple front wing but it had no lack of rear wing complexity! That is because it had a much more rearwards weight distribution than a modern car. Therefore it didn't need much downforce on the front compared to the rear, but all the rear downforce was welcome.




Modern cars are quite the opposite to the 126C4 and have a very, very forward weight distribution (indeed it is mandated in the regulations and the very wide front tyres don't help) hence they need a lot of front wing load to balance them out.

Originally Posted by Sodemo

I think it’s just the size of them plus also the number of elements.

If you compare it to a front wing from 20 years ago, the wings have about double the elements and are much bigger.

The reason they are narrower then is that the permitted box was narrower, the permitted box is now wider so they are wider. But the box is wider for a reason, the full width front wing helps manage the front tyre airflow better and should produce better racing. That is why full width front wings are the preferred design in F2 & Indycar, categories which have great racing.

Regulations about maximum wing width are nothing new. Ferrari thought they were clever when they realised the rules said how wide the wings could be, but not whether or not you could have two of them and adjusted the 126C2 accordingly.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

When the wheel track was wider until '92, it wasn't as necessary to 'outwash' the turbulent air coming off the front tyres as it didn't hit the underfloor (and therefore destroy the downforce performance) anyway, besides it was impossible (apart from the loophole in '91 I mentioned above, where teams put on tyre wake control spats running off the front wing endplates) as the maximum front wing width fit in-between the front wheels. While until '08 it was still impossible to do as the rule required the front wing to only a little more than the width between the tyres.

It was only when the front wing was made wider in '09 that this possibility was (unintentionally) created.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Maybe (and this is just a non-technical thought) the rules banning bargeboards defined them as being above the floor, and these W13 elements look (to me) like they are below the floor?

The rules specifically allow four venturi inlet strakes per side.

Some teams are doing clever things with these though, such as Ferrari not using the full permitted depth to the ground but rather having it short so that it sheds the (low pressure, suction) vortex closer to the roof of the venturi tunnel or HAAS not using the full permitted length but rather positioning one behind the other as a kind of slotted flap.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

It was only when the front wing was made wider in '09 that this possibility was (unintentionally) created.

I really believe the OWG (Overtaking working Group) knew exactly what they were doing. The original F1 laws governing wings 1968/69 made sure that the front wing width wad within the width between the front rims in order to prevent the competitors using them to provide fairings for the front wheels. F1 was supposed to be an open wheel formula.

The Tyrrell 003 and some of the March cars tried to use the front wing fairing to shield the front wheels.

[wnut]

On board with Lewis W13

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEzNirEeRzQ

Cannot believe how smooth the engine and tranny are.

[Sodemo]

If they limited the front wing size, surely the teams would be forced to run less rear wing in order to achieve car balance?

[S griffin]

Let's hope the restrictions on the front wing work, at the moment it seems they are pretty much fairly standard on all cars

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

If they limited the front wing size, surely the teams would be forced to run less rear wing in order to achieve car balance?

They wouldn't be able to run a lap time, its essentially what happened in 2014.
The damn things are just too heavy for minimalist aero.

[S griffin]

The teams will always find a way to get the performance. Fact is, prior to 2017, it used to be a case of finding grip to match the power. But thankfully the rules have limited the aero again this year, so we should be thankful for hopefully better racing as a result

[Richard C]

Haas showed their real 2022 car during shakedown/photo day running at Barcelona. It is different (as expected) from what they showed previously. It seems to have very similar aero concepts to the Ferrari (shock). For example, it has a similar concave upper sidepod (not as deep as the Ferrari) with gills. At the same time it seems to have a number of unique details not yet seen on other cars (details on the leading edge of the front wing endplates, ridge vents over the engine cover and a unique semi-detached shark fin are a few examples).







I like the looks of the car.

Richard

[Mike Harte]

Not a car, but FOM have introduce a brand new gin palace in Barcelona. This flies in the face of what Ross Brawn stated a couple of years ago when he said that F1 needed to cut back on the "motorhomes" in the interest of not needing fleets of transporters to carry them around Europe.

Bernie managed to be able to run the commercial side of F1 extremely successfully for years using just an extremely modest, small motorhome with an awning. So, Liberty's excesses continue after the thrifty years of Mr E.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/ne...ddock/8367193/