F1 considering wheel arches for wet conditions

[Taxi645]

F1 considering to introduce wheel arches.

So as most of you are probably aware F1 is considering to introduce wheel arches somewhere during the 2023 season.


Here is another article on the matter:
https://the-race.com/formula-1/f1-wh...a-2021-fiasco/


Some take away's:
Tombazis also stressed that there is no desire to design the wheel arches “to be removed or fitted in a rush”, meaning that they would only be put onto the cars before sessions or races or during red flag periods.
He also stressed that if the race starts wet and then dries up, the wheel arches would remain on the cars to the end of the grand prix.

So if there is heavy rain say half an hour before the start and than no more rain, they either will postpone the race or fit the arches and have to run the wheel arches for what might be an 80% dry race. Doesn't sound like a great plan to me.


Pirelli is indicating that if with these arches they are going to run in much wetter conditions, they need to know in time because the current full wets are not designed for these conditions because currently the cars without arches would not run in those conditions.


“If the idea is to have a device that is avoiding to have spray in the air and the visibility is much better so they are running in full wet conditions, we need this information to design tyres to cope with these conditions because the intermediate tyre is not a tyre for heavy rain conditions, the aquaplaning resistance of the intermediate is not designed for that.”

It all sure does sound quite rushed to me.

Rather see they indeed research how much is caused by the wider tyres and how much is caused by the ground effect aerodynamics and only after thoroughly analysing the finding, decide on what would be the best cause of action.


If it was found that the amount of spray of these wider tyres does play a big part then it would be interesting to model what the effect of a 5cm narrower tyre would have. Not only would a narrower tyre sling less spray into the air it would also be 5cm further away (at equal car width) from the most active upwards aero.

[VIVA GT]

Just a simple thought but, I would expect that in order to have any significant effect in reducing spray the wheel arches would have to also wrap around the sidewalls of the tyres too. Surely this will cause a problem with tyre changes should the conditions dry out?

[Tourer]

Can see all sorts of headaches with the idea of arches.

• Firstly, there is the question of the impact on aero - could the arches make it harder to overtake again for example?
• Then there's the question of where the spray comes from - realistically how much is from the tyres themselves?
• If a large percentage of the spray DOES come directly off the tyres now - does fitting wheel arches mean that spay will now be directed back onto the tyre and track surface - meaning less clearing of the track due to cars running, more risk of aquaplaning and maybe overloading the tyre's capacity to deal with water.
• Then there is the question of attachment methodology - if fitted during a race won't be scrutineered so is there surety on how safe - also, will the arches deal OK with impacts from other cars or are they likely to fly off easily?

No doubt there are many other things to consider as that short list is straight off the top of my head on first thought.

Sounds like a thought bubble that hasn't been really examined so don't know how serious they are.

[chillibowl]

Given the time limits on races and how races affected by weather seem to always get cut short as a result, I’m skeptical of anything that could potentially add time and work to a red flag period? Maybe a moot concern though?

[E.B]

When is an open wheeler not n open wheeler? When it has guards that cover the wheels?

[Taxi645]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

Just a simple thought but, I would expect that in order to have any significant effect in reducing spray the wheel arches would have to also wrap around the sidewalls of the tyres too. Surely this will cause a problem with tyre changes should the conditions dry out?

I think the problem is more in the interaction between the tyre spray and the underside of the car in the centre. This for two reasons; 1 The underside sucks even more spray and throws it into the air and 2 I suspect the air in the centre is so turbulent that the spray is turn into a mist that reduces visibility even more and also stays suspended longer. The outside of the tyre does not have these problems (as much), so I don't expect that to be a problem.

Originally Posted by Tourer

Can see all sorts of headaches with the idea of arches.

• Firstly, there is the question of the impact on aero - could the arches make it harder to overtake again for example?
• Then there's the question of where the spray comes from - realistically how much is from the tyres themselves?
• If a large percentage of the spray DOES come directly off the tyres now - does fitting wheel arches mean that spay will now be directed back onto the tyre and track surface - meaning less clearing of the track due to cars running, more risk of aquaplaning and maybe overloading the tyre's capacity to deal with water.
• Then there is the question of attachment methodology - if fitted during a race won't be scrutineered so is there surety on how safe - also, will the arches deal OK with impacts from other cars or are they likely to fly off easily?

No doubt there are many other things to consider as that short list is straight off the top of my head on first thought.

Sounds like a thought bubble that hasn't been really examined so don't know how serious they are.

Agreed on all accounts. What if such a wheel arch make contact with a fast spinning tyre when there is contact between two cars and where will blade like shape then fly off to?

[VIVA GT]

From all of the comments above it would appear that fitting mudguards to F1 cars in order to reduce the spray in wet conditions then is a complete non-starter.
(I just wonder why it was suggested in the first place? There couldn't have been a lot of thought put into it).

[grantp]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

From all of the comments above it would appear that fitting mudguards to F1 cars in order to reduce the spray in wet conditions then is a complete non-starter.
(I just wonder why it was suggested in the first place? There couldn't have been a lot of thought put into it).

May as well require a full body.

But why not put the responsibility on the track design?

A new surface and construction approach with self drying capabilities could have an eventual spinoff into the real world.

[Taxi645]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

From all of the comments above it would appear that fitting mudguards to F1 cars in order to reduce the spray in wet conditions then is a complete non-starter.
(I just wonder why it was suggested in the first place? There couldn't have been a lot of thought put into it).

Personally I think they manoeuvred themselves a bit into a difficult spot. The ground effect cars in combination with the wider tires have proven to be quite headache regarding wet races this year.

They can't get rid of the ground effect cars, because it has improved dry racing a lot. I certainly don't want it to go because of the wet racing problems.

Then there are the wider tyres they can't get rid of without loosing face just one year after introduction.

On the other hand they have to do SOMETHING regarding the wet weather running. This year wet racing proceedings were just a sorry mess compared to the brilliant wet weather races from the (recent) past. So they don't want to touch the ground effect (thank god) and they don't want to touch the wider tyres (yet), when they should, so what options are there than those that come across as very desperate?

To be honest, 5cm narrow tyres at the same car width, would reduce the spray a bit and pull it away 5cm from the diffuser and it's violently turbulent suction, but I could imagine it would still be worse than we had before.

[Sodemo]

Surely with severe wet weather tyres they should be running a narrower tyre? At least they used to when Bridgestone ran the show. How much of the problem would that alleviate? Narrower tyre = better in aquaplaning situations, better at reducing spray as less water is picked up. Wheel covers wouldn’t solve the aquaplaning problem anyway, the two things are not connected.

[crmalcolm]

Mercedes and McLaren are set to test a new wheel arch component at Silverstone in the upcoming weeks which would dramatically decrease the amount of spray from a wet track surface.

'Mercedes and McLaren will undertake the test on July 13 on Silverstone's National circuit which will be artificially soaked prior to the cars heading out on track.

Tests will be filmed and then evaluated by the authorities to determine how an F1 car creates spray and whether the wheel arches will have the necessary effect.'

[v8supes]

See im ok with this IF it works and allows us more wet running and improves visibility. Im sceptical as to if it will make a real impact though.

[Peter Mallett]

Not entirely sure this will make any difference. Anyone who has driven on a motorway in heavy rain will know that it gets pretty difficult to see and spray can often out pace the windscreen wipers. AFAIK all vehicles on a public road in the UK are fitted with wheel arches and these often wrap around the top part of the tyre. Likewise road tyres are unlikely to lift more water than the racing wets (worth checking).

[VIVA GT]

Just another question about this idea but surely, although these wheel arches may (and I do mean may) cut down on the spray, but they will also prevent the standing water from being dispersed, so will also prevent the formation of a dry line surely?
(What I'm trying to say here is that it would severely slow down any drying of the track) Sorry I blame having just got back from holiday and having too many wines tonight!

[bathurst77]

Just send someone to local Truck repair and get a carton of those big square rubber mud flaps on the back of every tipper. She'll be right.. same for everyone s alls fair

[Gerard C]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Not entirely sure this will make any difference.

Well obviously it will make a difference. I think that this will lead to less direct spray from the tires and more "side mist" which I consider worse. Your example of what happens with road cars is quite good but in F1 you have to take the efficient diffuseur and rera wing effect in count. From this https://the-race.com/formula-1/f1-wh...a-2021-fiasco/ you'll see that the images show only the side view simulation. Having done some endurance in the wet with a Caterham I can attest that overtaking a GT like a Porsche is a scary experience, you're fully blinded at the point even the flags can't be seen and I didn't appreciate to jeopardize with my life just beacuse of the rain.
@Viva:

[Richard C]

The first test of this at Silverstone has come and gone and I missed the news articles about it from a week or so ago.

https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/wh...plex/10498480/

In short, the first test wasn't particularly successful. It did reduce some of the tire spray, but they are seeing that the bulk of the spray is being kicked up by the diffuser (no surprise here) and not the tires. That at least for this first test, it really didn't have a substantial impact.

They are looking to do more testing (which is probably right thing to do), but it is not looking good for a purely tire based spray solution. I can imagine when it's all done, the answer will be the only way to really prevent the spray would be significant and likely unacceptable aero changes.

Richard

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by Richard C

The first test of this at Silverstone has come and gone and I missed the news articles about it from a week or so ago.

https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/wh...plex/10498480/

In short, the first test wasn't particularly successful. It did reduce some of the tire spray, but they are seeing that the bulk of the spray is being kicked up by the diffuser (no surprise here) and not the tires. That at least for this first test, it really didn't have a substantial impact.

They are looking to do more testing (which is probably right thing to do), but it is not looking good for a purely tire based spray solution. I can imagine when it's all done, the answer will be the only way to really prevent the spray would be significant and likely unacceptable aero changes.

Richard

If you see them, you realise that 'wheel arches' isn't really an accurate description. They're pretty clever, look quite smart and could be fitted and removed quickly as they will be fastened to the uprights.

Quite what the teams could do to change the rear floors in short order though, I have no idea.

[grantp]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

Just another question about this idea but surely, although these wheel arches may (and I do mean may) cut down on the spray, but they will also prevent the standing water from being dispersed, so will also prevent the formation of a dry line surely?
(What I'm trying to say here is that it would severely slow down any drying of the track) Sorry I blame having just got back from holiday and having too many wines tonight!

Taking you thought a stage further, all F1 needs to do is mandate the installation of a quick drying track surface, starting with the most "at risk" (of rain) tracks.

So Spa, obviously, and then pick another half a dozen from the rest of the runners.

I would think some sort of under-track vacuum and heating system would do it. Maybe subcontract the design to one of the teams to make sure it is done the right way and controlled by the right people.

After all, we would not want a heated track to be used dubiously for tyre warming purposes, nor a vacuum system that might supplement the effects of aero, would we?

Plan "C" would be to revert to running races badly affected by rain as a SIM event. Let all the damp and disappointed spectators join in to see if they can beat the regular drivers. That should keep them happy.

[morninggents]

Have you been enjoying a few glasses of wine tonight, Grant?

[Sodemo]

Maybe they can fit mud flaps too?

[Taxi645]

I've said before that I suspect that part of the problem is that because of the interaction of the spray from the tyres and the violently turbulent air coming from the underside the spray from the tyres is torn into smaller droplets than before. If so this would have two consequences:

1 Visibility impairment is stronger because the spray turns into more like a fog, which blocks more of the view than just spray.
2 These smaller droplets/fog stays suspended in the air longer so this worse visibility stays for longer after the car has passed.

If you look at older rain footage, you do see quite a bit of spray being thrown up, but it falls down much quicker so visibility returns faster after the car has passed: https://youtu.be/h0u4zJvPg4E?t=720

I suspect this idea with the current mud guards will last one race max. As said before, imagine such a part come in contact with (another) tyre and how violent this blade like shape could be thrown in any random direction.

To me the best way forward would seem not to keep the spray from being thrown up, but to try and isolate the tyre spray from the violently turbulent and low pressure air from the underside as much as possible. I would not mind at all if that concept would cost downforce. I rather have a wet race with low downforce than a continuously postponed race or no race at all. This has several advantages:

1 These sort of barge boards would be placed on the inside of the wheels so:
a) it would not look so ghastly and b) would be out of harms way if there is contact between cars.
2 It does not compromise the drying of the track as much.
3 It would not look so silly if you start the race wet, the track dries within 15 minutes and then you still have 75 min of dry racing with those silly mud guards attached.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

Maybe they can fit mud flaps too?

Assuming the FIA renderings that have been widely shared are those that were tested at Silverstone and while they show a bit over the rear wheels, the main thing that jumps out is what I would effectively call "mud flaps".

Originally Posted by Taxi645

I suspect this idea with the current mud guards will last one race max. As said before, imagine such a part come in contact with (another) tyre and how violent this blade like shape could be thrown in any random direction.

I think they have effectively said what was tested will not work. So nothing is going to be raced until more testing. As to bits flying off. That really is no different than any other part of the bodywork that can be impacted by another car such as the front wing, etc. I view that as less of a risk to other drivers as the solutions being ineffective as they may be torn off (see comment below)

Originally Posted by Taxi645

To me the best way forward would seem not to keep the spray from being thrown up, but to try and isolate the tyre spray from the violently turbulent and low pressure air from the underside as much as possible. I would not mind at all if that concept would cost downforce. I rather have a wet race with low downforce than a continuously postponed race or no race at all. This has several advantages:

1 These sort of barge boards would be placed on the inside of the wheels so:
a) it would not look so ghastly and b) would be out of harms way if there is contact between cars.
2 It does not compromise the drying of the track as much.
3 It would not look so silly if you start the race wet, the track dries within 15 minutes and then you still have 75 min of dry racing with those silly mud guards attached.

This goes back to the original issue of risk vs. reward. The problems this calls out, while frustrating to fans, is relatively rare. So the more invasive and disruptive the solution, the less it makes sense. And when I say invasive, I mean that any type of significant aero changes (particularly at the front of the car) that tries to redirect spray away from the underbody, or elsewhere is going to significantly disrupt the existing aero optimization of the car. And that doesn't just mean the cars would be slower, they might be unsafe to drive at race speeds.

As to the point of parts flying off. Trying to trap or redirect spray from the tires (such as the water squeezed out of the track/tire intersection toward the underbody) means spray shielding VERY low to the track surface. Can those be low enough to be both effective AND also not be regularly torn off by curbs, etc.

Richard

[Gerard C]

Originally Posted by morninggents

Have you been enjoying a few glasses of wine tonight, Grant?

T'was an answer to this: Sorry I blame having just got back from holiday and having too many wines tonight! But we are talking about water here and waiting for plans D and ongoing… What could be found before P, I wonder?



This could be true (from Richard C): And that doesn't just mean the cars would be slower, they might be unsafe to drive at race speeds.

[chillibowl]

This is probably more in the realm of sci fi, but not as far fetched as it used to be, but if the primary issue is one of visibility then I would like to see the technology being one more focused on the helmet visor, some sort of HUD display, thermal imaging built in. Rather make it easier for them to see or identify the car in front of them.

I say less far fetched as we are already seeing wearables like glasses having built in thermal imaging capabilities at the consumer level. How effective that is in the rain and no doubt would be a steep learning curve for the drivers but also a more attainable solution then making significant and/or costly changes to the cars?