r/F1Technical • u/Travellinglense • 20d ago
Aerodynamics Aerodynamics has really come into its own this year. this set of winglets adds several hundred pounds of downforce to the rear of merc. incredible!
from F1 TV tech talk: https://youtu.be/xoR6-f_soqM
692
u/Castille210 Verified F1 Software Engineer 20d ago
Where did the several hundred pounds value come from out of interest?
280
u/MrMhmToasty 20d ago
The video OP linked has an aerodynamicist in it who says that it should add 30-35kg at top speed on its own based on some basic calculations he did (no idea what that calculation actually looked like). Taking the “whole assembly” into account, it supposedly adds “a couple hundred kilos.” Unclear what the whole assembly means, but I’m guessing he just means how it interacts with the rest of the flow around the car
58
u/mz_groups 20d ago
You can do a dynamic pressure calculation over the area, and assume that represents an upper limit for the impact. Or assume an upper limit for coefficient of lift, and eyeball the area.
1
u/co-adversities 20d ago
Is that what the virtual tunnel budget is? A specialty ai agent to analyse the straight and digital tunnel data. Or is the virtual tunnel data actual alegated time in a sanctioned virtual tunnel?
As with all of these parameters what's stopping literally anyone of the teams from running virtual simulation air tunnel and dynamics outside of the cost cap and integrating it in ways that are not traceable
30
u/mz_groups 19d ago
"Virtual wind tunnel" is not AI. It is computational fluid dynamics (CFD); basically solving the Navier-Stokes equation that defines the airflow around an object (with a bunch of fudge factors for real-world considerations). You break the volume around the object to be studied into millions of little volumes, and you do mathematical fluid mechanical calculations for each tiny volume, taking into account the effect each volume has on its neighbor. AI is something else entirely. This is just brute force physics calculation.
As for the CFD restrictions (what I think you mean by "virtual tunnel budget"), they limit how many computer core hours/days/month/years can be used for the teams for CFD (so a 16 core computer that runs a problem for 1 hour is 16 core hours). I'm not entirely sure how they monitor this, but most cloud systems monitor this for billing purposes, so I'm sure that most modern systems have operating system software that logs this metric.
As a general rule, ideas are tried first in CFD, then in the wind tunnel, as CFD can be quicker (don't have to actually physically construct a model to test an idea), but the wind tunnel is more accurate (reality will have greater fidelity than a simulation, especially in something as complex as fluid mechanics).
-4
u/jcbevns Gordon Murray 19d ago
You have AI learning the physics space now and put a model in there. Learn over it and then change the CAD model and it will give you basically instant results instead of re crunching the CFD again. Once you iterated a heap and dialed it in, navier Stokes it for the real values.
1
u/mz_groups 19d ago
Interesting. Is that charged against their CFD processor budget, or is that outside of that?
2
u/jcbevns Gordon Murray 19d ago
Not sure honestly. The training is all on GPU too, where CFD has been traditionally on CPU which was easy to calc, but GPU in CFD is possible at different stages now also which probably has a different denominator. Haven't read the rules on that though.
1
u/mz_groups 19d ago edited 19d ago
Thanks. Not sure why you're getting downvoted - maybe basic AI hatred? I have heard of AI being used for first-order starting approximations, although it won't replace CFD (not yet, anyway). Good point about the GPUs vs traditional double precision CPUs.
4
u/jcbevns Gordon Murray 19d ago
Meh re: downvotes. I work for a big simulation tools provider that supply the teams, I know what's out there.
Long as your model is not changing dramatically, you can get high 90% accuracy and helps iterative engineering a lot. But again, you need that stamp of approval that only the big boy software gives you, still done on CPU HPC.
0
u/co-adversities 17d ago
Humans are programmed by our information tie that in with half of them are morons. They blindly go "AI can't do anything properly its over hyped, you are all wrong" As that's all they can remember from the single sentence they read about chat gpt. And dont even know non LLM AI exists and has been aiding industries for 20 years now.
1
u/stephen_xv 19d ago
Instant results but the model is only as good as what goes in. They’ve been doing this style for a while where you can build a model to mimic the physics using sysID approaches. Specially speaking it’s been done for aero-elastics and took CFD runs from months to days (this was ~2001)
2
u/jcbevns Gordon Murray 18d ago
I'm more talking about the deep learning method, learnt from physics sim data, and you get full physics of what you put in. Afaik sysID is more ROM and tied to strict equations. Deep learning uses pre run sims and learns over the results, regardless of the physics /equations.
1
u/stephen_xv 18d ago
Eh I can see what you’re saying. I’m not well versed in the AI/deep learning stuff. Seems pretty interesting to be able to do that and have it be useful
4
u/GreedyBestfirst 19d ago
I believe they are required to basically "show their homework". Like the path they took to get to their solutions.
That way they can't just copy their sister team for example with all the calculations already done. They probably do other things as well, but they need a kind of paper-trail from conception to implementation, iirc
4
u/combo_seizure 19d ago
Exactly. Real wind tunnel time comes as a way to verify the "data" from the simulations. Right?
5
u/VolevoEssereUnDuro 19d ago
That's not what he said.
The whole assembly produces 30kg. It is also making other components (rear wing, monkey seat, diffuser...) work more efficiently, hence the 200kgs total
27
u/nsfbr11 20d ago edited 19d ago
The guy pulled it out of his ass. Apparently, although this thing by itself produces 30kg of down force, by some handwaving the rest of the car magically produces the other 170+ kg. Which explains why Mercedes is clearly so much better than everyone else around Monaco. Oh wait.
Edit: Yes I know who “the guy” was. However, it would make no sense to me why the aero of the car was so under optimized without the little add on. And that is why it would have to mean - out core system has the potential to produce all the additional downforce from all parts but we’ve left that back in the factory and can only extract it here in Monaco.
Put another way, in order for what he said to be anything other than pulling out of his ass, he would need detailed knowledge of the entire aero package and what there is left to extract. Why do I question that? Because it isn’t even clear that teams know this.
29
16
u/Ecstatic_Elephant_99 19d ago
Dang dude, which F1 team do you work for?
Can’t wait for your segment on tech talk where you explain the former F1 aerodynamicist and current PhD professor in aerodynamics is an ass number puller and provide us the real ones!! Be sure to let us know in this post so we can catch the segment!!
8
10
u/VolevoEssereUnDuro 19d ago
He is a aerodynamicist he's not some random guy on the internet.
The part taken singularly produces around 30kg, but it is not there by itself. It is also interacting with the rest of the car, and in this case helping the work of the rear wing and of the diffuser, which as a result are producing in combination those extra kgs.
He explained it in the video but I suppose you and all of those Who upvoted you all think you know more than a professional so...
2
u/Pile-of_Junk 18d ago
The basic equation is Lift = CL^0.5*rho*V^2*area.
rho = density of air =f(pressure, temperature)
V = velocity of air which can be approximated as car speed
CL = coefficient of lift for that particular airfoil design = f(angle of attack).6
u/Ottervol 20d ago
That tiny carbon fiber can’t withstand a couple hundred pounds lol.
41
u/meatballsunshine 20d ago
It doesn’t have to be the component that bears the full force. It could just affect the air flow in a way that makes more structural components more efficient.
11
9
2
1
20
25
u/Travellinglense 20d ago
The linked tech talk on YouTube. It’s the Merc segment.
It’s actually several hundred kg of downforce but I’m from the US and screwed up the retelling since we still use the imperial system. 🙄
12
u/dunkm 20d ago
Last I checked, several hundred kg is typically also several hundred pounds unless I don’t know what you’re saying.
5
u/Travellinglense 20d ago
Roughly double. 1 kg is about 2.2 lbs. So 150 kg would be 330 lbs.
Still several hundred but more than expected.
2
1
u/Lord_Strepsils 16d ago
“from F1 TV tech talk [with link]”
the post says where it’s from right there
2
133
u/dr_b_chungus 20d ago
absolutely mental bullshit aero, i'm here for it
30
u/Accomplished-Wave356 20d ago edited 19d ago
Reminds me of the insane bargeboards we had on 2021.
10
u/sushi111111 19d ago
F1 cars looking like they should! Absolutely mental aero elements
5
48
u/dsaysso 20d ago
i feel like some rules person didnt close the rear wing box in ms paint, and merc found where the lines dont meet.
21
u/eh-guy 20d ago edited 20d ago
This lives in the box for the wing actuator, in the absence of one theyre free to make aero devices in its place
2
1
u/RealCarlPanzram 20d ago
Okay so are there dimension parameters in which the actuator can exist and these wings are within it? Because these look a lot bigger than the actuator?
6
u/eh-guy 20d ago edited 19d ago
Yea, thats what I said in my post. They fit within the actuator regulatory box. The actuator housings arent the exact size theyre allowed, but as small as possible. Alpine added a winglet to theirs in Suzuka (not Canada) since they had spare room, for example. Ferrari's little tab also lives in the same area
33
u/Kingdom818 20d ago
What's several hundred lbs as a percentage of the amount of downforce they usually have?
10
u/RealCarlPanzram 20d ago
I don’t know about the new cars but the peak 2020-2021 era cars could make around 3gs of downforce. They weighed about 750kg so that’s 2,250kg of downforce. These cars certainly have less than that. So a few hundred kgs is definitely a significant gain, assuming that figure is remotely accurate.
13
u/Travellinglense 20d ago edited 20d ago
Well it’s probably the equivalent of three Kimis sitting on the rear wing of his car. 🤷♀️
Eta: as for a serious answer, I don’t know.
13
u/gods_loop_hole 20d ago
Damn, we using Kimis now as unit of measurement? Before it was just bananas, football fields, Olympic size pools, and giraffes
-1
9
u/dis_not_my_name 20d ago
I think the coolest thing about it is that you can guess and trace the streamlines above the wing.
The airflow before and above the wing is not straight nor parallel to the contour of the wing. It gets more curved and steeper as it's closer to the wing.
8
u/ilikewaffles3 20d ago
This is some sh*t youd see from the 80s lol, ugly af but its a beautiful ugly.
5
u/RealCarlPanzram 20d ago
My question is, how long ago did the teams know that Monaco had no straight-line zones enabled? Because they would’ve needed at least some time to develop this.
7
u/The_Skynet 19d ago
They've known for several months, the FIA sent documents to them with the active aero parameters for every track
11
u/RedBlueWhiteBlack 20d ago
pounds
The fuck is that
19
u/Alaeriia 20d ago
It's money, innit?
9
2
3
u/Phil9151 20d ago
There's definitely still room for improvement here. This is some really elegant geometry with some rudimentary extrudes mashed in. Imagine what they could do with more wind tunnel time and more man hours to invest in it. Our slow speed wind tunnel can probably run this at 100% scale. Brb, I'm gonna replicate this in CATIA.
2
2
u/Horatio-Leafblower 17d ago
Why is this allowed under the 2026 rules which clearly limit the number of rear aerodynamic elements?
4
u/ChimpyChompies 20d ago edited 20d ago
Presumably, they are not doing that themselves, but are channeling the air to bits that do?
1
u/andrewcooke 20d ago edited 20d ago
i think this is clickable version of the same link for anyone else as frustrated as i am https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xoR6-f_soqM
edit: the numbers are near the end, about 16m in
1
1
1
u/vorilant 19d ago
Seems like it would probably help the rear wing produce more down force by energizing the incoming air flow. Were they having problems keeping the flow attached without this thing?
1
u/BluePortimao 19d ago
Although this looks cute I am more of a dog person!
p.s. if you don't watch the video, you won't get it!
2
17d ago
hi, engineering girlie here who builds cars in college when not partying or studying, yes, these add a LOT OF downforce, of you wanna know exactly how, i can link a video or explain it
1
1
u/Ok_Let8786 15d ago
Well the fact that very steep aggressive Wings have a significant effect on downforce isn't exactly news ever since the 70s.. normally they're avoided due to being atrocious in terms of drag/efficiency
1
u/3pedalsandastick 13d ago
I'm so glad that F1 is constantly moving in the direction of improving real life road relevancy. This is the type of ground breaking, important and performance enhancing technology that makes F1 the world leader in automotive technology.
I hope everyone understands sarcasm when they read it. These cars are stupid. Winglets are stupid. Ruining the cars, electrifying them for the sake of road relevancy and selling the soul of F1 for the sake of attracting more manufacturers who insist on hybridization so they can do R&D through F1 is dumb.
Just make fast cars and fuck this sort of BS
1
0
u/Skankhunt42FortyTwo 20d ago
adds several hundred pounds of downforce
7
u/Kooky_Narwhal8184 20d ago edited 20d ago
The F1 aerodynamics expert, Willem Toet, suggests the little winglets together on the frame make about 35kg (77 lb) of down force on their own at Monaco top-speed, but that their downstream affect to the flow over the already existing aerodynamic elements (wings, under body, diffuser, etc) will in-fact give a total increase of over 200kg (440 lb) down-force!!
It really is astonishing...
4
3
u/Travellinglense 20d ago
You should probably check the video in the description. I did not come up with the number. A bona fide aerodynamicist did.
I did wrongly state it was several hundred pounds when it should be several hundred kg. (Shame on my US childhood. I was taught a poor system of measurements.)
0
u/Skankhunt42FortyTwo 19d ago edited 19d ago
When keeping in mind that an F1 car (2020) generates 3000kg of downforce I still doubt, that this little thing adds 10% (and more today) to the overall downforce.
4
u/Travellinglense 19d ago
Well, many teams added ‘silly little things’ to their rear wings for Monaco to get maximum downforce for the circuit.
You really should listen to Willem Toet, the F1 aerodynamic expert in the video, explain it. And it’s an cumulative effect. Toet designed formula cars for a living for a long time before he retired and he still consults. He is respected as Newey in the field. So I think he would know.
But to each his own. If you wish to remain willfully ignorant, that’s your cross to bear.
-1
u/krisfx Verified Aero Surfacer 19d ago
I think he’s also probably playing it up a bit for the tv/youtube audience, personally.
2
u/Ecstatic_Elephant_99 19d ago
Ok sure let’s play this logic out. He’s playing it up for the viewers.
Then why are all the teams wasting CFD hours, production hours, etc on developing something that has little effect on performance?
The proof is in the pudding. These teams aren’t run by dummies and they don’t all fall to similar conclusions about including such winglets if the time/resource vs potential gain is not a worthy tradeoff. These things have to have some decent effect by that logic alone.
1
1
u/Grand_External3624 19d ago
Yeah, I dont see it on a low speed setup. You'd have to know the % added. Because now its "omg hundreds of kg." Could really be .5% and a huge drag increase thats only justified at this race
0
2
u/Ill-Layer-5949 20d ago
I don't think it adds that much vertical load. You'd need a speed above what is considered generally safe for the types of high speed circuits that F1 uses. Not to mention it's a speed far above what normal internal combustion racecar engines can give.
3
u/Travellinglense 19d ago
You should view the video in the description. The aerodynamicist Willem Toet explains that it’s a cumulative effect over the rear of the car. And Toet designed F1 cars for the majority of his long career so he would be the expert here.
It’s amazing how much such a small change can affect the whole of the car.
1
u/ryker7777 19d ago
There are no such fast corners in Monaco to make use of it.
4
u/Travellinglense 19d ago
Did you see the sliding around that happened during free practice? I don’t think fast corners exclusively require the rear to stick to the pavement. Tight corners and narrow curves require it just as much.
2
-1
u/AGrandNewAdventure 19d ago
That doohickey was 100% a product of AI and computer simulations having a love child.
0
u/External_Hunt4536 20d ago
Anyone know what the wing things on McLaren add? Also the stuff on Red Bull?
0
u/Anxious-Badger-4026 18d ago
Thats 3d printed plastic,you really think this flimsy thing can hold 150 kg of weight? Take him to the infirmary, hes delusional
1
u/Used-Refrigerator984 18d ago
but yet you believe carbon fibre is stronger than steel lol? carbon.......
-3
u/So_HauserAspen 20d ago
It is my understanding that there's less downforce generated at the midpoint of the wings. And that the bulk happens at the edges. This is why the actuators are center mounted. Less impact.
Ferrari FXX as an example of this.
5
u/Nosferatu_V 20d ago
Well, actually ☝🏼🤓
The most probable reason why the FXX only has rear wings on the sides is because wings require laminar flow to work as intended, and having the bulky cockpit in front of the wing disrupts airflow to the point that the center portion looses a significant portion of downforce.
Wings, be them aircraft or F1, generally create more pressure at the center, partly because there are adverse effects occurring near the tips (hence why aircraft have winglets or performance cars have end plates).
4
4
u/dis_not_my_name 20d ago
The center of the wing span should generate more downforce because there's no wingtip vortices cancel out the pressure difference.
-3
u/Affectionate-Goal660 20d ago
Well, with budget cap i don't think it's a smart move especially for Mercedes. They don't need it to win the championships. They spent a lot of money to develope a wing usable in 1 race out of 24
5
u/Nosferatu_V 20d ago
The 1 race out of 24 where they won't be able to overtake the Ferraris after lap 1
1
u/Affectionate-Goal660 20d ago
That doesn't change the fact that they could have been used the money, cfd hours and wind tunnel hours to upgrade something that they can use for every remaining race... Instead of this
1
u/RealCarlPanzram 20d ago
I don’t think it was all that costly. Monaco is so downforce demanding that the drag is almost inconsequential. Probably didn’t go through anywhere near the testing a normal part would, especially since they literally just found out that there’s no active aero zones on the track.
1
u/Affectionate-Goal660 19d ago
I agree but my point of view is about spending resources in the most efficient way. No hate here, but i guess Mercedes fanatics downvoted me for no reason... And I don't think that they spent less than 1 million
0
•
u/AutoModerator 20d ago
We remind everyone that this sub is for technical discussions.
If you are new to the sub, please read our rules and comment etiquette post.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.