F Ducts and Blown Rear Wings

[dpbird90]

So, while the teams are inventing their own F Ducts and blown wings, it got me thinking. McLaren, Ferrari and Sauber all seem to channel air through the "shark fin" engine cover, whereas Mercedes are experimenting with a wee device on the wing itself, no tube in the engine cover like the others, from one of the pictures it looks like RBR were looking at a similar system. Just curious; anyone with better knowledge know how these systems work? I can't see it working as unlike the McLaren system, there is nothing to channel the air?

[LocoBlade]

Mercedes are ducting air to the rear wing like everyone else, but via a convoluted route under the engine cover, across the gearbox area then up the rear wing support into the rear wing. The reason they dont do it the same way as Mclaren and Ferrari etc is that they don't want to run a sharkfin with their design of engine cover / air intake with the split either side of the central roll pillar.

Red Bull are doing it via the sharkfin like everyone else...


from Scarbs F1

[dpbird90]

LocoBlade said:

Mercedes are ducting air to the rear wing like everyone else, but via a convoluted route under the engine cover, across the gearbox area then up the rear wing support into the rear wing. The reason they dont do it the same way as Mclaren and Ferrari etc is that they don't want to run a sharkfin with their design of engine cover / air intake with the split either side of the central roll pillar.

Red Bull are doing it via the sharkfin like everyone else...


from Scarbs F1

Cheers for that, its a really good pic. I must have got a dodgy camera angle when I looked at the RBR one, the Merc one sounds a hell of a lot more complex than it needs to be, but if it works I suppose that doesn't matter.
I still can't see how the Ferrari one hasn't been deemed illegal, after watching Alonso drive 1 handed down the straights to make it work, I would have thought that it would be classed as too dangerous. Although I suppose its better than headbutting the steering wheel to make it work, which is probably what HRT would have come up with if they had the cash.

[TXWRX]

is the merc one not more complex because this is the only way they can accomodate it due to the design of their tub? the mclaren was designed from the outset to incorporate it, the others have had to retro fit it and the rules state no changes can be made to the tub, i'e making new holes or channels in it, so merc have been forced into something different?

[JustNeil]

dpbird90 said:

LocoBlade said:

Mercedes are ducting air to the rear wing like everyone else, but via a convoluted route under the engine cover, across the gearbox area then up the rear wing support into the rear wing. The reason they dont do it the same way as Mclaren and Ferrari etc is that they don't want to run a sharkfin with their design of engine cover / air intake with the split either side of the central roll pillar.

Red Bull are doing it via the sharkfin like everyone else...


from Scarbs F1

Cheers for that, its a really good pic. I must have got a dodgy camera angle when I looked at the RBR one, the Merc one sounds a hell of a lot more complex than it needs to be, but if it works I suppose that doesn't matter.
I still can't see how the Ferrari one hasn't been deemed illegal, after watching Alonso drive 1 handed down the straights to make it work, I would have thought that it would be classed as too dangerous. Although I suppose its better than headbutting the steering wheel to make it work, which is probably what HRT would have come up with if they had the cash.

Been having a think about this one handed driving lark and it's something that was quite common before the advent of paddle shift gearboxes. A quick watch of Senna's Monaco qualifying lap of Monaco shows that one handed is OK. Bearing in mind they also run a form of power steering too and they are supposed to be the best in the world, I don't see it as unduly dangerous. Now, whether it's a distraction and therefore a danger is another question. All academic as they won't be seen after this year anyway.

[LocoBlade]

TXWRX said:

is the merc one not more complex because this is the only way they can accomodate it due to the design of their tub? the mclaren was designed from the outset to incorporate it, the others have had to retro fit it and the rules state no changes can be made to the tub, i'e making new holes or channels in it, so merc have been forced into something different?

I dont think its the design of their tub as they've still got a hand/knee operated hole to block off which activates it and so are still channelling air through the cockpit area and then out into the back half of the car like all the F Duct cars. As I mentioned above, I think its because the design of their roll hoop and engine inlet means running a sharkfin is counter productive to the overall aerodynamics of the car, so do it this way instead.

[LocoBlade]

dpbird90 said:

I still can't see how the Ferrari one hasn't been deemed illegal, after watching Alonso drive 1 handed down the straights to make it work, I would have thought that it would be classed as too dangerous. Although I suppose its better than headbutting the steering wheel to make it work, which is probably what HRT would have come up with if they had the cash.

ISTR reading somewhere that Ferrari changed their cockpit ducting in Turkey so it's now operated by the knee like Mclaren, could be wrong though.

[PabloTeK]

JustNeil said:

Been having a think about this one handed driving lark and it's something that was quite common before the advent of paddle shift gearboxes. A quick watch of Senna's Monaco qualifying lap of Monaco shows that one handed is OK. Bearing in mind they also run a form of power steering too and they are supposed to be the best in the world, I don't see it as unduly dangerous. Now, whether it's a distraction and therefore a danger is another question. All academic as they won't be seen after this year anyway.

I dare say that modern F1 cars are much faster at changing direction, the older cars look more ponderous compared to the speed that modern cars turn at in clear air. You could probably get a little more time to react in say a 1985 car than you would in a 2005 car.

[german tony]

I read that Ferrari have found 0.7 of a second by copying Red Bull's idea of using the exhaust gases to interfere with the rear wing's performance.

Anybody know how that works?

[CNHSS1]

german tony said:

I read that Ferrari have found 0.7 of a second by copying Red Bull's idea of using the exhaust gases to interfere with the rear wing's performance.

Anybody know how that works?

http://scarbsf1.wordpress.com/2010/03/02/red-bull-exhaust-driven-diffuser/

[E30M3SE]

german tony said:

I read that Ferrari have found 0.7 of a second by copying Red Bull's idea of using the exhaust gases to interfere with the rear wing's performance.

Anybody know how that works?

I thought I heard 'someone' during Tv commentary, don't recall if it was race quali or practice, that the Redbulls exhausts gases were used by the rear diffuser.

ETA, Ferrari appeared to have the exhaust in the same place as previously in Canada, from what I saw.

Edited by E30M3SE on Wednesday 16th June 14:40

[LocoBlade]

german tony said:

I read that Ferrari have found 0.7 of a second by copying Red Bull's idea of using the exhaust gases to interfere with the rear wing's performance.

Anybody know how that works?

I think you may have misread the article because as far as Im aware the Red Bull's exhausts doesn't interfere with the rear wing, whereas regular exhausts DO. Exhaust gasses going through the rear wing isn't an advantage though, with normal exhaust location, the hot turbulent gasses exit in front of the rear wing disrupting the airflow and making the wing less efficient, so Red Bull are actually gaining from keeping the hot gasses away from that area, so the wing sees more cool / less turbulent air.

The main advantage to the low exhausts is how they blow the hot gases around and through parts of the diffuser. doing this produces higher pressure differences and so generates more downforce. Exiting the exhaust through the diffuser to generate downforce isnt a new idea and was done in the 80s i think, but they found it that doing that made the car became far too sensitive to the throttle, ie if the driver lifted slightly mid corner, the exhaust gas output would reduce and the diffuser would suddenly stop generating as much downforce, making the car unstable. It seems Red Bull have been able to use the advantages of the system to generate downforce without the disadvantages of unpredictable downforce levels, probably by indirectly blowing the gasses at the diffuser area rather than exiting right in the middle of the diffuser itself, so perhaps the gains are ultimately less than if they exited the exhaust into the diffuser itself, but you don't have the sensitivity issues.

[zac510]

There must be some throttle or ride height sensitivity on the RBR because the drivers complained about handling performance in Australia and China where we had damp races (ie less full throttle). This suggests that they might have accepted this compromise in favour of dry race performance.

Edited by zac510 on Wednesday 16th June 15:16

[german tony]

Intially I read http://www.planetf1.com/news/18227/6208600/Alonso-... which quotes up to 0.7 secs/lap & a "new Red Bull-like exhaust-blown rear end" which I assumed meant the rear wing, mistakenly, it seems as the following agrees with you & talks about the double-diffuser.

http://www.motorsport-total.com/f1/news/2010/06/Fe...

It suggests that by moving the exhaust exit lower & modifying the rear suspension to suit the effect of the double diffuser can be improved by up to 50%. It quotes 0.3 to 0.4 secs/lap.

Thanks for your info.

[AlexS]

LocoBlade said:

german tony said:

I read that Ferrari have found 0.7 of a second by copying Red Bull's idea of using the exhaust gases to interfere with the rear wing's performance.

Anybody know how that works?

I think you may have misread the article because as far as Im aware the Red Bull's exhausts doesn't interfere with the rear wing, whereas regular exhausts DO. Exhaust gasses going through the rear wing isn't an advantage though, with normal exhaust location, the hot turbulent gasses exit in front of the rear wing disrupting the airflow and making the wing less efficient, so Red Bull are actually gaining from keeping the hot gasses away from that area, so the wing sees more cool / less turbulent air.

The main advantage to the low exhausts is how they blow the hot gases around and through parts of the diffuser. doing this produces higher pressure differences and so generates more downforce. Exiting the exhaust through the diffuser to generate downforce isnt a new idea and was done in the 80s i think, but they found it that doing that made the car became far too sensitive to the throttle, ie if the driver lifted slightly mid corner, the exhaust gas output would reduce and the diffuser would suddenly stop generating as much downforce, making the car unstable. It seems Red Bull have been able to use the advantages of the system to generate downforce without the disadvantages of unpredictable downforce levels, probably by indirectly blowing the gasses at the diffuser area rather than exiting right in the middle of the diffuser itself, so perhaps the gains are ultimately less than if they exited the exhaust into the diffuser itself, but you don't have the sensitivity issues.

I believe that the way the exhaust gas flows on the RBR also has benefits to the air flowing round the rear wheels, and there are some discussions on F1Technical.net that the introduction of the hot exhaust gas to the diffuser reduces the onset of separation which also helps things.

[Eric Mc]

Routing exhaust gases through the diffuser was common practice in the early 1990s.

[dpbird90]

Eric Mc said:

Routing exhaust gases through the diffuser was common practice in the early 1990s.

Yeah, I was thinking about this last night, even up to the late 90s the exhausts exited at the bottom of the car, around the diffuser. Wonder why they stopped it when it provides extra downforce?

[Mazda Baiter]

Eric Mc said:

Routing exhaust gases through the diffuser was common practice in the early 1990s.

[FourWheelDrift]

I wonder if another reason for exiting the exhaust gases over the lower element of the rear wing opposed to the diffuser is that diffused air flow allows slip streaming. But airflow over the wing is disrupted and causes all the problems of not being able to follow another car in the fast corners.

Edited by FourWheelDrift on Thursday 17th June 11:47