F1 2022 Pre-Season Testing Thread

[Tifoso]

Unfortunately F1 is not beauty contest

Help me to recall the last beautiful Ferrari that wasn’t a winner?

[wisepie]

1) For what it's worth, I think the Merc is ugly.
2) I hope that Mercedes have a proper of a season - though I suspect they won't!
3) Hope we are fighting for wins and podiums (podia?) all year.

Up yours Toto, up yours Horner!

Over and out..

Well said, and the Merc resembles a beached whale to me, hope it performs like one too!

[Tony]

Maybe fat and low is better, just guessing.
.................................................. .................................................. ............................
Subsequent wind tunnel tests yielded an extraordinarily low[3] drag coefficient of 0.113.[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schl%C3%B6rwagen

I'm not an aerodynamicist by any stretch of the imagination, but you would think that if you are carrying more weight higher up, your CoG is going to suffer, thus impacting your cornering ability...

[PURE PASSION]

The new bottom had a clear cut in the rear, a modification made to give more stability to the flow at high speeds and further mitigate the porpoising phenomenon.
The F1-75, as understood by Formu1a.uno , underwent a greater oversteer with the new bottom specification, obviously a 'counter' to compensate, but with the advantage of being able to opt for softer set-ups, with a better compromise, which bring greater advantages in the slow. Today we saw on the track an F1-75 glued to the ground in the fast (one of the lowest cars, if not the lowest) but still quite high in the slow.
With the cars of the new generation, those who go fast in the medium and low speed corners will be able to make the difference . This is because in the fast, the 'ground effect' aerodynamic concept will help everyone to go fast or in any case the performance differences will be reduced compared to other types of curves.
Ferrari worked a lot during the winter on this aspect , to be able to make its F1-75 work with rather soft set-ups, although the ground effect in the fast prefers very stiff set-ups and that do not work too much on pitch and roll. Porpoising, not noticed in Maranello with the canonical development tools (wind tunnel, computational fluid dynamics and simulator), had removed some certainty, found with the updates brought to the track so far.
Finally, the new bottom specification has maintained all the previous innovations , namely the tie rod in the final part of the bottom and the cut created where the Venturi tunnels have their minimum section at high speeds; all novelties useful for limiting the aerodynamic blocking below the bottom and for removing the trigger of porposing. These are already good signs.

Also AmUS quoted that the difference will be made in slow corners !!!

[Gilles]

I'm not an aerodynamicist by any stretch of the imagination, but you would think that if you are carrying more weight higher up, your CoG is going to suffer, thus impacting your cornering ability...

Cog is normally more related to handling, but indirectly, you’re right. This year, body roll could disrupt the work of the channels under the floor

[KimiBot]

yes, and also this would look much different, if something higher in the middle, but I am just guessing again and "they" say, it will be 1 sec faster, so "they" know better, must be so

[tifosi1993]

Cog is normally more related to handling, but indirectly, you’re right. This year, body roll could disrupt the work of the channels under the floor

I don't think F1 teams really care about COG, particularly this year. These cars are already quite heavy (almost 800kg). Their main focus is to run as low as possible, hence why most are suffering from porpoising. They can easily fix that problem by increasing the height, but I don't think any of them is even considering that solution.

Also it's almost impossible to pinpoint the exact location of COG from the CFD/CAD/Computer Generated model. The whole car needs to be made first and even then it might not match the Computer model.

[SS454]

So you have decided it's already the best solution? Yet we have Ferrari saying they looked at similar and dismissed it...

We don't see anyone coming up with the solution Ferrari have done, so why is it so angering you that nobody has went with what Mercedes have done?

Can you post the quote where Ferrari looked at a similar idea please?

It's reasonable one would assume Mercedes' solution is going to be the best. I tend to agree with that, unless it brings reliability issues or some crazy aero sensitivity issues. If it was possible, teams would have virtually no bodywork in the sidepod area, and no team would ever want to run a giant box as a sidepod, and since Mercedes is closer to no sidepods, and Ferrari is closer to being a giant box, that crude simple reality would suggest Mercedes is likelier to be the better concept. Though it doesn't mean it is.

[SS454]

I don't think F1 teams really care about COG, particularly this year. These cars are already quite heavy (almost 800kg). Their main focus is to run as low as possible, hence why most are suffering from porpoising. They can easily fix that problem by increasing the height, but I don't think any of them is even considering that solution.

Also it's almost impossible to pinpoint the exact location of COG from the CFD/CAD/Computer Generated model. The whole car needs to be made first and even then it might not match the Computer model.

I think COG becomes more important as the weight goes up. For the sake of simple math, lets say the COG was dead center and 400 kg was above this center line. Physics suggest that it should be harder to control 400 kg of weight above the CG vs 300 kg if cars still weighed 600 kg.

Of course the CG is not found on just the Z axis. How close the weight is to the centerline (nose to rear wing) is very important. Front to rear weight dist not as critical since there are rules that restrict this.

[stefa]

Well said, and the Merc resembles a beached whale to me, hope it performs like one too!

[Greig]

Not necessarily. While the frontal area should be significantly less than other teams, the sidepods don't appear like they would do much to control the wake off the front tires and aren't redirecting airflow away from the rear tires. The tires are the cause of the most drag on an F1 car. So far, all my readings of different simulations suggest Ferrari's design is one of the least draggy cars, especially around the rear wheels.

It's reasonable one would assume Mercedes' solution is going to be the best. I tend to agree with that, unless it brings reliability issues or some crazy aero sensitivity issues. If it was possible, teams would have virtually no bodywork in the sidepod area, and no team would ever want to run a giant box as a sidepod, and since Mercedes is closer to no sidepods, and Ferrari is closer to being a giant box, that crude simple reality would suggest Mercedes is likelier to be the better concept. Though it doesn't mean it is.

Which one is it?

[PURE PASSION]

Can you post the quote where Ferrari looked at a similar idea please?

Hearing someone on the Ferrari side (on the updated W13) says it's clearly extreme, but that they somehow thought of that direction at the time, discarding it, preferring the potential of what they produced.
It's not something he scared.
From formu1a__unο

[PURE PASSION]

��️ | When the floor was close to the ground, the F1-75 did not suffer any porpoising on the straights and in the corners the car felt very stable and fast.
From @wearetherace
The behavior of the Ferrari F1-75 in the turns was very positive today!
She always seems to be manageable. Sparks flew from the back of the floor through some turns. The car seemed to remain fully controllable.
(@SportmphMark)

[Gilles]

Can you post the quote where Ferrari looked at a similar idea please?

It's reasonable one would assume Mercedes' solution is going to be the best. I tend to agree with that, unless it brings reliability issues or some crazy aero sensitivity issues. If it was possible, teams would have virtually no bodywork in the sidepod area, and no team would ever want to run a giant box as a sidepod, and since Mercedes is closer to no sidepods, and Ferrari is closer to being a giant box, that crude simple reality would suggest Mercedes is likelier to be the better concept. Though it doesn't mean it is.

Maybe late, sorry :
https://www.formu1a.uno/ferrari-cred...l-regolamento/

[tpe]

1. Even if Merc has issues, they will eventually solve them
2. I accept that they sandbagging. By 1.8 seconds from Ferrari and 2+ from AT?

I think they will have a super diva. Let's see.

[Gilles]

I don't think F1 teams really care about COG, particularly this year. These cars are already quite heavy (almost 800kg). Their main focus is to run as low as possible, hence why most are suffering from porpoising. They can easily fix that problem by increasing the height, but I don't think any of them is even considering that solution.

Also it's almost impossible to pinpoint the exact location of COG from the CFD/CAD/Computer Generated model. The whole car needs to be made first and even then it might not match the Computer model.

Yes Cog is very important and this year more than before. If you want, i can find articles saying that, but it requires time, tell me
For knowing where it is located, that's easy with cad tools and that's one of the main indicators during the design

[SS454]

Which one is it?

Less draggy rear tire doesn't necessarily mean better does it? You do see the part where I said "Mercedes is likelier to be the better concept. Though it doesn't mean it is" right?

I also said virtually no body work, meaning they would absolutely put turning vanes to control air where they wanted it. But no aerodynamisist wants a big hole in a big bulky sidepod. Cooling ducts are terrible for airflow. Frontal area is formulated into how much drag the car makes.

I see some potential issues to the Mercedes design. One is the lack of downwash on the forward section of the floor, and the other is the lack of outwash control around the rear tires. But like I said, since the aero guys would rather no sidepods existed over a box, its easy for one to assume the Mercedes concept should be better.

[SS454]

Hearing someone on the Ferrari side (on the updated W13) says it's clearly extreme, but that they somehow thought of that direction at the time, discarding it, preferring the potential of what they produced.
It's not something he scared.
From formu1a__unο

Maybe late, sorry :
https://www.formu1a.uno/ferrari-cred...l-regolamento/

Thanks, since Greig ignored the request. Gilles, the link is 404 error though.

[Greig]

Thanks, since Greig ignored the request. Gilles, the link is 404 error though.

LOL it's been posted on here not hard to find - https://mobile.twitter.com/Vettelecl...23838828949511

[Greig]

Less draggy rear tire doesn't necessarily mean better does it? You do see the part where I said "Mercedes is likelier to be the better concept. Though it doesn't mean it is" right?

I also said virtually no body work, meaning they would absolutely put turning vanes to control air where they wanted it. But no aerodynamisist wants a big hole in a big bulky sidepod. Cooling ducts are terrible for airflow. Frontal area is formulated into how much drag the car makes.

I see some potential issues to the Mercedes design. One is the lack of downwash on the forward section of the floor, and the other is the lack of outwash control around the rear tires. But like I said, since the aero guys would rather no sidepods existed over a box, its easy for one to assume the Mercedes concept should be better.

In other words, you don't know.

[SS454]

LOL it's been posted on here not hard to find - https://mobile.twitter.com/Vettelecl...23838828949511

If it was so easy, why didn't you post it? Can't stand to actually be helpful?

[SS454]

In other words, you don't know.

I seem to know more than you that's for sure.

[Greig]

I seem to know more than you that's for sure.

You don't know so what are you trying to achieve?

[Greig]

If it was so easy, why didn't you post it? Can't stand to actually be helpful?

Yes that's right.

[SS454]

You don't know so what are you trying to achieve?

I wouldn't use the words "trying to achieve" to me responding to a post. I'm not running a campaign here. In any case, what I did was pretty clear isn't it? Giving an easy to understand reason to why people may think the Mercedes is the better concept based on facts, however saying which solution is best is still yet to be seen. Do I need to explain to you more clearly that the sum of a car is made up of more than just it's sidepods and that it's the entire package that will determine it's success?


So I will return the question to you, what are you trying to achieve? You haven't offered anything to the subject. I mean ZERO. You don't agree with what I say? Be specific in what and why and try to disprove it and then how about offering some opinions of your own? But so far not a single thing. I ask for a simple quote on what Ferrari said, and you ignore it. So if you have no value to a conversation, then what are you trying to achieve? I'm genuinely anxious to see if you can muster a legit answer to this question.

[Greig]

I wouldn't use the words "trying to achieve" to me responding to a post. I'm not running a campaign here. In any case, what I did was pretty clear isn't it? Giving an easy to understand reason to why people may think the Mercedes is the better concept based on facts, however saying which solution is best is still yet to be seen. Do I need to explain to you more clearly that the sum of a car is made up of more than just it's sidepods and that it's the entire package that will determine it's success?


So I will return the question to you, what are you trying to achieve? You haven't offered anything to the subject. I mean ZERO. You don't agree with what I say? Be specific in what and why and try to disprove it and then how about offering some opinions of your own? But so far not a single thing. I ask for a simple quote on what Ferrari said, and you ignore it. So if you have no value to a conversation, then what are you trying to achieve? I'm genuinely anxious to see if you can muster a legit answer to this question.

Still no idea what you are trying to achieve?

You have no idea which solution is better but you pick the Merc side anyway just because I never, you even changed your mind halfway through the thread

I never ignored your request, just thought you would be big enough and clever enough to find it since it was on here, but I guess I was wrong, apologies.

[SS454]

So if you have no value to a conversation, then what are you trying to achieve? I'm genuinely anxious to see if you can muster a legit answer to this question.

Still no idea what you are trying to achieve?

You have no idea which solution is better but you pick the Merc side anyway just because I never, you even changed your mind halfway through the thread

I never ignored your request, just thought you would be big enough and clever enough to find it since it was on here, but I guess I was wrong, apologies.

Just as I expected. Thank you.

[Greig]

Just as I expected. Thank you.

I will wait for real analysis not your guess work that changes depending on who said Merc was the better solution....

You could certainly apply for some F1 jobs though with your knowledge.

It's very possible that neither solution is the best and they might well balance each other out, or both Ferrari and Merc have gone too extreme and something like the Red Bull will be the better overall package, but as nobody can tell I would not be see quick to decide which is better as you and your friend did, but if the Ferrari comment is true then we should not be too concerned about it.

I imagine Merc will have some problems with the wing mirrors as Brawn has already hinted at, and with the teams now able to force rules being changed with a vote of 8 then they could find them being banned which would cause them some problems...

[paolo lalli]

Ferrari another solid testing session thats all that matters,ferrari have come out of the blocks fast as I expected and as stated in previous posts,mercedes have a lot of work to do on there car, regardless of the concept.No upgrades on the ferrari just exploiting and studying the car to gain maximum performance.

[Cavallino]

Firstly, every team has pretty tight sidepods, and williams has gone in that direction, i don't really consider this design "radical". They're just really small sidepods.