I’ve done a mid-test tech review for Richland F1 which encompasses general test procedures and some of the updates we have seen so far. Full review to come on my blog at the end of the week but for now here’s my latest piece – http://richlandf1.com/?p=19182
The Young Driver Test (YDT) at Silverstone had more of a purpose than a normal YDT (the last being held in Abu Dhabi in November 2012) thanks to the calamities with the Pirelli P-Zero rubber so far this year. “Young” drivers were still in abundance, but the FIA introduced a few changes to ensure the safety of the future tyres that will be introduced for Hungary next weekend.
The FIA gave permission for each team to have one full day of running with either one of their driver’s or half a day for both of the drivers. Most teams took the opportunity to capitalise on having an experienced driver in the car, although they were restricted to a program set by Pirelli to clarify how the new tyre will behave from next weekend onwards.
The FIA also stated that teams could not make any major setup changes (such as ride heights, rollbars, spring rates) to the cars when using a current driver to make sure that they did not gain an advantage with their current driver lineup. However small alterations such as tyre pressures and wing angles could be changed if they wanted to.
Some teams chose not to field a “young” driver and instead deployed the expertise of a test driver who knows the team inside out. This is still permitted within the regulations as they do not participate in any Grand Prix weekend in the F1 calendar.
Despite the slightly different rules, the normal stream of updates continued to make their way to the cars for the three-day test.
It’s all well and good having updates to bring to the car, but without measuring data from these components you cannot improve the car. This is why teams build unique sensors that are designed to measure specific parameters of the car whilst it is running.
Image not available
These sensors generally come in the form of pitot tubes: commonly found on aircraft (next time you’re by the wing of an aeroplane, look out the window and you’ll probably see one), the tube is designed to measure airflow velocity. Teams will build varying sizes of array to accommodate a certain amount of these tubes depending on the area of the car.
Above we can see an image of the Ferrari with a small arrangement of pitot tubes attached to an array. These will all be linked to what is effectively a blackbox attached to the car, receiving data from each tube about the velocity of airflow that is hitting them.
The placement of the sensor will tell us what the team wants to measure. In the above case, Ferrari have placed the array in the region in which the exhaust gases will hit the floor of the car via the coanda (the behaviour of a fluid passing out of a jet and onto a surface. Hold a spoon under an open tap and see what happens to the water as it leaves the trailing edge…) and downwash effect. This will allow the team to see how changes to the bodywork or exhaust mapping can change the velocity of the flow hitting this region. Ideally they will want higher velocity flow to try to replicate the Exhaust Blown Diffuser (EBD) effect that was banned after 2011.
Many teams placed a large grid of tubes at the section just beyond the airbox and over the sidepods to measure the flow coming off of various components. The front wing will have a large impact on the flow rate at this section of the car as it is chucking large volumes of turbulent air upwards and backwards towards the rear of the car. The tubes will be able to measure the speed of this flow and the engineers may be able to decipher how this will affect components downstream, the rear wing for example.
Over the course of the testing period, the data engineers will be able to map the flow structures of the car by placing these tube arrays at various stages of the car. They will then be able to compare this data with that taken in the wind-tunnel and Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) systems back at the factory and see if they correlate. If there is positive correlation then the designers can be confident that whatever they bring to the car should work as desired. If the results don’t match up, things can get very tricky and engineers and designers can be led down a rocky road. Ferrari have had poor correlation over the last few years and look where they are…
There are other sensors, too. Teams commonly use infrared sensors to measure tyre temperatures but there are also other interesting devices.
Lotus use device called the Kistler RoaDyn.
The Enstone outfit have been utilising this system for a few years now and it appears to be a good tool for them. The RoaDyn measures four parameters of the wheel in all three axis: pressure; force; acceleration; torque. The measurements the devices gather will determine how the tyre behaves as the car travels around the circuit. This sensor would have been very useful for the YDT at Silverstone because of the new type of tyre that they are testing.
The sensors above will have been used for a wide variety of objectives, and constant straight-line speed runs will gather the appropriate information needed to alter any designs on the car. McLaren were no exception to this, but also implemented the now widely used Flow-Visualization (Flo-Viz) on a slightly updated front wing and turning vanes.
The team tested their current front wing with new mounting pillars. They are longer than their predecessors, stretching back as far as legally possible (in line with the trailing edge of the wing endplate) to guide flow more directly to the T-Tray.
McLaren sprayed the wing with Flo-Viz for analysis. The appearance of the Flo-Viz paint appeared to be quite uniform and the flow does not appear to detach which is a good sign. However it would be very rare for airflow to detach here as it is passing over an element that is placed vertically rather than horizontally. The Flo-Viz will be particularly useful to show how the flow behaves across the pillar and where it leads to afterwards.
The team also returned to using the three-element turning vanes beneath the chassis. They were abandoned after the Jerez pre-season test because they did not allow easy access to the key components of the pullrod suspension layout beneath the chassis, leading to longer setup change time which compromised running time.
Perhaps McLaren now feel that this season is dead and buried and it is worth concentrating further on aerodynamic development for next season, or they have found a go-to setup that does not require a lot of messing around with during the race weekend to get the car in tune with the driver.
Another theory is that the new tyre construction coming for Hungary does not interfere with the flow structures of the turning vanes. McLaren believe that the current 2013 tyre construction has a huge influence on the aerodynamics of their car due to the softer sidewalls interacting with the bodywork in ways that were not anticipated. With the harder sidewall tyre coming in next week, we could see them move up the grid.
The Woking based outfit added an additional vortex generator fence to the top of each sidepod, making a total of six (three each side). This should boost the downwash effect over the exhaust plume, aiding the EBD effect and sealing the gap between the rear tyre and the floor/diffuser wall. Each fence reacts with eachother to produce a net vortex, therefore simply adding fences on top of the sidepod will not necessarily give the car more downforce.
McLaren concentrated heavily on the crucial region where the exhaust plume makes contact with the floor near the rear tyre. They coated this section of the floor with a blue material. I may be incorrect, but my guess is that the blue coating has a melting point similar to that of the temperature of the exhaust gases that are reaching this area of the car. Rather than relying on an infrared camera, the engineers will be able to visibly examine how the gases interact with the floor and how the temperature is spread along its surface. The designers can then make changes to the vortex generators, sidepods and engine mapping to meet a desired criteria.
On Thursday, the team examined the same area of the car but with a different sensor. These horizontal sensors may be able to read pressure and temperature, effectively mapping how the exhaust gases change within these parameters along this stretch of the floor. This is the same idea as the blue coating but data can now be collected on the area as well as examined visible evidence.
Image not available
Sauber introduced an all-new full coanda exhaust system at the YDT. It featured an under-tunnel but retained its exhaust bulge from the previous system where the ramp now extends downwards from.
I have tried to explain how it works in the diagram above. The yellow line, dotted as it passes through the tunnel, is airflow coming from around the sidepod. The red area represents the exhaust plume (although I would expect it to be firing out at a steeper angle) and the green line shows the airflow coming over the top of the sidepod pushing down onto the plume – downwash.
Sauber previously had a semi-coanda exhaust system, whereby the exhaust gases had to “jump” from the sidepod down to the floor whilst flow still passed beneath it. There was no tunnel on the previous system. The system they are now using was pioneered by Red Bull last season, although it tends to work better for Renault-engined cars.
Sauber also appeared to be trialling their Drag Reduction Device (DRD) for the first time since pre-season testing. The device utilises ears each side of the airbox, like the Lotus system, to trigger a fluid switch within the engine cover of the car at high speed, sending air up the vertical column, in to the low pressure region beneath the rear wing and stall it.
Where the Sauber system is different is where the airflow exits when the device is not active. On other cars we see ductwork exiting the engine cover and beneath the Y75 Monkey Seat winglet. Sauber however have been able to tap unwanted flow off within the engine cover, exiting at the same place where air cooling the engine and transmission would be released.
Image not available
Lotus continued their work with their race-proven DRD at Silverstone this week, with the device’s debut race at the very same venue last month.
Image not available
The system was no different (as far as I could tell) from that used recently, but the image above shows some key features of their device. The yellow circle highlights a number of holes within the stalling column of the system. At speeds just below the activation point of the device, some airflow still leaks up the stalling column instead of exiting beneath the Monkey Seat duct, which can disturb the rear wing’s downforce. These holes bleed off this unwanted flow before they can reach the bottom of the wing. When the device is active, the pressure within the stalling column can overcome these small holes and will therefore not greatly effect the stalling of the wing.
The orange arrow shows how the pillar is attached to the base of the rear wing. This could be acting as a stabiliser at high speed, reducing the movement of the pillar and therefore increasing the stalling effect.
Toro Rosso also evaluated their DRD for the first time this week. Despite claims that they tried such a system in Abu Dhabi last year, I have been informed that this is incorrect. The system is quite clever as all of the components that produce the switch effect within the device are all hidden inside of the engine cover, much like Red Bull’s when they debuted it (in Abu Dhabi, incidently).
Image not available
With HRT out of the equation, that leaves just Marussia and Caterham fighting for the penultimate and last places in the 2013 season. The two teams chasing the midfield bunch have a lot to play for as they appear to be continuing their battle for 10th spot in the Constructors’ championship. The difference between 11th and 10th position is worth literally millions of pounds, so grabbing that place will be extremely important for next season as the new regulations come in.
Whether either team can find that extra step to bring them up to the establishment will always remain an uncertainty, but the two teams are making (very) steady progress in putting the foundations down to do so. This post will highlight the key updates that both teams have brought to the final test and most likely to the first round in Australia.
Having secured 10th place in the dying moments of last year, Caterham have arguably always had the upper hand over any of the “new” teams since their birth as Team Lotus in 2010. However, pre-season form has suggested that the team have stayed relatively static in terms of performance whilst Marussia have made leaps and bounds over the winter.
Having not brought anything substantial to the final test (a large update is due for when the European races start – Barcelona, incidently), I shall go over some of the key components on the CT03.
Image not available
Image not available
Exhausts have been the main talking point around the CT03. The top image shows the exhaust channel as seen in Jerez and the first Barcelona test. It features an aerofoil that runs the width of the channel. The aerofoil is designed to further push the exhaust plume downwards towards the floor, increasing the downwash/coanda effect that teams have been exploiting since last year.
The FIA have since clarified that as this device is within the imaginary conical region that prohibits the use of bodywork to manipulate the exhaust gases, it is therefore illegal. The bottom image shows that the aerofoil has been removed. Caterham had no choice but to remove it, but I doubt they will lose too much performance because of this. Obviously it would not have been there unless there was performance to be had, but the reduction of this device can be easily recovered elsewhere on the car.
Image not available
Caterham have further developed on last season’s front wing. The wing features four elements in total, two of them created from splitting the top flap close to the endplate. Having more elements increase the consistency of the airflow along the gradient of the wing, so I expect to see this area being further developed across the season as most teams have at least five elements in this area (Ferrari have seven in total along the endplate area!).
Also evident in this image is the cascade winglet arrangement. The element that attaches the main winglet to the endplate (spanning from the ‘McG’ logo) is angled downwards, which indicates that it is trying to turn more flow around the front tyre by accelerating the air over this bodywork and into the endplate. The small horizontal fin attached to the main winglet is used to guide flow coming off of the top flap inside of the front tyre and efficiently through the front suspension arrangement.
The CT03 features a stepped nose without a modesty panel (see my post about them here – https://thewptformula.wordpress.com/2013/02/16/analysis-modesty-panels/), only Lotus have opted to do this along with Caterham. Having said that, both Lotus and Caterham had the most efficient stepped noses from last year, so carrying them over will reduce weight at the front axle without costing them too much of an aero-penalty.
The CT03 is very much an evolution of last year’s car, but the team have added three vertical fences that generate vortices along the length of the sidepod. This vortices aim to increase the downwash effect upon the exhaust plume further. What I find interesting about them is that they are very high. The height of these fences are generally determined by the thickness of the boundary layer of air that lines the top of the sidepod inlet (McLaren had low-lying fences on their sidepods last year). This indicates that their sidepod design is compromised in that it produces a large layer of boundary flow, suggesting that they are having issues managing the airflow coming over the top of the chassis and also handling the wake from the front tyre that is induced at high-speed.
Marussia have done the complete opposite to Caterham and have introduced a substantial upgrade package to their MR02 for the first race.
Image not available
Above shows an image of the launch version of the 2013 challenger. It features and extremely rounded engine cover with a very thick surface area in comparison to almost every other team on the grid. This made the car look very long, but I am told that the wheelbase is exactly the same as last year’s car.
In this image we can now see the addition of a shark-fin style engine cover that is very similar to one that Williams have been running for the past few years. This should guide airflow coming off of the airbox area more directly to the central section of the rear wing, producing cleaner flow and increasing the efficiency of the wing. This also leaves area to develop the cooling exit that many teams have at the back of the car that opens up right onto the centre of the beam wing.
Above we have an image of the front wing that the MR02 was running during Jerez and Barcelona. It is a direct copy (as far as I can tell) from last year’s car, featuring four elements and very simple endplates.
Below shows the new design. The endplates have been broadened by increasing the width of the footplate, allowing a turning vane to placed upon it in order to aid flow around the front tyre and into the sidepod area. The cascade winglet has a small detail in that it dips downwards as it meets the vane, a common feature on many of the cars that was pioneered by Ferrari.
The wing is still four elements but has been profiled much differently: all of the elements of the wing bend downwards to meet the footplate, creating slots all the way across the front wing. This is to increase the consistency of the flow which should induce more downforce as well as better direction of flow over the rest of the car.
Also new are the slots at the inboard tip of the flap. As seen on the Lotus last year (and copied by many teams), These intricate pieces are also designed to control airflow coming off of the flap and direct it effectively back over the suspension. Note that a gurney flap has been placed across the majority of the trailing edge of the flap except the most inboard part. This has been done as another measure of guiding flow backwards.
Thankyou very much for reading this. Any feedback would be great and enjoy this coming season!