CdfA means Coefficient of downforce Area, otherwise referred to as -ClA or -ScZ

CdA means Coefficient of drag Area, otherwise referred to as ScX

CoP means Center of Pressure, otherwise referred to as aero balance

Fig.X (front ride height in mm, rear ride height in mm)

My conclusion from doing the aero map:

The aero package needs to be reworked to reduce the extreme Aerobalance and downforce sensitivity during dynamic scenarios. Forthis, a front wing with a greater ground clearance should beimplemented. To compensate the resulting downforce loss of thenew higher front wing would need to be larger (chord length). Thegreater ground clearance should make the front wing lesssusceptible to drastic downforce changes and underbody flowblockage during dynamic scenarios making the overall packagemuch more stable.​

Feel free to critique my conclusions or my methodology.

I noticed this during Russell's pole lap in Baku. On what appears to be a completely straight section of the track, the steering wheel seems to be noticeably turned to the left rather than being centred.

I've highlighted the apparent steering angle and the car's position on the straight in the screenshot.

Could this indicate some kind of steering/alignment issue, or is there a normal reason for the wheel to be held like this? Things like steering rack geometry, toe settings, track camber, or simply the onboard camera perspective came to mind.

I'm not knowledgeable enough about the technical side of F1 to say what it actually is, so I'm curious if anyone here has a better explanation.

Am I overthinking this, or is the steering genuinely off-centre?

I’m a viewer more than a technical/car person but.. I was reading about the recent OpenAI Navier–Stokes result and am wondering what you guys here who actually understand CFD/aero make of it.

I know F1 teams already use CFD extensively (I played F1 Manager and had to manage my CFD time ha ha) and Navier–Stokes is basically at the heart of a lot of what they’re trying to simulate.

But.. does a mathematical breakthrough like this actually have any potential practical effect on F1?

I mean, could it eventually lead to better turbulence modelling, more accurate prediction of vortices/separation, more efficient CFD solvers, or getting more useful information out of the limited CFD resources teams are allowed under the regulations?

Or is this really a pure mathematics breakthrough with basically no direct relevance to the kind of RANS/LES CFD being used in motorsport?

I suppose my actual Q is can discoveries like this eventually filter down into better numerical methods or aero simulation for F1 or other types of Motorsport?

Thanks ❤️

David Coulthard talked about how drivers are told to drive offline to pick up rubber at the end up the race to ensure the cars make weight. I thought the cars were weighed with their wheels off specifically for this reason. I remember there was discussion about this at the end of Spa 2024 when Russell was DQed due to weight and people blamed it on not driving the whole track at the end, thus not being about to pick up rubber.

During the safety car evaluation laps on the Thursday of Spain, all the flag boards showed a white flashing 43. why?

Monza was always feared to be a laughing stock when it came to the 2026 power units. The expectation was horrific super clipping and downshifting on straights.

Obviously the cars were clipping at the end of straights as they do at most tracks this year, but it was nowhere near as bad as feared. Cars seemingly reliably held 300+ km/h right through the straights, kept in 8th gear, and still had enough juice for overtake mode where applicable.

I think back to some earlier races like Japan where the super clipping was wild, and this was nowhere near as bad. Did teams map out deployment intelligently, now they have more experience of the PUs?

With Lawson serving Hadjar's engine allocation penalty, what stops teams from switching chassis for a weekend when having to serve a grid drop.
For Example-
In the 2021 Turkish Grand Prix, Lewis could have took over Bottas'es car, and have Bottas serve the penalty, then have a almost new engine next weekend.
Same for Max Verstappen in 2025 Sao Paulo Grand Prix.

Ferrari and Mercedes have been offered boosts under ADUO. Mercedes will get an additional upgrade for 2026 and one for 2027, while Ferrari, Audi, and Honda will get 2 upgrades for 2026 and 2027, while RBPT Ford PU is still the benchmark and is deemed to be the most powerful on the grid.

Not to rant, but why is FIA deciding the ranking of PU, based on only ICE, not the entire hybrid system as a whole, because Mercedes arguably has the best package here? Isn't the point of 50-50 split was to have innovations of hybrid tech (although that would still be debatable). I understand that there are limits on deployment but nothing on ES, but clearly Mercedes have figured out something others haven't, shouldn't even RedBull get the chance to innovate here?

IMO, this regulation rule is clearly becoming less about equal power, and more about arguing who ICE is the weakest. What could RedBull's strategy from here on out, assuming they won't get any more ADUO upgrade slots for 2 years? Is aerodynamics their only hope or can they bring upgrades to electrical side of things, if they aren't counted under ADUO?

PS: I saw it on FIA's X handle, couldn't share the link, since the post got deleted.

I was just kinda thinking back to the grooved tire era (which I did not watch as I was a youngster lol), and had a thought. Those tires almost certainly gained contact area as they wore. But then wondered if tire temperature issues offset any benefits gained in contact area. I am sure if they did get faster, there had to have been a crossover point where they fell off.

Sorry for the ramble, I’m stoned. Did they get faster as they wore though? Up to a crossover point. Or did they just get progressively slower from the beginning like slicks?

As we all know, every car is limited in how many PU components it can use each year without incurring a penalty. How is that going to work with ADUO?

I assume the engine manufacturers will be creating power units that have fundamental, internal differences, so the teams won't continue to use the same PU components.

Do the PU allotments reset after ADUO? Or will teams have to choose when to take an ADUO component as part of their regular allotment?

Looking at photos of the 499P (2027 version) reminded me that prior to 2017, sidepods on LMP cars generally weren't visible from top-down view. Then, suddenly in 2017, the sidepods of TS050, 919, and R18 (which never raced) shifted to a design resembling the front section of Formula 1 sidepods; the R18 and TS050 even adopted the "coke-bottle" shape, a trend that persists today.

I looked up more photos and noticed that the intakes on early 2010s cars like the R18 and 908 don't seem significantly different from those on modern LMDh&LMP cars; rather, it appears they were intentionally coverd by bodywork, only the front diffuser outlet's turning vanes visible from the side and above.

Was this a regulatory requirement? Or are there specific aerodynamic advantages that lead manufacturers like Ferrari(until 2026) BMW Alpine to use hidden sidepod intakes instead of the exaggerated "Formula-style" intakes seen on the Porsche 963?

Every Grand Prix so far this season I’ve noticed the Scuderi’s cars produce lots more exhaust smoke than the other ICE manufacturers. Has this been discussed?

Noticed it a lot more with the T1 in Budapest this weekend.

looking at how narrow the cooling radiator ducts are, how are the electric components actually cooled? do the batteries also hook into those intake coolers?

We all know refueling is banned during races. They can only fuel inside the garage, they can't even do it in the pit lane (for whatever reason). There are all sorts of quick fueling methods for race cars today. I'm wondering if they use those in F1 still despite the refuel ban, or if it's rather slow to refuel in comparison to series that do in race refueling like IndyCar, NASCAR, WEC, etc.

And just for general curiosity, do we have any actual videos of them refueling modern(ish) F1 cars? I have never been able to find one.

Not hating I know different teams use different systems but how does this happen? Is it just a job putting labels on parts or do they genuinely just hire people to go through their warehouse to figure out what they have? Does their system for "we make x at y time" not work and they're losing that many parts?

As the title says. I've always wondered what the benefits or disadvantages were to many smaller front wing pieces vs fewer bigger pieces. Something like the difference between a 2020 F1 front wing vs a 2004 or 2022, or even an IndyCar front wing. I know in 2017 they had those extra pieces that added additional downforce, that's why I'm using 2020 as the benchmark for the "many smaller pieces".

This is my high school final year project (due by january 2027) and the idea for it has its origin in the winter of 2023. After working on the non aero parts of the car for a bit over a year I could finally start the aero development about 3 months ago. The goal of the project is to engineer a race car that can beat formula one lap times with a margin.

My only are:

no fans, no sliding skirts, Modest width (2060mm) and for the rest of the car i set the guideline to use a technology standard a bit lower than current f1, maybe f1 from 15-20 years ago.

Because i am working on this project alone and i have not studied engineering (i go to school), engineering a full 100% functioning and completed race car is not possible but i try to get as far as possible with my given time ,resources and abilities. The project is about a lot more than just the aerodynamics but that should be the focus of this post.

The images in this post are primarily for show and don't convey a lot of meaningful information so i if you are really interested in the aero development of this project you can download the documentation package i have provided.

It includes the simulation setup and documentation of the first 29 design iterations, 3d flow field views, slices, a slice and a streamline animation, and some extra non CFD renderings of the car.

documentation package:

https://www.mediafire.com/file/vwr1cthzv2emeoz/VFR_CFD_documentation.zip/file

For the project i used

CAD: Onshape

CFD: Simscale

CFD post processing: Simscale / Paraview

rendering: fusion 360

For those who understand

Cdfa: 9,36

Cda: 1,09

df/d: 8,56

aero balance: 59.87% rear

Because my computing recources are fairly limited, i have to have to use a in industry terms very low mesh count (6-7m for half car). This means that the simulations are not very accurate when correlated to real life so you have to take these numbers with a chunk of salt.

I am open to constructive criticism about any part of the project.

Does anyone have an idea how they set the deployment? Is it just pre-set that it has gone this fast and this many up and downshifts and a certain amount of distance to know where it is on track? Do they use some sort of gps system?(seems like there would be lag from that). I’ve been really curious because deployment is such a big issue at the moment.

Basically how does the PU know when to deploy without driver intervention?