2022 aero run-down: Teams of note
~40 min read
Welcome back to Formula Over-Analysed, after a nearly 17-month-long hiatus. I was busy with the A levels for the past 12 months and for the 5 months before, I lost some interest in the writing process of F-OA. Fortunately, though, my love for aeronautics has intensified in the meantime, and I finally have the time to actually write about the biggest passion I have now. Hence, I decided to write about aero in F1 again. I will be writing my summarised version of each team's progression through the season whose cars have been fast, inconsistent or noteworthy in other regards, namely Aston Martin, Ferrari, Red Bull and Mercedes, based on my limited knowledge and observations. After that, I intend to write about the 2023 minor aero regulation change and my little research with regard to aeroelasticity. This page may again take a hiatus as I have to serve the nation come January 2023.
Due to aero and F1 not being on my list of priorities (anything academically useful for the A levels) for the majority of 2022, I did not actually watch any of the races or the practice sessions (with the sole exception of Singapore) after pre-season testing. However, I do know of people who have watched the races this year and all the information in this 2-part paper will be credited to them, along with the numerous news sources found online, with the actual analysis of this information being done by me -the author of F-OA. This paper will also focus mainly on the sidepods and floors, as the front wings, monocoque, rear wing and chassis shape are pretty unchanged up and down the grid. So without further ado, I bring to you, MARSH- I mean:
Red BullConstructors' standing:P1
Drivers' standings:P1 and P3
Poles: 8Wins: 17
(Top to bottom: the RB18 at preseason testing; the all-conquering RB18 at the season finale in Abu Dhabi)
While the RB18 had shown initial signs of being fast, by the RB18 being put on the front row, on pole, or somewhere near it in the first few races, the pace they had over one lap apparently was traded off with reliability, causing Verstappen to retire from 2 of the first 4 races. From then on, a slew of side-pod, suspension and crucial floor upgrades allowed Verstappen to go on and win 13 more races, enabling him and Red Bull to reach P1 in the championship again. The latter party had to stand a 9-year wait. There is no denying that the floor and the rear-end upgrades helped propel the team in performance. But, how did these upgrades actually work?
From the 2 images shown above, there is a noticeable difference between the car in testing (T) and the car in Abu Dhabi (AD); specifically in the sidepod and the floor inlet region of the car. The similarity is that there is a significant clearance between the inlet and the bottom lip of the sidepod. However, from T to AD, the sidepod itself has moved inwards and downwards, with what remains is a small dimple at the front and a contoured connection between the floor and the body at the rear of the floor, allowing for more air to flow over the floor in a manner that reduces drag, and also leads to the floor stalling on the straights, stopping the production of downforce on the straights.
Furthermore, with the sidepod moving closer to the floor, a crevice along the sidepod-floor connecting region is generated, which is there to improve the aerodynamic nature of the sidepod but can also act as a double floor. This means that the car can reach higher speeds on the straights, as the car can ride so close to the ground that the diffuser stalls, and through the corners as the double floor means that more downforce can also be produced through cornering.
However, another clever upgrade that Red Bull seems to have brought was a very 'reactive' set of rear suspension, as reported by Ted Kravitz based on Sebastian Vettel's observations from the Singapore Grand Prix, where he was following Red Bull's Max Verstappen closely behind. The suspension makes the rear of the car and diffuser behave like it's being blown on (yes, like a blown diffuser), in that, on the straights, the rear end drops very close to the ground, stalling the diffuser and making it not produce downforce. With no downforce being produced, the car is able to reach higher speeds on the straights-something no other team had been able to execute. Hence, with the side pod upgrades, clever suspensions and a blindingly fast driver who is able to maximise (ironically) his car, Max and Red Bull were able to win both championships in 2022.
Ferrari
Constructors' standing:P2
Drivers' standings:P2 and P5
Poles: 12
Wins: 4
(Top to bottom: the Ferrari SF-75 at pre-season testing; the SF-75 at post season testing)
Ferrari came off the block guns blazing, with 3 pole positions and 2 pole-to-checkered wins from their supposed lead driver Charles Leclerc. Their car had also shown supreme pace in testing. However, for the relatively new F1 fan, they may see the Ferrari's boat-like width and shape of its sidepods, and assume that they would provide more drag than desired. Would that truly be the case? No, not at all. Ferrari's sidepods are unlike anyone else's on the grid, as it was wide, yet 'hollow'.
Ferrari's sidepods have a small 'canal' in them, where the air can flow through to act in a similar manner to side exhausts minus the heat and speed of actual exhaust gases. The has been allowed to come close to that though, as its cooling vanes are positioned in such a manner that the air exiting the 'canal' is warmer and thus faster than the air around the sidepods.
Furthermore, the shape of the pits is such that it is directed to be on the diffuser, which is their version of a blown diffuser which provides the same effect as the side-exhaust blown diffuser of Adrian Newey's RB9. This means that the car is able to be stable under cornering and yet fast in a straight line. Hence, while RB was initially struggling for reliability early on in the season, Ferrari was able to assert an early dominance, as Charles became the first driver to enter triple digits by a sizeable margin while everyone else was struggling with porpoising -another poignant issue that everyone suffered with, which I will talk about when reviewing the W13.
However, as the season wore on and the championship battle intensified, the SF75 seemed to have lost its direction, as by the end of the season, neither Charles nor Sainz was able to drive the car fast enough to win any of the remaining 10 races - a promise that Binotto failed to uphold. The car seemed to become lost as the way Charles and Sainz drive the car is different: Charles prefers an active front end while Sainz prefers a stable rear-end, which are theoretical polar opposites. Hence, while trying to cater the car to both drivers' needs, the car became undrivable for either championship glory. Speaking of which;
Mercedes
Constructors' standing:
P3
Furthermore, the shape of the pits is such that it is directed to be on the diffuser, which is their version of a blown diffuser which provides the same effect as the side-exhaust blown diffuser of Adrian Newey's RB9. This means that the car is able to be stable under cornering and yet fast in a straight line. Hence, while RB was initially struggling for reliability early on in the season, Ferrari was able to assert an early dominance, as Charles became the first driver to enter triple digits by a sizeable margin while everyone else was struggling with porpoising -another poignant issue that everyone suffered with, which I will talk about when reviewing the W13.
However, as the season wore on and the championship battle intensified, the SF75 seemed to have lost its direction, as by the end of the season, neither Charles nor Sainz was able to drive the car fast enough to win any of the remaining 10 races - a promise that Binotto failed to uphold. The car seemed to become lost as the way Charles and Sainz drive the car is different: Charles prefers an active front end while Sainz prefers a stable rear-end, which are theoretical polar opposites. Hence, while trying to cater the car to both drivers' needs, the car became undrivable for either championship glory. Speaking of which;
Mercedes
Constructors' standing:
P3
Drivers' standings:P4 and P6
Poles: 1
Wins: 1
(Top to bottom: the Mercedes W13 at pre-season testing; the W13 at post season testing)
Mercedes were coming off the back of an intense championship battle with Red Bull, especially in the form of Lewis Hamilton and Max Verstappen. Without expressing my opinion on which way the decision should've gone since that is irrelevant to the topic at hand, what can be said is that Mercedes certainly looked to be carrying their dominance in 2022.
They certainly did seem to be doing so even at the pre-season test at Bahrain, where the Brackley-based outfit showed up with a car that seemingly had no sidepods. They were then aptly named 'zero pods' after the air inlet for the side-pod was but a seemingly small opening to the intercoolers inside, as you may see above in either picture. This instantly meant that the Mercedes had lower drag than any other team, as any air in the side-pod region would either enter the slit or pass around it and not deflect in any set direction.
However, this seemed to have come at a cost. Almost every team had to put up with porpoising, but it seemed to have affected the constructors' champions of 2021 the most. Porpoising is when the floor oscillates from being close to the ground and far away from it, depending on the amount of downforce that is being generated by the Venturi tunnels. In the heyday of venturi tunnels in F1, teams would run 'skirts' that would run the length of the car, allowing the driver to extract downforce while not building up so much that the diffuser stalls and the car may then be pushed up as the air then builds. However, as the FIA pretty much outlawed skirts for the new regulations, no team ran it, yet almost no team expected porpoising to take place.
Now, with most of the air now flowing around the side-pod and over the floor (due to restrictions on the latter), there was more air flowing over the floor of the Mercedes than any other team. This means that on the straights, it was the Mercedes that had the most 'bouncing' as the aerodynamic shape of the car allowed for higher speeds to be reached than the rest, meaning that there was more downforce being produced from the floor, and with no skir to balance it, the car would begin to oscillate up and down as the car would periodically stall its diffuser of the straights.
This leads to a less-than-comfortable ride as well as undesirable floor wear-and-tear. This -along with a PU that still seemed to be slower than that of the Red Bull and Ferrari- meant that the German team had produced a weaker car than their 8 predecessors. In a weaker car with the least wind tunnel time of any other team on the grid under the current technical regulations, Mercedes seemed to struggle to recapture the time they had in the air of the previous 8 seasons, completing the year with just 1 pole and 1 win.
A thing to note here is that the Mercedes itself changed very little since testing; or, at least in the way of aerodynamics. With the sole exception of an updated rear wing design, when we observe the 2 images above, there appears to have been very little aerodynamic evolution with the exception of additional cooling vanes on the zero pod by the end of the season. This is because Mercedes brought the bulk of their upgrades to their PU as it evidently seemed to be weak from the off as there were far too many breakdowns for Mercedes in testing. It remains to be seen whether their successor will appear similar as they do seem to have a decently fast aero-package. Speaking of similar looking aero packages;
Mercedes were coming off the back of an intense championship battle with Red Bull, especially in the form of Lewis Hamilton and Max Verstappen. Without expressing my opinion on which way the decision should've gone since that is irrelevant to the topic at hand, what can be said is that Mercedes certainly looked to be carrying their dominance in 2022.
They certainly did seem to be doing so even at the pre-season test at Bahrain, where the Brackley-based outfit showed up with a car that seemingly had no sidepods. They were then aptly named 'zero pods' after the air inlet for the side-pod was but a seemingly small opening to the intercoolers inside, as you may see above in either picture. This instantly meant that the Mercedes had lower drag than any other team, as any air in the side-pod region would either enter the slit or pass around it and not deflect in any set direction.
However, this seemed to have come at a cost. Almost every team had to put up with porpoising, but it seemed to have affected the constructors' champions of 2021 the most. Porpoising is when the floor oscillates from being close to the ground and far away from it, depending on the amount of downforce that is being generated by the Venturi tunnels. In the heyday of venturi tunnels in F1, teams would run 'skirts' that would run the length of the car, allowing the driver to extract downforce while not building up so much that the diffuser stalls and the car may then be pushed up as the air then builds. However, as the FIA pretty much outlawed skirts for the new regulations, no team ran it, yet almost no team expected porpoising to take place.
Now, with most of the air now flowing around the side-pod and over the floor (due to restrictions on the latter), there was more air flowing over the floor of the Mercedes than any other team. This means that on the straights, it was the Mercedes that had the most 'bouncing' as the aerodynamic shape of the car allowed for higher speeds to be reached than the rest, meaning that there was more downforce being produced from the floor, and with no skir to balance it, the car would begin to oscillate up and down as the car would periodically stall its diffuser of the straights.
This leads to a less-than-comfortable ride as well as undesirable floor wear-and-tear. This -along with a PU that still seemed to be slower than that of the Red Bull and Ferrari- meant that the German team had produced a weaker car than their 8 predecessors. In a weaker car with the least wind tunnel time of any other team on the grid under the current technical regulations, Mercedes seemed to struggle to recapture the time they had in the air of the previous 8 seasons, completing the year with just 1 pole and 1 win.
A thing to note here is that the Mercedes itself changed very little since testing; or, at least in the way of aerodynamics. With the sole exception of an updated rear wing design, when we observe the 2 images above, there appears to have been very little aerodynamic evolution with the exception of additional cooling vanes on the zero pod by the end of the season. This is because Mercedes brought the bulk of their upgrades to their PU as it evidently seemed to be weak from the off as there were far too many breakdowns for Mercedes in testing. It remains to be seen whether their successor will appear similar as they do seem to have a decently fast aero-package. Speaking of similar looking aero packages;
They certainly did seem to be doing so even at the pre-season test at Bahrain, where the Brackley-based outfit showed up with a car that seemingly had no sidepods. They were then aptly named 'zero pods' after the air inlet for the side-pod was but a seemingly small opening to the intercoolers inside, as you may see above in either picture. This instantly meant that the Mercedes had lower drag than any other team, as any air in the side-pod region would either enter the slit or pass around it and not deflect in any set direction.
However, this seemed to have come at a cost. Almost every team had to put up with porpoising, but it seemed to have affected the constructors' champions of 2021 the most. Porpoising is when the floor oscillates from being close to the ground and far away from it, depending on the amount of downforce that is being generated by the Venturi tunnels. In the heyday of venturi tunnels in F1, teams would run 'skirts' that would run the length of the car, allowing the driver to extract downforce while not building up so much that the diffuser stalls and the car may then be pushed up as the air then builds. However, as the FIA pretty much outlawed skirts for the new regulations, no team ran it, yet almost no team expected porpoising to take place.
Now, with most of the air now flowing around the side-pod and over the floor (due to restrictions on the latter), there was more air flowing over the floor of the Mercedes than any other team. This means that on the straights, it was the Mercedes that had the most 'bouncing' as the aerodynamic shape of the car allowed for higher speeds to be reached than the rest, meaning that there was more downforce being produced from the floor, and with no skir to balance it, the car would begin to oscillate up and down as the car would periodically stall its diffuser of the straights.
This leads to a less-than-comfortable ride as well as undesirable floor wear-and-tear. This -along with a PU that still seemed to be slower than that of the Red Bull and Ferrari- meant that the German team had produced a weaker car than their 8 predecessors. In a weaker car with the least wind tunnel time of any other team on the grid under the current technical regulations, Mercedes seemed to struggle to recapture the time they had in the air of the previous 8 seasons, completing the year with just 1 pole and 1 win.
A thing to note here is that the Mercedes itself changed very little since testing; or, at least in the way of aerodynamics. With the sole exception of an updated rear wing design, when we observe the 2 images above, there appears to have been very little aerodynamic evolution with the exception of additional cooling vanes on the zero pod by the end of the season. This is because Mercedes brought the bulk of their upgrades to their PU as it evidently seemed to be weak from the off as there were far too many breakdowns for Mercedes in testing. It remains to be seen whether their successor will appear similar as they do seem to have a decently fast aero-package. Speaking of similar looking aero packages;
Aston Martin
Constructors' standing:
P7
Aston Martin
Constructors' standing:
P7
Drivers' standings:P12 and P16
Poles: 0
Wins: 0
Points: 55
(Top to bottom: Aston Martin's 2021 car the AMR21; Aston Martin's 2022 competitor the AMR22-A at pre-season testing; the AMR22-B at Abu Dhabi)
As discussed in my first-ever article on this blog, I predicted that Aston Martin was testing a new aero concept for 2021 when they altered the side-pod inlet to be much higher and smaller than that of the RP20, which they would iterate in its true form in 2022. Much to my surprise and delight, it did seem that way, as the concept of the higher sidepod inlet made its way onto the AMR22-A. We can even visually observe this from the first 2 pictures above, as their sidepod regions are similar: there is a high clearance between the bottom edge of the side-pod inlet and the top edge of the floor.
The AMR22-A also seemed to be running that concept for the length of the floor, implying that they opted for a 'true' double-floor concept. This means that the downforce through the corners would be more pronounced and the speed on the straights, higher.
However, during the first race of the season, Aston Martin driver Lance Stroll was complaining about rear tyres overheating and front tyres not heating up enough, even when his car had no damage. This hints at the idea that the car was not aerodynamically balanced, as there was too much downforce through the rear of the car that was produced from the double floor, and there was too little downforce in the front to balance it.
As the double floor concept seemed to be producing too much downforce that they might have needed to redesign the whole front of the car, the Silverstone-based outfit chose to run a whole new chassis for the rear, appearing similar to Red Bull and chose to run the same front nose concept. The new chassis can be seen in the second pic above.
This allowed for the car to be a tad more 'balanced' and in fact, less demanding on the tyres as Seb and Lance now almost always pitted at around the same laps as everyone else if they were on similar strategies. This is because the double-floor concept being removed means that there was lesser downforce being generated towards the rear of the car, alleviating all the pressure on the tyres and making the car -overall- much more aerodynamically balanced.
While the new AMR22-"B" seemed to almost always show its pace in the free practice, the change in the systems or programming of the car almost never allowed the car to initially break free from Q1 in quali, as there was almost no visual difference between the cars in either session. However, as the chassis was now easier on its tyres, this gave its drivers a wider working window with every set of tyres, allowing them to consistently finish near or in the points after their disastrous quali.
Furthermore, as the sidepods were now one of -if not, the best- on the grid, their race pace almost always seemed to be in the top 5 teams. On the other hand, while their quali pace eventually seemed to have improved, it was never as good as it should've been. Hence, the Aston Martin can be said to be a poor car over one lap, but decent overall over the course of the whole race.
Points: 55
(Top to bottom: Aston Martin's 2021 car the AMR21; Aston Martin's 2022 competitor the AMR22-A at pre-season testing; the AMR22-B at Abu Dhabi)
As discussed in my first-ever article on this blog, I predicted that Aston Martin was testing a new aero concept for 2021 when they altered the side-pod inlet to be much higher and smaller than that of the RP20, which they would iterate in its true form in 2022. Much to my surprise and delight, it did seem that way, as the concept of the higher sidepod inlet made its way onto the AMR22-A. We can even visually observe this from the first 2 pictures above, as their sidepod regions are similar: there is a high clearance between the bottom edge of the side-pod inlet and the top edge of the floor.
The AMR22-A also seemed to be running that concept for the length of the floor, implying that they opted for a 'true' double-floor concept. This means that the downforce through the corners would be more pronounced and the speed on the straights, higher.
However, during the first race of the season, Aston Martin driver Lance Stroll was complaining about rear tyres overheating and front tyres not heating up enough, even when his car had no damage. This hints at the idea that the car was not aerodynamically balanced, as there was too much downforce through the rear of the car that was produced from the double floor, and there was too little downforce in the front to balance it.
As the double floor concept seemed to be producing too much downforce that they might have needed to redesign the whole front of the car, the Silverstone-based outfit chose to run a whole new chassis for the rear, appearing similar to Red Bull and chose to run the same front nose concept. The new chassis can be seen in the second pic above.
This allowed for the car to be a tad more 'balanced' and in fact, less demanding on the tyres as Seb and Lance now almost always pitted at around the same laps as everyone else if they were on similar strategies. This is because the double-floor concept being removed means that there was lesser downforce being generated towards the rear of the car, alleviating all the pressure on the tyres and making the car -overall- much more aerodynamically balanced.
While the new AMR22-"B" seemed to almost always show its pace in the free practice, the change in the systems or programming of the car almost never allowed the car to initially break free from Q1 in quali, as there was almost no visual difference between the cars in either session. However, as the chassis was now easier on its tyres, this gave its drivers a wider working window with every set of tyres, allowing them to consistently finish near or in the points after their disastrous quali.Furthermore, as the sidepods were now one of -if not, the best- on the grid, their race pace almost always seemed to be in the top 5 teams. On the other hand, while their quali pace eventually seemed to have improved, it was never as good as it should've been. Hence, the Aston Martin can be said to be a poor car over one lap, but decent overall over the course of the whole race.
Comments
Post a Comment