[soitlyobserty]

Looking back to the Italian GP I noticed that a few teams didn't run the shark fin aero configuration.

These teams are McLaren, Williams and Ferrari.

All the other teams did run use it.

I always thought that this kind of aero config, using the vertical airbox extension, gives more stability at high speeds and under heavy braking, thus I was a bit puzzled to see some teams not using it, especially given the track conditions.

What are you thinking about it? What was the logic behind not using this aero configuration by some of the teams?

[soitlyobserty]

I also think that Ferrari did run an asymmetrical rear wing, with a larger section on the right side.
Sadly I couldn't find any good images with this.

[investmentonlinev2006x]

Actually I'm wondering what sort of aero benefit the shark fin has at all. You are quite correct that neither McLaren or Ferrari ran it.


It seems to me that the point of the shark fin is actually to do with providing advert space. Renault, Red Bull and Toro Rosso use it quite effectively, whereas Ferrari and McLaren's biggest and most obvious advert "branding" relies on the colour of the car itself.

[CesseOveldset]

It seems to me that the point of the shark fin is actually to do with providing advert space.

That is horribly incorrect.

[BluewayAllere]

That is horribly incorrect.

why?

[drislerfottor]

i think you will find that it will give the car more control in a straight line at high speed.

http://www.f1wolf.com/2008/08/the-f1...-ad-space.html

Red Bull - When looking at the fin it looks like they designed the shape to make the bull or the bull’s tail fit the car better. Who knows perhaps that was the real reason behind this fin design and everybody else got fooled and followed suit without really knowing why . http://www.formula1.com/news/technic...8/790/525.html

Since last season it seems most teams have found from their wind tunnel and CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics) aerodynamic testing that elongating the engine cover provides clear advantages in terms of rear-wing efficiency. By improving the quality of airflow directed towards the rear wing, the fin increases downforce and allows the squads to run lower rear-wing angles, enhancing the car's top speed. BMW Sauber have adopted this philosophy with their 'mini' shark fin. Similar in style to the one found on McLaren's MP4-23,

[CesseOveldset]

why?

...the dorsal fin is designed to improve the efficiency when the car is in yaw. It straightens the airflow to prevent a reduction of downforce when the car is turning. http://www.f1technical.net

[investmentonlinev2006x]

The first link you provided actually supports what I said... er.

http://f1.gpupdate.net/en/news/2008/...ty-at-mclaren/
As you can clearly see, it is a large structure and one that is particularly sensitive to crosswinds. We felt that our car already delivers sufficiently in yaw and that continuing to experiment with the dorsal fin might not bring us the sufficient performance benefit we'd require to make it worthwhile. As such, it is not something we are giving priority to at the moment. 05 Aug 08

And that was 11 days ago.

[CesseOveldset]

The first link you provided actually supports what I said... er.

http://f1.gpupdate.net/en/news/2008/...ty-at-mclaren/

05 Aug 08

And that was 11 days ago.

Well obviously, like all aero innovations, they are compatible with some cars more than others. And obviously McLaren don't find it necessary/compatible with their car.

Like how the bridge wings on the nose aren't used by all of the F1 teams, but of course thats due to advertising space being the main influence in putting them there, instead of an aerodynamic advantage.

I would trust f1technical over a stupid blog with no grounding on facts any day.

[cabonuserollyo]

When the CART teams were using them in the early '90's they said it was for straight-line stability. Cleaning up the air flow to the rear wing also sounds reasonable, and would be a more recent concept as the aero gets more and more refined.

[emuffette]

And they will be gone next year with the new regulations, correct?

[soitlyobserty]

Anyone else found a picture of the asymmetrical Ferrari rear wing?
I'm really interested to know why did they use it.

[Lillie_Steins]

I was under the understanding that it helps straighten up the air before it hits the rear ring, so its primary benefit would be on high speed corners etc etc.

With Monza being primarily long straights, maybe they thought it wasn't as needed. But can't think of why it would disadvantage the cars by having the fins.

[crycleascentyv]

surface area drag?

[soitlyobserty]

Thanks for these explanations.

[Celeliamend]

surface area drag?

Bingo!

[CaseyFan]

Anyone else found a picture of the asymmetrical Ferrari rear wing?
I'm really interested to know why did they use it.

here you go

http://www.f1m.com/main/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=9576

[gamecasta]

Wow! What an informative post.

Thanks.

[soitlyobserty]

here you go

http://www.f1m.com/main/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=9576

Yep saw that too. I was just searching for one taken during the race.
Anyway from the pictures I saw (from race day) they were running this same asymmetrical wing.

[soitlyobserty]

Wow! What an informative post.

Thanks.

Isn't it?!
These guys know every inch of an F1 car, and almost all the F1 cars ever built. they can even tell you of the top of their head the small differences between cars build in consecutive years by most of the manufacturers (you know, things like suspension arms mountings, a bit raised nose etc).
Being a Formula 1 cars modeler myself, I know that what is discussed on a F1 modeling forum is way better technical stuff than what we usually manage around here, sadly.