ENHANCEMENT OF AERODYNAMIC

PERFORMANCE OF A FORMULA-1 RACE CAR

USING ADD-ON DEVICES
B. N. Devaiah1, S. Umesh2
1- M. Sc. [Engg.] Student, 2- Asst. Professor
Automotive and Aeronautical Engineering Department,
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies, Bangalore 58.

Abstract
Aerodynamics plays a very important role in motorsports. Car manufacturers around the world have been fascinated and
influenced by the various aerodynamic improvements that are used in racing. There has been a constant effort on their side to
incorporate these changes to road vehicles not just as an aesthetic design feature but also since they believe that these features
can contribute to improving fuel economy and vehicle handling. One of the main areas of concern in racing is to balance
aerodynamic forces and to streamline the air flow across the body towards improving stability and handling characteristics,
especially, while cornering. At present, formula racing cars are regulated by stringent FIA norms, there is a constraint for the
dimensions of the vehicle used, engine capacity, power output and emission. It is difficult to obtain the optimum aerodynamic
performance with the existing racing car. There is a need for improvement in the aerodynamic performance of these race cars
by using add-on devices locally with different configurations to streamline and channelize the airflow besides reducing
aerodynamic forces and providing stability that improves cornering and handling characteristics.
In this project work, an attempt has been made to improve the aerodynamic performance of F1 race car by using various
add-on devices with different configurations through steady state CFD simulations. Initially, steady state external air flow
simulation on the baseline model F-1 car without add-on devices has been carried out to obtain air flow pattern around and
for aerodynamic forces using FLUENT solver. A detailed survey on different add-on devices used for racing applications has
been made and geometric models of some add-on devices like front wing, bargeboard, nose wing, rear wheel scallops, roof
spoiler and rear wing with best possible configurations were created and attached to the baseline model. Steady state CFD
simulation on the modified F1 race car with add-on devices has been carried out for different speeds. Aerodynamic
performances like lift force, drag force and their co-efficients are evaluated for different configurations of add-on devices for
different speeds
From parametric CFD simulations on F-1 car attached with add-on devices, there is a considerable amount of drag and
lift force reduction besides streamlining the airflow across the car. The best possible configuration for all add-on devices, i.e.
front and rear wings, nose wing, barge board, roof spoiler and wheel scallops, are derived from CFD simulations. The
combination of all these add-on devices with the most appropriate configurations is suggested to incorporate for F1 race car
to improve aerodynamic performance..

Key Words: F-1 Car, Steady State Aerodynamic Analysis, Wings, Add-on Devices, Drag Reduction

these add-on devices is also not a simple task with the

1. INTRODUCTION
A Formula-1 car has many add-on devices that aim at
reducing the lift and drag forces on the car and there-by
reducing the lap times. But, the lift and drag forces are
inversely proportional to each other. Often one tends to
ignore the fact that the combination of the right
configuration of all the add-on devices is what contributes to
the reduced lap times and not just the design of the
individual add-on devices. For example, the lift reduction
achieved by an add-on device, say the front wing, comes at
the cost of higher area being exposed the air leading to an
increase in the drag force, but, the additional downforce is
essential for F1 cars as the high speed requires huge amount
of traction to improve its stability, especially at corners to
allow high cornering speed. In race cars, especially the open
wheel types like the ones used in Formula-1, the add-on
devices play a major role in the lap timings and ultimately is
the difference between the best and the rest. The design of
constraints imposed by the regulations and also the practical
constraints. The configuration of the add-on devices is as
important as the design itself, if not more. In order to
maintain desirable handling qualities, the fore-aft location of
the aerodynamic centre of pressure (CP) is very important.
Typically the centre of pressure needs to be located within a
certain distance forward or behind the car centre of gravity.
The add-on devices used in the F-1 car model and their
functions have been explained in detail in section 2 of this
paper. The rear wing is a crucial component for the
performance of a Formula 1 race car. These devices
contribute to approximately a third of the cars total down
force, while only weighing about 7 kg [7]. Figure 2.1 shows
a rear wing with the airfoil profiles. Usually the rear wing is
comprised of two sets of aerofoils connected to each other
by the wing endplates. The upper aerofoil, usually consisting
of three elements, provides the most downforce. The lower
aerofoil, usually consisting of two elements, is smaller and

SAS TECH Journal 72 Volume 12, Issue 1, April 2013

provides some downforce. However, the lower aerofoil
creates a low-pressure region just below the wing to help the
diffuser create more downforce below the car. The rear wing
is varied from track to track because of the trade-off between
downforce and drag. More wing angle increases the
downforce and produces more drag, thus reducing the cars
top speed. So when racing on tracks with long straights and
few turns, it is better to adjust the wings to have small
angles. On the other hand, when racing on tracks with many
turns and few straights, it is better to adjust the wings to
have large angles.
Splitting the aerofoil into separate elements as shown in
Figure 1 is one way to overcome the flow separation caused
by adverse pressure gradients. Multiple wings are used to
gain more downforce in the rear wing. Two wings will
produce more downforce than one wing, but not twice as
much. Figure shows the relationship between the number of
airfoils with both the lift coefficient and the lift/drag ratio.
The lift coefficient increases and lift/drag (L/D) ratio
decreases when increasing the number of aerofoils. The
position of the wings relative to each other is important. If
they are too close together, the resultant forces will be in
opposite directions and thus cancel each other.
Fig. 1 Cascaded wing with aerofoil profile
Rear wing endplates are designed with form and
function in mind. Because of their form they provide a
convenient and sturdy way of mounting wings. The
aerodynamic function of these endplates is to prevent air
spillage around the wing tips and thus they delay the
development of strongly concentrated trailing
vortices. Trailing vortex or induced drag is the dominating
drag on rear wings. An additional goal of the rear endplates
is to help reduce the influence of upflow from the wheels.
Figure 2 shows a rear wing endplate.
SASTECH Journal 73
Fig. 2 Endplate design
The front wing of an F1 car has a lot of constraints too
like the rear wing and other parts. It is required to have a
neutral central section. This section must be at least 50 cm in
length and cannot induce any amount of downforce, hence
the name neutral central section. There is freedom though in
the number of cascades and the flexibility of the wings, i.e.,
the regulations do not specify or limit the number of
cascades and its flexibility. It is found that the stability of a
car, while slipstreaming, improves when the wings are
flexible. Also, the closer the wings are to the ground, the
more is the downforce that it produces, since it make use of
the ground effect of the car. But, the regulations specify the
minimum ground clearance of the car at standstill position
which cannot be compromised on. Hence, flexible wings are
added which, due to its flexibility, moves down during
cornering which induces a higher downforce on the car and
improves its handling and stability.
Aerodynamic performance enhancement is a very
important part of the strategy of any race car team and is a
subject of great interest. Many researchers have studied the
means to enhance the aerodynamic performance and also the
effect these changes have on the overall performance of the
car employing analytical and experimental methods. Noah J
McKay and Ashok Gopalarathnam [1] conducted an
analytical study to determine the effects of wing
aerodynamics on the performance of race cars and its effect
on lap times on different kinds of tracks. Different airfoil
shapes were considered for the design and were analyzed
during cornering, straight line braking and straight line
acceleration conditions. These shapes were tried for single
and dual wing configurations. The results showed the
importance of maintaining a proper lift to drag ratio and that
the front wing downforce had to balance the rear wing
downforce for optimal results.
Joseph Katz and Darwin Garcia [4] conducted a study
on an open-wheel type, 1/4th scale model of an Indy car to
analyse the aerodynamic components of the add-on devices.
The testing has been done at low speeds in a wind tunnel
using the elevated ground plane method. The aerodynamic
loads were measured by a six component balance to
maintain accuracy. It is concluded that the two wings and the
vortex generators generated the maximum downforce and
the major contributors of drag are the wheels and wings.
Volume 12, Issue 1, April 2013
 Michael S Selig and Mark D Maughmert [5] suggested
a method for the selection of the different parameters of an
airfoil like the airfoil maximum thickness ratio, pitching
moment, part of the ve1oclty distribution, or boundary-layer
development. A hybrid-inverse airfoil design technique has
been developed by coupling a potential-flow, multipoint
inverse airfoil design method with a direct boundary-layer
analysis method.
Ashok Gopalarathnam et al [6] conducted a study on
the design of high lift airfoils for low aspect ratio wings with
endplates that are extensively used in rear wings of race cars.
The induced effects of this setup and the optimum angle of
attack is determined. A parametric study is conducted on the
airfoils to study the effects of the constraints due to the
regulations.
Magnus O Johansson and Joseph Katz [8] conducted a
series of experiments on sprint car model in a small scale
wind tunnel to test the effect that the wings can have on the
downforce and cornering ability. They conducted parametric
studies by considering different airfoil profiles and
concluded that the center of pressure can be varied by
adjusting the front wing configuration and the modified
airfoil shapes resulted in greater downforce and cornering
ability.
Car Specifications
The car chosen is the Ferrari F2003 GA and its specs
are as shown in the table below.
Table 1. Engine specs
Configuration Ferrari Type 052
Mid-engine, rear
Location wheel drive, longitudinally
mounted
Aluminum alloy block
Construction
and head
Height 959 mm
Front track width 1470mm
Rear track width 1405 mm
Wheel base 3100mm
Overall length 4545mm
2. MODELLING, DISCRETIZATION AND
ANALYSIS
Geometric modeling of the Ferrari F2003-GA was done
using the software tool CATIA V5. Fluid domain
discretization was done in ICEM CFD, which was used as a
pre-processor. Steady state external aerodynamic analysis
has been carried out for the three models of the car, namely,
(i) baseline model, (ii) baseline model with the front and rear
wings attached, (iii) final car model with all add-on devices
attached, at five different speeds of 150 kmph, 200 kmph,
250 kmph, 300 kmph and 350 kmph in FLUENT V6 which
was used as a solver and post-processor.
The geometric model of the F1 car is first cleaned up.
The geometry is simplified by closing or filling the tyre
treads. This is done in order to ensure that the discretization
or meshing of the model does not fail at the treads because
of it shape and minute size. Figure 3 shows the geometric
model of the baseline car in isometric view. It can be seen
from the figure that the baseline car does not have any add-
on devices. This model is analyzed just to check how the car
behaves at high speeds without the influence of any add-on
devices.

Displacement 2,997cc, V10

4 valves per cylinder,

Valve
DOHC

Aspiration Naturally Aspirated

Magnetti Marelli Fuel

Fuel feed
Injection Fig. 3 Geometric model of the baseline car
Table 2. Dimensions of the car The next step is to attach the front and rear wings to the
baseline car. The baseline model with the wings attached
Weight 600 kg (Figure 4.3) is again analysed for five different speeds of
150, 200, 250, 300, 350 kmph to study the amount of
downforce and drag force on the car with just the wings
Length 4545 mm attached and to find how much of an improvement it is from
the initial baseline model without any add-on devices. The
final step in modelling is to design the add-on devices. The
Width 1796 mm different add-on devices that are designed are:

SASTECH Journal 74 Volume 12, Issue 1, April 2013

 Modified Front Wing: The front wings are responsible moments on the front and rear ends of the car and to
for up to 30% - 40% of the downforce generated in an F1 streamline the flow of air above and below the upper control
race car. The front wing in the original design does not have arm of the double wishbone suspension assembly. The figure
end plates and deflectors on it. This results in the air directly 6 shows the designed nose wing and its location on the nose.
coming in contact with the front wheels which contribute to
the drag. Hence, the base plate is designed such that the
trailing edges of the plate help in streamlining the flow of
the under-body air away from front wheels as shown in
figure 4. The deflectors also have the same function of
streamlining the air around the front wheels on the upper-
body side. As its name suggests, it just deflects the air away
from the tyre such that the streamlines get re-attached with
the flow along the car body as soon as it passes the tyres.

Fig. 6 Nose wing

Roof spoiler: It is a wing that is placed just above the
driver cockpit and its main purpose is to provide downforce
by streamlining and re-directing the air towards the rear
spoiler. The front and the rear parts of an F1 car has wings
that generate the required amount of downforce, but the
middle part also must have a sufficient amount of downforce
Fig. 4 Modified front wing with the base plate and to balance the overall aerodynamic moments on the car. The
the deflector basic idea is to keep the centre of pressure as close to the
centre of gravity (CG) of the car to provide maximum
Bargeboard: It is a piece of bodywork mounted stability during operation. Figure 7 shows the roof spoiler
vertically between the front wheels and the start of the designed of the car.
sidepods to help smooth the airflow around the sides of the
car. The bargeboard in the car is located just behind the
suspension control arms. It helps in streamlining the flow
around the car body thus helping in reducing aerodynamic
drag on the car. The air after passing through the front
wings, come in contact with the suspension control arms and
the flow-lines become haphazard. The main function of the
bargeboard is to streamline this haphazard flow around the
body of the car such that it re-attaches to flow through the
rear wing which is critical in generating downforce. The
design is such that flow of air happens on both the inner and
outer edges of the bargeboard and this ensures there is no
flow separation. Figure 5 shows the bargeboard design.

Fig. 7 Roof spoiler

Fig. 5 Design and position of bargeboard
Nose wing: The nose wing has an inverted negative lift
airfoil shape and is modelled using the NACA 6 series co-
ordinates. It is placed just before the suspension arms
assembly of the front wheel on the front nose of the car. Its
main purpose is to maintain the balance of aerodynamic
Rear Wheel Scallops: The rear wheel scallops
positioned just in front of the rear wheels serve the purpose
of streamlining the air coming from the bargeboard and the
front wings towards the rear wing and away from the rear
tyres. This helps in generating downforce and also reduces
the drag force on the car. The rear wheel scallops are
designed such that the stream of air passes on both its faces
and re-directs it away from the rear tyres thereby reducing
the drag force and helps in knocking off a few crucial milli-
seconds off the lap times! Figure 8 shows the rear wheel
scallops.

SASTECH Journal 75 Volume 12, Issue 1, April 2013


Fig. 8 Rear wheel scallops
Rear wing: The two main parts of the rear wings are
the cascading wing profiles and the end plates. The rear
wings produce downforce towrds the rear end of the car.
Most of the contours on the car are designed such that they
streamline the air into the rear wings so as to induce the
largest amount of downforce. Another important part of the
rear wing is the beam wing. It is the lowest wing section and
is very strictly regulated by crash test regulations. It is also
quite heavy sine it supports the whole wing and some cars
use it as a part of the chassis also.
Fig. 11 Discretized model of car with all add-on
devices
3 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS AND
VALIDATION
The results from the steady state analysis carried out on
the three models of the F-1 car are discussed in this chapter.
The performance and the aerodynamic forces and their
coefficients are analysed by simulating at five different
speeds of 150, 200, 250, 300 and 350 kmph for all the three
models.
3.1 Solver settings and parameters
The solver settings set in FLUENT software for the
simulation is as shown in the table 3
Table 3. Solver settings

Solver type 3d- pressure based

velocity absolute

flow steady

viscosity model Turbulent (K-epsilon)

The other settings that have to be specified for the

Fig. 9 Rear wing simulation are the boundary conditions. Table 5.2 gives the
Figure 9 shows the model of the F1 car after all the boundary conditions set in Fluent software for the analysis.
designed add-on devices have been attached. Table 4. Boundary Conditions

Parts Boundary Conditions

Car body Stationary wall, no slip

Add-on devices Stationary wall, no slip

Rotational wall with
Wheels
specified angular velocity
Translational wall with
Domain bottom wall
specified velocity
Fig. 10 Model with all add-on devices Domain top, left Stationary wall, with
and right walls specified shear condition
Figure 10 shows the discretized model of the car with
all add-on devices and the different mesh sizes adopted in Domain Inlet Velocity Inlet
order to save computational time, without compromising on
the accuracy of the results. Domain outlet Pressure outlet

SASTECH Journal 76 Volume 12, Issue 1, April 2013

3.2 Results car body and regions of low velocity just behind the car
(wake region), which is considerably large.
The baseline model of the F1 car is simulated and the
results are as tabulated in table 5.
Table 5. Comparison of aerodynamic forces at
different speeds for baseline model

Baseline Model
Car Drag Lift
Cd Cl
Speed Force Force
150 1215.49 0.7866 439.74 0.2846
Fig. 14 Contours of pressure and velocity
200 2158.84 0.7865 766.80 0.2826

250 3375.14 0.7865 1207.39 0.2814

300 4860.24 0.7865 1732.39 0.2803

350 6613.07 0.7862 2363.45 0.2810

Fig. 15 Pathlines seen from the side view

showing streamlines along the body
The model of the F1 car with all the add-on devices that
have been designed, like, the bargeboard, nose wing, front
wing modifications, roof spoiler, rear wheel scallops and the
rear wing are attached is analysed and simulated and the
results are as tabulated in Table 6.
Table 6. Comparison of aerodynamic forces at
Fig. 12 Variation of drag force (N) v/s speed
different speeds model with all add-on devices
(kmph)

Model with all add-on devices

Car Drag Downforc
Cd Cl
Speed Force (N) e (N)
150 1353.72 0.7814 346.63 -0.200

200 2404.78 0.7808 620.95 -0.201

250 3754.96 0.7805 976.01 -0.202

300 5407.41 0.7806 1413.07 -0.203

Fig. 13 Variation of down force (N) v/s speed 350 7357.34 0.7802 1929.99 -0.204
(kmph)
Figure 13 shows the contours of pressure distribution Both the drag and lift forces are increasing with
and velocity distribution along the center plane in x- increase in speed. The variation in the drag and lift forces
direction. High pressure points can be observed at the nose with speed is almost linear as shown in figure 5.17 and 5.18
tip, the front wheel, the body of the car and the area behind respectively.
the cockpit. The velocity plot shows stagnation points on the

SASTECH Journal 77 Volume 12, Issue 1, April 2013

 model with all add-on devices when compared to the model
with only the front and rear wings attached. Figure 18 shows
the drag co-efficient variation and it follows the same pattern
as the drag force.

Fig. 16 Variation of drag force (N) v/s speed

(kmph)

Fig. 18 Graph showing variation of drag force

for the different models

Fig. 17 Variation of down force (N) v/s speed

(kmph)
4. COMPARISON OF RESULTS
The results for the three models are compared and the Fig. 19 Graph showing variation of drag co-
changes in their aerodynamic forces and co-efficients are
efficient for the different models
analysed. The comparison of these values at different speeds
is as shown in table 5.10. In table 5.10, baseline stands for
the baseline model of the car, wings only stands for the car
model with the front and the rear wings attached and all add-
ons stands for the car model with the modified front wing,
rear wing, bargeboard, nose wing, rear wheel scallops and
the roof spoiler attached.
Table 7. Comparison of aerodynamic forces and
their co-efficients of the three models at a speed of
200 kmph
Drag Force Downforce
Cd Cl
(N) (N)
Baseline 2158.85 -0.7859 766.81 0.2791
Fig. 20 Graph showing variation of down force
Wings
2571.81 -0.8406 -798.77 -0.2611 for the different models
only
All add- The variation of downforce and its co-efficient are as shown
2404.78 -0.7809 -620.95 -0.2016
ons in figure 19 and 20. It can be seen that the add-on devices
have reduced the drag but, at the expense of reduced
Figure 17 shows the drag force variation for different downforce. But the reduction in the lift co-efficient is very
models. It can be seen that the drag force is least on the small.
baseline model which is understandable since it has a very
small frontal projected area. The drag force is less on the

SASTECH Journal 78 Volume 12, Issue 1, April 2013


Fig. 21 Graph showing variation of lift co-efficient
for the different models at 200 kmph
Table 5.8 shows the lift to drag ratio for the three models.
The L/D ratio gives the ratio of lift force by drag force. The
variation of L/D ratio for the three models is shown in
Figure 5.30. The lowest L/D ratio (0.258) is for the model
with all add-on devices attached. Hence it can be seen that
the model of the car with the designed add-on devices
attached gives the best L/D ratio and the best configuration
of add-on devices is arrived at.
Table 8. L/D ratio for the three models
L/DRatio
Baselinemodel 0.355
Modelwith
0.310
wingsattached
Modelwith
0.258
alladdons
Fig. 22 Graph showing variation of L/D ratio for
the different models at 200 kmph
5. CONCLUSION
In this project work, an attempt has been made to improve
the aerodynamic performance of F1 race car by using
various add-on devices like front wing, bargeboard, rear
wing, nose wing, roof spoiler and wheel scallops with
SASTECH Journal 79
different configurations through steady state CFD
simulations.
A comparison was made with the baseline model , car
with wings attached and the car with all add-on devices
attached and the following points were concluded:
A reduction of 10.22% and 4.75% in the drag
force and drag co-efficient respectively is seen in
the model with all add-on devices when compared
to the baseline model.
There was a reduction of 6.5% in the drag force
and 5.4% reduction in the drag co-efficient in the
modified model with the add-on devices when
compared to the model with only the wings
attached.
The downforce and the lift co-efficient were seen
to increase by 2 times for the model with all add-
on devices attached when compared to the baseline
model.
There was an increase of 22% and 15% in the
downforce and lift co-efficient in the modified
model with the add-on devices when compared to
the model with only the wings attached.
6. REFERENCES
[1] McKay, Noah J, 2002. The Effect of Wing
Aerodynamics on Race Vehicle
Performance. SAE Publications
[2] Gregor Seljak, 2008. Race Car Aerodynamics.
[3] 2011 FIA Regulations
[4] Katz, Joseph and Garcia, Darwin, 2002.
Aerodynamic Effects of Indy car components.
SAE Publications
[5] Selig, Michael S and Maughmert, Mark D, 1992.
Generalized Multipoint Inverse Airfoil Design
AIAA Journal, Vol. 30.
[6] Ashok Gopalarathnam et al, 1997. Design of
High Lift Airfoils For Low Aspect Ratio Wings
With Endplates AIAA Journal
[7] BMW Sauber F1.07 Development: Analysis &
Drawings. 2012. BMW Sauber F1.07
Development: Analysis & Drawings. [ONLINE]
Available at:
http://www.f1network.net/main/s491/st122735.ht
m?print=1.
[8] Johansson, Magnus O and Katz, Joseph, 2002.
Lateral Aerodynamics of a Generic Sprint Car
Configuration SAE Publications
Volume 12, Issue 1, April 2013