In the world of Formula 1, driver safety is paramount. After the crash of Jules Bianchi at the 2014 Japanese Grand Prix, a new safety device called the ‘Halo’ was introduced to improve driver safety. While its reception was mixed at the time, the controversies revolving around the device have now simmered down.

That’s because the Halo has more than proven its life-saving capabilities over the last few seasons. From Charles Leclerc’s incident at Spa in 2018 to Romain Grosjean’s fiery crash in Bahrain in 2020 and more recently, Guanyu Zhou’s car that flipped upside down at Silverstone in 2021. Many drivers have walked away from serious incidents with only minor injuries thanks to the Halo.

Designed to withstand 15 times the static load of a Formula 1 car and a 20kg (44Ibs) wheel travelling at 225kph (140mph), this article delves into the engineering behind the design, manufacture and testing of this revolutionary safety device.

To determine the effectiveness of these devices, the FIA developed rigorous safety test programmes which involved applying significant vertical, frontal, and lateral loads for five seconds. The Halo was the only device that passed these tests.

How is the Halo manufactured?

Welding the titanium tubes is also a challenge, as the material must be shielded to prevent oxidation which could affect the weld’s integrity. ‘We have developed a bespoke shroud technique that we weld the parts within using a unique gas mix to ensure that the welds don’t oxidise in any way,’ says Chilcott.

The V transition and rear mounts are machined from titanium billet using 3 and 5-axis milling machines. The complexity and size of the V transition result in a machining time of at least 40 hours. Once the tube sections are welded and cooled, they are attached to the V transition, and the rear mounts are also welded to the structure.

The final step involves machining the whole assembly to tolerance, ensuring it fits the chassis properly. ‘The tolerance across the bolt holes in the rear feet is 100 microns which is a challenge on what is ultimately a fabricated structure. We address that by securing the Halo by the ‘nose’ and finish machine the rear mounts and without this final process, the Halo wouldn’t fit to the chassis,’ explains Chilcott

Who has been saved by the Halo?

Since its introduction to F1 in 2018, the Halo has become an integral part of most single-seater motorsport categories including Formula E, F2, F3, Euroformula Open, and Super Formula. With its wide adoption, this revolutionary safety device has saved many lives and prevented drivers from serious injuries.

The Halo’s effectiveness has been demonstrated in several accidents. The first notable incident was during the 2018 Belgium Grand Prix when Fernando Alonso’s car launched over Charles Leclerc’s cockpit. The Halo protected Leclerc, and subsequent analysis estimated that it endured a 56kN load [2], demonstrating its ability to withstand extreme forces and prevent injuries.

During the opening lap of the Belgium Grand Prix in 2020, there was a massive accident involving multiple cars at the Spa-Francorchamps circuit. Giovinazzi’s car made contact with the rear of Russell’s car, causing it to go airborne and flip over. The Halo on Russell’s car deflected the impact of Giovinazzi’s car, preventing it from directly hitting Russell’s head.

The remarkable life-saving capabilities of the Halo were prominently demonstrated during Romain Grosjean’s harrowing crash at the 2020 Bahrain Grand Prix. As his car collided with a barrier at high speed, it split in two and instantly burst into flames. Miraculously, the Halo deflected the barrier and created a protective zone around Grosjean’s head, allowing him to escape with relatively minor injuries. This incident served as a definitive testament to the Halo’s ability to safeguard drivers in the most treacherous circumstances.

References

[1] 2018. How to make an F1 Halo [Online]. FIA

[2] 2018. FIA confirms level of impact on Leclerc’s Halo in Spa crash [Online]. Crash.net

The subject of preheating tyres is, ironically, a hot topic in the run up to the Centenary Le Mans 24 hours, the cornerstone of the FIA World Endurance Championship (WEC). As part of the drive to become carbon neutral, the FIA introduced a tyre road map for the 2023 WEC season. The aim was to ban the energy-sapping practice of pre-heating tyres. However, this has been thwarted by two high-profile accidents where Toyota’s Brendan Hartley and Ferrari’s Antonio Fuoco crashed at the Spa 6 hours earlier in the season.

Both accidents were attributed to leaving the pitlane on cold tyres. This prompted an in-depth investigation where the FIA and ACO have agreed to reverse the regulation and authorise tyre warming for all WEC classes for this year’s 24 Hours of Le Mans only.

Why do tyres need to be preheated?

Preheating tyres in its crudest form has been a part of motorsport since the 1970’s. Apparently, at the 1974 Formula 1 Canadian Grand Prix, teams stripped the duvets from their hotel beds to wrap around the tyres. Today, tyre warming is exploited across almost every level of car and bike racing, from Formula 1 and MotoGP, down to trackday bikes and radio control racing.

To understand why tyre preheating has become such an important practice, we first need to understand how a tyre generates grip. The viscoelastic behaviour of tyre rubber means that at low temperatures the modulus of the rubber is high which makes it brittle and rigid. Whereas at high temperatures, the modulus of the rubber is low, making the rubber flexible and elastic. The more elastic the rubber, the more contact it makes with the track as it moulds into the grooves of the asphalt.

When a driver leaves the garage, their main priority during the outlap is to bring all four tyres up to temperature consistently. This means avoiding subjecting the tyres to large longitudinal or lateral loads, so minimising heavy braking and accelerations as well as reducing speed around long corners.

> How does a tyre generate grip?

If a driver pushes too hard before the tyres are within the optimum temperature window, the surface of the tyre is too cold and brittle to generate grip, resulting in the tyre sliding which damages the surface. This can lead to graining which reduces the amount of rubber in contact with the track and ultimately the available grip.

What are tyre blankets, tents and ovens?

The different approaches to pre-heating tyres is defined in the regulations of each championship. Typically, single seaters use tyre blankets and closed wheel categories favour tyre tents or ovens. This is predominantly due to the difficulties of fitting a tyre blanket within the wheel arch of sportcars.

A tyre blanket consists of a flexible heating element contained within a heat conductive gel. The blanket is sized to encase the entire circumference of the tyre and once fitted to the full set of tyres, the blankets can then be connected to a thermostatic control box which is used to monitor the heating process.

Tyre tents or ovens are large enclosures that house several racks of tyres. Hot air is blown into the tent, usually by means of a fuel-based space heater, which gradually heats the tyres. Both tyre blankets and ovens consume large amounts of energy, and in both cases can take approximately 1 to 2 hours to heat the tyres to the desired operational temperature.

How long should tyres be preheated?

The time tyres spend in a tyre blanket or oven is defined by the regulations of each championship. In Formula 1, tyres are only allowed to be preheated prior to a session in which they are intended to be used. Slicks can be preheated for a maximum of two hours at 70degC (158degF), intermediates can also be heated for two hours but only up to 60degC (140degF) and wets are not allowed to be preheated. These temperatures limits refer to the temperature of the surface of the tyre’s tread or sidewall, measured with an IR gun, not the temperature set on the blankets themselves.

Should preheating tyres be banned?

The issue with banning preheating in championships which are used to this practice is that drivers, engineers and tyre manufacturers all need time to adjust. Furthermore, preheating a tyre and rim also increases the tyre pressure which is critical to the structural integrity of the tyre sidewall, particularly on racecars that generate significant downforce. Without preheating, tyre pressures will be much colder at the start of a run, which could be a structural safety risk.

There is also the added implication of lower pressures affecting the ride height and therefore the aero platform. To avoid this issue, cold starting pressures could be boosted. However, tyre pressures increase significantly throughout a run, so simply boosting starting pressures could mean the tyres become over-pressured later in the stint, which can then lead to a myriad of overheating and wear issues.

The solution is to develop tyre compounds and constructions that can provide the support and grip at colder temperatures and lower pressures, without compromising performance. Formula 1 tyre supplier, Pirelli has tried to achieve this with a step-by-step approach. Pirelli originally targeted 2022 to ban tyre blankets alongside the new 18inch low profile tyres, however this has now been implemented in several stages.

The 2021 season saw the maximum pre heat temperature reduce to 100degC (212degF) for the fronts and 80degC (176degF) for the rears. This has now been further reduced to 70degC (158degF) for 2 hours, and the number of blanket sets for slick tyres reduced to 7 per car. This approach is giving Pirelli time to develop tyres that can cope with starting from cold. All teams will vote on the proposed ban of tyre blankets by the 31^st July, following the two day test after the British Grand Prix.

Does preheating tyres result in better racing?

Not all high-profile championships preheat tyres, and yet still deliver competitive and engaging racing. For example, the likes of IndyCar and Formula 2 have successfully banned the use of tyre blankets. In fact, the lack of tyre blankets in IndyCar actually generates more excitement around the pitstop windows.  The  offset of cold, new tyres against hot, heavily worn tyres constantly changes the effectiveness of the undercut or overcut and therefore the pitstop strategy.

The British Touring Car Championship (BTCC) is another good example of a race series working well without any form of tyre heating. Unlike many other championships, BTCC allow Front Wheel Drive (FWD) and Rear Wheel Drive (RWD) cars to compete side by side. The absence of preheating tyres typically favours FWD cars in the early stages of a race because the front tyres are bought up to temperature much faster than a RWD car. However, RWD cars tend to have a more even spread in tyre wear hen compared to a FWD car and therefore has more grip towards the end of the race.

The future of preheating tyres

There is an argument to say that as a professional racer, driving to the limit of adhesion offered by the tyre regardless of circuit grip level, tyre life or in this case tyre temperature should be par for the course. This coupled with the fact that several high-profile professional championships already operate without any form of tyre preheating, would suggest that WEC and Formula 1 could successfully follow the same path.

What is clear however, is that if tyre blankets and ovens are banned, tyre suppliers and teams need time to adjust to this new way of racing. Getting this right is not only vital for the safety of competitors, but is also imperative to the quality of the racing. It is also publicly important that the environmental reasons for banning preheating is not cancelled out by the carbon footprint of repairing accident damage due to cars crashing on cold tyres. Perhaps the more graduated approach applied by Formula 1 and Pirelli could have been utilised by WEC to avoid this sticky situation surrounding tyre warmers during the build up to Le Mans.

The technical support programme between Red Bull Powertrains and Honda Racing Corporation extends to the end of 2025. In 2026, Red Bull Powertrains will run a power unit developed in collaboration with American automotive giant Ford which will work with RBPT to develop the next-generation hybrid power unit and supply power units to Oracle Red Bull Racing and Scuderia AlphaTauri. 2026 will see that the 1600 cc, 90-degree V6 architecture remains unchanged, with a similar RPM limit. However, fundamental changes to the formulae include the removal of the MGU-H, an increase in output for the MGU-K and much tighter constraints on internal combustion engine design.

The internal combustion engine (ICE) will run on 100% sustainable fuel by 2026, which must be sourced from non-food bio sources, municipal waste or certified carbon capture schemes. The technical regulations specify that the fuel energy flow rate must not exceed 3000MJ/h, which equates to approximately 65kg/h, compared to the current fuel flow rate of 100kg/h. However, the FIA has reduced the fuel flow rate in a bid to reduce ICE output to approximately 400kW (536bhp), representing an approximately 35% drop in performance compared to the engines of the current era. The MGU-H absence will necessitate a complete redesign of the ICE as the combustion regime of the existing engines is permitted by the charge air control the MGU-H provides.

The rules will provide greater freedom for combustion system design but will outlaw features such as variable inlet trumpets on cost control grounds. The bottom-end components of the internal combustion engine – reciprocating parts, pumps and other ancillaries – will be subject to much more restricted designs. The FIA will also enforce the standardisation of components such as injectors and many engine sensors. Additionally, the FIA will open the authorised materials list to exclude many high-cost options.

MGU-K peak output will increase to 350kW, with full power permitted up to around 300km/h. After that speed, the regulations specify the following equation for deployment: P(kW)=1850 – [5 x car speed (km/h)] when the car speed is below 340km/h; at or above 340km/h, the rules limit MGU-K power to 150kW. The MGU-K will also have to be mounted within the battery volume in the chassis to ensure all high-voltage cables are within the car’s main crash structure.

The Red Bull Ford deal is a long-term strategic technical partnership which will continue until at least 2030. The FIA states that the 2026 regulations are as such to increase the road relevance of the energy recovery and electrical components, with battery cell chemistry and technology open to development; there is a non-exclusivity provision in the rules here. This is where Red Bull Ford’s power unit will draw on Ford’s EV knowledge and depth of resources, including battery cell, electric motor technology and power unit control software and analytics.

Running a contemporary Formula 1 car is one of humankind’s most sophisticated systems engineering challenges. Mercedes Formula 1 explains how electronics, systems engineering and data work in F1 and the relevance of each part of the team system.

Audi will enter the FIA Formula 1 World Championship as a power unit supplier from 2026, marking the first time in more than a decade that a Formula 1 power train will be built in Germany. The company’s motivation to join F1 derives from F1’s plan to become more sustainable and cost-efficient.

In early August 2022, the FIA World Motor Sport Council (WMSC) approved the 2026 Formula 1 power unit regulations. The 1600cc turbo V6 engines will remain essentially the same layout as now, with a similar RPM limit, though a new fuel flow rate will reduce power by approximately 36.5% to 400kW (536bhp).

The engine’s internal components, including reciprocating parts, pumps, and other ancillaries, will be subject to more tightly prescribed designs. The FIA will ban features such as variable inlet trumpets and a longer list of exotic materials to exclude many high-cost options.

Fuel injectors and many engine sensors will be standardised. The power unit regulations will include exhaust systems and other ancillary items, so they will be subject to penalties should they exceed their prescribed running life.

However, the combustion chamber will retain significant design freedom to promote clean combustion of the new-for-2026 100% sustainable fuel, which must be sourced from non-food bio sources, municipal waste or certified carbon capture schemes.

The electric power systems of the power units will change dramatically, including the removal of the MGU-H and an increase in output for the MGU-K. The removal of the MGU-H was something the VW group voted for as it felt it was hugely expensive to develop and thought it had little road car powertrain relevance.

The lack of the MGU-H will effectively necessitate the manufacturers’ redesign of the power unit as, amongst other things, they will lose the current control it affords over the inlet charge.

The 2026 electric power systems consisting of an electric motor, battery, and control electronics will increase sharply compared to today’s Formula 1 drive systems. The electric motor will be nearly as powerful as the combustion engine at 350kW output, and the battery and power electronics will be designed to accommodate this.

The Audi power unit will be built at Audi Sport’s Competence Center Motorsport in Neuburg an der Donau, near Audi AG’s company headquarters in Ingolstadt. In Neuburg, there are already test benches for F1 engine testing and electric motor and battery testing.

Additional necessary preparations are being made regarding personnel, buildings, and technical infrastructure, with everything essential to be in place by the end of the year. A separate company was recently founded for the power unit project as a wholly owned subsidiary of Audi Sport.

Audi will decide which team they will be lining up within 2026 by the end of this year and is pooling its strengths for the Formula 1 project and consequently is discontinuing its LMDh project. Alongside customer racing, Audi Sport will continue its innovation project with the RS-Q e-Tron in the Dakar Rally.

Formula 1 introduced new fuel regulations for 2022, including a 10% ethanol fuel percentage. The construction of the ethanol molecule means it carries a lower quantity of joules per kilogram as a combustible vapour than the equivalent volume of Formula 1 race gasoline. However, as per all alcohol-based compounds, ethanol’s evaporation characteristics mean that it will extract temperature out of the combustion chamber during the intake and compression strokes and initial stages of combustion. That lets the mapping engineers lower the ignition advance, taking it closer to TDC and initiating better-timed combustion. For these reasons, ethanol brings a favourable prospect to the efficiency potential of Formula 1 engines.

Design engineers can adjust several follow-on configuration parameters from these characteristics thanks to introducing the higher ethanol content. The compression ratio is the primary beneficiary of the ethanol blend and could increase and drive the combustion efficiency higher. Additionally, ethanol molecules contain oxygen. Instead of solely relying on the oxygen ingested into the engine through the intake, further oxygenation of the working fluids in the combustion chamber will occur with the higher percentage ethanol blend in the Formula 1 fuel. Engineers can implement a lot of redesign and optimisation into the air loop because it will no longer have the same target of kilograms per hour of oxygen from ingested air.

When the energy-limited formula came into place in 2014 and research into the fuel started, Formula 1 fuel manufacturers discovered that some fuel molecules produce significantly more energy than others. Because the fuel flow and load are prescribed in kilograms, there is scope for developing the calorific value of the fuel. The development targets are how engineers can apply as much energy into one kilogram of fuel and generate the proper pressure and motion for the direct-injected gasoline engine. The research octane number (RON), which ranks how close to the most efficient moment the sparkplug can ignite the fuel, is a primary driver in the combustion development of the high-efficiency fuel.

‘Having 10% ethanol significantly affects the pressure and temperature of the air as it mixes in the chamber,’ highlights Thomas. ‘There’s less calorific value in each ethanol molecule than race gasoline, which means collectively, the fuel potency is slightly diluted. However, some parts of its characteristics benefit performance, such as its lower vapour pressure, which has quite a nice impact on the temperature and volatility of the combustion chamber environment. Other areas of the fuel characteristics were not quite as good. We’re developing with Petronas and trying to have more of the good characteristics exploited and less of the bad sides integrated. Additionally, matching that to the engine characteristics is critical for the best output from the power unit.’

Power Unit Technical Specification

• Type: Mercedes-AMG F1 M13 E Performance
• Power Unit Minimum Weight: 150 kg

Internal Combustion Engine (ICE)

• Capacity: 1.6 litres
• Cylinders: Six
• Bank Angle: 90
• No of Valves: 24
• Max rpm ICE: 15,000 rpm
• Max Fuel Flow Rate: 100 kg/hour (above 10,500 rpm)
• Fuel Injection: High-pressure direct injection (max 500 bar, one injector/cylinder)
• Pressure Charging: Single-stage compressor and exhaust turbine on a common shaft
• Max rpm Exhaust Turbine: 125,000 rpm

Energy Recovery System (ERS)

• Architecture: Integrated Hybrid energy recovery via electrical Motor Generator Units
• Energy Store: Lithium-Ion battery solution of minimum 20 kg regulation weight
• Max energy storage/lap: 4 MJ
• Max rpm MGU-K: 50,000 rpm
• Max power MGU-K: 120 kW (161 hp)
• Max energy recovery/lap MGU-K: 2 MJ
• Max energy deployment/lap MGU-K: 4 MJ (33.3 s at full power)
• Max rpm MGU-H: 125,000 rpm
• Max power MGU-H: Unlimited
• Max energy recovery/lap MGU-H: Unlimited
• Max energy deployment/lap MGU-H: Unlimited

Fuel & Lubricants

• Fuel: PETRONAS Primax
• Lubricants: PETRONAS Syntium

The 2022 chassis regulations allow for very different design philosophies to be used, and teams across the grid have chosen their own paths to follow. The AT03 is relatively conventional and conservative in both its design and layout. The side impact structure supports the leading edge of a rectangular heat exchanger intake on either side of the driver cell. The cooler housing lays very flat, with the upper surface sweeping downwards towards the car’s rear. The underside of the cooler housing is heavily sculpted away for aerodynamic benefit. However, with so much scope for different design concepts, AlphaTauri has built some flexibility into its concept to give it scope for change if the team discovers a better one later down the line.

‘We have reasonable fluidity in our design,’ confirms AlphaTauri’s technical director, Jody Egginton. ‘It’s been this approach for several years now in this team but, with a new regulation set, we are all starting from the same new point. We focussed very much on making sure what’s under the skin gives lots of scope for us to develop the aerodynamics of the car without having to make expensive and non-performing architectural changes.

‘We’d hate to be cornered by an architectural bit of hardware under the skin that we probably could have dealt with, so we believe we’ve built in as much scope as we can to make quite reasonable changes in something like sidepod geometry, or engine cover, without having to do new radiator packages etc.

‘It’s the same story with the front wing / nose interface. I’d imagine many teams are working on that simply because of the newness of the regulations, but the way we’ve done that will not limit us if we want to change it. However, I’m sure there are concepts out there we couldn’t adopt. For example, we’re running pushrod front suspension. If we decided to go to a pull rod layout, that’s unlikely to be happening in season.

‘As we get more familiar with the regulations in later years, we will probably get a better read on where we need to focus. For now, we want to develop quickly without having to do a lot of extra work to get the aerodynamic surfaces you want onto the car.’

At the start of the 2022 F1 season, the “porpoise effect” has undoubtedly been one of the main protagonists. This effect, which has been known since the 1970s and 1980s in cars with ground effect, is characterised by a chassis oscillation when the car travels at high speed. In this situation, the downforce generated by the ground effect is so high that it sucks the bottom of the car to the ground. As it approaches the track, downforce increases, but it reaches a point where there is a sudden loss of downforce and the suspension springs push the chassis back up. Again, the floor generates a lot of downforce and the car is pushed down once more. This behaviour is repeated cyclically, producing an oscillation known as the “porpoise effect” (or simply “porpoising”).

Suspension model

To simulate this effect, the quarter-car suspension model shown in Figure 1 is used. It is assumed that the model is linear and that there is no tyre damping. The sprung mass is m_s and the unsprung mass is m_u. Z_s, Z_u and Z_rare the positions of the sprung mass, the unsprung mass and the road, respectively. DWF is the downforce generated by the vehicle. The suspension spring stiffness and tyre rates are K_s and K_t, respectively. And C_s represents the damper rate.

Case 1: Simulating with a traditional aerodynamic model

Figure 2 represents the Simulink model of the complete system (case 1). The total DWF (DWF_total) generated by the vehicle has been divided into two blocks. The first one (upper downforce) represents a non-linear model in which the DWF (DWF_upper) is proportional to the square of the speed. The second one (floor downforce)is a simplified aero map representing the DWF generated by the vehicle floor (DWF_floor) as a function of the ride height (RH). As RH decreases, DWF_floor becomes larger, up to a point (RH_peak) where it reaches a maximum (DWF_peak). Below this point, the bottom of the vehicle begins to rapidly lose its ability to generate DWF (Figure 3).

The simulation shows that as the speed increases, the DWF (DWF_total, DWF_upper and DWF_floor) increases and the RH (Z_s) decreases (Figure 4). From a certain instant (t = 4.6 s), the DWF_upper continues to grow because of the increase in speed, but the DWF_floor starts to decrease because the RH is below RH_peak. TheDWF_total grows more slowly, but, despite the decrease in RH, the porpoising effect does not appear.

Case 2: Simulating with a modified aerodynamic model

The reason why the porpoising effect does not appear is that the aerodynamics model (specifically, the floor model) does not fully reproduce the real air behaviour. A so-called “magic block” has been inserted into the simulation model, which includes the equations of air dynamics that have not been taken into account until now (Figure 5). This issue is the subject of continuous research. These equations reflect the “hysteresis” of the air as its state is perturbed. That is, if the ride height is changed, there will be a variation in the generated downforce, which will depend on the speed of the vertical movement of the vehicle. In other words, we have a dynamic aero map, rather than a static aero map.

As can be noticed in Figure 6, variations in the DWF_floor start to appear from the instant t = 5 s, causing oscillations in the suspended mass (Z_s), in the tyres (Z_u) and in the suspension (Z_s – Z_u).

By increasing the damper rate (C_s > C_s nominal value), oscillations can be eliminated (Figure 7). And if it is increased too much (C_s >> C_s nominal value), the oscillations reappear (Figure 8). However, on this occasion, the suspension movement (Z_s – Z_u) has been greatly reduced and it is almost locked so that the movement of the chassis (Z_s) is almost entirely caused by the movement of the tyre (Z_u). It could be said that the vehicle bounces on the tyres.

On the other hand, returning to the case where porpoising is eliminated (C_s > C_s nominal value), it can be observed in Figure 9 that, if the car goes over a bump (at t = 10 s), the oscillations may reappear.

Conclusion

The quarter-car suspension model allows the porpoising effect to be simulated as long as you have a model of the aerodynamics that reflects the full behaviour of the air. On the other hand, increasing the damper rate may help to reduce porpoising, but it deteriorates the grip of the vehicle and, on bumpy tracks, may cause the porpoising effect to reappear. Therefore, it seems that an aerodynamic approach must be adopted to solve the problem.

About the authors

Nacho Suárez – PhD Electronics Engineer, Vehicle Dynamics, Virtual 7-post Rig, Simulation, Autonomous Vehicles, Control, Racing, Embedded Systems; UNEX University. Enrique Scalabroni – formerly at Dallara Automobili, Ferrari F1 Chassis Technical Director, Williams F1 and Lotus F1 among many others. Timoteo Briet – Aerodynamic and CFD engineer, Mathematician, Cosmologist, Online Course CFD, Aero and CFD professor. Suárez, Scalabroni and Briet have been researching topics related to transient aerodynamics and its effects or problems for a number of years. A better understanding of the porpoising problem is the reason for the research explored in this article. They have written two other research papers that you can find in the links below:

https://zenodo.org/record/5813304#.YdFkDDPMK1s

https://zenodo.org/record/5813306#.YdFkkjPMK1s

Performance is a multi-faceted word in Formula 1. It can be associated with lap time, driveability, top speed, tyre degradation, downforce, power unit output and efficiency, overall reliability, component stiffness, aerodynamic drag, resource efficiency in cost, time, energy and much more. The various areas of performance can influence each other, so measuring them depends on the data collected and the analysis undertaken. Each Formula 1 car carries around 300 sensors onboard, producing 1.5 terabytes of data throughout a race weekend.  For a race season, a two-car team produces 11.8 billion data points. These must all be filtered and analysed to look for performance gains, reliability issues or strategies for the team to make better decisions or to work out their competitors’ actions.

From the 11.8 billion data points, it is fair that teams reasonably understand what the car is doing. However, to make performance gains and other improvements, they need to keep developing the car, find ways to be more efficient, and understand the car’s characteristics in more detail. When engineers design parts for the car, teams produce them virtually in CAD, so there is an exact digital twin of each full-scale car in CAD and a fluid dynamics model. This is where the virtual world and the physical world intersect.

Teams will simulate the properties of any newly designed elements in this digital world before a component is built, tested, and put onto the racecar. CFD analysis produces a vast amount of data, measuring every cubic centimetre of airflow around the car in high resolution. The post-CFD analysis is equally critical, as it influences whether a part should be taken to the 3D printer and manufactured at a 60 per cent scale for testing in the wind tunnel.