Long or short nose? Key differences and analysis behind F1 engineers’ choice. Short or long nose for Formula 1 cars?.

Since the introduction of ground-effect cars, the design of front wing noses has not been subject to strict regulatory restrictions regarding their attachment to the wing profiles. This has allowed teams to develop a wide range of different solutions and experiment with two types of nose: short or long. But what exactly is meant by a short or long nose? And what criteria guide engineers in choosing between the two solutions?

Throughout this regulatory era, two design philosophies have emerged regarding the integration of the nose with the front wing. In some cars, the nose ends directly on the mainplane, while in others, it connects to the second element of the wing.

Over time, some teams have experimented with both solutions. A surprising case is Red Bull, which, despite adopting a specific configuration since 2022, decided to change philosophy in the final season of the current regulations. With the second specification brought to the Bahrain tests, the nose now connects to the second element of the wing instead of the mainplane, where it had been positioned since 2022.

To understand this design choice, it is essential to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of both configurations. Red Bull tested both solutions in the Bahrain pre-season testing session to compare them directly on track, as wind tunnel simulations, despite their sophistication, cannot fully replicate real-world scenarios.

The analysis

In the original design, with the nose resting on the mainplane, the front wing generated more downforce in the central section, being the part closest to the asphalt and therefore most influenced by ground effect. The closer it is to the ground, the more the airflow accelerates and gains energy until it reaches a point where the flow separates from the surface, causing the wing to stall.

This design produces greater front-end downforce, particularly when the car is slightly higher off the ground, such as in low- and medium-speed corners. However, the absence of a gap between the nose and the wing profile means that, as speed increases and ride height decreases, this area can stall because the air can no longer flow effectively over the wing profile.

As a result, there is a loss of front downforce and a reduction in pitch sensitivity, which can be beneficial under braking. However, when the airflow under the wing is disrupted and becomes turbulent, this turbulence extends to the car’s floor, compromising its aerodynamic efficiency. It is important to note that, in the current generation of ground-effect cars, the floor plays the most crucial aerodynamic role, as it generates the majority of the downforce.

The new “short” nose

The new configuration, with the nose connected to the second element of the wing, has a more rounded shape compared to the previous, sharper version. In this case, the central section of the front wing does not generate the same level of downforce because the gap allows airflow to pass through, reducing its effectiveness at low and medium speeds.

The advantage of this configuration is that the car’s floor receives cleaner and more uniform airflow. With less turbulent incoming flow, the floor can operate in more optimal conditions, ensuring better overall performance for the car.

To compensate for the loss of aerodynamic load at low speeds, a small gurney flap has been added—a thin carbon fiber profile at a right angle, applied to the trailing edge of the front wing’s final flap. This component acts as a vortex generator, designed to be effective at medium-low speeds to recover downforce.

FIA crash tests

When working on the front wing, it is essential that it passes the FIA’s homologation crash tests and remains structurally sound. A nose design that connects to the second element of the wing is more complex to engineer because, being smaller, it must still absorb the same forces as a long-nose design. Additionally, with the short-nose solution, the mainplane—since it is not connected to the nose—requires even stronger mounts to withstand the high stresses of the track. For this reason, changing the front wing design philosophy takes time and financial resources, as engineers must ensure both performance gains and compliance with the FIA’s stringent structural regulations.

In light of these considerations, the choice of front wing design depends on the specific needs of the car and the driver’s driving style. Teams must find the right compromise between aerodynamic load, stability, and driver preferences.

Source: f1ingenerale