energies
Article
Aerodynamic Effect of the Gurney Flap on the Front Wing of a
F1 Car and Flow Interactions with Car Components
Mattia Basso, Carlo Cravero * and Davide Marsano






Citation: Basso, M.; Cravero, C.;
Marsano, D. Aerodynamic Effect of
the Gurney Flap on the Front Wing of
a F1 Car and Flow Interactions with
Car Components. Energies 2021, 14,
2059. https://doi.org/10.3390/
en14082059
Academic Editor: Jorge M. M. Barata
Received: 5 March 2021
Accepted: 6 April 2021
Published: 8 April 2021
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Energies 2021, 14, 2059. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14082059
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Meccanica, Energetica, Gestionale e dei Trasporti (DIME),
Università degli Studi di Genova, Via Montallegro 1, 16145 Genova, Italy; mattia.basso01@gmail.com (M.B.);
davide.marsano@edu.unige.it (D.M.)
* Correspondence: cravero@unige.it
Abstract: The design of a racing car needs several aerodynamic design steps in order to achieve high
performance. Each component has an aerodynamic interaction with the others and high performance
requires a good match between them. The front wing is undoubtedly one of the main components to
determine car performance with a strong interaction with the downstream components. The Gurney
Flap (GF) is a small appendix perpendicular to the pressure side of the front wing at the trailing edge
that can dramatically improve the front wing performance. In the literature, the performance of a GF
on a single profile is well documented, while in this paper the GF mounted on the front wing of a
racing car has been investigated and the interactions through the 3D flow structures are discussed.
The global drag and downforce performance on the main components of the vehicle have been
examined by comparing the cases with and without a GF. The GF increases the downforce by about
24% compared to a limited increase in the drag force. A fluid dynamic analysis has been carried out
to understand the physical mechanisms of the flow interaction induced to the other components. The
GF, in fact, enhances the ground effect, by redistributing the flow that interacts differently with the
other components i.e., the wheel zone.
Keywords: racing car; front wing; gurney flap; CFD
1. Introduction
In Formula 1 (F1), front wings are one of the main components for the aerodynamic
performance of the car. They have been the subject of massive studies that have led to
the current configurations after a continuous phase of development since the 1950s. The
introduction of CFD techniques, associated with an available computational resources
increase, has significantly contributed to the development of ever-increasing aerodynamic
performance for the entire vehicle. The changes made to the vehicles over the years have
been carried out according to variations that have undergone the various tracks of the
world championship. They have become increasingly short and complex over time, and
the main objective for cars has moved from reaching their maximum speed to reaching
their maximum acceleration. The aerodynamic components designed to have as low drag
as possible have been improved to enhance the tire traction during steering and braking,
i.e., maximizing the downforce. Typically, the front wing is responsible for 25% of the total
downforce generated. The complexity of a front wing has been studied [1] and it is still
a crucial issue. The Gurney Flap (GF) is a small supplement mounted perpendicularly
to the pressure side of a wing along the trailing edge that brings a series of aerodynamic
improvements to the car. In racing vehicles, this component has a height of 1%–5% as
the ratio between its height and the chord of the wing. The macroscopic effect of the flap
is an increased flow deflection due to both flow recirculation on the pressure side and
increased lower base pressure at the trailing edge [2]. This increases the airfoil aerodynamic
loading and therefore the downforce. Local effects of the suction side separation bubble at
low height from the ground can increase the related drag. Nevertheless, the aerodynamic
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies
Energies 2021, 14, 2059 2 of 15

efficiency (downforce/drag) with a proper flap dimension can increase with respect to
baseline airfoil configuration [3]. If the Gurney is mounted on thicker ailerons the drag
can be reduced because the vortices break off further downstream on the profile, keeping
the boundary layer attached and stable for a wider incidence and ground height range
with respect to the baseline case [2]. In several experimental works, the geometrical data
of the GF have been optimized according to the application [3–5]. Experimental analysis
using hot anemometers has shown that the wing without a GF has a wake with less
instabilities with respect to the case including it [6,7]. These studies indicate that although
the flow downstream of the Gurney satisfies Liebeck’s hypotheses, its instantaneous
structure consists of a vortex shedding. To explain how this wake contributes to raising the
downforce, these vortices have been investigated on how they form and interact to give a
Von Karman’s vortex shedding [8]. It has been shown that for a given incidence and height
of the GF, the low pressure acting on the Gurney base remains constant along the surface.
In simple bodies, Rosko [9] noted similar regions of constant low pressure between
the separation points due to the vortex shedding that reduces pressure acting on the
face downstream of the device in the trailing edge area. Bearman and Trueman [10]
hypothesized that this balancing effect is responsible for the increase in the depression
area. Bearman [11] also quantified the magnitude of the recirculation zone, introducing
the concept of length of formation, defined as the axial distance from the base of the
body to the position of maximum. Good and Joubert [12] have shown how for flat plates
immersed in a turbulent boundary layer, the maximum pressure measured downstream on
the plate increases with the height of the disturbing element. Kennedy and Marsden [13]
demonstrated computationally and experimentally that an increase in the load acting on
the entire wing is generated, introducing a finite pressure difference at the trailing edge.
Aerodynamic studies of the GF have been conducted considering the ground effect [14,15].
The GF has been analyzed and optimized recently in different applications. Tang and
Dowell [16] compared the experimental loading of an NACA 0012 airfoil with a static and
oscillating trailing edge GF by using an incompressible Navier–Stokes solver. A movable
GF on an NACA 4412 airfoil has been studied by Camocardi et al. [17] by investigating the
flow structure near the airfoil wake. Lee [18] studied the impact of GFs of different sizes
and perforations on an NACA 0012 profile discussing the growth and development of the
tip vortex with particle image velocimetry. Recently, Cole et al. [19] studied the effect of
different GFs by highlighting that the airfoil shape is also strategic for the aerodynamic
performances. Min et al. [20] analyzed the vibration reduction in micro flaps helicopter
rotors with a GF. Pastrikakis et al. [21] compared the performance of a helicopter rotor
with a GF at different forward flight speeds. A lift enhancement above 10% has been
observed by Mohammadi et al. [22] by comparing the clean DU91W(2)250 airfoil. Recently,
Woodgate et al. [23] used an inhouse CFD solver to evaluate the implementation of a GF
on wings and rotors. Fernandes-Gamiz et al. [24] used CFD RANS models to analyze and
design the GF and micro tabs on a S810 airfoil and a DU91(2)250 airfoil; in addition, the
proper orthogonal decomposition (POD) has been used to develop a reduced order method.
Aramanedia et al. [25] used the same airfoil to show a parametric study on the GF length
through RANS models; the Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) have been used to obtain an
accurate prediction model of the aerodynamic behavior of the airfoil with a GF.
Extensive aerodynamic analyses on the profile in ground effect have been performed
and the simulation of the vortex shedding from the GF has been discussed [26]; a criterion
to quantify the wake and the recirculation zone in the vortex shedding mechanism has
been developed [27]. The accuracy in numerical prediction of unsteady flows is essential
for the vortex shedding mechanisms, but also for other aerodynamic problems like tonal
noise [28] or vibro-acoustic stability analysis [29,30]. In this paper the CFD analysis of the
aerodynamic performance of the front wing of a Formula 1 car is presented to understand
the effects of a GF on the multi-element wing. The flow structures with and without the
GF are investigated to also highlight the interaction with downstream car components.
Very few studies have been published on the interaction of the Gurney with the other
Energies 2021, 14, 2059 3 of 15

components of a racing car, in order to understand any additional beneficial effects. The
first part of the paper examines the global drag and downforce on the main components
of the vehicle located between the front wing and the tire. The second part discusses in
some detail the differences in the flow structures that occur with or without a GF on the
various car components using a set of control planes in the 3D domain. Studies on the
aerodynamics of racing car wings using CFD have been published [31–33] and the Ansys
CFX code, as in the present work, has been used to investigate the ground effect [34].
The CFD model setup is crucial to correctly represent different racing scenarios [35] or to
investigate the effect of the wake on the following cars [36]. The 3D model of a real F1
car from the 2000s is used as reference geometry for the analysis. The car model is old,
compared to current models, but it is an actual car configuration that participated in F1
championships for years. It can therefore be considered a relevant case in aerodynamic
design for the scope of the present paper. It must be evident that a university research
group cannot have access to the most recent geometrical designs to publish a research
paper. Moreover, any experimental data are kept confidential and not made available to
university groups to be published. With the above restrictions, the paper is aimed at the
critical analysis of the flow structures around the front wing and the interactions between
components (e.g., wheels, struts, etc.) to highlight: (1) the strong aerodynamic interactions
between parts, (2) the dramatic effect of a small detail (the Gurney flap) on component
performance and aerodynamic interactions. The CFD technology is used as a numerical
application tool to investigate and to quantify the above effects. The use of CFD, properly
set, is a current design practice for such configurations. The CFD model used has been set
up in previous research activities with reference cases where detailed experimental data
were available for validation. Only the front part of the car is considered with the rear part
modelled with a boat tail to keep the car obstruction to flow close to the front wing. The
attention is therefore focused on the GF aerodynamic effects and interactions with the front
car components.

2. Geometry and CFD model

2.1. Application
The geometry used for the analysis is a Formula 1 car of the early 2000s with a front
wing composed of: a main wing (main) (c = 0.228 m, b = 0.639 m), a flap (c = 0.182],
b = 0.626 m), and two endplates. The endplate facing the exterior of the aileron has
c = 0.501 m and b = 0.127 m, while the one facing inwards has c = 0.186 m and b = 0.137 m.
The GF is installed perpendicularly to the trailing edge of the flap with the following
reference geometry:
• Central part with height of 1.35% of the aileron chord and thickness s = 1.75 mm;
• Lateral part of variable height between 1.8% and 0.36%, with thickness s = 1.9 mm;
• External part in contact with the endplate with h = 1.8% and s = 1.9 mm;
• Internal endplate with h = 1% of chord of the complete aileron.
The above front wing is installed in a racing car with a lv = 3.5 m body and maximum
width of 0.5 m, with a tire of diameter 620 mm and tread width w = 320 mm. The tire is
supported by lower and upper suspensions with an aerodynamic section: the first has
c = 77 mm and the second has a variable chord between 85 and 167 mm. A camera is
installed with a wing profile with c = 168 mm and b = 100 mm. In Figure 1, the geometry
of the vehicle and the front wing with the GF is reported, by highlighting its location.
 Energies 2021, 14, 2059 4 of 15
2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 15

Figure 1. Geometry of the model and front wing with GF details.

Figure 1. Geometry of the model and front wing with GF details.

2.2. Governing Equations

2.2. Governing Equations
The Reynolds-averaged equation for conservation of mass and momentum form the
The Reynolds-averaged equation for conservation of mass and momentum form the
dynamic flow problem. The turbulence model adopted in the CFD approach is the k-ω
dynamic flow problem. The turbulence model adopted in the CFD approach is the k-ω
SST, in order to solve the boundary layer near the walls; it is based on the Boussinesq’s
SST, in order to solve the boundary layer near the walls; it is based on the Boussinesq’s
hypothesis to model the Reynolds stress tensor. This model was developed to combine
hypothesis to model the Reynolds stress tensor. This model was developed to combine the
the accuracy of the k-ω model near the wall and the robustness of the k-ε in the
accuracy of the k-ω model near the wall and the robustness of the k-ε in the free-stream. It
free-stream. It contains some different terms with respect to the standard k-ω formula-
contains some different terms with respect to the standard k-ω formulation. A blending
tion. A blending function activates the transformed models k-ω and k-ε depending on the
function activates the transformed models k-ω and k-ε depending on the local value of
local value of y+, i.e., near or far from the wall [37]. A different formulation for the eddy
y+, i.e., near or far from the wall [37]. A different formulation for the eddy viscosity and
viscosity and modified constants is introduced. The transport equations are:
modified constants is introduced. The transport equations are:
( )+ ( )= + ∂ − ∂k + (1)
" #
∂ ∂
(ρk) + (ρkui ) = Γk + Gk − Yk + Sk (1)
∂t ∂xi ∂x j ∂x j
( )+ = + "− + # + (2)
∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ω
Γω


(ρω ) + ρωu j = + Gω − Yω + Dω + Sω (2)
The diffusivity is obtained∂tby the following
∂x j equations:
∂x j ∂x j

The diffusivity is obtained

= by+ the following equations: (3)
µt
= + Γk = µ + (3)
σk (4)

The eddy viscosity is determined with: µt

Γω = µ + (4)
σω
1
=is determined with:
The eddy viscosity (5)
1
∗,
ρk 1
µt = (5)
The model constants are: σk,1 = 1.176, σω,1 = 2.0, σk,2ω=max
1.0, σ1ω,2, SF
= 21.168, α1 = 0.31, βi,1 =
h i
∗
a a1 ω
0.075, and βi,2 = 0.0828.
The model constants are: σk,1 = 1.176, σω,1 = 2.0, σk,2 = 1.0, σω,2 = 1.168, α1 = 0.31,
2.3. CFD Model β = 0.075, and β = 0.0828.
i,1 i,2
The computational domain for the study of a Formula 1 front wing consists of a
2.3. CFD Model
rectangular parallelepiped sufficiently extended so that the boundary conditions do not
influence the flow structure around the domain
The computational front wingfor and the front
the study of aofFormula
vehicle. 1Infront
orderwingto consists of a
save a considerable amountparallelepiped
rectangular of computational resources,
sufficiently only one-half
extended so that of
thethe front wing
boundary conditions do not
and the vehicleinfluence
was modelled,
the flowexploiting its axialthe
structure around symmetry.
front wingTheanddomain
the fronthas the fol-In order to save
of vehicle.
lowing geometrical characteristics:
a considerable amount theofground has a surface
computational 3lv × only
resources, 8lv, while
one-half the of
entire
the front wing and
domain has a height of 2lv. In
the vehicle was addition,
modelled,the exploiting
surface in front of the
its axial wing is placed
symmetry. The domainat 2lv, the
has the following
surface at the outlet is 5lv far.
geometrical Figure 2 shows
characteristics: thethe calculation
ground domain3land
has a surface v × the
8l v ,details
while of
the the
entire domain has
Energies 2021, 14, 2059 5 of 15

Energies
Energies2021, 14,14,
2021, x FOR PEER
x FOR REVIEW
PEER REVIEW 5 5ofof1515
a height of 2lv . In addition, the surface in front of the wing is placed at 2lv , the surface at
the outlet is 5lv far. Figure 2 shows the calculation domain and the details of the vehicle
geometry.
vehicle In orderIn
vehiclegeometry.
geometry. to study
Inorder and
orderto compare
tostudy
study and the case with
andcompare
compare the and
thecase without
casewith
withanda without
and GF, one model
withouta aGF, has
GF,one
one
been
modelcleaned
modelhas
hasbeenup by the
beencleaned GF
cleanedup from
upbybythethe
theGFflap.
GFfrom
fromthe
theflap.
flap.

Figure
Figure 2.
Figure Computational
2.2.
Computational domain
Computational and
domain
domain geometry
and
and detail
geometry
geometry of
detail
detail the
ofof vehicle
the
the simulated.
vehicle simulated.

The
The domain
Thedomain
domainhas has been
hasbeen discretized
beendiscretized
discretizedwith with an
withan unstructured
anunstructured
unstructuredgrid grid with
gridwith prism
withprism layers
prismlayers near
layersnear
near
the
the wall
thewall wallofofofthe
the vehicle
thevehicle
vehicleand and itsitscomponents,
andits components,
components,in ininorder
order
ordertototosolve
solve the
solvethe boundary
theboundary layer.
boundarylayer. layer.TheThesize
size
ofofthe
of the first
first cell
cell has
has been
been set
set to
to have
have a
a y+
y+ close
close to
to one.
one. AA local
local refinement
refinement
the first cell has been set to have a y+ close to one. A local refinement is required on the is
is required
required on the
leading
leading
leadingedges edges
edgesof ofofthe
the wings
thewings
wingsand and
andat atatthe
the trailing
thetrailing edges
trailingedges with
edgeswith the
withthe GF,
theGF,GF,setting
settinga amaximum
maximumsize size
of 1 mm.
ofof1 1mm. mm.TheThe global
Theglobal mesh
globalmesh meshsizesize consists
sizeconsists of about
consistsofofabout 45 million
about4545million of cells.
millionofofcells. In Figure
cells.InInFigure
Figure3,3,3,the
the mesh
themesh
mesh
for
for the
forthe thecase
case
case with
with
with aaGF aGF isisshown,
GF isshown,
shown, while
while Figure
while Figure4 reports
Figure the the
4 4reports
reports wall y+
thewall
wallcontours
y+y+contoursalongalong
contours the front
along the
the
wing
front
frontwingofwing
theofvehicle.
ofthe The mesh
thevehicle.
vehicle. The
Themeshused
meshused has
used been
has designed
hasbeen
beendesigned to have
designed ahave
totohavehigh quality;
a ahigh overover
highquality;
quality; 90%
over
of90%
90% cells have
ofofcells ahave
cellshave quality higher
a aquality
quality thanthan
higher
higher 0.5
thanand
0.5 with
0.5and an
andwith equi-angle
with ananequi-angle skewness
equi-angle skewness greater
skewness thanthan
greater
greater 0.55
than
and
0.55
0.55andthe aspect
andthe ratio
theaspect is
aspectratio higher than
ratioisishigher 0.6.
higherthan This
than0.6. mesh
0.6.This strategy
Thismesh with
meshstrategy the
strategywith same
withthe local
thesame refinement
samelocal
localre-re-
on the wings
finement
finement ononthe has been
thewings selected
wingshas hasbeen
been after
selecteda grid
selected dependency
after
after a agrid analysis performed
griddependency
dependency analysis in a previous
analysisperformed
performed inina a
work
previous
previous [26]work
on
work the[26]wing
[26] inthe
ononthe ground
wingineffect
wing inground analyzed
ground effectin
effect an isolated
analyzed
analyzed form
ininanan withform
isolated
isolated and
form without
with
withand a
and
GF.
without In the
withouta aGF. previous
GF.InInthe work
theprevious[26],
previouswork the CFD
work[26], model
[26],the
theCFDwas validated
CFDmodelmodelwas by comparing
wasvalidated the
validatedbybycomparing numerical
comparingthe the
results
numerical with detailed
results experimental
with detailed data [38,39]
experimental at different
data
numerical results with detailed experimental data [38,39] at different distances from distances
[38,39] at from
different ground
distances and with
from
different
ground
groundand GF heights.
andwith withdifferent
differentGF GFheights.
heights.

Figure
Figure 3.
Figure Detail
3.3.
Detail of
Detail the
ofof the
the calculation grid
calculation
calculation of
grid
grid the
ofof the
the aileron’s vehicle.
aileron’s
aileron’s vehicle.
vehicle.
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 15

Energies 2021, 14, 2059 6 of 15

Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 15

Figure 4. Wall y+ contours on the aileron’s vehicle.

The followings boundary conditions have been set: at the inlet of the domain a uni-
Figure 4. Wall y+ contours on the aileron’s vehicle.
form velocity of 70 m/s and a turbulence intensity of 5% are fixed, while at the outlet of
Figure 4. Wall y+ contours on the aileron’s vehicle.
the domain there is boundary
The followings a pressureconditions
ambient condition.
have been In set:the symmetry
at the side,
inlet of the the surface
domain has
a uniform
been fixed
velocity as
70am/s
symmetry a condition, while at the surface relativewhile
to the ground, a wall no
Theoffollowings and turbulence
boundary intensity
conditions haveofbeen5% areset: fixed,
at the inlet ofatthe
thedomain
outlet of the
a uni-
slip condition
domain there with
is a the sameambient
pressure velocitycondition.
of the car In is set;
the finally the remaining
symmetry side, the surfaces
surface hasofbeen
the
form velocity of 70 m/s and a turbulence intensity of 5% are fixed, while at the outlet of
domain
fixed as have been set as an inviscid
a symmetry wall. The car surfaces are set as a no slip condition.
the domain there is acondition,
pressure while
ambient at the surface
condition. relative
In to the
the symmetry ground, a wall
side, the no slip
surface has
The flow is
condition withconsidered
the same isothermal
velocity of and
the incompressible.
car is set; finally All
the the equations
remaining have ofbeen
surfaces the
been fixed as a symmetry condition, while at the surface relative to the ground, a wall no
solved
domain with
have second
been order numerical schemes and steady flow simulations havecondition.
been set
slip condition withsettheas an
same inviscid
velocitywall.
of theThe
car car surfaces
is set; finallyare
theset as a no slip
remaining surfaces of the
up.
The flow is considered isothermal and incompressible. All the equations have been solved
domain have been set as an inviscid wall. The car surfaces are set as a no slip condition.
with second order numerical schemes and steady flow simulations have been set up.
The flow is considered isothermal and incompressible. All the equations have been
3. Results
3.solved with second order numerical schemes and steady flow simulations have been set
Results
3.1.
up. Global Performance
Global of the Main Components
3.1. Performance of the Main Components
This section discusses the main differences concerning aerodynamic performance
This section discusses the main differences concerning aerodynamic performance with
3. Results
with or without the GF on the front wing. As shown in Figure 5, both the global down-
or without the GF on the front wing. As shown in Figure 5, both the global downforce and
force and drag in the front
3.1. Global wing increased with the GF; the lift (downforce) and the drag
drag in the Performance of the
front wing increased Main Components
with the GF; the lift (downforce) and the drag increased by
increased by 23.98% and 28.19%, respectively, while the aerodynamic efficiency E de-
23.98% This
andsection
28.19%,discusses the while
respectively, main thedifferences
aerodynamic concerning
efficiencyaerodynamic
E decreasedperformance
only by 5%.
creased only by 5%.
with or without the GF on the front wing. As shown in Figure 5, both the global down-
force and drag in the front wing increased with the GF; the lift (downforce) and the drag
increased by 23.98% and 28.19%, respectively, while the aerodynamic efficiency E de-
creased only by 5%.

Figure 5. Lift and drag coefficients of the complete aileron with and without GF.
Figure 5. Lift and drag coefficients of the complete aileron with and without GF.

The
The lift
lift coefficient
coefficient C
Cll and
and the
the drag
drag coefficient
coefficient C
Cdd have
havebeen
been defined
defined as:
as:
L and without GF.
Figure 5. Lift and drag coefficients of the complete aileronLwith
C  (6)
Cl l= 1  AU 2 (6)
1/2ρAU 2 
2 ∞
The lift coefficient Cl and the drag coefficient Cd have been defined as:
DDRL
R
CC
dCd l 1
= 2 2
(7)
(7)
/112ρAU
 AU∞ 2 (6)
22  AU
The aerodynamic efficiency E is defined as:
The aerodynamic efficiency E is defined as:
D
CdCl/CD = LR/D 2
E= (8)
(7)
1  AU
2 

The aerodynamic efficiency E is defined as:

Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 15

Energies 2021, 14, 2059 7 of 15

Cl
E L (8)
CD D
This
This parameter
parameter is is very
very important
important to
to indicate
indicate how
how much
much lift
lift (downforce)
(downforce) is is obtained
obtained
with the GF referred to the drag value.
with the GF referred to the drag value.
The
The lift
lift and
and drag
drag contributions
contributions ofof the
the individual
individual components
components were were calculated,
calculated, by
by
measuring, respectively, the vertical and horizontal force components
measuring, respectively, the vertical and horizontal force components using using the commercial
the com-
post-processing software Ansys
mercial post-processing CFX-Post.
software Ansys In Figure 6, the
CFX-Post. contributions
In Figure 6, the ofcontributions
downforce and of
drag for the main, the flap, and the endplates are shown.
downforce and drag for the main, the flap, and the endplates are shown.

Figure 6.
6. C
Cl and
and C
Cd performance comparison on main, flap, and endplates.
Figure l d performance comparison on main, flap, and endplates.

With the
the GF,
GF,aadownforce
downforceincrease
increase
of of about
about 30%
30% on on
the the
flapflap
andand on endplates
on the the endplates
and
and 20%
20% formain
for the the main was observed;
was observed; on theon the hand,
other other the
hand, theincreased
drag drag increased
by 33% by
and33%
24%and
on
24%flap
the on and
the flap and
on the on the endplates,
endplates, respectively,
respectively, but decreased
but decreased on the main onbythe main
67%. Thebyeffects
67%.
Thethe
on effects on the suspensions
suspensions (upper the
(upper and lower), andwheels,
lower),and
the wheels,
the bodyand thevehicle
of the body ofare
thereported
vehicle
areTable
in reported
1. in Table 1.

Table 1. Percentage
Table 1. Percentage variation
variation of
of aerodynamic
aerodynamic forces
forceson
onsuspension,
suspension,tire
tireand
andvehicle
vehiclebody.
body.

Suspensions
Suspensions Tire
Tire Vehicle Body
Vehicle Body
Downforce
Downforce Drag
Drag Downforce
Downforce Drag
Drag Downforce
Downforce Drag
Drag
Upper: +22.7
Upper: Upper: +2.6
+22.7 Upper: +2.6 +37.9
+37.9 − 25.8
−25.8 +62.9
+62.9 +48.7
+48.7
Lower: +62.8
Lower: Lower: +57.4
+62.8 Lower: +57.4

therefore affected
The above components are therefore affected by
by the
the GF
GF installation:
installation: increase in
in
downforce and drag, with the exception of the wheels where there is a reduction in in drag
drag
like for the main (see Figure 6).

3.2. Fluid-Dynamic Analysis

3.2. Fluid-Dynamic Analysis
To
To understand
understand the
the main
main differences
differences on
on the
the aerodynamic
aerodynamic performance
performance of of the
the vehicle
vehicle
and
and its components, a fluid dynamic analysis was carried out on a set of control planes, as
its components, a fluid dynamic analysis was carried out on a set of control planes, as
shown
shown in in Figure
Figure 7.
7.
 Energies 2021, 14, 2059 8 of 15
s 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 15
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 15

Figure 7. Characteristic
Figure plans
7. Characteristic considered
plans forfor
considered thethe
fluid dynamics
fluid dynamicsanalysis in the
analysis x, yx,direction.
in the y direction.
Figure 7. Characteristic plans considered for the fluid dynamics analysis in the x, y direction.

On plane x1, Figure

On 8, the comparison of the contoursof for pressure and velocity, with velocity, with
On plane
plane xx11,, Figure
Figure 8,
8, the
the comparison
comparison of thethe contours
contours for
for pressure
pressure and
and velocity, with
and without a and
GF, without
are plotted to are
understand theunderstand
reason for the
the reason
downforce increase and
and without a GF, are plotted to understand the reason for the downforce increase
a GF, plotted to for the downforce increase and
and
drag reductiondrag
on the main wing
reduction on with
the a GF.
main wing with a GF.
drag reduction on the main wing with a GF.

Figure 8. Comparison on the x1 plane of distributions between the case with (right) and without GF (left): (above) pressure
igure 8. Comparison on the xvelocity
contours 1 plane of distributions between the case with (right) and without GF (left): (above) pres-
Figure 8.with
Comparison vectors,
on the x(below) velocity
1 plane of contours.
distributions between the case with (right) and without GF (left): (above) pres-
ure contours with velocity vectors, (below) velocity contours.
sure contours with velocity vectors, (below) velocity contours.
A large area of low pressure (high velocity) under the main wing is evident with the
A large area
GFof low pressure
installed (high velocity) under the The
mainflow
wing is evident with the
A largethatareaenhances the ground
of low pressure effect.
(high velocity) under is the
affected
mainby the presence
wing is evidentofwith
the GF
the
GF installed that
and enhances the
redistributed ground
below effect.
the mainThe flow
wing is
and affected
towards by
the the presence
endplate, as of theby the velocity
seen
GF installed that enhances the ground effect. The flow is affected by the presence of the
GF and redistributed
vectors. belowvelocity
the main wing alongand towards the side
endplate,
gives as seen bywake
the ve-
GF and The redistributedincrease
below the main the wing
suction and towards athe
smaller
endplate, as onseen
the main wing
by the ve-
locity vectors. as
The velocity
seen in increase
Figure 9, alongthe
where thestreamlines
suction side on gives
the ya2 plane
smaller wake
are on the
plotted. This is the main
locity vectors. The velocity increase along the suction side gives a smaller wake on the
main wing as seen
reasonin for
Figure
the 9, where the streamlines on the ywith
2 planeGF areinstalled.
plotted. This is
main wing as drag
seen reduction
in Figure 9,onwhere
the main
the wing
streamlinesa on the y2 planeThe
aresame figure
plotted. alsois
This
the main reason for the
shows thedrag reduction
typical flow on the main
structure with wing with a GF
recirculating flows installed.
upstreamTheand
same downstream the
the main reason for the drag reduction on the main wing with a GF installed. The same
figure also shows
GF the
on the typical flow structure with recirculating flows upstream and
figure alsoflap element
shows theoftypical
the wing.
flow structure with recirculating flows upstream and
downstream the GF on the flap element of the wing.
downstream the GF on the flap element of the wing.
Energies 2021, 14, 2059 9 of 15
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 15
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 15

Figure 9. Comparison on the y2 plane of streamline between the case without (left) and with (right) GF.
Figure 9. Comparison on the y2 plane of streamline between the case without (left) and with (right) GF.
Figure 9. Comparison on the y2 plane of streamline between the case without (left) and with (right) GF.
The
The same
same fluid dynamics analysis
fluid dynamics analysis was
was performed
performed on
on the
the xx2 plane
plane to
to understand
understand the
the
2
The in
increase same fluid
drag anddynamics
in analysis
downforce on wasendplate.
the performed on the xand
Pressure 2 plane to understand
velocity contours the
are
increase in drag and in downforce on the endplate. Pressure and velocity contours are
increase
reported in drag
Figureand
10.
reported in Figure 10. in downforce on the endplate. Pressure and velocity contours are
reported in Figure 10.

Figure 10. Comparison on the x2 plane of distributions between the case with and without GF: (above) pressure contours
Figure
with 10. Comparison
velocity on the x2 plane contours.
vectors, (below) of distributions between the case with and without GF: (above) pressure contours
Figure 10. Comparison on the xvelocity
2 plane of distributions between the case with and without GF: (above) pressure contours
with velocity vectors, (below) velocity contours.
with velocity vectors, (below) velocity contours.
The velocity vectors have an evident upwash direction in the wing central area,
The
whileThe velocity
laterally
velocity vectors
thevectors
flow interactshaveanan
have evident
with
evident upwash
theupwash
tire direction
anddirection
tends toinbetheinwing
the wing
deviated in all
central central area,
directions.
area, while
while
By laterally
comparing
laterally thecase
the
the flow flowwith
interacts interacts withtire
and without
with the theaand
tire and
GF,tends tends
to betodeviated
an evident be deviated
low-pressure indirections.
all directions.
in allregion is located By
By
in comparing
the lower the
part ofcase
the with
endplate and without
facing thea GF,
car an
in evident
the case
comparing the case with and without a GF, an evident low-pressure region is located in low-pressure
with a GF. region
Without the is located
GF, the
in the
above
the lower
lower part
depression
part of of the
area
the isendplate
negligible.
endplate facing
facingWith the
the the car
car ininthe
GF, thecase
the casewith
flow with
is aa GF.
GF. Without
accelerated Without
underthe the
the GF,GF, the
basethe of
above
the depression
endplate
above causing
depression area
areathe is
is lownegligible.
pressure
negligible. With
With the
zones. GF, the
In these
the GF, flow
regions,
the flow is accelerated under
due to theunder
is accelerated the
redistribution base
the base of of
the endplate
flow, higher
the endplate causing the
velocities
causing low
the low pressure
arepressure zones.
observedzones. In
downstreamthese regions,
In these fromregions, due
the due to the
endplate. redistribution
to the The flow rate,
redistribution of
thethe
and
of flow,
flow,higher
consequently
higher velocities
the axial are
velocities areobserved
velocity, downstream
is distributed
observed downstream morefrom
from the
theendplate.
evenly over the car
endplate. The
Theand flow
flowinrate,
the
rate,
and consequently
bottom
and consequently
area of thethe the axial
main
axialwing velocity,
and is
velocity, is
the distributed more evenly
flap. Therefore,
distributed more evenly
the flow overpasses
over the car
the carthrough
and in
and in the
the
channels
bottom areaarea ofofthethe
generated main main
by the
wing wing
base and
andofthethethe flap. Therefore,
endplate,
flap. Therefore, withthehigher
flow the flow through
passes
velocities
passes through
giving
the rise tothe
channels a
channels
relevant
generated generated
ground
by theeffect by
base on the
of the base of the
the endplate, endplate,
endplate. withHowever, with higher
higheratvelocities
the endplate velocities
exitrise
giving giving
thetopressure rise
a relevant tore-a
relevant
groundlower,
mains ground effect
effectgenerating on
on the endplate. the
a larger endplate.
However,
wake with However,
at the at
endplate
higher the
drag. Even endplate
exit the exit
pressure
in the the
wheelremainspressure
area, thelower,
flowre-
mains lower,
generating
differs between generating
a largerthewake awith
case with larger wake
higher
and with
drag.
without ahigher
EvenGF. inWithdrag.
the wheel
theEven inthe
area,
GF, thefluid
wheel
flowbeing area,deflected,
differs the flow
between
differs
the
carries between
caseoutwith andthe
a greater case
pathwith
without GF.and
acausing awithout
With the GF,akinetic
greater GF.fluid
the With the loss.
being
energy GF, the Forfluid
deflected, being
carries
this outdeflected,
reason, anear
greater
the
carries
path
tread, inout
thea low
causing agreater
greater path
region, kinetic causing
there energya greater
are no loss.
marked Forkinetic
this energy
reason,
depression nearloss.
areas. the For thisinreason,
tread,
The same the of
set low near the
region,
contours
tread,
there in
are the
no low
marked region, there
depression are no
areas. marked
The depression
same set of areas.
contours
on plane x3 are shown in Figure 11 to understand the phenomena related to3 the perfor- The
on same
plane set
x of
are contours
shown
on plane
mance onxsuspensions
3 are shown and in Figure
wheel.11 to understand the phenomena related to the perfor-
mance on suspensions and wheel.
Energies 2021, 14, 2059 10 of 15

Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 15

Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW
in Figure
11 to understand the phenomena related to the performance on 10 of 15
suspensions
and wheel.

Figure
Figure
Figure 11.11.
11. Comparison
Comparison
Comparison ononthe
on theon
the onthe
on thexx3x3 3plane
the plane of
ofdistributions
distributions between
distributions betweenthe
thecase
casewith
withand
andwithout
without
withoutGF:
GF:(above) pressure
(above)
(above) pressure
pressure
contours
contours with
with velocity
velocity vectors,(below)
vectors, (below)velocity
velocity contours,
contours, and
and vectors.
vectors.
contours with velocity vectors, (below) velocity contours, and vectors.

Thebaseline
The baseline case
case without
without aa GF GF hashasthree
threedistinct
distinctswirling
swirling directions
directionsaffected
affectedby by
thethe
the
presence of
presence of the the wheel.
the wheel.
wheel.TheThe first
Thefirst is at
is is
first the
at at top
thethe of
toptop the
of the wheel
wheel
of the (where
(where
wheel high pressures
highhigh
(where pressures and sep-
and sep-
pressures and
arationsare
separations
arations arearegenerated
generated
generated on on
on thethe
the tread
tread
tread and
andandon the
ononthe rubber
the sides).
rubber
rubber The
sides).
sides). second
The
The is due
second
second to the
is due
is to the
the
turbulences created by
turbulences by the
the wheel
wheel (where
(wherelow lowpressure
pressureisis reached). The third is due to the
created is reached).
reached). The third is due to the the
flow that externally and internally bypasses the wheel (influenced by the flow exiting the
flow that externally and internally bypasses the wheel (influenced by the flow flow exiting
exiting the
the
endplate). In the area between the bottom of the car and the wheel, on the back of the
endplate). InIn the
the area
area between
between the the bottom
bottom of of the car and the wheel, on the back of the the
lower suspension, a low-pressure zone is created with upward motion. With the GF, the
lower suspension, a low-pressure zone is created with upward motion. With the GF, the the
main difference concerns the flow pattern below the front wing near the ground; it is
main difference concerns the flow pattern below thethe
front wing nearnear
the ground; it is more
more swirling with a smaller extension of the low-pressure zones, while the velocities is
difference concerns the flow pattern below front wing the ground; it
swirling
more with a smaller
swirling extension of the low-pressure zones, while the velocities remain
remain higher.with a region,
In this smaller extension
there of the interaction
is a different low-pressure zones,
between thewhile the velocities
mainstream and
higher.
remain In this In
higher. region,
this there is
region, a different
there is a interaction
different between
interaction the mainstream
between the mainstreamand and
the
the suspension with a greater turbulence than with a GF. This different interaction is
suspension
the with
suspension
displayed
a
on thewith
greater turbulence
a greater
y4 plane of Figure
than
turbulence with
12 with the than a GF. This different
with contours.
velocity
interaction is displayed
a GF. This different interaction is
on the y4 plane
displayed on theofyFigure
4 plane12
of with the12velocity
Figure with thecontours.
velocity contours.

Figure 12. Comparison on the y4 plane of velocity contours between the case with and without GF.
Figure 12. Comparison
Figure 12. Comparison on
on the
the yy44 plane
plane of
of velocity
velocity contours
contours between
between the
the case
case with
with and
and without
without GF.
GF.
A large recirculation bubble is generated below the lower suspension without the
GF; Athe incoming
large flow on bubble
recirculation the suspension, induced
is generated by the
below the lower
GF, hassuspension
a correct incidence
without with
the GF;
A large recirculation bubble is generated below the lower suspension without the
theincoming
the suspensionflowrodonthat
thestrongly reduces
suspension, its wake.
induced TheGF,
by the radically different
has a correct flow structure
incidence with the
GF;
thatthe incoming
forms in the flow
tires on the under
wake, suspension,
the induced bycanthebeGF, has a correct incidence with
suspension rod that strongly reduces itssuspensions,
wake. The radically observed
differentinflow
Figure 13 using
structure that
the suspension
the streamlines rod that strongly
visualization. reduces its wake. The radically different flow structure
forms in the tires wake, under the suspensions, can be observed in Figure 13 using the
that forms in the tires wake, under the suspensions, can be observed in Figure 13 using
streamlines visualization.
the streamlines visualization.
 Energies
gies 2021, 14, PEER14,
x FOR2021, 2059
REVIEW 11 of 15 11 of 15
Energies
Energies 2021,
2021, 14,14, x FOR
x FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 1111ofof1515

Figure 13. Comparison

Figure ofComparison
the streamlines
ofofthe
thebelow the vehicle between the case with and without GF. without GF.
streamlines
Figure13.
Figure 13.Comparison
Comparisonof thestreamlines
streamlinesbelow
belowthe
thevehicle
vehiclebetween
betweenthe
thecase
casewith
withand
and withoutGF.
GF.

Figure 14 showsFigurethe14
Figure streamlines
shows the pattern
streamlineson a pattern
transversalon onaaplane close to
transversal the endplates
plane close totothe
the endplates
Figure 1414shows
showsthe the streamlines
streamlines patternon
pattern atransversal
transversal plane
plane closeto
close theendplates
endplates
(plane y4) where
(plane they flow
) wherewithout
the a
flowGF (left)
without is slower
a GF close
(left) is to ground
slower close and
to gives
ground rise
and to a
gives rise
riseto
(planey44y)4where
(plane ) wherethe theflow
flowwithout
withouta aGF GF(left)
(left)isisslower
slowercloseclosetotoground
groundand andgives
givesrise totoaa a
large recirculation
large area due
recirculation
largerecirculation to interaction
recirculationarea area due
areaduedueto with the
totointeraction
interactiontire. The
with
interactionwith configuration
the
withthe tire.
thetire. The
tire.The with the
configuration
Theconfiguration GF,
configurationwith as
with
withthe the GF,
GF,as
theGF,
large asas
previously discussed,
previously has
previouslydiscussed,higher
discussed,
discussed,has velocity
has higher
hashigher close to
velocity
highervelocity ground
close
velocityclose to and the
ground
closetotoground above
and
groundand therecirculation
above
andthe recirculation
theabove
aboverecirculation area
recirculation
previously
area is absent; the is
isarea flow
absent; is flow
the
absent; deflected
isflow
theflow upward
deflected with upward
upward a positive
with with
awith interaction
positive with
interaction thewith
suspen-
the suspensions,
area is absent; the isisdeflected
deflected upward a apositive
positive interaction
interaction withwith thethesuspen-
suspen-
sions, as previously
assions, discussed.
previously However,
discussed. However,in this inlast
thiscase,
last the last
case, wake
the of the
wake car
ofwake
the is
car wider
isthe
wider (stream-
sions, asaspreviously
previously discussed.
discussed. However,
However, in inthis
this last case,
case, thethe wake ofof the carcarisiswider
wider
(streamlines lines
deflection)
(streamlines thus
deflection) giving
thus
deflection) more
giving overall
thusmoregiving drag,
overall but
drag,
moreoverall
overall also
but beneficial
alsobut
drag, effects
beneficial
butalso
also on the
effects
beneficial on the tire,
effects as
(streamlines deflection) thus giving more drag, beneficial effects ononthethe
tire, as previously claimed.
previously claimed.
tire,asaspreviously
previouslyclaimed.
claimed.
tire,

Figure 14. Comparison on the y4 plane of the streamlines. Without (left) and with (right) GF.
Figure14.
Figure 14.Comparison
Comparisonononthe
they44yplane
planeof
4plane ofofthe
thestreamlines.
the streamlines.Without
streamlines. Without(left)
Without (left)and
andwith
with(right)
(right)GF.
GF.

In Figure 15 In
theFigure
pressure contours on the y3 plane are
theyshown. They highlight thathighlight
a
InInFigure
Figure 15
1515the
thepressure
the pressure
pressure contours
contours
contours on onthe
on the y3y3plane
plane
3 plane areshown.
are
are shown.They
shown. They highlight
highlight that
thata a
that
large low-pressure
a large area is
largelow-pressure generated
low-pressure
low-pressurearea areaon isthe nose
generated
areaisisgenerated of the
on
generatedononthe connector
the
thenose nose of
noseofofthe with
the the GF
connector
theconnector and
connectorwith a
with re-
withthe the
theGF GF
GFand and a
anda are-
re-
large
duction of the high-pressure
reduction
ductionofof ofthe
the zone below
thehigh-pressure
high-pressurezonethe suspension.
zonebelow
below
belowthe the These combined
suspension.
thesuspension. These
suspension.These effects give
combined
Thesecombined effects
effectsgive
combinedeffects give
duction
more downforcemorewith the GF installed.
downforce withthe
theGF GFinstalled.
installed.
more downforce with

Figure
15. 15. Comparison
Comparison on on the
the y3 plane
y3 plane of pressure
ofon
pressure contours. Case without (left) and with (right)
Figure Figure
Figure 15.
15. Comparison
Comparison onthe 3contours.
they3yplane Case without
planeofofpressure
pressure (left)
contours.
contours. andwithout
Case
Case with (right)
without GF.
(left)
(left) andwith
and with(right)
(right)
GF.
GF.
GF.
The pressure contours on the x4 plane are shown in Figure 16 to discuss the various
aerodynamic effects acting on the other parts of the vehicle.
Energies 2021,
Energies 14,14,
2021, x FOR PEER
x FOR REVIEW
PEER REVIEW 12 15
12 of of 15

Energies 2021, 14, 2059 12 of 15

The
Thepressure
pressure contours
contours on the
the xx44 plane
planeare
areshown
shownininFigure
Figure
1616
to to discuss
discuss thethe various
various
aerodynamic
aerodynamiceffects
effects acting the other
acting on the otherparts
partsofofthe
thevehicle.
vehicle.

Figure 16. Comparison on the x4 plane of pressure contours with velocity vectors. Case without (left) and with (right) GF.
Figure
Figure 16. Comparison on
16. Comparison on the
the xx44 plane
plane of
of pressure
pressure contours
contours with
with velocity
velocity vectors.
vectors. Case
Case without
without (left)
(left) and
and with
with (right)
(right) GF.
GF.

Low-pressurezones
Low-pressure zonesaround
aroundthe thecar
carand
andunder
underthethebody
bodyare
aregenerated
generatedbybyvortices
vorticesthat
thatLow-pressure
develop from zones
the around
ground at thethe car and
corners of under
the body the body are
sections. Thesegenerated
vortices by vortices
and theirlow
develop
that fromfrom
develop the ground
the groundat theatcorners
the cornersof the
ofbody
the sections.
body These
sections. vortices
These and and
vortices theirtheir
low pressure
pressure are
are useful useful to
to both both feed
feedfeed the
the the cooling
cooling sections
sections (main
(main radiator
radiator and
andandbrakes)
brakes) and
andandto
low pressure are useful to both cooling sections (main radiator
to generate additional downforce. In the case with the GF, the low-pressure regions are brakes)
generate
tomore
generateadditional
additional downforce.
downforce. In the case
In the in with
case the
with GF, the low-pressure
the GF, the regions
low-pressure are
regions more
extended below the body, resulting more downforce. However, the drag gener-are
extended below the body, resulting in more downforce. However, the drag generated at
more
ated at the rear of the vehicle is higher. This can be argued from the analysis of Figuregener-
extended below the body, resulting in more downforce. However, the drag 17,
the rear of the vehicle is higher. This can be argued from the analysis of Figure 17, where
ated at the
where the rear of thecontours
pressure vehicle on
is higher.
a planeThis can be argued
downstream of the from
vehiclethe analysis
are shown.of Figure
The flow 17,
the pressure contours on a plane downstream of the vehicle are shown. The flow structure
where the in
structure pressure
the wake contours
with a on
GFahas plane downstream
a larger of therecirculating
and stronger vehicle are zone
shown. The
with flow
low
in the wake with a GF has a larger and stronger recirculating zone with low pressure that
structure
pressure in the
that wake with
increases a GF has
the pressure a larger
drag and stronger recirculating zone with low
of the vehicle.
increases the pressure drag of the vehicle.
pressure that increases the pressure drag of the vehicle.

Figure 17. Comparison of pressure contours with velocity vectors on a downstream plane. Case with (left) and without
(right) GF.
Figure 17.
Figure 17. Comparison
Comparison of
of pressure
pressure contours
contours with
with velocity
velocity vectors
vectors on
on aa downstream
downstream plane.
plane. Case
Case with
with (left)
(left) and
and without
without
(right) GF. The pressure coefficient distributions on the wing and flap sections at planes y1, y2,
(right) GF.
and y3 are reported in Figure 18. From these graphs, it is clear that the aerodynamic loads
are The
The pressure
higher with thecoefficient
pressure distributions
GF installed,
coefficient giving more
distributions on the wing
wing from
ondownforce
the and flap
and flap sections
bothsections
wing andatflap.
at planes yy1,, y
planes 1 2,
y2,
and
and yy33 are
are reported
reported in
in Figure
Figure 18.
18. From
From these
these graphs,
graphs, it
it is
is clear
clear that
that the
the aerodynamic
aerodynamic loads
loads
are higher with the GF installed, giving more downforce from both
are higher with the GF installed, giving more downforce from both wing and wing and flap.
flap.
 Energies 2021, 14, 2059 13 of 15
Energies 2021, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 15

Figure
Figure18.
18.Pressure
Pressurecoefficients
coefficientson
onwing
wing(upper)
(upper)and
andflap
flap(lower)
(lower)sections
sectionson
onplans
plans yy11, ,yy2 2and
andyy3 3with
with(red
(redlines)
lines)and
and
without (blue lines) GF.
without (blue lines) GF.

4.4.Conclusions
Conclusions
The
Theresults
resultsofofdetailed
detailedCFD CFDanalysis
analysisononaavehicle
vehicleconfiguration
configurationrepresentative
representativeofofan an
F1F1 car have been used to investigate the effects of GF installation onthe
car have been used to investigate the effects of GF installation on theflow
flowstructure
structure
and
andon oncomponent
componentperformances.
performances.ItItcan canbebeobserved
observedthat thatthe
theaddition
additionofofthisthissmall
smalldevice
device
has a dramatic effect on the overall flow structure around the
has a dramatic effect on the overall flow structure around the car. The flow structurecar. The flow structure
from
fromthe thefront
frontwing
wingaffected
affectedby bythetheGF
GFwill
willinteract
interactwith
withthetheother
othercarcarcomponents
componentswith with
evident aerodynamic performance changes with respect to the
evident aerodynamic performance changes with respect to the baseline configuration. baseline configuration. The
The overall
overall front
front wing wing downforce
downforce increases
increases of of almost
almost 24%,
24%, while
while thedrag
the dragforce
forceincrease
increaseis
is28%.
28%.TheThecontribution
contributionofofthis thispaper
paperisistoto highlight
highlight thethe effects
effects that
that thethe
GFGF cancan have
have on on
the
the
carcar components,
components, to give
to give an interpretation
an interpretation of the
of the aerodynamic
aerodynamic performance
performance fromfrom the
the flow
flow structures,
structures, and to and to stress
stress the strong
the strong aerodynamic
aerodynamic interaction
interaction betweenbetween
components components
from the
from the addition of the GF. The main difference with a GF, consists in
addition of the GF. The main difference with a GF, consists in a large area of low pressure a large area of low
pressure under the main wing that enhances the ground effect, which
under the main wing that enhances the ground effect, which causes a redistribution of the causes a redistri-
bution
flow inofthetheother
flowcomponents:
in the other a components: a flowunder
flow acceleration acceleration
the baseunder
of thethe base ofand
endplate thea
endplate and a better
better interaction withinteraction
the wheel withgroup.theOnwheel group. On
the contrary, the contrary,
without a GF large without a GF
recirculation
large
bubblesrecirculation
on the lowerbubbles
part on the vehicle
of the lower part of the vehicle
are detected. It hasarebeen detected.
highlightedIt has been
that the
highlighted that the correct
correct dimensioning dimensioning
and installation of theand
GF installation
can increaseof thethe GF can increase
aerodynamic downforcethe
aerodynamic
from differentdownforce from different
car components, car components,
with an increase with an increase
in the aerodynamic in the
efficiency aerody-to
compared
baseline.
namic The CFD
efficiency technology
compared is an essential
to baseline. The CFD tool technology
to support the design
is an and aerodynamic
essential tool to sup-
tuning
port the of the car.
design and aerodynamic tuning of the car.

Author Contributions: M.B., C.C., D.M. have equally contributed to the concept of the research
activity, the setup of the model, the discussion of the results, and the writing of the paper. All au-
thors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Energies 2021, 14, 2059 14 of 15

Author Contributions: M.B., C.C., D.M. have equally contributed to the concept of the research
activity, the setup of the model, the discussion of the results, and the writing of the paper. All authors
have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: No external findings have to be cited.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Nomenclature

A Area
b Wing span
c Wing chord
Cd Drag coefficient
Cl Lift coefficient (downforce)
Cp Pressure coefficient
d Diameter
DR Drag coefficient
E Aerodynamic efficiency
h Height of Gurney flap (percentage of the airfoil chord)
k Turbulent kinetic energy
L Lift (downforce)
lv Vehicle length
p Static pressure
s Thickness
u Velocity
u’ Axial local velocity
U∞ Velocity at the domain inlet
w Width
y+ Non dimensional boundary layer distance from wall
µ Dynamic viscosity
ρ Density
ω Specific rate of dissipation

Acronyms

ext External
GF Gurney Flap
inf Inferior
int Internal
sup Superior

References
1. Roberts, L.S.; Correia, J.; Finnis, M.V.; Knowles, K. Aerodynamic characteristic of a wing-and-flap configuration in ground effect
and yaw. Proc. IMechE Part D J. Automob. Eng. 2016, 230, 841–854. [CrossRef]
2. Zerihan, J.; Zhang, X. Aerodynamics of Gurney Flaps on a Wing in Ground Effect. AIAA J. 2001, 39, 772–780. [CrossRef]
3. Jeffrey, D.; Zhang, X.; Hurst, D.W. Aerodynamics of Gurney Flaps on a Single-Element High-Lift Wing. J. Aircr. 2000, 37, 295–301.
[CrossRef]
4. Liebek, R.H. Design of Subsonic Airfoils for High Lift. J. Aircr. 1978, 15, 547–561. [CrossRef]
5. Myose, R.; Papadakis, M.; Heron, I. Gurney Flap Experiments on Airfoils, Wings and Reflection Plane Model. J. Aircr. 1998, 35,
206–211. [CrossRef]
6. Coles, D.; Wadcock, A.J. Flying-Hot-Wire Study of Flow Past an NACA 4412 Airfoil at Maximum Lift. AIAA J. 1979, 17, 321–329.
[CrossRef]
7. Thompson, B.E.; Whitelae, J.H. Trailing-Edge Region of Airfoils. J. Aircr. 1989, 26, 225–234. [CrossRef]
Energies 2021, 14, 2059 15 of 15

8. Gerrard, J.H. The mechanics of the formation region of vortices behind bluff bodies. J. Fluid Mech. 1966, 25, 401–413. [CrossRef]
9. Roshko, A. On the Drag and Shedding Frequency of Two-Dimensional Bluff Bodies; NACA TN 3169; National Advisory Committee
Aeronautics: Moffett Field, CA, USA, 1954.
10. Bearman, P.W.; Trueman, D.M. An Investigation of the Flow around Rectangular Cylinders. Aeronaut. J. 1972, 23, 229–237.
[CrossRef]
11. Bearman, P.W. Investigation of the flow behind a two-dimensional model with a blunt trailing edge and fitted with splitter plates.
J. Fluids Mech. 1965, 21, 241–255. [CrossRef]
12. Good, M.C.; Joubert, P.N. The form drag of two-dimensional bluff-plates immersed in turbulent boundary layers. J. Fluid Mech.
1968, 31, 547–582. [CrossRef]
13. Kennedy, J.L.; Marsden, D.J. The development of High Lift, Single-component Airfoil Sections. Aeronaut. J. 1979, 30, 343–359.
[CrossRef]
14. Zhang, X.; Zerihan, J. Off-Surface Aerodynamic Measurements of a Wing in Ground Effect. J. Aircr. 2003, 40, 716–725. [CrossRef]
15. Zhang, X.; Zerihan, J. Aerodynamics of a Double-Element Wing in Ground Effect. AIAA J. 2003, 41, 1007–1016. [CrossRef]
16. Tang, D.; Dowell, E.H. Aerodynamic loading for an airfoil with an oscillating gurney flap. J. Aircr. 2007, 44, 1245–1257. [CrossRef]
17. Camocardi, M.; Marañon, J.; Delnero, J.; Colman, J. Experimental study of a naca 4412 airfoil with movable gurney flap. In
Proceedings of the 49th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition,
Orlando, FL, USA, 4–7 January 2011.
18. Lee, T. Piv study of near-field tip vortex behind perforated gurney flaps. Exp. Fluids 2010, 50, 351–361. [CrossRef]
19. Cole, J.A.; Vieira, B.A.O.; Coder, J.G.; Premi, A.; Maughmer, M.D. Experimental Investigation into the Effect of Gurney Flaps on
Various Airfoils. J. Aircr. 2013, 50, 1287–1294. [CrossRef]
20. Min, B.Y.; Sankar, L.N.; Rajmohan, N.; Prasad, J.V.R. Computational Investigation of Gurney Flap Effects on Rotors in Forward
Flight. J. Aircr. 2009, 46, 1957–1964. [CrossRef]
21. Pastrikakis, V.A.; Steijl, R.; Barakos, G.N. Effect of active Gurney flaps on overall helicopter flight envelope. Aeronaut. J. 2016, 120,
1230–1261. [CrossRef]
22. Mohammadi, M.; Doosttalab, A.; Doosttalab, M. The effect of various gurney flaps shapes on the performace of wind turbine
airfoils. In Proceedings of the ASME Early Career Technical Conference, Atlanta, GA, USA, 2–3 November 2012.
23. Woodgate, M.A.; Pastrikakis, V.A.; Barakos, G.N. Rotor Computations with Active Gurney Flaps. Adv. Fluid-Struct. Interact. 2016,
133, 133–166.
24. Fernandez-Gamiz, U.; Gomez-Mármol, M.; Chacón-Rebollo, T. Computational Modeling of Gurney Flaps and Microtabs by POD
Method. Energies 2018, 11, 2091. [CrossRef]
25. Aramendia, I.; Fernandez-Gamiz, U.; Zulueta, E.; Saenz-Aguirre, A.; Teso-Fz-Betoño, D. Parametric Study of a Gurney Flap
Implementation in a DU91W(2)250 Airfoil. Energies 2019, 12, 294. [CrossRef]
26. Cravero, C. Aerodynamic performance prediction of a profile in ground effect with and without a Gurney flap. ASME J. Fluids
Eng. 2017, 139. [CrossRef]
27. Cravero, C.; Marogna, N.; Marsano, D. A Numerical Study of correlation between recirculation length and shedding frequency in
vortex shedding phenomena. WSEAS Trans. Fluid Mech. 2021, 16, 48–62. [CrossRef]
28. Cravero, C.; Marsano, D. Numerical prediction of tonal noise in centrifugal blowers. In Proceedings of the Turbo Expo 2018:
Turbomachinery Technical Conference & Exposition, Oslo, Norway, 11–15 June 2018.
29. Niccolini Marmont Du Haut Champ, C.A.; Silvestri, P. Experimental and numerical vibro-acoustic investigation on a trimmed car
door to analyze slamming event. Appl. Acoust. 2020, 166, 107380. [CrossRef]
30. Guerrero, J.E.; Pacioselli, C.; Pralits, J.O.; Negrello, F.; Silvestri, P.; Lucifredi, A.; Bottaro, A. Preliminary design of a small-sized
flapping UAV: I. Aerodynamic performance and static longitudinal stability. Meccanica 2016, 51, 1343–1367. [CrossRef]
31. Huminic, A.; Chiru, A. On CFD Investigations of Vehicle Aerodynamics with Rotating Wheels’ Simulation; Technical Paper 2006-01-08-
04; SAE World Congress: Detroit, MI, USA, 2006.
32. Wang, Y.N.; Tseng, C.Y.; Huang, Y.L.; Leong, J.C. Investigation of 2004 Ferrari Formula One Race Car Wing Effects. In Proceedings
of the International Symposium on Computer, Communication, Control and Automation, Tainan, Taiwan, 5–7 May 2010; pp.
85–88.
33. Kieffer, W.; Moujares, S.; Armbya, N. CFD study of section characteristics of Formula Mazda race car wings. Math. Comput. Model.
2006, 43, 1275–1287. [CrossRef]
34. Huminic, A.; Huminic, G. CFD Investigations of an Open-Wheel Race Car. In Proceedings of the 4th European Automotive
Simulation Conference, Munich, Germany, 6–7 July 2009.
35. Soso, M.D.; Wilson, P.A. Aerodynamic of a wing in ground effect in generic racing car wake flows. Proc. IMechE Part D J. Automob.
Eng. 2006, 220, 1–13. [CrossRef]
36. Newbon, J.; Dominy, R.; Sims-Williams, D. CFD Investigation of the Effect of the Salient Flow Features in the Wake of a Generic
Open-Wheel Race Car. SAE Int. J. Passeng. Cars-Mech. Syst. 2015, 8, 217–232. [CrossRef]
37. ANSYS Inc. Ansys CFX Theory Guide; v.17; ANSYS Inc.: Canonsburg, PA, USA, 2016.
38. Zerihan, J.; Zhang, X. Aerodynamics of a Single Element Wing in Ground Effect. J. Aircr. 2000, 37, 1058. [CrossRef]
39. Zerihan, J. An Investigation into the Aerodynamics of Wings in Ground Effect. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Southampton,
Southampton, UK, 2001; 236p.