If you would like to take the first step into F1 aerodynamics , check out my course on Udemy. www.udemy.com/course/formula-1-aerodynamics/?referralCode=526FE430BE7CC668A2FF
I find it very curious that the cfd models show the merc having cleaner airflow around the body and into the wings because of the early closing of the front tyre wake and a stronger airflow through into the beam wing, resulting in a more effecient rear wing than in the amr but on track it's the latter that is performing much better. Maybe Mercs problem is not so much in the bodywork but more on the underfloor or suspension, just like they suspect it was last year. I can't wait to see if their new concept is actually gonna make them more competitive
Yes, the main problem for mercedes is that they over corrected for their problems last year. The car was super draggy last year, but had good floor performance. This year the car works really well through the air, but there's not nearly as much performance from the floor, which may be explained in part by the rules that raised the floor height.
I am REALLY enjoying these. I definitely understand what is going on more now. I am currently exploring making my own CFD model as well just for the fun of it but also to understand how teams are using the flow structure on the floor edge in front of the rear tires. Thanks again brother.
@9:50 Every car has separation there, you can even see it on the Red Bull flow vis, it's just the nature of the beast. The slow high static pressure air on the top of the edge wing actually helps the edge wing work. New rules means you need a better performance edge wing, and you need the side pods to condition the flow to the edge wing, while at the same time supplying enough air for the rear wing, and inboard side of the tires. Once the pressure difference from the edge wing causes the edge wing vortex, then the air that runs along the vortex becomes energized just like the floor vortex does to the air in the venturi tunnels.
It does seem to show the problem areas versus the successes. The W14 may be sleek but its cutting through the air like a bullet and not developing enough downforce passing the sidepods. Its also creating drag in the zone between the front tires and sidepods versus lower drag on the AMR23 but greater downforce. So you can see the huge fuzzy area alongside the AMR23 which could be all downforce. So, the larger "fuzzy" areas of low pressure on the AMR23 is the key to its performance. Its all so tricky but we can now see the effects of what was probably thought to be no drag zones but not generating the downforce. MB made a bullet but that doesnt work when you also need to stick the car to the ground.
Something to chew on, once the wake of the car exists, it's not existing in isolation. Air upstream will interact with the wake of the car, instead of the car itself. Look at the slow low energy air as "virtual bodywork". The AMR pods move that slow high static pressure air down low, the benefit of this is clearly seen in the rear wing, the AMR has a nice cushion of high speed air on the suction side. Mercedes downwash gives air to the diffuser and moves the slow static pressure air higher which decreases air going to the rear wing. Just from the CFD it's obvious that the ride hight window for the Mercedes is much smaller, because the high speed air under the rear wing has a very small area. The AMR has a much bigger area of high speed air under the rear wing and likely has a much wider setup window.
@@f1aerodynamicist The edge wing vortex also helps shoot air into the mouse hole. That lateral air that comes in the mouse hole on the side of the diffuser, possibly works like the side channel in this video ruclips.net/user/shortspyUXVXNZLHo
Great analysis… now I want to see the Red Bull vrs the Aston… I want to see that top Down look… everyone says it’s got down force with less drag… I want to see that comparison
@@f1aerodynamicist do you have any videos talking about floors? Ground effect? And Philosophies of said floors per team? Fluid dynamics was my worst module at university 😅🤣
At 8:05 and on I see that one quite interesting part is the velocity and pressure around the rear wing that is quite different in the simulation. The AMR23 has a high velocity under the wing and a low pressure point under it while the W14 seems to cause more drag than downforce. It's of course not conclusive since this is a 2D cut, but it seems like it could be something to look at over more cuts to see how it varies. Also realize that it's when you are turning you want to have more downforce than when driving straight and it's on the inner side of the car that you want most downforce when turning.
I don’t know anything about downforce, but from what i see redbull rb19 gain more downforce from the side pod, if you look at the shape of the side pod, the shape looks like an aerofoil, the undercut works to speed up the air to reduce pressure thus produce more downforce. Just from my own opinion.
I think Mercedes depends to much from the under floor for downforces because of the new regulations, I think they got it right but they didn’t expect the porpoising problem to happen. The increase of ride height hurt them even more because that will reduces the amount of downforce produced. Sorry for my grammar mistakes, not my first language.
It's not just the side pods. I think people don't understand that Redbull has succeeded to fully manage the airflow from the front to the back. The Diffuser, beam wing and top wing work together to keep the airflow connected. They are the only ones doing this as efficiently as this. The top wing of the Redbull has smooth outer edges and aggressive main plain compared to Mercedes and Ferrari which, when they open the DRS, they have 2 advantages, a higher drag reduction as the main plain of the top wing is aggressive, and it also stalls the airflow from the diffuser to the top wing by opening the DRS. That is why they have a significant advantage when DRS is open.
Well ,I agree with the flow management part. But stalling the diffuser, might not agree..the real benefit is if you can stall the beam wing itself coz that's quite draggy. And that in turn ' might ' big might , stall the diffuser
@F1 Aerodynamicist your prob correct. Take a look at the rear wings of the RB vs other cars. Mercedes especially seem to still want to create vortices from the outer edges where RB looks to try and reduce any drag from the wing outside of its DRS zone
Great work! Looking forward to the next part and i hope, as we got Mercedes vs. AM that we will get Red Bull vs. Ferrari, too. That would be perfect and an absolute dream!
Thank u sir Your video are great with perfect analysis. I am from India who is SAE Baja and wants to be a f1 engineer (may be in powertrain department 😅.) Kindly can you make a video regarding the process to being in Italy and what should we do to prepare our self. Again thanking you as the info about the aero is very much helpful.
Isn't it that the large sidepods of the AM create a flowfield that "keeps" the front-wheel wake outboard? Together with the pressurisation of undercut? While the front-wheel wake of the W14 hits the rear of the Mercedes as the effect of wing quickly wears off. I think this would explain why Mercedes has such problems with downforce. Vortex Control and Tire Squirt Management become uncontrollable, which has a negative effect on the diffuser and the aerodynamics in the rear. And here the circle would close why the sidepods have a decisive effect after all. At least as long as there are no more bargeboards!
Great video. Can you make a similar video about Red Bull's triple DRS trick? (Named by Gary Amdersson like this, their DRS works a bit more efficient bc it can also stall the beamwing + rear suspension combo)
Great stuff, but its a bit difficult to follow what you're saying because you're not recording your mouse pointer. Please record your mouse pointer, its only visible when you are drawing something.
Superb work ! Could you do such a comparison on the different approach of floor sealing ? I suspect that RedBull really shine on this area while Mercedes does it well only in a limited window. Anyway nice work
I suppose then, the trick is to make the entire sidepod a downwashing wing? If you look at the upper surface of the RB19 it's basically that. It's Mercedes mid wing, but bigger.
so i guess mercedes was right to question its concept so late. theoretically the cfd here shows mass flow similar to the aston martin to the rear beam wing and rear wing. but now they know the slight increase in mass flow to the inside of the rear tires to help with diffuser expansion is probably the area of biggest gain. hopefully they can bring something this season that will allow that affect and bring more exciting races
Oddly though the sidelines and mid wing of the w14 were supposed to spin a massive vortex down the side of the car to that area so I'm not sure why it's not working. In the diagram here the w14 looks the much better airflow to all the right places. I just wonder if optimising the airflow is too tricky when the cars in yaw?
@@magicalrobster I think that’s the key, is the yaw. Straight line everything is great but I guess at the end of the day, a wall of material is better than an limited aerofoil?
@@Jay-nk6dm it seems to be but according to Kyle engineers the w14 system if using air rather than a sidepid is it should in theory be more tunable. However something seems to not work with this concept in practice. Maybe there are too many variables with it
Hey Shubh. Excellent analysis as always. How much performance do you think the ground effect and the floor is contributing to the overall performance of the 2023 cars. And would you be making a video about that in the near future, so that we could get a rough idea about the floors that maybe different cars might be running as that is the part that is rarely seen or disclosed?
I think you want the floor to be somewhere in the range of 60 percentage as that's the most efficient system you have. Previous years it used to be around 40-45 percent. Video on the floor is really hard to make , but yeah once we see some floors , y not 🙃
You used the word "closing" the wake a couple of times. What do you mean by that? I understand that the undercut pressurization directs the air out, and the low pressure in the undercut tunnel sucks the air in, but I don't get how this "closes" the wake.
So imagine the front wheel wake behind the tyre . It has an inside and outside part . Until now the idea was that the undercut pressurisation moves wake away from the sidepod , what I'm suggesting is that u just don't push it away from the inside you close it by drawing air from the external freestream
@@f1aerodynamicist You legit say it like 30 times in the video too lol, I'm sure your learn the correct version or you'll avoid saying it completely if I bully you enough about it no? ❤
If you would like to take the first step into F1 aerodynamics , check out my course on Udemy.
www.udemy.com/course/formula-1-aerodynamics/?referralCode=526FE430BE7CC668A2FF
great video, can you use a larger pointer or zoom in closer when not drawing so we can see clearer what you're looking at.
Yup working on that , thank you for the feedback
I find it very curious that the cfd models show the merc having cleaner airflow around the body and into the wings because of the early closing of the front tyre wake and a stronger airflow through into the beam wing, resulting in a more effecient rear wing than in the amr but on track it's the latter that is performing much better. Maybe Mercs problem is not so much in the bodywork but more on the underfloor or suspension, just like they suspect it was last year. I can't wait to see if their new concept is actually gonna make them more competitive
Absolutely , that underfloor pic of the RedBull is like gold right now, everyone wants to see it 🙃. Waiting for that crash
@@f1aerodynamicist we need George to kamikaze into one of the Red Bull cars so we all can have a look at 🤪
The AMR and the Merc have the same rear suspension.
Yes, the main problem for mercedes is that they over corrected for their problems last year. The car was super draggy last year, but had good floor performance. This year the car works really well through the air, but there's not nearly as much performance from the floor, which may be explained in part by the rules that raised the floor height.
I am REALLY enjoying these. I definitely understand what is going on more now. I am currently exploring making my own CFD model as well just for the fun of it but also to understand how teams are using the flow structure on the floor edge in front of the rear tires. Thanks again brother.
Hey, that's great, let me know how your model comes along , would love to collaborate at some point if you are interested 😊
@@f1aerodynamicist that's awesome. I'll keep you posted.
Hello ! I'm starting to get interested in CFD and was wondering : what do you mean by "making your own model"
@@matdan6683 simply means we made a model of the car. Nothing innovative in the CFD domain. Fairly standard processes
@@f1aerodynamicist And do you have softwares to recommend on which to create a model and/or test it with CFD ?
@9:50 Every car has separation there, you can even see it on the Red Bull flow vis, it's just the nature of the beast. The slow high static pressure air on the top of the edge wing actually helps the edge wing work.
New rules means you need a better performance edge wing, and you need the side pods to condition the flow to the edge wing, while at the same time supplying enough air for the rear wing, and inboard side of the tires. Once the pressure difference from the edge wing causes the edge wing vortex, then the air that runs along the vortex becomes energized just like the floor vortex does to the air in the venturi tunnels.
It does seem to show the problem areas versus the successes. The W14 may be sleek but its cutting through the air like a bullet and not developing enough downforce passing the sidepods. Its also creating drag in the zone between the front tires and sidepods versus lower drag on the AMR23 but greater downforce. So you can see the huge fuzzy area alongside the AMR23 which could be all downforce. So, the larger "fuzzy" areas of low pressure on the AMR23 is the key to its performance. Its all so tricky but we can now see the effects of what was probably thought to be no drag zones but not generating the downforce. MB made a bullet but that doesnt work when you also need to stick the car to the ground.
Something to chew on, once the wake of the car exists, it's not existing in isolation. Air upstream will interact with the wake of the car, instead of the car itself. Look at the slow low energy air as "virtual bodywork". The AMR pods move that slow high static pressure air down low, the benefit of this is clearly seen in the rear wing, the AMR has a nice cushion of high speed air on the suction side.
Mercedes downwash gives air to the diffuser and moves the slow static pressure air higher which decreases air going to the rear wing. Just from the CFD it's obvious that the ride hight window for the Mercedes is much smaller, because the high speed air under the rear wing has a very small area. The AMR has a much bigger area of high speed air under the rear wing and likely has a much wider setup window.
Interesting observation there, missed that , thanks for pointing it out mate😊
@@f1aerodynamicist The edge wing vortex also helps shoot air into the mouse hole. That lateral air that comes in the mouse hole on the side of the diffuser, possibly works like the side channel in this video
ruclips.net/user/shortspyUXVXNZLHo
I'm hooked on ur channel.Great job 👏👏👏
Welcome aboard!
Great analysis… now I want to see the Red Bull vrs the Aston… I want to see that top Down look… everyone says it’s got down force with less drag… I want to see that comparison
I'll try to work on that, thank you 😊
Please do it!
We need something to make your curser clearer. Might just be me but I lose sight of it quite easily :)
Yeah Alex , good shout , I'm gonna jump to another application
@@f1aerodynamicist do you have any videos talking about floors? Ground effect? And Philosophies of said floors per team? Fluid dynamics was my worst module at university 😅🤣
@@alexthomson6178 not yet
At 8:05 and on I see that one quite interesting part is the velocity and pressure around the rear wing that is quite different in the simulation. The AMR23 has a high velocity under the wing and a low pressure point under it while the W14 seems to cause more drag than downforce.
It's of course not conclusive since this is a 2D cut, but it seems like it could be something to look at over more cuts to see how it varies.
Also realize that it's when you are turning you want to have more downforce than when driving straight and it's on the inner side of the car that you want most downforce when turning.
The turning bit is important information , you will see why in Part 3 , the AMR 23 Concept is an absolute rockstar with yaw
I don’t know anything about downforce, but from what i see redbull rb19 gain more downforce from the side pod, if you look at the shape of the side pod, the shape looks like an aerofoil, the undercut works to speed up the air to reduce pressure thus produce more downforce. Just from my own opinion.
Thats like sideforce , haha, but yeah I see your point
I think Mercedes depends to much from the under floor for downforces because of the new regulations, I think they got it right but they didn’t expect the porpoising problem to happen. The increase of ride height hurt them even more because that will reduces the amount of downforce produced. Sorry for my grammar mistakes, not my first language.
It's not just the side pods.
I think people don't understand that Redbull has succeeded to fully manage the airflow from the front to the back. The Diffuser, beam wing and top wing work together to keep the airflow connected. They are the only ones doing this as efficiently as this. The top wing of the Redbull has smooth outer edges and aggressive main plain compared to Mercedes and Ferrari which, when they open the DRS, they have 2 advantages, a higher drag reduction as the main plain of the top wing is aggressive, and it also stalls the airflow from the diffuser to the top wing by opening the DRS. That is why they have a significant advantage when DRS is open.
Well ,I agree with the flow management part. But stalling the diffuser, might not agree..the real benefit is if you can stall the beam wing itself coz that's quite draggy. And that in turn ' might ' big might , stall the diffuser
@F1 Aerodynamicist your prob correct. Take a look at the rear wings of the RB vs other cars. Mercedes especially seem to still want to create vortices from the outer edges where RB looks to try and reduce any drag from the wing outside of its DRS zone
Great work! Looking forward to the next part and i hope, as we got Mercedes vs. AM that we will get Red Bull vs. Ferrari, too. That would be perfect and an absolute dream!
That's the plan!
Thank u sir Your video are great with perfect analysis. I am from India who is SAE Baja and wants to be a f1 engineer (may be in powertrain department 😅.) Kindly can you make a video regarding the process to being in Italy and what should we do to prepare our self. Again thanking you as the info about the aero is very much helpful.
Yup surely I will do a video about my experience in italy
@@f1aerodynamicist thank you sir for your help
Isn't it that the large sidepods of the AM create a flowfield that "keeps" the front-wheel wake outboard? Together with the pressurisation of undercut? While the front-wheel wake of the W14 hits the rear of the Mercedes as the effect of wing quickly wears off. I think this would explain why Mercedes has such problems with downforce. Vortex Control and Tire Squirt Management become uncontrollable, which has a negative effect on the diffuser and the aerodynamics in the rear. And here the circle would close why the sidepods have a decisive effect after all. At least as long as there are no more bargeboards!
Great video. Can you make a similar video about Red Bull's triple DRS trick? (Named by Gary Amdersson like this, their DRS works a bit more efficient bc it can also stall the beamwing + rear suspension combo)
Great stuff, but its a bit difficult to follow what you're saying because you're not recording your mouse pointer. Please record your mouse pointer, its only visible when you are drawing something.
Yup, I will , planning to move to a different platform after the part 3 of this series , since it's already recorded
@@f1aerodynamicist Cheers mate, appreciate it!
Superb work ! Could you do such a comparison on the different approach of floor sealing ? I suspect that RedBull really shine on this area while Mercedes does it well only in a limited window. Anyway nice work
I've already made a video on this , check out my aero analysis playlist , red bull floor edge video
@@f1aerodynamicist Thanks, just seen it and its verys good !
@@anonymeguy9172 thanks mate 🙃
I suppose then, the trick is to make the entire sidepod a downwashing wing? If you look at the upper surface of the RB19 it's basically that. It's Mercedes mid wing, but bigger.
Nicely pointed out , yes as long as you suppress the losses on the body itself and don't feed it to the rear in the process, more on this in Part 4.
so i guess mercedes was right to question its concept so late. theoretically the cfd here shows mass flow similar to the aston martin to the rear beam wing and rear wing. but now they know the slight increase in mass flow to the inside of the rear tires to help with diffuser expansion is probably the area of biggest gain. hopefully they can bring something this season that will allow that affect and bring more exciting races
Oddly though the sidelines and mid wing of the w14 were supposed to spin a massive vortex down the side of the car to that area so I'm not sure why it's not working. In the diagram here the w14 looks the much better airflow to all the right places. I just wonder if optimising the airflow is too tricky when the cars in yaw?
@@magicalrobster I think that’s the key, is the yaw. Straight line everything is great but I guess at the end of the day, a wall of material is better than an limited aerofoil?
@@Jay-nk6dm it seems to be but according to Kyle engineers the w14 system if using air rather than a sidepid is it should in theory be more tunable. However something seems to not work with this concept in practice. Maybe there are too many variables with it
What hardware are you using to simulate these ?
It's the usual high performance xeon processor, 32 cores, 128 GB ram
Hey Shubh. Excellent analysis as always. How much performance do you think the ground effect and the floor is contributing to the overall performance of the 2023 cars. And would you be making a video about that in the near future, so that we could get a rough idea about the floors that maybe different cars might be running as that is the part that is rarely seen or disclosed?
I think you want the floor to be somewhere in the range of 60 percentage as that's the most efficient system you have. Previous years it used to be around 40-45 percent.
Video on the floor is really hard to make , but yeah once we see some floors , y not 🙃
You used the word "closing" the wake a couple of times. What do you mean by that? I understand that the undercut pressurization directs the air out, and the low pressure in the undercut tunnel sucks the air in, but I don't get how this "closes" the wake.
So imagine the front wheel wake behind the tyre . It has an inside and outside part . Until now the idea was that the undercut pressurisation moves wake away from the sidepod , what I'm suggesting is that u just don't push it away from the inside you close it by drawing air from the external freestream
Should get yourself knocking at mercedes door they've just sacked some engineers for mistakes 👍
Haha, I'm sure they have a talented bunch
Just a larger cursor would help, cheers!!
Larger cursor in Part 4 🙃
Great explanation content! How would be most appropriate contacting to show designs?
You can email me at formula1.aerodynamicist@gmail.com
@@f1aerodynamicist Unfortunately it says the email address wasn’t found
@@curtisboulton5410 formula1.aerodynamicist@gmail.com
We're do you get the Cfd models? Arent these like top secret?
They are done by us, they are not super accurate and are developed independently
If AMR had rear fenders like indycars their drag & top speed would improve a lot.
Lands up, land up, land up 🙃 Ends up, end up, end up!
😂
@@f1aerodynamicist You legit say it like 30 times in the video too lol, I'm sure your learn the correct version or you'll avoid saying it completely if I bully you enough about it no? ❤
good bro
Thank you bro
@@f1aerodynamicist can you please tell me how is life as a aerodynamicist? im in 12th rn , so looking for some info bout your job and your journey
.😊
❤