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
If you look at what Red Bull did for the RB19(on the top) is that they enlarged the undercut to get more air into the mouse hole, which is also fed by the downwashing sidepods anyway. This energizes the vortices in the diffuser. If you look at the fact that the teams that don't have these sidepods have problems with aerodynamic stability (Ferrari and Mercedes), I think this is the advantage of this concept. It's what keeps the Vortex structures stable. With Ferrari and Mercedes, they become unstable under certain conditions, whereas with Red Bull, the downwash of the sidepods keeps them stable.
Pretty much. The side pods keep the air over the edge wing and in front of the rear tire, and the pressure difference between there and the underside of the edge wing creates a strong in-washing vortex, which feeds the mouse hole
Notice the inner fence and the central body, there is a high pressure zone that extends about 70mm into the floor, it stops and is sandwiched between the two inner fence vortices. That high pressure zone is typical of a sonic shock. If it is indeed a sonic shock, then a convex surface will accelerate the flow further. The vortex however is changing the shape of the surface behind the shockwave. This is partly why the position of the vortex is very important, because it shapes the tunnel after the shockwave, and because it's easier to maintain the vortex integrity when it has a good line of sight to the diffuser.
I've always wondered why the F1 diffusers have their very specific kick. Obviously a typical diffuser has a smooth convex kick but the F1 cars seem to have a relatively sharp curve followed by the concave kick. The concavity is presumably to stay within the area box, but I've never understood why the sharper profile is used at the start of the kick in F1. What are the benefits, drawbacks, quirks etc of such a profile?
I see this Anti dive thing being so hyped up, and it's painful to see how misunderstood this is. Firstly, F1 cars are so stiff on heave that anti dive doesn't really matter, the suspension geometry is defined by the flow field. Anybody who saw a real F1 telemetry knows this. secondly, if anything, the Red Bull looks to have much less anti dive than the others, so I don't know where this came from. I expected you to correct this, but great video anyways.
![FendiDa Rappa - Clock Dat ft. Shamar Marco [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3NBU8KHdxYY/mqdefault.jpg)
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
Awesome Explaination . Thank you😍
Thank you
If you look at what Red Bull did for the RB19(on the top) is that they enlarged the undercut to get more air into the mouse hole, which is also fed by the downwashing sidepods anyway. This energizes the vortices in the diffuser. If you look at the fact that the teams that don't have these sidepods have problems with aerodynamic stability (Ferrari and Mercedes), I think this is the advantage of this concept. It's what keeps the Vortex structures stable. With Ferrari and Mercedes, they become unstable under certain conditions, whereas with Red Bull, the downwash of the sidepods keeps them stable.
Pretty much. The side pods keep the air over the edge wing and in front of the rear tire, and the pressure difference between there and the underside of the edge wing creates a strong in-washing vortex, which feeds the mouse hole
Still every video I learn something new. Honestly I don’t think I would know as much as I would now without your videos.
Thank you mate , let's keep learning together
Thank you sir for the explanation of floor philosophy
Most welcome
Notice the inner fence and the central body, there is a high pressure zone that extends about 70mm into the floor, it stops and is sandwiched between the two inner fence vortices. That high pressure zone is typical of a sonic shock. If it is indeed a sonic shock, then a convex surface will accelerate the flow further. The vortex however is changing the shape of the surface behind the shockwave. This is partly why the position of the vortex is very important, because it shapes the tunnel after the shockwave, and because it's easier to maintain the vortex integrity when it has a good line of sight to the diffuser.
I've always wondered why the F1 diffusers have their very specific kick. Obviously a typical diffuser has a smooth convex kick but the F1 cars seem to have a relatively sharp curve followed by the concave kick. The concavity is presumably to stay within the area box, but I've never understood why the sharper profile is used at the start of the kick in F1. What are the benefits, drawbacks, quirks etc of such a profile?
Awesome video needs more views
So...looking forward to your CFD calculation after Monaco😃😍
It's coming out next week
@@f1aerodynamicist 😍🙏🏻😍
Nice video! The color scheme for those lambda2 images seem strangely familiar for some reason :)
Hahah, I know why 🙏
What happened to camera quality? Washed out, laggy, didn't use to be like this in prior videos.
You are also still saying lands up btw ;)
It's because it was recording over a video call
I see this Anti dive thing being so hyped up, and it's painful to see how misunderstood this is. Firstly, F1 cars are so stiff on heave that anti dive doesn't really matter, the suspension geometry is defined by the flow field. Anybody who saw a real F1 telemetry knows this. secondly, if anything, the Red Bull looks to have much less anti dive than the others, so I don't know where this came from.
I expected you to correct this, but great video anyways.
I see your point , I didn't want to go all in 😂. Internet doesn't like extreme comments