That's not true you don't want drag in the corner either, you don't mind it much but it's not the thing you want, you want downforce, those are not the same.
@@metro3313 considering that cars have brakes, drag is kinda irrelevant in corners. You dont care if it's high or low, assuming that downforce is the same
Fun factoid: the car in front also benefits from having someone in their slipstream, as it presents a longer body to the air and cuts the low pressure area immediately behind them. It's most prominent in NASCAR where the cars run bumper to bumper and can go faster in pairs than they do solo. If you ever watch inline speed skating they work together in long packs which dramatically helps everyone in the pack.
First moment I, non-native English speaker, heard "air, like water, is a fluid" I nearly spat my tea, before I could remember that "fluid" and "liquid" are different terms. Damn you, linguistic barrier! On the other hand, I belive comparing air to water is the best way to explain drag and other stuff like that to anyone of any age who have expirienced swimming. What an improvement over the years though! When I saw the title and that it has been posted minutes ago I was wondering, I could remember you already covered it an earlier video. But comparing them know, what an astonisihing progress you made!
It's really nice that they have those two terms, Its very useful when talking about the physics' of it. unfortunate it doesn't exist in my native language. Same with for example velocity and speed.
At certain speeds liquids like water and gases like air behave almost the same way from a fluid dynamics standpoint. Modeling is almost the same as well if you use for example CFD simulations. It‘s not just a simplification for purpose of this video
@@Numfuddle yes, I was talking about how easy it is to understand, never meant that it is oversimplified. Thanks a lot for clarifying this, I wasn't competent enough to state that)
In my experience, most native English speakers use the word "fluid" strictly for liquids, except in the context of (formal) Physics and Chemistry. It's not your fault for getting confused. English is bonkers.
I think it was also worth mentioning the fact that being in dirty air reduces the overall car performance. The main issue is that chasing closely a car ahead means that the average temperature of the air you'll be facing is higher than what should be, so this will lead to an easy overheat of your tires with subsequent excess degradation or formation of graining. I'm not sure about this, so I ask our lord and savior Chainbear's opinion, but I think that dirty air may not be great for engine performance. I guess that oxygen concentration in free air is a bit better, and surely the decreased air pressure in the wake will make the engine suffer a bit, although the presence of the compressor might make up for this effect.
It isn't great for engine performance, and not just because the air itself is hotter, but also due to the turbulence. The radiators in the sidepods rely on clean laminar airflow in order to achieve maximum heat-exchange between the coolant fluid and the airstream flowing through them, so when following an opponent the turbulent air decreases the effectiveness of the radiators and leads to engine overheating.
I thought the biggest issue with dirty air and tyres is that a following car uses up more tread to make up for lower downforce in the corners. I think of it as the tires almost imperceptibly oversteering/understeering, and therefore skidding slightly through a turn. I know nothing, though, and I didn't even bother looking it up just now.
The overheating of tyres, the additional damage and higher wear rate is not to do with a higher average air temperature. As @pyRoy6 was suggesting, the cause of tyre problems is the reduction in down force and how that causes the car to act under cornering. The car will have a tendency to slide more (under-steer and/or over-steer issues may also be amplified). The additional movement causes the compound on the tyre to move about more, degrading it, causing quicker graining and potentially blistering. The heat issue can be cyclic. Lower cornering speeds require increased breaking before the corner, which increases the heat generated by the brakes, subsequently this bleeds into the wheels and tyres, increasing their temperature. On the flip side, lower cornering speeds can cause an undesirable drop in tyre temperature. Such heat changes can increase wear and damage, and again amplify sliding during cornering. There is also a risk of the temperature going to far in one direction, or the other (getting to high, or to low), which can be very difficult to recover from.
That’s not why you overheat your tires. You overheat your tires due to the loss of downforce therefore sliding them across the track trying to keep up. Causing friction aka heat.
Damn, I miss the aerokits. Not very pretty, but it was like IndyCar somehow took a quantum leap in F1's direction. Shattered track records all over the place.
I'd like to have been a fly on the wall at some of the teams aero department meetings. Specifically when discussing how they can create extra turbulence behind the vehicle under the incoming regs. Deciding on whether it is worth balancing the downsides to the own cars by creating that turbulence Vs the negative impact on following drivers looking to pass improving their chances for better places.
3:26 Fun thing is, the drag coefficient of a cube and an F1 car are almost equal, so if they have the same frontal area, velocity and go through the same density air, the drag force would be about the same
@@constantinlegras769 Yeah you are right, drag coefficient of a cube is 0.8 while DC of an F1 car is around 1. Varies from circuit to circuit, in Monza ~0.8 to Monaco ~1.2 give or take. I'm using data from 2005 so it might be slightly different to today.
Yeah, but that cube car also had open wheels, and the majority of drag comes from the wheels, so probably the cube car has a buch bigger drag coefficient overall, than the F1 car
Great video explanation. One part you got slightly incomplete is at 8:17, the reaction force is only a 2/5 slice of the downforce. most of the downforce is made by suction of faster air running underneath the car, not by reacting to air going up. Lower pressure sucks the car onto the road, not just because air is being pushed up. The diffuser as a concept does not need air on top. just air flowing underneath. In that case the only opposite reaction is the cars suspension.
"The diffuser as a concept does not need air on top. just air flowing underneath" not true at all. for there to be a force acting down on the car the pressure above needs to be higher than the pressure under. your car would have negative downforce
@@FullOilBarrel yes, it can't be a vacuum obviously, what I meant is that there does not need to be air forcing if down, in the means of a resultant force, like it would be in another fluid such as water where the dnlensity is 1000 times higher ie the force would be 1000 times higher
This is very noticeable watching onboard footage and keeping an eye on the car's front antennas. The antennas are very still on the straights and go wild when following another car on the corners or mid-overtaking, when the driver change lanes and go from the slipstream to clean air - in-between there's heaps of dirty air and the antennas go crazy!
This year is my first season watching F1 properly and this is *exactly* the question I've been asking in the last few weeks because the commentators have never bothered to explain it. Thank you so much! Excellent video, and an extremely clear explanation.
@@huaichien It was indeed. The first season was excellent for a rookie. Indeed it was a stroke of genius that Mercedes weren't involved in that first season because it then had to tell the story of the challengers -- including those for whom coming 4th or 5th would be an achievement. That made it really interesting. I've since come to realise some of the spin they put on things... but still. It got me into it, and it had loads of exciting race footage. Now I watch live!
@@splode7414 Glad you have been drawn to F1. I've been watching the races since the late 80s, in the days of Piquet, Prost, Senna and Mansell. Present F1 is still an attractive sport to watch but can't help but feel that new fans have missed out on so much. The unbelievable engine sound when you watch at the track. The visibly different car designs when the regulations were not so restrictive, so it's more interesting for fans to spot cars. There was greater variety of results when minnows could get the occasional front row start or race podium. Also, the cars looked more exciting on TV due to less perfect driving, more sliding and twitching, more onboard camera vibration, and lower TV definition.
This explains the basic theory well but I wished there was more practical discussion. What confuses people is why are we told that following another car slows you down if they're intentionally following each other during qualifying laps. It sounds contradictory and the nuances of it are subtle, complicated, and rarely ever explained in the media.
Great video, only one thing I would correct; the friction of a tire is non-linear. If you push twice as hard you do not get twice the lateral force, this is the reason why you want to reduce weight transfer since what you loose on the inside tire is not gain back completely on the outside tire.
7:20 It's definitely not linear in case of tíres. The friction coefficient decreases by adding more normal force on the tire. This is the basis of many things in vehicle dynamics
It's linear for static friction, tires are definitely a more complex case on the boundary of rolling and sliding friction at maximum grip, but when he was showing the general example with the bus and the block he was accurately describing static friction which is how I took it. I was kinda watching this whole video as if I were showing it to a high school physics class tho; you'd start with describing the more graspable concept and then layer the complexity on as needed beyond that.
Aerodynamics, [ and to a slightly lesser degree hydrodynamics ] is one of the most complicated and difficult things to understand and control. To some extent a racing car is analogous to an aeroplane. In the latter case you want to generate LIFT. To do so you inevitably create DRAG, and aeroplane design is basically the problem of control and balance of WEIGHT which is in opposition to LIFT, and PROPULSION FORCE which must oppose DRAG. For a car, LIFT is substituted in the mix for DOWNFORCE, otherwise the problems are the same. In practical aerodynamics the wind tunnel is the most useful tool, because calculation is so difficult. Wind tunnels rely on an input of smooth air, which the object under test disturbs, leaving a turbulent wake. In the case of car racing, only the lead car experiences anything approaching smooth air, those following are faced with violently turbulent air. Ordinary drivers on public roads which are unpaved become intensely aware of " eating the dust " of the vehicle in front in dry conditions, or, on paved roads in the rain, an opaque spray. The basic shape of a racing car is not conducive to having low DRAG. In fact in the case of the wheels, it's desirable to create drag forces around them for air cooling of the tyres. In the 2022 machines there appears to be a new emphasis on creating laminar [ that is smooth ] flow over the tyres which will reduce DRAG but decrease the cooling effect. Like I said aerodynamics is a difficult subject - every change affects everything else. If race car design follows the example of fighter jet design we can expect introduction of more variable geometry, and all of it computer controlled !
Funny, I always thought the rear wing was meant to create traction/grip on straights as well. Because of that notion, I was always confused with DRS, as I thought the thin air in the slipstream would reduce traction, so reducing traction even more by opening the DRS didn't make a lot of sense to me: why was everyone so concerned about creating traction with floor effects, rear wings, soft tyres and so on if then the best way to gain speed was to reduce drag (and therefore downforce) as much as possible? I guess there is a point of diminishing returns in the traction/speed proportion, and getting extra downforce exclusively for curves explains many things. Now DRS makes a lot more sense. Your videos are awesome ^^
Indeed you have grasped it! You really don't need much rear stability on the straight because you aren't resisting lateral loading from turning, and traction loading at high speeds is not a big stress on the tire like it is at low speeds, meanwhile the air speed is high so a lot of downforce is available (but not needed); voila, enter DRS: dump the drag when you don't need it, keep it when you do :)
7:20 that is true only when the friction coefficient stay the same, but tires are load sensitive, meaning that when more (vertical) load is applied on them, their friction coefficient starts dropping, so the relationship is not linear for tires, it is digressive. Example: You have 1000 N load initially on a tire, with a friction coefficient of 0.4. This means you have 1000 N * 0.4 = 400 N of friction force. You increase load to 2000 N for the same tire (via generating downforce), but the friction coefficient dropped to 0.3. This means you have 2000 N * 0.3 = 600 N of friction force, not 800 N, which is the case when friction coefficient stays constant (at 0.4 in our example).
Correction to 3:24 Assuming the same cross section area the cube would have a slight advantage over F1 car in terms of drag. Cube has drag coefficient of about 0.8, and F1 car has a drag coefficient of about 1. For context normal cars have a drag coefficient of about 0.35
I think that a good example for dirty air in water as discussed at 8:30 would be the swimming in whitewater. Whitewater contains more air than unmoved water and hereby reduces its density and therefore the lift and probably also the counter force created when trying to paddle with your hands. Therefore it is almost impossible to swim in whitewater without other tools.
You took a long time getting to the simple fact that slipstream vs. dirty air is straight line vs. cornering. The only thing I didn't like about your description was describing drag as "pulling the car back" rather than resistance in the front, which is what it is. This is similar to NASCAR rubes who don't understand elementary physics thinking that drafting sucks the front car back rather than the thinner air allowing the car behind to accelerate faster. The buffeting of the rear car as he pulls out to pass starts slowing him down, but the buffeting of the front car as the rear starts to pass does not slow it down until the passing car is in front of him causing air to pile up in front of his car. There's a great deal of misunderstanding of how aerodynamics work for those who lack a good education. Thanks for your instructive video.
The slip stream is not lower density, it's lower pressure. Think of air in a tyre. If you warm it up, the air pressure goes up, but air density goes down as it expands. Pressure resists the compression forces on it, NOT a higher density of air. The car in front is pushing against higher (still) pressured air. The car behind is passing through air moving at speed which is lower pressure against it's front. Pressure is directional and is measured via force applied over surface area. With less pressure from the front, you have less force from the front going against your car. Density is just the amount of air occupying a certain volume of space (which is actually the same for both cars). The air density remains the same for the car infront and the car behind, the pressure though is different. One has air compressed against it, raising the pressure by a lot, the other has air moving forwards from it, so it's like encountering a tail wind.
Always love your videos. My ONLY slight observation is you might want to use a sailboat and rudder instead of a raft. Paddle boat, speed boat, submarine, jet plane, helicopter, anything like that use the medium they're in AS their propulsion. A car uses friction against the earth to move through air, and a sailboat uses friction against the wind to move through water, so I feel like they may be the closer cousins because each of them use an independent propulsion to move through a medium they're in direct opposition to, if that makes sense. Doesn't have anything to do with your explanation, because you didn't mention that the oars would be causing their own little wake patterns separate from the raft. Just a thought I wanted to share. Thank you for the wonderful content!
you can also think about it this way: downforce produces corner speed but slows the car down in a straight with slipstream you reduce downforce and drag helping reaching higher speeds in straights but slowing down the car in the corners with less downforce
I usually like the Chain Bear videos. However I am a bit disappointed by this video. There were actually a lot of parts that are sloppy if not completely wrong. 5:02 the pocket of air is not low density, but turbulent and therefor low pressure. The effect of density changes is mostly neglected in technical aerodynamics bellow 0.3 Mach as it is too small to play any role. Unfortunately most of the argumentation based on "just less air" is just wrong. 6:08 Aero efficiency is the ratio of the coefficient of downforce and the coefficient of drag. So how much downforce u produce for your drag. U cannot say in general terms if a slipstream will increase or decrease this number or it stays the same. For F1 with there nowadays complex aerodynamics u can be quite sure it goes down, wich is why dirty air is especially bad. It's not only that u have less effective q but also a smaller c_downforce.
5:02 the pocket of air behind the car has lower density as compared to the air on the sides and the front of the car.. it is an area of low pressure.. they've studied this on submarines too, they wanted to improve the acoustics of a 4 blade propeller.. cause when the blade spins it creates an area of low pressure behind it and this even produces bubbles which is bad (enemy sonar can detect this), so by adding more blades to the propeller (7 blade propeller) it improved the acoustics and the propeller can spin at a slower rate
Doesn't the messy, disruptive air mentioned at 9:05 also cause problems for the follower on the straights? Maybe not in speed, but maybe in stability and thus handling of the car?
I asked this question previously: would it be possible to reduce dirty air / turbulence through direct regulation of the car's wake? Consider it an extension of the limits to car size: as well as restricting the length, width, and height of the car (i.e. the physical space the car takes up), put a physical, measurable limit on the amount of turbulent air it produces (i.e. the broader aerodynamic space the car takes up, defined at a certain distance back, or maybe set limits at several distances and several speeds).
Thanks for the video. If you're in the market for a new video idea I would like to request one. Could you show some of the likely outcomes of the 2021 Russian GP had certain drivers pitted at different times than they did. For example, had Lando and Charles pitted for wets when Lewis did (or the lap before) based on their existing lap times.
Stuart another well explained video, something I’ve not seen before on RUclips. I’ve decided to support you on Patreon throughout the 2022 season with the new regulations. Keep up the good work and well done.
Excellent video Chain Bear. This is a subject I felt I understood pretty well, but I still leaned plenty. Your explanations are clear and easy to understand, and moreover enjoyable!
This is the problem, dirty air and slipstream negate each other from corners into straights and vice versa, the cars fall so much behind in corner that it barely makes the time it lost due to dirty air in the slipstream (net time gain= 0 or negative mostly) if the corner leads to a straight which is why they brought in DRS to make slipstream more effect but DRS has its own issues. All aboard the DRS Train!! choo! choo!
Using water as an example again, slipstreaming can also be thought of like a small car tucking up behind a big truck as they both go through a patch of high water. The truck pushes all the water out so that it’s shallow enough, albeit briefly, for the small car to go through. Dirty air would be as if the truck started turning through the water. The car needs consistently shallow water to be able to continue to keep up, but as the truck turns it disrupts the flow of shallower water for the car, making that task more difficult. I figure that just about everyone who’s been driving more than a year or two on public roads (at least the ones in the US lol) has experienced that scenario at some point so I figured I’d toss it out there.
Aerospace engineering here: air density doesn’t change. Air is pretty well characterized as incompressible (constant density) at sub transonic velocities (
Slipstream may be exaggerated to mean a vacuum created by the front fast-moving car (as it takes time for the surrounding air to fill the displaced space), thus staying in the vacuum allows for higher top speeds due to less drag. The term focuses on "the lack of." During cornering, downforce is to some degree reduced by a drop in pressure, however, that's only a small part of the "dirty air." More importantly, "dirty" air includes turbulence and vortices created by the front car (and staying on the track -- it takes time to dissipate or going back to a uniform state -- think of it as small wind streams tangled in different directions). I would not say the two terms describe the same thing in two situations (like in the comment by FullOilBarrel). Because "dirty air" hurts more than simply providing a low pressure, as explained.
and here i thought dirty air was what happened when the silly vortexing wild air being forced *around* the slipstream bubble crashed back into the middle of the track as the low pressure zone disappated, like the eddies in the wake of a boat behind the smooth laminar flow of the immediate wake. I hadn't really considered the effect on cornering.
not absolutely, you can think of slipstream as a low pressure zone and the dirty air as a turbulence zone when changing from dirty air to slipstream as you approach another car it makes a difference but yes, compared to "still" or "organized" air, both are better in the straights and worse at corners
Great video explainer this. Could you do a video in the future about why the rules on how many components (such as a ICE or PU or gearbox) are so restrictive that everyone has to take penalties in the year. I understand that without any limits then the costs will massively inflate as teams use highly performant single use components but why are they so restrictive that it seems no-one can stay within the limits? Why not relax it so that people can realistically stay within the limits while being restrictive enough to keep costs reasonable. Thanks!
Your videos are so exciting, thanks for all this Contents. How do you do your animations and video representations ? Continue like this, you're the best !
Hey, Stuart, this question is coming to me as I’m watching the podium ceremony after Istanbul. How is it that drivers can go an entire race on a single set of intermediates as Ocon just did?
My question is will fixing the dirty air problem in the corners take away the slipstream on the straights if the 2022 regs go according to plan? I assume it would as they are basically two sides of the same coin.
what i like the most about f1 is their criativity and the fact that the innovations they create will be commercially available when it becomes cheap increasing safety and driving pleasure it's awesome
If downforce is proportional to the cars speed wouldn't it be better to just make the cars heavier to handle to corners better? Since in a straight line the wings would create more force when you don't want it and not when you do
Could you make a video explaining what they mean when they say a car "Is still live"? I heard it's something about electrical charge and people are not suppose to even touch it and I really don't understand how that happens. Thanx in advance!
For those who are wondering why we need down force So basically while cornering the necessary centripetal force comes from friction between Tire and road which is the function of car weight and coefficient of friction between Tire and road but considering the car velocity the necessary centripetal force is not enough just by relying on car weight and hence a down force is required to Artificially increase the weight of car and hence increase the centripetal force so car can take smooth tight turns and does not undergo understeering condition
This might be a stupid question. But why do engines not lose power when they are following in the slip stream at high speeds? After all, there`s less air for them to use?
It’s basically the space behind a f1 car that doesn’t have enough air or a low pressure region. In straight lines it’s called slip stream as it reduces the drag on the car. On curves n turns the same air is called dirty as it reduces the downward force needed to grip the car.
Turbulent (dirty) air can still cause drag but not provide good even downforce. Think about if you had downforce on the wrong side of the car (left instead of right, forcing a lockup on the left wheels when you're turning left - left wheels spinning less than right wheels). Slipstream is lack of drag due to the relative movement of air going in same direction (think about having a tailwind). Slipstream can be dirty or clean. They're trying to clean up the slip stream's dirtiness in the new F1 cars for 2022. Air resistance is required for downforce (in excessive of weight), which essentially is drag. Clean drag vs dirty turbulent drag - you can have the same amount of 'drag' that is dirty and horrible if it's still spinning in vortices and not still, putting uneven downforce all over, vs nice clean still air ahead. Think about cross winds that are blowing in gusts instead of a constant stream. One moment it's pushing you to the side, next moment it's not. You've counter steered only to find you need to steer straight again... over and over. That is the effect of dirty air. Tail wind may reduce drag, but overall, is different from dirty air, as it is smooth. Regardless how you drive, straight or around corners - you don't want dirty air because you lose control. Less drag is fine, as long as it is clean, you can still navigate the corner at good speed. As for saying drag is not taken into account when braking, no drag = less downforce on your tyres = less friction when braking. Therefore, DRAG is important for braking - for the downforce, not for it's stopping power (at higher speeds it does slow you down more, but more efficient downforce should be prioritised over 'drag' in that sense... drag is an unwanted but necessary side effect when trying to get more downforce, the issue is finding the balance of downforce for the amount of drag you're willing to compromise) Mercedes have longer cars, allowing more downforce for the same amount of drag overall, compared to redbull that has the shortest cars, who rely on their shorter wheel base to navigate corners better, hence requiring a higher rake and more drag to produce the same amount of downforce. Can be seen in the straight line speed difference between the two cars. Verstappens' style of driving suits a shorter wheel base as he does micro turns rather than one big smooth turn, a shorter wheel base allow more controlled oversteer so he spends less time 'turning' and more time 'driving straight' - which is better for tyre wear, this allows more controlled corner over taking, and allows you to take narrower inside lines when at turn 1 side by side battles, or outside lines with later apexes to get on the power earlier as it is a much slower but sharper turn --- you early brake outside lines for later apex and faster exits. Hamilton's style of driving suits longer wheel base where he can decide when to brake a lot more comfortably, and win on straights and inside line entry speeds as his braking distance is shorter. He also has to take a longer curve exit due to under steering, so MUST win on the entry speed when on inside line so that he is ahead and able to make the turn to the full length of the corner. His car is too long to hug the inside line of a turn at speed and would have to slow dramatically if he's ever pinned side by side. (rules of current F1 racing favors inside line late braking as it gives advantage to whoever is 'in front' when turning... that is why outside line drivers always have to give up the position and take a riskier turn into late apex... and hope for a switcheroo with their faster exit. - You late brake inside lines for faster entry but slower exits. It's also the reason why Hamilton hit Verstappen at silverstone. He couldn't steer further into the inside after having to brake so late when verstappen forced him to go behind him to take the inside line very late into the straight and his longer wheel base understeered (Mercedes car need the full length of the turn at speed, so he would've edged Verstappen off the lane even if there was no contact, unless he slowed down which is very hard to do whilst turning as braking can lock up wheels and still send the car into verstappen). If verstappen followed his usual racing line to take an early braking into a late apex, hamilton charging down the inside would be on his line, and per FIA rules, he can not take the line, so he had to take an outside line that put him at risk of Hamilton crashing into him. If Hamilton was in a redbull car, he can probably take the inside line turn, but he wouldn't have had the straight line speed to get there before verstappen closed it off. So for the same drag, mercedes cars have more downforce, but when it comes to dirty air, the uneven downforce applied is also amplified, that is why mercs HATE to race behind other cars compared to redbull cars that can follow in dirty air as their reliance clean drag for downforce is not as much There's a bunch of fakers pretending to be aerodynamics engineers or mechanical engineers what not, we can't prove what they do, but the lack of detail in their reasoning is appalling, so take what you will with a grain of salt.
this is a very good explanation about the difference. thanks so much for that!! slipstreaming exists in every racing discipline and so does dirty air, I guess. however, is dirty air just a worse problem in F1 than in Touring Cars (for example) because of how the wings are designed? (vortexes and other things you explained)
F1 car aerodynamic surfaces are hyper-precisely engineered to get maximum aerodynamic performance possible, but that also means they're incredibly sensitive to less than ideal air conditions like dirty air. Part of the goal of the 2022 regulations is to simplify what teams can and can't do in aerodynamic surface design so that the cars can maintain performance across a wider variety of conditions. Part of the issue is that the 2017 regulation changes were made with the goal of allowing teams to chase pure speed. The result is the fastest cars in the history of F1 but are very difficult to actually race because they are so sensitive to suboptimal conditions. The new regs coming in next year is basically course correction.
So... Whether you'll get the benefits of slipstream or the drawbacks of dirty air depends depends on whether you're on a straight vs in a corner and on how far behind the car you are?
Future video idea: take how the F1 games give the drivers stats such as pace, race craft etc… and apply it to the cars with categories such as speed, aero, handling, braking etc… we all know the cars are all unique but I’m interested to hear how you would score the 10 different vehicles on the grid.
What is the difference between slipstream and a tow? Why tow is talked about only on certain tracks? Wouldn't the same effect highlight when there's a long straight no matter what track?
the radius of curvature of a corner must be big enough to create a noticeable tow, otherwise it is only dirty air that ruin the mid corner and exit for the car behind
It's simple, the tow is a tactic while slipstream is the phenomenal that makes tow happen.. The drivers gain time when in the slipstream of the front driver which reduces drag on his car so that he has superior cornering speed.. The reason it works on certain tracks (like Monza) so much bcz there are hardly any corners in Monza and so dirty air doesn't affect the cars as much... The net gain is positive, remember Slipstream and Dirty Air works against each other and the number of corners and length of straights determines which one will have a higher value at the end of a sector, hence determines whether tow is effective or not... Hopefully, this helped you to understand. TL;DR: Slipstream > Dirty Air = Effective TOW (less corners or shorter corners, more or longer straights) TIME GAINED (Monza, Baku) Slipstream < Dirty Air = ineffective TOW (more corners or longer corners, less or short straights) TIME LOST (Catalunya)
It's called a tow when the net effect is only positive. Usually in qualifying where a car starts its flying lap taking a tow on the straight froma car that's ending its lap, so after giving you a good slipstream they'll let you pass and you'll have gained some free tenths. Tow are usually called that way when they are voluntary, like between team members. On certain tracks straight speed is key and you don't loose too much on corners by being behind someone. Yes exactly, like in Monza, so good teams make their drivers go out alternatively so to give both an edge on rivals.
@@squeakybunny2776 yeah but why tow is talked about for example in Silverstone, when there are multiply fast corners before the Hangar straight, creating dirty air and thus ruining the momentum?
My son (7) has just started to drive sim racing games, and wanted to learn about slip streams, he loved this, your graphics are better than my woffle lol. So you are educating not only old men like me, but also kids with these videos! 😀 thanks
I think slipstream helps less because of the lower pressure, and more because the air has been set moving in the direction of the cars. So the following car is pushing through the air at a lower relative velocity, which means notably lower drag. But the air has been churned and made turbulent in the process, and both the lower relative velocity and the turbulence lead to less downforce on the precisely-sculpted aero features of the following car, which doesn't matter on straights but is bad in corners.
We heard same thing a few years ago and they didnt make it better. We heard the rear tire exclusion zone would help low rake cars too, and it didnt. Ill wait till i see on track results before i believe the new car will be better
just consider slipstream and dirty air basically the same. both reduce drag. you want that in a straight but not in a corner
Simplified at its best
That's not true you don't want drag in the corner either, you don't mind it much but it's not the thing you want, you want downforce, those are not the same.
@@helderboymh Drag slows down the car faster, so yes you do want it, unless you don't plan on stopping for corners
@@metro3313 considering that cars have brakes, drag is kinda irrelevant in corners. You dont care if it's high or low, assuming that downforce is the same
@@soundninja99 Oh really? You must be an engineer in aerodynamics to know this.
Fun factoid: the car in front also benefits from having someone in their slipstream, as it presents a longer body to the air and cuts the low pressure area immediately behind them. It's most prominent in NASCAR where the cars run bumper to bumper and can go faster in pairs than they do solo. If you ever watch inline speed skating they work together in long packs which dramatically helps everyone in the pack.
NFS Carbon Nikki: Two cars travelling together go faster than one.
@@FURYBrenton and she wasn’t lying cause we’d b FLYING through the map😂
Seriously can't wait to see 2022 car race.
Hopefully they won't postpone it again.
But if the 2022 cars will only lose a bit of downforce when behind another car, then won't slipstreaming be less effective
If following close becomes easier, I project a lot of brake-checking.
@@harrybirchall3308 Yeah, but I heard DRS will also be less effective.
@@idexpro8263 True. But I'd rather watch close racing through corners than simple aero-assisted overtakes in straight lines.
Thinking about Jeremy Clarkson's Atom face is much better than thinking about his O face!
Rumor has it they are the same thing…
@@mikelanzo9872 his poor gf 😆
Hear hear!
Why did you have to put that in my head :(
When’s Clarkson’s Farm S2 ??
First moment I, non-native English speaker, heard "air, like water, is a fluid" I nearly spat my tea, before I could remember that "fluid" and "liquid" are different terms. Damn you, linguistic barrier! On the other hand, I belive comparing air to water is the best way to explain drag and other stuff like that to anyone of any age who have expirienced swimming.
What an improvement over the years though! When I saw the title and that it has been posted minutes ago I was wondering, I could remember you already covered it an earlier video. But comparing them know, what an astonisihing progress you made!
It's really nice that they have those two terms, Its very useful when talking about the physics' of it. unfortunate it doesn't exist in my native language.
Same with for example velocity and speed.
LMAO, before I read your comment I also was confused about him saying that air is a fluid 😂😂😂
At certain speeds liquids like water and gases like air behave almost the same way from a fluid dynamics standpoint. Modeling is almost the same as well if you use for example CFD simulations.
It‘s not just a simplification for purpose of this video
@@Numfuddle yes, I was talking about how easy it is to understand, never meant that it is oversimplified. Thanks a lot for clarifying this, I wasn't competent enough to state that)
In my experience, most native English speakers use the word "fluid" strictly for liquids, except in the context of (formal) Physics and Chemistry. It's not your fault for getting confused. English is bonkers.
This would make excellent physics class material 😁
@@AzathothsAlarmClock maybe i could pass my physics exams if the questions were like this
The presenter would have to get his physics correctly though, and there are a number of mistakes in this video.
@@stupidas9466 what are the mistakes in this video?
I think it was also worth mentioning the fact that being in dirty air reduces the overall car performance. The main issue is that chasing closely a car ahead means that the average temperature of the air you'll be facing is higher than what should be, so this will lead to an easy overheat of your tires with subsequent excess degradation or formation of graining.
I'm not sure about this, so I ask our lord and savior Chainbear's opinion, but I think that dirty air may not be great for engine performance. I guess that oxygen concentration in free air is a bit better, and surely the decreased air pressure in the wake will make the engine suffer a bit, although the presence of the compressor might make up for this effect.
It isn't great for engine performance, and not just because the air itself is hotter, but also due to the turbulence. The radiators in the sidepods rely on clean laminar airflow in order to achieve maximum heat-exchange between the coolant fluid and the airstream flowing through them, so when following an opponent the turbulent air decreases the effectiveness of the radiators and leads to engine overheating.
I thought the biggest issue with dirty air and tyres is that a following car uses up more tread to make up for lower downforce in the corners. I think of it as the tires almost imperceptibly oversteering/understeering, and therefore skidding slightly through a turn. I know nothing, though, and I didn't even bother looking it up just now.
The overheating of tyres, the additional damage and higher wear rate is not to do with a higher average air temperature.
As @pyRoy6 was suggesting, the cause of tyre problems is the reduction in down force and how that causes the car to act under cornering. The car will have a tendency to slide more (under-steer and/or over-steer issues may also be amplified). The additional movement causes the compound on the tyre to move about more, degrading it, causing quicker graining and potentially blistering.
The heat issue can be cyclic. Lower cornering speeds require increased breaking before the corner, which increases the heat generated by the brakes, subsequently this bleeds into the wheels and tyres, increasing their temperature. On the flip side, lower cornering speeds can cause an undesirable drop in tyre temperature. Such heat changes can increase wear and damage, and again amplify sliding during cornering. There is also a risk of the temperature going to far in one direction, or the other (getting to high, or to low), which can be very difficult to recover from.
it’s just the wind stream the car in front creates. the air is a lot different and it causes a massive loss in downforce.
That’s not why you overheat your tires. You overheat your tires due to the loss of downforce therefore sliding them across the track trying to keep up. Causing friction aka heat.
2:49 which is why in aerokit days (2015-2017), sometimes you see Indy cars running asymmetric wings on ovals.
Damn, I miss the aerokits. Not very pretty, but it was like IndyCar somehow took a quantum leap in F1's direction. Shattered track records all over the place.
Chain Bear: air particles all around
Me: air all particles around
/r/dontdeadopeninside
I'd like to have been a fly on the wall at some of the teams aero department meetings. Specifically when discussing how they can create extra turbulence behind the vehicle under the incoming regs. Deciding on whether it is worth balancing the downsides to the own cars by creating that turbulence Vs the negative impact on following drivers looking to pass improving their chances for better places.
3:26 Fun thing is, the drag coefficient of a cube and an F1 car are almost equal, so if they have the same frontal area, velocity and go through the same density air, the drag force would be about the same
I thought a cube had an even better drag coefficient than an f1 car
@@constantinlegras769 Yeah you are right, drag coefficient of a cube is 0.8 while DC of an F1 car is around 1. Varies from circuit to circuit, in Monza ~0.8 to Monaco ~1.2 give or take. I'm using data from 2005 so it might be slightly different to today.
Yeah, but that cube car also had open wheels, and the majority of drag comes from the wheels, so probably the cube car has a buch bigger drag coefficient overall, than the F1 car
@@Bartooc the drag coefficient of a modern car is higher
Cubes don't make mad downforce tho :P
Great video explanation. One part you got slightly incomplete is at 8:17, the reaction force is only a 2/5 slice of the downforce. most of the downforce is made by suction of faster air running underneath the car, not by reacting to air going up. Lower pressure sucks the car onto the road, not just because air is being pushed up. The diffuser as a concept does not need air on top. just air flowing underneath. In that case the only opposite reaction is the cars suspension.
"The diffuser as a concept does not need air on top. just air flowing underneath"
not true at all. for there to be a force acting down on the car the pressure above needs to be higher than the pressure under.
your car would have negative downforce
@@FullOilBarrel yes, it can't be a vacuum obviously, what I meant is that there does not need to be air forcing if down, in the means of a resultant force, like it would be in another fluid such as water where the dnlensity is 1000 times higher ie the force would be 1000 times higher
This is very noticeable watching onboard footage and keeping an eye on the car's front antennas. The antennas are very still on the straights and go wild when following another car on the corners or mid-overtaking, when the driver change lanes and go from the slipstream to clean air - in-between there's heaps of dirty air and the antennas go crazy!
7:23 love that the bus is so recognizably a Transport for London Wright New Routemaster
This year is my first season watching F1 properly and this is *exactly* the question I've been asking in the last few weeks because the commentators have never bothered to explain it. Thank you so much! Excellent video, and an extremely clear explanation.
welcome
Out of curiosity, what drew you to watch F1? Netflix Drive To Survive?
@@huaichien It was indeed. The first season was excellent for a rookie. Indeed it was a stroke of genius that Mercedes weren't involved in that first season because it then had to tell the story of the challengers -- including those for whom coming 4th or 5th would be an achievement. That made it really interesting. I've since come to realise some of the spin they put on things... but still. It got me into it, and it had loads of exciting race footage. Now I watch live!
@@splode7414 Glad you have been drawn to F1. I've been watching the races since the late 80s, in the days of Piquet, Prost, Senna and Mansell. Present F1 is still an attractive sport to watch but can't help but feel that new fans have missed out on so much. The unbelievable engine sound when you watch at the track. The visibly different car designs when the regulations were not so restrictive, so it's more interesting for fans to spot cars. There was greater variety of results when minnows could get the occasional front row start or race podium. Also, the cars looked more exciting on TV due to less perfect driving, more sliding and twitching, more onboard camera vibration, and lower TV definition.
This video is basically my dissertation project without the maths, how nice everything is without the maths 😂
This explains the basic theory well but I wished there was more practical discussion. What confuses people is why are we told that following another car slows you down if they're intentionally following each other during qualifying laps. It sounds contradictory and the nuances of it are subtle, complicated, and rarely ever explained in the media.
This video summarised in about 10 words:
Dirty Air - No Downforce --> Understeer/Oversteer --> Slower
Slipstream - No Drag --> Faster Top Speed
Need that 10 minutes for mid roll ads :/
This ^^
I can summarise in one word. TURBULANCE.
@@LPRD Actually it's 8 minutes now, that's why you see many videos that are just 8 minutes instead of 10.
But then you don't have the beautiful animations and the soothing voice.
When you're so early you can't autoskip the sponsorship yet
How does one autoskip it?
Please, how?
RUclips Vanced (probably)
@@Myrr_ vanced skips youtube's ads, but not in-video ones
@@NoNameAtAll2 It does, it's in the settings. Also there's a browser plugin.
Thank you! I’m relatively new to F1, and this has been one of my biggest questions. Solved!
Great video, only one thing I would correct; the friction of a tire is non-linear. If you push twice as hard you do not get twice the lateral force, this is the reason why you want to reduce weight transfer since what you loose on the inside tire is not gain back completely on the outside tire.
3:19 a rare insight in Ferrari's technical drawings for the SF1000
7:20 It's definitely not linear in case of tíres. The friction coefficient decreases by adding more normal force on the tire. This is the basis of many things in vehicle dynamics
It's linear for static friction, tires are definitely a more complex case on the boundary of rolling and sliding friction at maximum grip, but when he was showing the general example with the bus and the block he was accurately describing static friction which is how I took it. I was kinda watching this whole video as if I were showing it to a high school physics class tho; you'd start with describing the more graspable concept and then layer the complexity on as needed beyond that.
Aerodynamics, [ and to a slightly lesser degree hydrodynamics ] is one of the most complicated and difficult things to understand and control. To some extent a racing car is analogous to an aeroplane. In the latter case you want to generate LIFT. To do so you inevitably create DRAG, and aeroplane design is basically the problem of control and balance of WEIGHT which is in opposition to LIFT, and PROPULSION FORCE which must oppose DRAG. For a car, LIFT is substituted in the mix for DOWNFORCE, otherwise the problems are the same. In practical aerodynamics the wind tunnel is the most useful tool, because calculation is so difficult. Wind tunnels rely on an input of smooth air, which the object under test disturbs, leaving a turbulent wake. In the case of car racing, only the lead car experiences anything approaching smooth air, those following are faced with violently turbulent air. Ordinary drivers on public roads which are unpaved become intensely aware of " eating the dust " of the vehicle in front in dry conditions, or, on paved roads in the rain, an opaque spray.
The basic shape of a racing car is not conducive to having low DRAG. In fact in the case of the wheels, it's desirable to create drag forces around them for air cooling of the tyres. In the 2022 machines there appears to be a new emphasis on creating laminar [ that is smooth ] flow over the tyres which will reduce DRAG but decrease the cooling effect.
Like I said aerodynamics is a difficult subject - every change affects everything else. If race car design follows the example of fighter jet design we can expect introduction of more variable geometry, and all of it computer controlled !
I would watch Formula Cube imo
Funny, I always thought the rear wing was meant to create traction/grip on straights as well. Because of that notion, I was always confused with DRS, as I thought the thin air in the slipstream would reduce traction, so reducing traction even more by opening the DRS didn't make a lot of sense to me: why was everyone so concerned about creating traction with floor effects, rear wings, soft tyres and so on if then the best way to gain speed was to reduce drag (and therefore downforce) as much as possible? I guess there is a point of diminishing returns in the traction/speed proportion, and getting extra downforce exclusively for curves explains many things.
Now DRS makes a lot more sense. Your videos are awesome ^^
Indeed you have grasped it! You really don't need much rear stability on the straight because you aren't resisting lateral loading from turning, and traction loading at high speeds is not a big stress on the tire like it is at low speeds, meanwhile the air speed is high so a lot of downforce is available (but not needed); voila, enter DRS: dump the drag when you don't need it, keep it when you do :)
7:20 that is true only when the friction coefficient stay the same, but tires are load sensitive, meaning that when more (vertical) load is applied on them, their friction coefficient starts dropping, so the relationship is not linear for tires, it is digressive.
Example:
You have 1000 N load initially on a tire, with a friction coefficient of 0.4. This means you have 1000 N * 0.4 = 400 N of friction force.
You increase load to 2000 N for the same tire (via generating downforce), but the friction coefficient dropped to 0.3. This means you have 2000 N * 0.3 = 600 N of friction force, not 800 N, which is the case when friction coefficient stays constant (at 0.4 in our example).
Correction to 3:24
Assuming the same cross section area the cube would have a slight advantage over F1 car in terms of drag. Cube has drag coefficient of about 0.8, and F1 car has a drag coefficient of about 1.
For context normal cars have a drag coefficient of about 0.35
I love your old janky version. I have shared that with so many people to explain the effect. Glad you have re-done this though!
Slipstream = builds speed on straights
Dirty Air = robs downforce while cornering
Easy
I think that a good example for dirty air in water as discussed at 8:30 would be the swimming in whitewater. Whitewater contains more air than unmoved water and hereby reduces its density and therefore the lift and probably also the counter force created when trying to paddle with your hands. Therefore it is almost impossible to swim in whitewater without other tools.
You took a long time getting to the simple fact that slipstream vs. dirty air is straight line vs. cornering. The only thing I didn't like about your description was describing drag as "pulling the car back" rather than resistance in the front, which is what it is. This is similar to NASCAR rubes who don't understand elementary physics thinking that drafting sucks the front car back rather than the thinner air allowing the car behind to accelerate faster. The buffeting of the rear car as he pulls out to pass starts slowing him down, but the buffeting of the front car as the rear starts to pass does not slow it down until the passing car is in front of him causing air to pile up in front of his car. There's a great deal of misunderstanding of how aerodynamics work for those who lack a good education. Thanks for your instructive video.
Yes! I’ve been waiting to learn this properly. Thank you!!!
The slip stream is not lower density, it's lower pressure. Think of air in a tyre. If you warm it up, the air pressure goes up, but air density goes down as it expands. Pressure resists the compression forces on it, NOT a higher density of air.
The car in front is pushing against higher (still) pressured air. The car behind is passing through air moving at speed which is lower pressure against it's front.
Pressure is directional and is measured via force applied over surface area. With less pressure from the front, you have less force from the front going against your car.
Density is just the amount of air occupying a certain volume of space (which is actually the same for both cars).
The air density remains the same for the car infront and the car behind, the pressure though is different. One has air compressed against it, raising the pressure by a lot, the other has air moving forwards from it, so it's like encountering a tail wind.
Could you do a video on seamless sequential gearboxes? I know there isnt a lot of info out there, but i am curious what you know/find out.
Always love your videos. My ONLY slight observation is you might want to use a sailboat and rudder instead of a raft. Paddle boat, speed boat, submarine, jet plane, helicopter, anything like that use the medium they're in AS their propulsion. A car uses friction against the earth to move through air, and a sailboat uses friction against the wind to move through water, so I feel like they may be the closer cousins because each of them use an independent propulsion to move through a medium they're in direct opposition to, if that makes sense. Doesn't have anything to do with your explanation, because you didn't mention that the oars would be causing their own little wake patterns separate from the raft. Just a thought I wanted to share. Thank you for the wonderful content!
you can also think about it this way:
downforce produces corner speed but slows the car down in a straight
with slipstream you reduce downforce and drag helping reaching higher speeds in straights but slowing down the car in the corners with less downforce
I usually like the Chain Bear videos. However I am a bit disappointed by this video. There were actually a lot of parts that are sloppy if not completely wrong.
5:02 the pocket of air is not low density, but turbulent and therefor low pressure. The effect of density changes is mostly neglected in technical aerodynamics bellow 0.3 Mach as it is too small to play any role. Unfortunately most of the argumentation based on "just less air" is just wrong.
6:08 Aero efficiency is the ratio of the coefficient of downforce and the coefficient of drag. So how much downforce u produce for your drag. U cannot say in general terms if a slipstream will increase or decrease this number or it stays the same. For F1 with there nowadays complex aerodynamics u can be quite sure it goes down, wich is why dirty air is especially bad. It's not only that u have less effective q but also a smaller c_downforce.
5:02 the pocket of air behind the car has lower density as compared to the air on the sides and the front of the car.. it is an area of low pressure.. they've studied this on submarines too, they wanted to improve the acoustics of a 4 blade propeller.. cause when the blade spins it creates an area of low pressure behind it and this even produces bubbles which is bad (enemy sonar can detect this), so by adding more blades to the propeller (7 blade propeller) it improved the acoustics and the propeller can spin at a slower rate
Doesn't the messy, disruptive air mentioned at 9:05 also cause problems for the follower on the straights? Maybe not in speed, but maybe in stability and thus handling of the car?
And suddenly I am now remembering the song you made about this very topic
This also applies to DF setup strats. If u want to chase, a slightly higher df is good, if u wanna lead lowered df is good.
I asked this question previously: would it be possible to reduce dirty air / turbulence through direct regulation of the car's wake? Consider it an extension of the limits to car size: as well as restricting the length, width, and height of the car (i.e. the physical space the car takes up), put a physical, measurable limit on the amount of turbulent air it produces (i.e. the broader aerodynamic space the car takes up, defined at a certain distance back, or maybe set limits at several distances and several speeds).
why is chain beer my favorite youtube channel but others not?
Mmmmmmmmmm beer 🍺
Thanks for the video. If you're in the market for a new video idea I would like to request one. Could you show some of the likely outcomes of the 2021 Russian GP had certain drivers pitted at different times than they did. For example, had Lando and Charles pitted for wets when Lewis did (or the lap before) based on their existing lap times.
Nice touch with the calculator numbers, Chain Bear :)
Stuart another well explained video, something I’ve not seen before on RUclips. I’ve decided to support you on Patreon throughout the 2022 season with the new regulations. Keep up the good work and well done.
Excellent video Chain Bear. This is a subject I felt I understood pretty well, but I still leaned plenty. Your explanations are clear and easy to understand, and moreover enjoyable!
I’ve been wanting to understand this. Thank you. Love from 🇿🇦
This is the problem, dirty air and slipstream negate each other from corners into straights and vice versa, the cars fall so much behind in corner that it barely makes the time it lost due to dirty air in the slipstream (net time gain= 0 or negative mostly) if the corner leads to a straight which is why they brought in DRS to make slipstream more effect but DRS has its own issues. All aboard the DRS Train!! choo! choo!
500k subs! Congrats Chain Bear!
As a new F1 fan I am thoroughly enjoying your videos. Thanks👏👏
Using water as an example again, slipstreaming can also be thought of like a small car tucking up behind a big truck as they both go through a patch of high water. The truck pushes all the water out so that it’s shallow enough, albeit briefly, for the small car to go through.
Dirty air would be as if the truck started turning through the water. The car needs consistently shallow water to be able to continue to keep up, but as the truck turns it disrupts the flow of shallower water for the car, making that task more difficult.
I figure that just about everyone who’s been driving more than a year or two on public roads (at least the ones in the US lol) has experienced that scenario at some point so I figured I’d toss it out there.
Aerospace engineering here: air density doesn’t change. Air is pretty well characterized as incompressible (constant density) at sub transonic velocities (
what do you mean by incompressable? because a plugged syringe can be compressed and acts like a spring, and sound itself is due to compression
Slipstream may be exaggerated to mean a vacuum created by the front fast-moving car (as it takes time for the surrounding air to fill the displaced space), thus staying in the vacuum allows for higher top speeds due to less drag. The term focuses on "the lack of." During cornering, downforce is to some degree reduced by a drop in pressure, however, that's only a small part of the "dirty air." More importantly, "dirty" air includes turbulence and vortices created by the front car (and staying on the track -- it takes time to dissipate or going back to a uniform state -- think of it as small wind streams tangled in different directions). I would not say the two terms describe the same thing in two situations (like in the comment by FullOilBarrel). Because "dirty air" hurts more than simply providing a low pressure, as explained.
3:20 Is the car moving forward or the road moving backwards? :P We need a separate video explaining that.
it must be retarding lol sionce the resultant force is backwards
and here i thought dirty air was what happened when the silly vortexing wild air being forced *around* the slipstream bubble crashed back into the middle of the track as the low pressure zone disappated, like the eddies in the wake of a boat behind the smooth laminar flow of the immediate wake. I hadn't really considered the effect on cornering.
can you explain why f1 drivers can't use the number 30? I was f1 2021 and they won't let me use that number even though no driver is using it
In your TLDR, you got it the other way around, you wrote that drag is good for straight line speed and that downforce is bad for corner speed
cute bear chain bear.
GOOD VIDEOS. NO BS. NO DRAMA. JUSS PURE FAXX AND INFO.
GOOD ILLUSTRATIONS, LOVE'EM
Clearest explanation of these phenomenon! Thank you always Chain Bear!
TLDR: Slipstream and dirty air are the same thing. It's good on a straight line but bad in a corner.
not absolutely, you can think of slipstream as a low pressure zone and the dirty air as a turbulence zone
when changing from dirty air to slipstream as you approach another car it makes a difference
but yes, compared to "still" or "organized" air, both are better in the straights and worse at corners
Nice ending! That's new to me.
Great video explainer this. Could you do a video in the future about why the rules on how many components (such as a ICE or PU or gearbox) are so restrictive that everyone has to take penalties in the year. I understand that without any limits then the costs will massively inflate as teams use highly performant single use components but why are they so restrictive that it seems no-one can stay within the limits? Why not relax it so that people can realistically stay within the limits while being restrictive enough to keep costs reasonable. Thanks!
Your videos are so exciting, thanks for all this Contents. How do you do your animations and video representations ? Continue like this, you're the best !
Hey, Stuart, this question is coming to me as I’m watching the podium ceremony after Istanbul. How is it that drivers can go an entire race on a single set of intermediates as Ocon just did?
My question is will fixing the dirty air problem in the corners take away the slipstream on the straights if the 2022 regs go according to plan? I assume it would as they are basically two sides of the same coin.
what i like the most about f1 is their criativity
and the fact that the innovations they create will be commercially available when it becomes cheap
increasing safety and driving pleasure
it's awesome
The quality in this video are amazing! Thank you for providing us such great educational videos for free!
Great video, keep up the great work!
Emm... the video title is identical to a 3yr-old WTF1 vid, only CAPS differs
this is the best explanation I’ve seen. Watching F1 will be much more exciting knowing this. Thx
If downforce is proportional to the cars speed wouldn't it be better to just make the cars heavier to handle to corners better? Since in a straight line the wings would create more force when you don't want it and not when you do
Could you make a video explaining what they mean when they say a car "Is still live"? I heard it's something about electrical charge and people are not suppose to even touch it and I really don't understand how that happens. Thanx in advance!
is that Vettel parachuting?
For those who are wondering why we need down force
So basically while cornering the necessary centripetal force comes from friction between Tire and road which is the function of car weight and coefficient of friction between Tire and road but considering the car velocity the necessary centripetal force is not enough just by relying on car weight and hence a down force is required to Artificially increase the weight of car and hence increase the centripetal force so car can take smooth tight turns and does not undergo understeering condition
This might be a stupid question. But why do engines not lose power when they are following in the slip stream at high speeds? After all, there`s less air for them to use?
He managed to use Sochi as an example of an overtake, what a season :0
What font are you using it's amazing
Alternative Tl;dw - Air generates both downforce and drag. Car in front removes air from car behind.
Now where can I get that Chain Bear soda shown in the outro?
It’s basically the space behind a f1 car that doesn’t have enough air or a low pressure region. In straight lines it’s called slip stream as it reduces the drag on the car. On curves n turns the same air is called dirty as it reduces the downward force needed to grip the car.
Turbulent (dirty) air can still cause drag but not provide good even downforce. Think about if you had downforce on the wrong side of the car (left instead of right, forcing a lockup on the left wheels when you're turning left - left wheels spinning less than right wheels).
Slipstream is lack of drag due to the relative movement of air going in same direction (think about having a tailwind).
Slipstream can be dirty or clean. They're trying to clean up the slip stream's dirtiness in the new F1 cars for 2022.
Air resistance is required for downforce (in excessive of weight), which essentially is drag. Clean drag vs dirty turbulent drag - you can have the same amount of 'drag' that is dirty and horrible if it's still spinning in vortices and not still, putting uneven downforce all over, vs nice clean still air ahead.
Think about cross winds that are blowing in gusts instead of a constant stream. One moment it's pushing you to the side, next moment it's not. You've counter steered only to find you need to steer straight again... over and over. That is the effect of dirty air.
Tail wind may reduce drag, but overall, is different from dirty air, as it is smooth.
Regardless how you drive, straight or around corners - you don't want dirty air because you lose control.
Less drag is fine, as long as it is clean, you can still navigate the corner at good speed.
As for saying drag is not taken into account when braking, no drag = less downforce on your tyres = less friction when braking. Therefore, DRAG is important for braking - for the downforce, not for it's stopping power (at higher speeds it does slow you down more, but more efficient downforce should be prioritised over 'drag' in that sense... drag is an unwanted but necessary side effect when trying to get more downforce, the issue is finding the balance of downforce for the amount of drag you're willing to compromise)
Mercedes have longer cars, allowing more downforce for the same amount of drag overall, compared to redbull that has the shortest cars, who rely on their shorter wheel base to navigate corners better, hence requiring a higher rake and more drag to produce the same amount of downforce.
Can be seen in the straight line speed difference between the two cars.
Verstappens' style of driving suits a shorter wheel base as he does micro turns rather than one big smooth turn, a shorter wheel base allow more controlled oversteer so he spends less time 'turning' and more time 'driving straight' - which is better for tyre wear, this allows more controlled corner over taking, and allows you to take narrower inside lines when at turn 1 side by side battles, or outside lines with later apexes to get on the power earlier as it is a much slower but sharper turn --- you early brake outside lines for later apex and faster exits.
Hamilton's style of driving suits longer wheel base where he can decide when to brake a lot more comfortably, and win on straights and inside line entry speeds as his braking distance is shorter. He also has to take a longer curve exit due to under steering, so MUST win on the entry speed when on inside line so that he is ahead and able to make the turn to the full length of the corner. His car is too long to hug the inside line of a turn at speed and would have to slow dramatically if he's ever pinned side by side. (rules of current F1 racing favors inside line late braking as it gives advantage to whoever is 'in front' when turning... that is why outside line drivers always have to give up the position and take a riskier turn into late apex... and hope for a switcheroo with their faster exit. - You late brake inside lines for faster entry but slower exits.
It's also the reason why Hamilton hit Verstappen at silverstone. He couldn't steer further into the inside after having to brake so late when verstappen forced him to go behind him to take the inside line very late into the straight and his longer wheel base understeered (Mercedes car need the full length of the turn at speed, so he would've edged Verstappen off the lane even if there was no contact, unless he slowed down which is very hard to do whilst turning as braking can lock up wheels and still send the car into verstappen). If verstappen followed his usual racing line to take an early braking into a late apex, hamilton charging down the inside would be on his line, and per FIA rules, he can not take the line, so he had to take an outside line that put him at risk of Hamilton crashing into him. If Hamilton was in a redbull car, he can probably take the inside line turn, but he wouldn't have had the straight line speed to get there before verstappen closed it off.
So for the same drag, mercedes cars have more downforce, but when it comes to dirty air, the uneven downforce applied is also amplified, that is why mercs HATE to race behind other cars compared to redbull cars that can follow in dirty air as their reliance clean drag for downforce is not as much
There's a bunch of fakers pretending to be aerodynamics engineers or mechanical engineers what not, we can't prove what they do, but the lack of detail in their reasoning is appalling, so take what you will with a grain of salt.
Thanks man..... was having this doubt in mind but never got satisfying answer.... although I knew that concept but thanks for elaborating so nicely
this is a very good explanation about the difference. thanks so much for that!!
slipstreaming exists in every racing discipline and so does dirty air, I guess. however, is dirty air just a worse problem in F1 than in Touring Cars (for example) because of how the wings are designed? (vortexes and other things you explained)
F1 car aerodynamic surfaces are hyper-precisely engineered to get maximum aerodynamic performance possible, but that also means they're incredibly sensitive to less than ideal air conditions like dirty air. Part of the goal of the 2022 regulations is to simplify what teams can and can't do in aerodynamic surface design so that the cars can maintain performance across a wider variety of conditions.
Part of the issue is that the 2017 regulation changes were made with the goal of allowing teams to chase pure speed. The result is the fastest cars in the history of F1 but are very difficult to actually race because they are so sensitive to suboptimal conditions. The new regs coming in next year is basically course correction.
@@Christopher_TG thanks for the explanation
Basically copied WTF1’s caption for their video on this topic…
Saw that too! How cynical.
This is an incredibly useful video. Great job!
So... Whether you'll get the benefits of slipstream or the drawbacks of dirty air depends depends on whether you're on a straight vs in a corner and on how far behind the car you are?
Brilliant video. Please do more such videos.
Great videos mate I appreciate you.
Future video idea: take how the F1 games give the drivers stats such as pace, race craft etc… and apply it to the cars with categories such as speed, aero, handling, braking etc… we all know the cars are all unique but I’m interested to hear how you would score the 10 different vehicles on the grid.
great video as always
So perfectly explained! You're awesome!
Great explanation 👍
Expecting a video about how Ocon finished a race with a single set of tire
Brilliant. Crystal clear explanation.
What is the difference between slipstream and a tow? Why tow is talked about only on certain tracks? Wouldn't the same effect highlight when there's a long straight no matter what track?
the radius of curvature of a corner must be big enough to create a noticeable tow, otherwise it is only dirty air that ruin the mid corner and exit for the car behind
You answered your own question
Tow only gets talked about when it is significant enough due to the presence of a long straight.
It's simple, the tow is a tactic while slipstream is the phenomenal that makes tow happen.. The drivers gain time when in the slipstream of the front driver which reduces drag on his car so that he has superior cornering speed.. The reason it works on certain tracks (like Monza) so much bcz there are hardly any corners in Monza and so dirty air doesn't affect the cars as much... The net gain is positive, remember Slipstream and Dirty Air works against each other and the number of corners and length of straights determines which one will have a higher value at the end of a sector, hence determines whether tow is effective or not... Hopefully, this helped you to understand.
TL;DR:
Slipstream > Dirty Air = Effective TOW (less corners or shorter corners, more or longer straights) TIME GAINED (Monza, Baku)
Slipstream < Dirty Air = ineffective TOW (more corners or longer corners, less or short straights) TIME LOST (Catalunya)
It's called a tow when the net effect is only positive. Usually in qualifying where a car starts its flying lap taking a tow on the straight froma car that's ending its lap, so after giving you a good slipstream they'll let you pass and you'll have gained some free tenths. Tow are usually called that way when they are voluntary, like between team members. On certain tracks straight speed is key and you don't loose too much on corners by being behind someone. Yes exactly, like in Monza, so good teams make their drivers go out alternatively so to give both an edge on rivals.
@@squeakybunny2776 yeah but why tow is talked about for example in Silverstone, when there are multiply fast corners before the Hangar straight, creating dirty air and thus ruining the momentum?
My son (7) has just started to drive sim racing games, and wanted to learn about slip streams, he loved this, your graphics are better than my woffle lol. So you are educating not only old men like me, but also kids with these videos! 😀 thanks
I think slipstream helps less because of the lower pressure, and more because the air has been set moving in the direction of the cars. So the following car is pushing through the air at a lower relative velocity, which means notably lower drag. But the air has been churned and made turbulent in the process, and both the lower relative velocity and the turbulence lead to less downforce on the precisely-sculpted aero features of the following car, which doesn't matter on straights but is bad in corners.
We heard same thing a few years ago and they didnt make it better. We heard the rear tire exclusion zone would help low rake cars too, and it didnt. Ill wait till i see on track results before i believe the new car will be better
You missed a trick not ending the video with the dirty air song. That song deserves some love!