This forum contains threads to discuss teams themselves. Anything not technical about the cars, including restructuring, performances etc belongs here.
Yeah, they will just be more precise on the designs.
It’s a bit like reverse really, give a man more time to validate his runs, he will just make more revisions without putting as much effort into them as he can play with the results until he gets them right. With less time he will likely put greater time and thought into the designs before running them to verify.
As someone else said the other week, Williams/haas aren’t at the forefront of the grid because they have the most time
A smart man will always put in as little effort as possible to get a good outcome. They are not hobbyist who love to spend time in the windtunnel. If it's that easy to just calculate some more and reduce the required time for testing with the same reliable outcome, they wil always calculate some more, so you don't have to test that much, which means you have testing time left for some other details, and thus can develop more parts?
You are assuming that currently Red Bull doesn't have an optimized calculate/test distribution in both finance and time. That would really surprise me.
The reason why HAAS isn't at the forefront is a lot more complicated (quality of personnel, windtunnel etc. comes into play), and not a good indicator of the importance of windtunnel time. It's better to look at the improvement of HAAS when they are allowed to have more windtunnel time.
Last edited by Curbstone on 08 Nov 2022, 21:06, edited 1 time in total.
And Brazil is far, far easier to follow/overtake compared to Mexico. Average overtakes at Brazil were over 60 per year prior to the new aero regulations which "allow" following. Mexico there were about 30 as a result of cooling being an issue when following, even with the new aero regs. Surely then it's possible that it's easier to pass backmarkers too at Brazil? So, these purely qualitative arguments can be made easily both ways.
What's Brazil got to do with it? The lap times are both in Mexico.
Ahh I read that it was 2016 Mexico. Regardless, the new regs in Mexico didn't improve the amount of overtaking.
Whether or not overtaking was improved in Mexico requires a deeper analysis. You have to consider cars qualifying out of position, cars which are better in races than qualy, poor pit strategies, and so on. It's very complicated. the number alone doesn't give a complete picture.
In this video, the author describes the so-called RB18`s secret weapons that helped to win both WDC and WCC championships:
I wonder had the following things could be implemented in the W14 car bearing in mind they will retain the same no-pods aero philosophy as we did figure out they`ll do next year:
- variable Venturi tunnels hights in order for a constant airflow volume hence velocity, to be achieved underfloor
***
- peak downforce created by the floor at lower-speed corners when the ride height is higher rather than high-speed corners when the car runs at the minimum height
The video is very amateurish about these two claims, unsurprisingly.
Variable height in RB18 tunnels does not represent an effort to achieve constant airspeed in them, on the contrary. Various vertical curves on the keel speed up the airflow and this low pressure is projected onto floor surface creating several low-pressure zones in the tunnel. All these zones are not as dependent of ride height changes as a typical "clean" design would be, even if they are relatively small.
Peak downforce is definitely not created at low speed corners, even if we are talking about aero coefficients and not outright air-velocity-dependent forces. RB18's floor profile is such that it creates a single massive low-pressure zone with the lowest throat height of all cars, more here:
This design still works the best at low ride heights, just like any other ground-effect floor out there. The difference here is that this design emphasizes diffuser performance and strong diffuser vortex generation to prevent diffuser stall when car is at its lowest, while slightly sacrificing overall peak downforce levels. This is completely different from Ferrari, a car that was allowed to bounce at high speed to keep the optimal ride height at all times and all corners.
Both cars had softer suspension and great low-speed corner performance where this performance was most important for lap time (e.g. Monaco), but RB never bounced as much since its diffuser rarely stalled at speed - contrary to Ferrari. As of TD039, RB18 simply managed to retain its original design properties, while Ferrari and others had to make severe compromises with their setup. The top speed of RB came mostly from better RW design with bigger DRS flap, until Ferrari had to cut back on engine power to lower the risk of mid-race failures. From that point RB18 even had a distinctive power advantage over its competitors.
I thank you, dear Sir, firstly for your answer and last but not least for the in-depth explanation for us F1 fans who are having basic aerodynamic knowledge.
With your kind permission, I would like to further ask you about some rumours about them being credible or not:
1. Has some kind of Gurney flaps (or maybe these edges have some rake that are just adding DF?) at the trailing edge of the floor that is working in conjunction with the ones at both sides of the central non-Venturi tunnels (see the below picture). This adds downforce due to their car's rake.
2. Those trailing edges of the floor were both reinforced for stopping flexing at specific loads but also to lower the car's CG after they figure out how to shave some weight out of the car.
3. Having some rake could it be that they also increase the DF at the back of the car in the same manner as they did until last year? If that is true can we quantify had this DF now is bigger than that generated by the Venturi tunnels?
Marko stated recently that they will focus on other areas than aero due to the CFD and windtunnel time penalty. Got me thinking which area. While watching the Mexico race I noticed the time lost on the main straight and gained back in the first sequence of corners by Merc vs RB was the exact opposite of last year where Merc gained time the main straight but lost that time (and more) again in the first sequence of corners vs RB. So if RB is short on windtunnel time for the next 12 months they can take a good look at how this years Merc is gaining time in the slow speed corners. So looks like they've got excellent mechanical grip just like Fer. High speed corner aero is already good and low drag aero for top speeds on straights looks BIC. Expecting 12 months of continuous upgrades on the suspension.
I also recall someone posting about more weight savings in the parts and chassis as an area of improvement in light of the reduced WT testing allowances.
I also recall someone posting about more weight savings in the parts and chassis as an area of improvement in light of the reduced WT testing allowances.
Teams had lot more kilos to play around with under the old regulations as they were underweight which is not or hardly the case under these regs so indeed thats also an area to claw back
1. Has some kind of Gurney flaps (or maybe these edges have some rake that are just adding DF?) at the trailing edge of the floor that is working in conjunction with the ones at both sides of the central non-Venturi tunnels (see the below picture). This adds downforce due to their car's rake.
2. Those trailing edges of the floor were both reinforced for stopping flexing at specific loads but also to lower the car's CG after they figure out how to shave some weight out of the car.
3. Having some rake could it be that they also increase the DF at the back of the car in the same manner as they did until last year? If that is true can we quantify had this DF now is bigger than that generated by the Venturi tunnels?
1. Something like that, all those curvatures are beneficial for overall downforce and might have some special purpose in corners/yaw.
2. Could be, not sure.
3. Rake increases front downforce, as front wing is closer to the ground. This was also the case with bargeboards and t-tray till 2021. Rake with is also aimed at high rear end to allow softer suspension to have extra travel before the car bottoms out on straights. With RB design, I have a feeling they also lose less floor downforce with rake than other designs do.
1. Has some kind of Gurney flaps (or maybe these edges have some rake that are just adding DF?) at the trailing edge of the floor that is working in conjunction with the ones at both sides of the central non-Venturi tunnels (see the below picture). This adds downforce due to their car's rake.
2. Those trailing edges of the floor were both reinforced for stopping flexing at specific loads but also to lower the car's CG after they figure out how to shave some weight out of the car.
3. Having some rake could it be that they also increase the DF at the back of the car in the same manner as they did until last year? If that is true can we quantify had this DF now is bigger than that generated by the Venturi tunnels?
1. Something like that, all those curvatures are beneficial for overall downforce and might have some special purpose in corners/yaw.
2. Could be, not sure.
3. Rake increases front downforce, as front wing is closer to the ground. This was also the case with bargeboards and t-tray till 2021. Rake with is also aimed at high rear end to allow softer suspension to have extra travel before the car bottoms out on straights. With RB design, I have a feeling they also lose less floor downforce with rake than other designs do.
I thank you again, dear Vanja, may I say?
Now regarding the suspension travel at the back of the car, do you think that RB18 uses a dual spring suspension system, like the ones described in the video from the link below or your expertise is more aero related rather than mechanical?
Enzo Fittipaldi joins Red Bull programme for Carlin F2 move
Enzo Fittipaldi has become a full Red Bull junior driver and will compete for Carlin in his second full Formula 2 season in 2023.
Marko confirmed that not all of Red Bull's 2022 F2 drivers will remain in the programme next year.
"We will make an announcement pretty soon about who is leaving and who are the new guys."
Meanwhile, Marko stressed that Liam Lawson will benefit from his planned move to Japan for 2023.
"He will do Super Formula. It's a difficult place to be. The Japanese drivers know every centimetre, they know all the tracks, it's not easy."
He also confirmed that Norwegian F2 racer Dennis Hauger will be elevated to an F1 reserve role next year, alongside Lawson, who won't always be available due to race weekend clashes.
"We have several reserve drivers. Another one will be Hauger, that's what's decided so far. And we will see the beginning of the season how it's going. There will be some clashes, but out of our youngsters there will be two or three."
Enzo Fittipaldi joins Red Bull programme for Carlin F2 move
Enzo Fittipaldi has become a full Red Bull junior driver and will compete for Carlin in his second full Formula 2 season in 2023.
Marko confirmed that not all of Red Bull's 2022 F2 drivers will remain in the programme next year.
"We will make an announcement pretty soon about who is leaving and who are the new guys."
Meanwhile, Marko stressed that Liam Lawson will benefit from his planned move to Japan for 2023.
"He will do Super Formula. It's a difficult place to be. The Japanese drivers know every centimetre, they know all the tracks, it's not easy."
He also confirmed that Norwegian F2 racer Dennis Hauger will be elevated to an F1 reserve role next year, alongside Lawson, who won't always be available due to race weekend clashes.
"We have several reserve drivers. Another one will be Hauger, that's what's decided so far. And we will see the beginning of the season how it's going. There will be some clashes, but out of our youngsters there will be two or three."
That confirms hauger isnt leaving as a few had suggested. some thought he might because he announced his team for next season already, whereas RB juniors tend to all announce at the same time later in the season
Yeah, they will just be more precise on the designs.
It’s a bit like reverse really, give a man more time to validate his runs, he will just make more revisions without putting as much effort into them as he can play with the results until he gets them right. With less time he will likely put greater time and thought into the designs before running them to verify.
As someone else said the other week, Williams/haas aren’t at the forefront of the grid because they have the most time
Yup totally agree, the penalty won't impact them at all. Red Bull got away with it, well played.
