Don't think we can say that without CFD101FlyingDutchman wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 11:30So that wing is there to improve aero efficiency of that section. Less lossy flow
Don't think we can say that without CFD101FlyingDutchman wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 11:30So that wing is there to improve aero efficiency of that section. Less lossy flow
Was explained by Kyle Engineer that a wing is better to use (RB18 had it) as it’s so much more efficient than cuts/anglesorganic wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 11:43Don't think we can say that without CFD101FlyingDutchman wrote: ↑25 Feb 2023, 11:30So that wing is there to improve aero efficiency of that section. Less lossy flow
Would it be possible not to duplicate your posts in this and the team thread?gcdugas wrote: ↑26 Feb 2023, 07:03Yes, you can ask WTF? to my idea. The "orthodox" view says I'm crazy and it makes sense but who would have thought that by flooding the diffuser with exhaust, and thus technically "defeating" the low pressure zone, that you would increase downforce? It turns out that by making the flow faster under the diffuser, it increased the suction. I'm arguing the same thing. By having the air flow faster horizontally over the diffuser that it will actually "pull" air out of the diffuser and increasing its effectiveness and suction. Plus you will not be feeding air into the negative pressure zone beneath the rear wing and increasing its effectiveness... all the while decreasing drag on the straights. I am asserting that it is counter-intuitive just as the blown diffuser was.
Sorry mate, but you are making stuff up with no technical basis for your “concept“ - if that worked, the teams would all be doing it.gcdugas wrote: ↑26 Feb 2023, 07:03Yes, you can ask WTF? to my idea. The "orthodox" view says I'm crazy and it makes sense but who would have thought that by flooding the diffuser with exhaust, and thus technically "defeating" the low pressure zone, that you would increase downforce? It turns out that by making the flow faster under the diffuser, it increased the suction. I'm arguing the same thing. By having the air flow faster horizontally over the diffuser that it will actually "pull" air out of the diffuser and increasing its effectiveness and suction. Plus you will not be feeding air into the negative pressure zone beneath the rear wing and increasing its effectiveness... all the while decreasing drag on the straights. I am asserting that it is counter-intuitive just as the blown diffuser was.
I should've specified more how this data was generated. This data is the fastest lap of each driver from the third day of testing.
Code: Select all
a = v^2/R
Code: Select all
1/k
Interesting analysis, thanks for sharingBigBeansBoy wrote: ↑27 Feb 2023, 07:15Hello all, I don't know if this thread is the perfect place for this analysis so please let me know if it should be moved.
I was heavily inspired by @F1DataAnalysis on twitter to try to dig into the numbers to get a better look at how Mclaren is looking. This is admittedly my first attempt at analyzing F1 telemetry data, so if I've made any mistakes feel free to correct, I can also provide any information regarding how values are calculated.
For all analyses here I'm looking at Norris, Perez, and Hamilton. If anyone wants to see any particular comparison please request!
Firstly, we're going to look at the speed, longitudinal acceleration (positive means foot on the gas, negative means slamming on the brakes), and lateral acceleration (related to mechanical grip with the assumption that the drivers are on the edge). All of these are in relation to distance along the track.
https://i.imgur.com/r4n0PYS.png
Starting with the main straight, top speed for Norris is 317kph compared to Perez's 319kph and Hamilton's 315kph.
We can see in the speed plot that the 3rd major braking point loses Norris a lot of time. I'm not including the figure here, but Piastri is very similar. (Though I should note he actually holds on to it a little better and where Norris' speed drops he's able to keep it steady. Both are still very off Hamilton/Perez.)
Additionally, at the 6th and 8th braking points the minimum speed going through the corner is notably lower.
Before diving into the longitudinal and lateral acceleration I think it's useful to look at them plotted with respect to each other:
https://i.imgur.com/STNO83Q.png
Here the data points create a shape narrower than the other drivers. Peak lateral acceleration occurs in high speed corners so that's likely where the Mclaren is lacking the most.
The max braking performance looks surprisingly good. So surprisingly I'm curious if it's an issue from the telemetry data. I did a fair amount of smoothing to remove weird artifacts, but it might not have been perfect. I think it's important to remember this caveat when looking at all of these figures.
Lastly, I want to include this figure showing the velocity and lateral acceleration plotted against each other. I'm not entirely sure what conclusions can be drawn from this, but I think it's interesting to look at:
https://i.imgur.com/uovqDv9.png
If anyone has any requests for other data/drivers to look at let me know!
But please, more of it, it is awesome. And feel free to drop a link in the car threads. Only the link to whichever other thread, though. Let’s not have those discussions in the car threads.hollus wrote: ↑28 Feb 2023, 21:07
A reminder to everyone but specially to the new people (welcome!).
The car threads are specially strictly moderated in this forum. Stick to this car and to hardware in the car threads.
Team politics and other team things, please in the team threads.
Lap times, happy faces, sensations and will they be faster/slower than XYZ, either in the team threads or in the race threads.
If your post is in this thread and is not centering on this car, the physical car, it might have been or might be deleted or moved.
Let's keep the awesome car threads on this forum
a) focused on the hardware and
b) awesome.
Thanks.