Red Bull RB20

[dren]

Aren't we reliving '22, where the whole forum went bonkers over an illusive inlet? I remember the majority here pointing to an off-color piece of carbon, speculating a porous panel intake.

If I really, really, really have a hard look, the "verticale intake" looks like nothing more than a Black painted panel to connect the old floor/tub to the mule sidepods. Especially as one would expect perspective to make it wider in a front shot and it just doesnt.

On top of the sidepod in the reveal there was a clear divet where one would expect the "top" inlet. I suspect it was just covered with a big decal that sagged a bit under the Hot lights.

They might even really have had that small bottom intake for silverstone just to make the cooling work. If they are focussen on floor and suspension, how the inlet is treated may be a minor factor.

The loss of the nose inlet is explaied by the rule change to add more drivers cooling. The inlets are now on top of the nose.

I agree about the divet on top where an inlet could end up. It looks to dip there a little. The whole sidepod might see some drastic changes over testing. I don't expect anything crazy with the front wing as-is. It may just be a vanilla launch wing with the old inlet covered for testing until an upgrade comes further down the line.

[taperoo2k]

Aren't we reliving '22, where the whole forum went bonkers over an illusive inlet? I remember the majority here pointing to an off-color piece of carbon, speculating a porous panel intake.

If I really, really, really have a hard look, the "verticale intake" looks like nothing more than a Black painted panel to connect the old floor/tub to the mule sidepods. Especially as one would expect perspective to make it wider in a front shot and it just doesnt.

On top of the sidepod in the reveal there was a clear divet where one would expect the "top" inlet. I suspect it was just covered with a big decal that sagged a bit under the Hot lights.

They might even really have had that small bottom intake for silverstone just to make the cooling work. If they are focussen on floor and suspension, how the inlet is treated may be a minor factor.

The loss of the nose inlet is explaied by the rule change to add more drivers cooling. The inlets are now on top of the nose.

I agree about the divet on top where an inlet could end up. It looks to dip there a little. The whole sidepod might see some drastic changes over testing. I don't expect anything crazy with the front wing as-is. It may just be a vanilla launch wing with the old inlet covered for testing until an upgrade comes further down the line.

I've heard a rumour we might not see the full RB20 until the race weekend. They might be doing something innovative with the sidepod inlets, it's hard to tell. It'll be interesting to see if this is an evolution of the RB19 or something completely different in the quest to stay ahead of the rest.

[Vanja #66]

A few details I noticed on some of the recent photos made me want to dissect the limited details we get to see on RB20 for now and I will focus on the sidepod inlet and the rear end of sausage pontoons.

What I want to say again before is that the front wing is not the differentiator of any kind and (as Tifosi have painfully witnessed) last year Ferrari has shown you can instead only get it very wrong if you mess up with the initial design and how it interacts with front suspension arms. So the back-forth nose and wing designs we see are not as important as they used to be. This was one of the intents of 2022 rules, making the front wing less of a performance differentiator and so less susceptible to getting messed up and influencing downstream flow field for the following car. My guess on RB20 difference to RB18/19 is mostly due to different drag requirements, so they cut some drag on the front and found a way to make up for the small amount of downforce they lost elsewhere.



Starting with the horizontal top inlet and the vertical S ducting, it's quite possible there is a vertical component to the cooling inlet. Or maybe it just goes all the way to the tub and underneath it is the S duct. No doubt the S duct is feeding some area under the bodywork to provide both better flow conditioning inside and also clean up the boundary layer for the very important undercut flow.

As for the undercut flow, there is another effect now in play that RB seem to want to fully exploit now and I'm talking about spillage. As the car goes faster, the radiators allow less and less air inside, since that air is going progressively faster. In 2023, this spillage was almost completely generated on the top surface so as the car went faster slightly more air was going down the sides and towards beam wing. I never put much emphasis on this effect with underbite inlets, since I believe there's too many losses along the way and there's always 5-6 rear suspension elements ahead of the beam wing.

In 2024, RB has clearly shifted the narrative towards leaving more spillage go down as the car goes faster. I hope my illustrations are clear enough In general, teams have become exceptionally good at controlling and predicting spillage, which is clear seeing the inlet leading edges becoming very, very sharp. Just 10 years ago this was a typical sidepod inlet. The top side strake (it's a strake, not a mid wing so please let's not misuse these terms) makes sure the local stagnation point is underneath it, so there can be almost no spillage on the top side - a complete reversal from last year's approach.

What can this additional amount of air do downstream? Well, it's first "stop" is conspicuously close the floor edge, I'm talking about a slight outwash bump in the undercut (orange circle) and more air could cause more pressurisation there. From that point, it continues towards undercut throat and floor edge. The undercut throat is almost smaller than RB18 design (let alone RB19), leading me to believe there is also a desire to pressurise this area that bit more. The cost is more drag. Ultimately, both of these effects combined could lead to slightly different levels of pressurisation near the floor edge (wing?) and it could influence different levels of pumping out the air from the floor side and into the floor edge vortex. I tried illustrating this change in pressurisation with coloured question marks ???

This would have a direct influence on the amount of air leaving the floor sideways at higher speeds, ie reducing the air going into floor throat. This would in turn reduce the bouncing tendency at higher speeds by "unloading" the throat. Overall, this could allow them to design slightly lower throat section and thus increase overall floor downforce with reduced risk of bouncing. This is hardly a novel effect, but maybe this inlet solution enhances it slightly. Not sure, would it be a too risky design?

Anyway, in the rear end the bodywork is now shaped in a much more aggressive manner. Bigger angle of the ramp meeting top of the floor means bigger local pressurisation, which in that case would mean local drag reduction and some downforce. I have a strong suspicion that the sausage pontoon "sail" in the back is there to also generate local pressurisation (this time meaning drag increase and local lift) to force more air in the lower zone. Both of these effects combined could lead to working the beam wing a bit harder and also the whole floor as a result. Of this overall effect in the rear end I am quite certain.

In the end, this launch spec RB20 features some innovations, some drag reduction elements and some drag increasing elements. I don't see it not being faster than RB19 at the start of the season and, more importantly for Red Bull team, this new development direction likely leaves a lot more room for further improvement than previous underbite design. This would be important for RB since they need to have something more to add for 2 more full seasons.

[Cs98]

With the current legality boxes could you vent an S-duct in the shoulder gulleys?

[OnEcRiTiCaL]

With the current legality boxes could you vent an S-duct in the shoulder gulleys?

You can literally anywhere between the "sketch" but is have to be a function, like is cooling something etcetera. You can't just blow through the air in a tunel.

[Emag]

A few details I noticed on some of the recent photos made me want to dissect the limited details we get to see on RB20 for now and I will focus on the sidepod inlet and the rear end of sausage pontoons.

What I want to say again before is that the front wing is not the differentiator of any kind and (as Tifosi have painfully witnessed) last year Ferrari has shown you can instead only get it very wrong if you mess up with the initial design and how it interacts with front suspension arms. So the back-forth nose and wing designs we see are not as important as they used to be. This was one of the intents of 2022 rules, making the front wing less of a performance differentiator and so less susceptible to getting messed up and influencing downstream flow field for the following car. My guess on RB20 difference to RB18/19 is mostly due to different drag requirements, so they cut some drag on the front and found a way to make up for the small amount of downforce they lost elsewhere.

https://i.ibb.co/NCmhm6x/ArWpSGO.jpg

Starting with the horizontal top inlet and the vertical S ducting, it's quite possible there is a vertical component to the cooling inlet. Or maybe it just goes all the way to the tub and underneath it is the S duct. No doubt the S duct is feeding some area under the bodywork to provide both better flow conditioning inside and also clean up the boundary layer for the very important undercut flow.

As for the undercut flow, there is another effect now in play that RB seem to want to fully exploit now and I'm talking about spillage. As the car goes faster, the radiators allow less and less air inside, since that air is going progressively faster. In 2023, this spillage was almost completely generated on the top surface so as the car went faster slightly more air was going down the sides and towards beam wing. I never put much emphasis on this effect with underbite inlets, since I believe there's too many losses along the way and there's always 5-6 rear suspension elements ahead of the beam wing.

In 2024, RB has clearly shifted the narrative towards leaving more spillage go down as the car goes faster. I hope my illustrations are clear enough In general, teams have become exceptionally good at controlling and predicting spillage, which is clear seeing the inlet leading edges becoming very, very sharp. Just 10 years ago this was a typical sidepod inlet. The top side strake (it's a strake, not a mid wing so please let's not misuse these terms) makes sure the local stagnation point is underneath it, so there can be almost no spillage on the top side - a complete reversal from last year's approach.

What can this additional amount of air do downstream? Well, it's first "stop" is conspicuously close the floor edge, I'm talking about a slight outwash bump in the undercut (orange circle) and more air could cause more pressurisation there. From that point, it continues towards undercut throat and floor edge. The undercut throat is almost smaller than RB18 design (let alone RB19), leading me to believe there is also a desire to pressurise this area that bit more. The cost is more drag. Ultimately, both of these effects combined could lead to slightly different levels of pressurisation near the floor edge (wing?) and it could influence different levels of pumping out the air from the floor side and into the floor edge vortex. I tried illustrating this change in pressurisation with coloured question marks ???

This would have a direct influence on the amount of air leaving the floor sideways at higher speeds, ie reducing the air going into floor throat. This would in turn reduce the bouncing tendency at higher speeds by "unloading" the throat. Overall, this could allow them to design slightly lower throat section and thus increase overall floor downforce with reduced risk of bouncing. This is hardly a novel effect, but maybe this inlet solution enhances it slightly. Not sure, would it be a too risky design?

Anyway, in the rear end the bodywork is now shaped in a much more aggressive manner. Bigger angle of the ramp meeting top of the floor means bigger local pressurisation, which in that case would mean local drag reduction and some downforce. I have a strong suspicion that the sausage pontoon "sail" in the back is there to also generate local pressurisation (this time meaning drag increase and local lift) to force more air in the lower zone. Both of these effects combined could lead to working the beam wing a bit harder and also the whole floor as a result. Of this overall effect in the rear end I am quite certain.

In the end, this launch spec RB20 features some innovations, some drag reduction elements and some drag increasing elements. I don't see it not being faster than RB19 at the start of the season and, more importantly for Red Bull team, this new development direction likely leaves a lot more room for further improvement than previous underbite design. This would be important for RB since they need to have something more to add for 2 more full seasons.

As always, a very detailed breakdown. Thank you for your input.

I am a bit "cautious" in assuming this will be the final iteration that will race in Bahrain (for most cars actually), but still, I wanted to ask. Is this approach similar in direction to what the McLaren has shown with their MCL38? RedBull's overbite is actually angled slightly downwards towards the leading edge, which I am assuming alters the airflow patterns downstream differently to what McLaren has done with theirs, which is more of a "wing" similar to the RB14.



However, something that perhaps was not directly noticeable in the McLaren, is that they have also made the initial downward slope of the undercut much more pronounced, which I think would also increase the pressurisation in this "frontal" sidepod area, and with it, the drag as well. Which is sort of what RedBull are doing by your analysis. At least by my understanding, please correct me if I am wrong.

Are both these teams opening up similar development paths for this season? And how difficult would it be for other teams which have committed to the opposite philosophy (AM, Ferrari and Merc) to switch if this indeed proves to have a higher ceiling when it comes to development potential?

[Sieper]

Very good explanation on push and pull rod suspension based on last years RB19. Poses the question what other teams will be doing this year.

[FW17]

Looks like a letterbox inlet. No vertical slot

[FNTC]

The ending is showing an RB19 with the underbite (and nose that ends on the second element, single pylon below the top airbox, etc, etc). Before that, you can se the vertical inlet at around 17 seconds in. But is it real or fake, who knows. It wouldn't surprise me if they just put on some vertical carbon bits there (as appears with the tip of the nose too) to trick the opposition.

[FW17]

The ending is showing an RB19 with the underbite (and nose that ends on the second element, single pylon below the top airbox, etc, etc). Before that, you can se the vertical inlet at around 17 seconds in. But is it real or fake, who knows. It wouldn't surprise me if they just put on some vertical carbon bits there (as appears with the tip of the nose too) to trick the opposition.

Yes it is the RB19 that is being pushed in the garage.

The first few seconds is where it is zoomed and there is no vertical slot. What ever is seen at 17s should be more distortion.

Anyway it is a poor quality video. We just have to wait a few days.

[PhF1x]

Considering the part lines I won't be surprised if this is their high downforce spec and on other circuits like monza, they switch out the intake for one that goes for an underbite instead.

They've either made this car with the intention of it being modular and thus smaller and cheaper updates or they have identified this area as the main focus for updates and would like to switch out the intakes easily.

As for the undercut, Redbull has always used it to seal the floor edge and control the tyre squirt so going for an overbite may help get the floor up to its peak performance at lower speeds.

[AR3-GP]

Considering the part lines I won't be surprised if this is their high downforce spec and on other circuits like monza, they switch out the intake for one that goes for an underbite instead.

They've either made this car with the intention of it being modular and thus smaller and cheaper updates or they have identified this area as the main focus for updates and would like to switch out the intakes easily.

As for the undercut, Redbull has always used it to seal the floor edge and control the tyre squirt so going for an overbite may help get the floor up to its peak performance at lower speeds.

I don't think there is intent to switch out the intakes. The purpose of raising the lip even higher seems to be to divert even more air to redirect down through the undercut. As Vanja exquisitely pointed out, there will be spillover at the radiator inlet which will go down into the undercut area at high speeds so in theory there is even more air going in this direction compared to last year (i.e more high speed downforce). Last year the radiator inlet spill over would go over the top of the sidepod. Now it looks like it will go underneath into undercut. It's an important aerodynamic difference which should not be trivialized.

[PhF1x]

Considering the part lines I won't be surprised if this is their high downforce spec and on other circuits like monza, they switch out the intake for one that goes for an underbite instead.

They've either made this car with the intention of it being modular and thus smaller and cheaper updates or they have identified this area as the main focus for updates and would like to switch out the intakes easily.

As for the undercut, Redbull has always used it to seal the floor edge and control the tyre squirt so going for an overbite may help get the floor up to its peak performance at lower speeds.

I don't think there is intent to switch out the intakes. The purpose of raising the lip even higher seems to be to divert even more air to redirect down through the undercut. As Vanja exquisitely pointed out, there will be spillover at the radiator inlet which will go down into the undercut area at high speeds so in theory there is even more air going in this direction compared to last year (i.e more high speed downforce). Last year the radiator inlet spill over would go over the top of the sidepod. Now it looks like it will go underneath into undercut. It's an important aerodynamic difference which should not be trivialized.

It's not "they could have both" in a trivial way. There's advantages and disadvantages to both solutions and one would believe if Redbull understood the importance of the intake lip to push it to such an extreme then they could also vary it based on the track if the overall aerodynamic package allows for it.


Every outer surface on an f1 car is a tool to manipulate airflow, why should the intake lip be something too sacred to touch?
Why can't it be used and changed like Redbull changes front wings and beam wings for the specific track?

[AR3-GP]

Considering the part lines I won't be surprised if this is their high downforce spec and on other circuits like monza, they switch out the intake for one that goes for an underbite instead.

They've either made this car with the intention of it being modular and thus smaller and cheaper updates or they have identified this area as the main focus for updates and would like to switch out the intakes easily.

As for the undercut, Redbull has always used it to seal the floor edge and control the tyre squirt so going for an overbite may help get the floor up to its peak performance at lower speeds.

I don't think there is intent to switch out the intakes. The purpose of raising the lip even higher seems to be to divert even more air to redirect down through the undercut. As Vanja exquisitely pointed out, there will be spillover at the radiator inlet which will go down into the undercut area at high speeds so in theory there is even more air going in this direction compared to last year (i.e more high speed downforce). Last year the radiator inlet spill over would go over the top of the sidepod. Now it looks like it will go underneath into undercut. It's an important aerodynamic difference which should not be trivialized.

It's not "they could have both" in a trivial way. There's advantages and disadvantages to both solutions and one would believe if Redbull understood the importance of the intake lip to push it to such an extreme then they could also vary it based on the track if the overall aerodynamic package allows for it.


Every outer surface on an f1 car is a tool to manipulate airflow, why should the intake lip be something too sacred to touch?
Why can't it be used and changed like Redbull changes front wings and beam wings for the specific track?

I understand what you mean, but I don't think we'll see it. It's a more profound change than wings.

[PhF1x]

I don't think there is intent to switch out the intakes. The purpose of raising the lip even higher seems to be to divert even more air to redirect down through the undercut. As Vanja exquisitely pointed out, there will be spillover at the radiator inlet which will go down into the undercut area at high speeds so in theory there is even more air going in this direction compared to last year (i.e more high speed downforce). Last year the radiator inlet spill over would go over the top of the sidepod. Now it looks like it will go underneath into undercut. It's an important aerodynamic difference which should not be trivialized.

It's not "they could have both" in a trivial way. There's advantages and disadvantages to both solutions and one would believe if Redbull understood the importance of the intake lip to push it to such an extreme then they could also vary it based on the track if the overall aerodynamic package allows for it.


Every outer surface on an f1 car is a tool to manipulate airflow, why should the intake lip be something too sacred to touch?
Why can't it be used and changed like Redbull changes front wings and beam wings for the specific track?

I understand what you mean, but I don't think we'll see it. It's a more profound change than wings.

I'll be more surprised if they haven't thought about it. You could only get so far ahead of the rest of the grid by being conventional.