Red Bull RB22

[euv2]

Here you go!

Giorgio Piola

[ME4ME]

Nice.Wonder how long that'll hold. Looks fragile.

[organic]

Diffuser extensions for lateral expansion

[AR3-GP]

Here you go!

Giorgio Piola

What would be the purpose of this?

[organic]

https://i.postimg.cc/D0rRC74p/image.png

You can see the spatula winglet here behind the FW. Given its position when mounted, looks highly likely it's helping to manage lower tyre wake. Probably interacts strongly with the FIA spec deflector part

[AR3-GP]

https://i.postimg.cc/QNQPZxHX/image.png
https://i.postimg.cc/D0rRC74p/image.png

You can see the spatula winglet here behind the FW

Yes I remember you asked about it yesterday, but I got sidetracked trying to find real floor inlets

[f1isgood]

What loophole are they exploiting here? How will this help? More front downforce?

[AR3-GP]

The famous RBR flap trim is gone.



It has been traditionally done to remove the bit of surface that tends to separate because of the DRS actuator like on this Audi.

[pantherxxx]

That's like a double diffuser equilavent in"terms of loophole"?

[euv2]

https://x.com/xavigazquez/status/202482 ... 96435?s=20



Can see how the diffuser extension is connected.

[vorticism]

Their FLED interpretation is interesting. One large FLED with four smaller FLEDs daisy-chained upon it.

Regarding the spatula fence and serrated diffuser fence: these are the sorts of shapes we’ll see on the FW fences & diffuser fences. Alpine brought a cantilevered FW fence. These and others I alluded to last year:

viewtopic.php?p=1300140#p1300140
viewtopic.php?p=1300481#p1300481

Nice thing about the fences: there’s no camera trained on them, and they don’t (afaik) have a deflection test. Aeroelasticity complicity? Implicitly? We shall see...

https://i.ibb.co/Gv0SHVjP/RB22-new-side ... -test2.png

Now that the undercut has appeared, and the 'floor extension' gone, we are seeing the floor entry very clearly. Is this (green encircled) a 'venturi tunnel like' entry hugging the tub's wall, @vorticism ? Do all teams have it ?

Good spot...

Nicolas Carpentiers has given us this image:

https://i.postimg.cc/P5NB1xwQ/20260220-084829.jpg

Which confirms your findings. Red bull seem to have recreated the floor entry of venturi cars. I would speculate that this is only possible with the sidepod extension that Vorticism previously discussed, the underneath of which is the roof of this venturi-like entrance?

The 3d shaping of the bib area as a whole is probably the most interesting detail of the car

https://i.postimg.cc/nrk6G92v/20260220-084829.jpg

It may help, although it’s still present here on the undercut version of their sidepod i.e. reduced or omitted overhang. It’s still interacting with the down-sloping fore-chassis/footwell (legwell?), regardless. Quite a complex interaction. Looks smart, at least.

[lio007]

Detailed flow-vis picture:

[AR3-GP]

You can see the air turning down in front of the undercut and going into the inboard floor inlet. It’s a big difference compared to the launch spec sidepod. The flow control in this area is impressive. I suspect that they are going to keep undercutting deeper and deeper.

[venkyhere]

The flowvis on the 'bargeboard' stay (bigger flatter stick) in the x-direction is something I didn't expect. With the venetian blinds receiving high pressure air in the x-y direction from the keel section below the driver's feet, I would have expected the wheel wake to start moving in x-y direction a bit before the stay itself. Or is this a simple case of flowvis that got 'spread' before hitting meaningful speeds ? I am most likely wrong in the way I am perceiving the way the venetian blind are expected to work (+x +y +z direction) and the stay rod seeing x-y air before hitting the venetian blinds ; but somehow I have a feeling that it would have been different with the bluff-sidepod vis-a-vis the moisture shots we saw from Barcelona test.

[AR3-GP]

The flowvis on the 'bargeboard' stay (bigger flatter stick) in the x-direction is something I didn't expect. With the venetian blinds receiving high pressure air in the x-y direction from the keel section below the driver's feet, I would have expected the wheel wake to start moving in x-y direction a bit before the stay itself. Or is this a simple case of flowvis that got 'spread' before hitting meaningful speeds ? I am most likely wrong in the way I am perceiving the way the venetian blind are expected to work (+x +y +z direction) and the stay rod seeing x-y air before hitting the venetian blinds ; but somehow I have a feeling that it would have been different with the bluff-sidepod vis-a-vis the moisture shots we saw from Barcelona test.

The blinds are not getting air from the keel section under the driver's feet. They are receiving the tire wake. The tire wake turns 90 degrees and then goes up and outboard right behind the tire.

Tire wake is turbulent so the flow viz that you see on the stay associated with the tire wake will be incoherent. That's what turbulence is.