Red Bull RB7 Renault

[MIKEY_!]

Basically no rough edges = clean aero. That what you've been getting at ringo? Anyway I think the cooling exit above the beam wing is directing air downwards and under the beam wing to some extent, a bit like those thin winglets just forward of the RW we saw pre-2009.

[Richard]

I don't agree with this bit. You've drawn your sketch as a flat plane in free air.

However that air flow has been heavily deviated by flowing past the front wing and around the side pod, by time it gets to the holes it is flowing along the bodywork regardless of pitch. The variation in pitch is relatively small compared the huge changes of direction enforced by the wings and sidepod.

[ringo]

Ringo,

I am not seeing really any ellipses in any of the pictures you are posting. Could paint an outline on them. Maybe Im just not understanding you correctly.

The elliptical wings was used on WWII era planes from a top view. For an airfoil shape an ellipse is not a bad front third of the airfoil but you really need a longer and sharper tail to get a clean separation.

Also an ellipse is not the most aerodynamic shape. That depends on the speed and viscosity.

You wont see a complete ellipse, only segments of ellipses.
Look on the elements of the front wing, the top view, and underneath if you can.
Those curves are not for good looks. They're actually ellipse segments.
It hard to see because the ellipses have really big axis dimensions. Ferrari copied this last year at Korean GP and found much improvement in their car's handling.

It's not obvious but on my F1 design ellipses are used almost everywhere.
You wont see those curves if you are not looking for them. It's also difficult to decipher when the ellipse segments have short lengths but have huge axis dimensions.
In fact none of the design was done with style, or fashion, or for beauty. The car was done with indifference to tradition or what we know F1 cars are supposed to look like. Most designs i see are based on bias and cosmetics; no purpose behind the curvature.
Not exaggerating, but every curve on the RB7 has a purpose and is not related to any art style, bias or tradition. Most of these are defined mathematically as ellipse, straight line, or another curve; i wont say. No splines are used on the car.
Most designs have splines nowadays, and i think this is why some teams are surprised at the results they get when they move from CFD to the track. Splines tend to promote free-styling in designing and things can get less accountable as you draw. That's what i think anyway.

I have one more thing to reveal about the sidepods. You can call it the holy grail of sidepod design. It's not anything to do with ellipses but it's there in plain sigth and none of the 2012 cars so far have it. It's on my F1 car.
As predicted there is one optimum, all teams are now converging onto redbull featurs. This last revelation with cause a mad sidepod rush for 2013. All cars will basically be the same.

[ringo]

I don't agree with this bit. You've drawn your sketch as a flat plane in free air.

However that air flow has been heavily deviated by flowing past the front wing and around the side pod, by time it gets to the holes it is flowing along the bodywork regardless of pitch. The variation in pitch is relatively small compared the huge changes of direction enforced by the wings and sidepod.

This is an exaggeration, but rake makes a world of difference. The air flow is deviated, but if you consider gravitation and also transient flow; this will be noticeable. I'm not saying techno babble to throw you off or slip out the side door of the discussion. Sometimes i just fool around with the CFD and notice little things.

[flynfrog]

Ringo,

I am not seeing really any ellipses in any of the pictures you are posting. Could paint an outline on them. Maybe Im just not understanding you correctly.

The elliptical wings was used on WWII era planes from a top view. For an airfoil shape an ellipse is not a bad front third of the airfoil but you really need a longer and sharper tail to get a clean separation.

Also an ellipse is not the most aerodynamic shape. That depends on the speed and viscosity.

You wont see a complete ellipse, only segments of ellipses.
Look on the elements of the front wing, the top view, and underneath if you can.
Those curves are not for good looks. They're actually ellipse segments.
It hard to see because the ellipses have really big axis dimensions. Ferrari copied this last year at Korean GP and found much improvement in their car's handling.

It's not obvious but on my F1 design ellipses are used almost everywhere.
You wont see those curves if you are not looking for them. It's also difficult to decipher when the ellipse segments have short lengths but have huge axis dimensions.
In fact none of the design was done with style, or fashion, or for beauty. The car was done with indifference to tradition or what we know F1 cars are supposed to look like. Most designs i see are based on bias and cosmetics; no purpose behind the curvature.
Not exaggerating, but every curve on the RB7 has a purpose and is not related to any art style, bias or tradition. Most of these are defined mathematically as ellipse, straight line, or another curve; i wont say. No splines are used on the car.
Most designs have splines nowadays, and i think this is why some teams are surprised at the results they get when they move from CFD to the track. Splines tend to promote free-styling in designing and things can get less accountable as you draw. That's what i think anyway.

I have one more thing to reveal about the sidepods. You can call it the holy grail of sidepod design. It's not anything to do with ellipses but it's there in plain sigth and none of the 2012 cars so far have it. It's on my F1 car.
As predicted there is one optimum, all teams are now converging onto redbull featurs. This last revelation with cause a mad sidepod rush for 2013. All cars will basically be the same.

you are stating the obvious here and acting like its new. I can find you an ellipse on pretty much any airfoil. I can also argue that any spline is just segments of an ellipse. I will say there is nothing that spectacular about the redbull side pod other than its very well sized and the packaging underneath it is very tight. no magic cups involved.

I'm pretty sure there is not an F1 car on grid that has an cosmetics bias. Every curve on every car has a purpose.

[flynfrog]

for example there are partial ellipses all over this car.


like I said nothing new

redbull for comparison

[ringo]

You won't know until i show it. It's not blind use of the ellipse shape, as that would present a bias to a design would't it?
You use the shape when it's best to do so, not because you want a theme.

Dont think F1 teams make cars unbiased. Most of them do have personal touches on them that really don't represent the optimum. They construct, based on their knowledge, what they think will work, then they refine from there.They aren't gods who aren't human who make errors and sub optimal choices. A suboptimal can be refined just like a good design.

Said the same thing with Ferrari and their push rod rear end. Some thought ferrari could do no wrong and all choices were the best choices for them. Didn't turn out that way. Nice effort to refine the push rods, simply because they were a bit stubborn and set in their ways. But at the end of the day, the foundation was weak.
This is the case with many parts on the car that are taken for cookie cutter standards year in year out without much thought into taking a pure approach.
So we have redbull running away with championships.

The side pods i will reveal maybe on Saturday. It's not what flyn frog thinks, not as simple as that. I will also show why other teams have not caught on to it.
They simply have not employed the philosophy. I have done some CFD tests with results for different sidepod designs mid 2011.
All details will be shown using the ringo F1 design, as it has the actual sketches.

It's before you now.

can you all see it?

[flynfrog]

oh tell us all seeing eye

[Richard]

I see illegal quad exhausts, surely Newey didn't manage to sneak that onto the RB?

[volarchico]

You definitely have my interest and I respect your intellect, but in some ways I agree with flynfrog that you come across sounding like a pompous arse.

EDIT: Is there any technical reason to "hold back" your insights or is this just all theatrics to appear more important?

[flynfrog]

You definitely have my interest and I respect your intellect, but in some ways I agree with flynfrog that you come across sounding like a pompous arse.

EDIT: Is there any technical reason to "hold back" your insights or is this just all theatrics to appear more important?

attention.

[flyboy2160]

stop with the secret drama! the real reason red bull uses ellipses is.......newey starts the designs on a drafting board by hand, using ancient french curve thingies - which have various sized ellipses built into them.

[flynfrog]

stop with the secret drama! the real reason red bull uses ellipses is.......newey starts the designs on a drafting board by hand, using ancient french curve thingies - which have various sized ellipses built into them.

also when doing lofts and sweeps in cad an ellipse works much smoother than trying to get a spline or radius to morph shape.

[JB2011]

Have to agree. What I'm seeing is a very basic looking car.

[markc]

Looking at that teaser it's the lower part of the side pod juts out more than the upper.
I'm sure I recall a previous post on this forum to the effect that that increases downforce.