Red Bull RB8 - A-spec vs B-spec

[raymondu999]

I know there is already a dedicated thread for this - but I think this potentially could lead to a heated debate and discussion that it would steer the RB8 thread clear of any productive discussion - so I set this up separate so that thread remains healthy - and it'll be easier for the mods then.

For the purposes of the discussion - let's define the A-spec as the car they had from launch - all the way through to Day 2 of Barca 2. By extension - B-spec will encompass the iterations of the car from the penultimate day of testing - and through to the current Melbourne spec, even with the slight exhaust upgrade.

Someone brought up the point a while back that you could compare this with the Lotus E20. The Lotus E20 today was the quickest Renault-powered car - and thus a good comparison for chassis design. Lotus seem to have just knuckled down and refined their design and packaging - which ironically seemed quite the Red Bull philosophy of the RB5-6-7 lineage. The Red Bull has always been about refinement in those years - and aside from adopting McLaren's f-duct; and using their exhaust to blow the diffuser - hasn't had any "gimmicks" so to speak. And as someone (I can't remember who) on this forum pointed out - the E20 wasn't doing (much?) funny with their exhausts.

With the B-spec they seem to sort of have gone the other way - they seem to have sacrificed packaging refinement for what would probably be a bit of a "gimmick" in trying to use the exhausts as such.

I'm no expert - but the packaging - and the airflow management around the previously-shrinkwrapped sidepods - would have taken a hit with the B-spec, no?

It seems to me almost as if they were gambling on something that they thought would perhaps push them a step back but then pull them two steps forward. In a way - losing a bit of their packaging benefit (1 step) - while gaining the benefits of the exhaust as from this B-spec car (2 steps).

While not being an aerodynamicist - I would have almost been inclined to put the exhausts in a place where it wouldn't make the car throttle-sensitive. Sometimes a drivable car is better than just a flat out fast car, IMO.

What do you all think? Informed opinion is welcome.

[raymondu999]

No takers?

After the race - I admit that maybe it may have been a bit of a kneejerk reaction from me. But still. My point could still hold true.

[Mysticf1]

I must say when i first saw the B spec, it struck me as very out of character for RedBull. The way the sidepods tapered in with the top edge tapering closer to the centreline was one of the most attractive features aesthetically.

I'm not going to pretend to know much about aero, but it just seems to me that the bridge/duct may not allow as much clean airflow to the center of the diffuser as the A spec. I wonder if they have or will try the current exhaust location without the ramp/bridge/duct?

[MIKEY_!]

A-spec. But only because it makes adding mclaren style exhaust bulges easier and creates less lift due to the shape. Oh and air from the splitter would reach the diffuser more easily with the A-spec sidepods. B-spec ones look like that air goes more towards the rear tires .

[raymondu999]

A-spec. But only because it makes adding mclaren style exhaust bulges easier

And the reason they'd want to do that is...?

air from the splitter would reach the diffuser more easily with the A-spec sidepods.

Is that not what the tunnel is for?

[MIKEY_!]

The mclaren bulges let more air reach the diffuser from the splitter. The tunnel does this to some extent but it's too small I think.

[LoudHoward]

I don't think they're stubborn enough to sacrifice laptime, we must assume they're getting better numbers from the B-Spec solution. Maybe it's inconsistent, maybe they haven't fully refined the setup to work with it yet, but they're only going to improve that by running it.

As for getting them to release it earlier onto the car, in hindsight yer maybe, but they obviously felt like the potential gains with it are worth the extra development time.

To put things in perspective, Webber* has qualified behind Hamilton in Malaysia basically the exact same distance (time wise) as he did last year. They seem to be making steady progress each time they run with this so I'm willing to give them the fly-aways and see what tweaks they make to it for Barcelona (I assume that's about the earliest they're going to be able to react properly with new bits of kit).

*Seb seems uncomfortable over a lap while the car is having difficulties, so the team might lean on Webbers experience here to help get this car into a sweet spot.

[MarkedOne8]

A-spec for sure because of exhaust system.

[ringo]

The A spec is probably a bit slower, but it surely is more consistent and less dependent on other variables.
Keep in mind we dont know the truth behind these systems. Mclaren race pace doesn't seem so hot in the cold. Sometimes Suaber is not so good either.
We really don't know which idea is best, but Lotus surely are very quick without a blown floor.

The RB8 B spec if you notice compromises the sidepod flow a bit, and the flow to the gearbox area. This is not the case with their first design.

It will be interesting to see them copy mclaren though. Though i think these exhausts are not worth much lap time.

[raymondu999]

That's what I thought too. The A-spec would have been a more... "organic," if you like, progression of the Red Bull line.

I think a more consistent, drivable car could also be better too though. No use having a car that gives you all the pace in the world but no confidence because the driver will be too scared to push.

I remember Patrick Head once said that that was the reason why Mansell and Patrese were so far apart in terms of pace. The active cars, given that their suspension always changed, couldn't really give a feel for the grip. Mansell used to just look at the engineer's data as to what speeds he could carry, how late he could brake etc; and would commit using the power of his apparently-lead attachments. Patrese on the other hand had slightly less dense attachments

[raymondu999]

Well Gary Anderson was saying in this Autosport how the exhaust does compromise their coke bottle. Not that it wasn't obvious by just looking at the RB8-B though.

[ringo]

The compromise is from the side view as well. The pressure recovery is not as uniform over the spec B pods.

[raymondu999]

The coke bottle loss might not be as bad as it seems though. I doubt Newey would put on an upgrade that would make a car slower. The bridge/tunnel/extreme undercut probably helps in that it maintains sme of the original path of the air through the undercut and int the coke bottle.

[myurr]

The coke bottle loss might not be as bad as it seems though. I doubt Newey would put on an upgrade that would make a car slower. The bridge/tunnel/extreme undercut probably helps in that it maintains sme of the original path of the air through the undercut and int the coke bottle.

Newey / Red Bull are as likely as any other top team to put a duff upgrade on the car where the real world doesn't match up with the predicted performance (i.e. quite likely to be a tiny bit out, unlikely but still possible to be a world of difference). However they wouldn't keep it on the car if it made it slower. So clearly there is a performance benefit to the current design.

[raymondu999]

That's what I meant. They have over 1220km (4 grand prix distances - 2 for each car) of running data for this current spec, and all the test data for the A-spec. Unless there was a clear benefit it wouldn't have stayed on. But my point was wondering if they took a "one step back, 2 steps forward" gamble. Ie mabe the B-spec is weaker than the -spec in some areas, but as a package overall it's quicker. If that makes sense.