A quick reminder that my Aerodynamics course has now launched over at courses.jkfaero.com/ ! The number of people signing up so far has been amazing, exceeding my expectations! I hope everyone is enjoying it and learning lots! p.s. I'm working currently to bring PayPal as an alternative payment solution, looks like it should be available early next week.
That's good that you made course that will turn amateur into ... ? (not sure who) someone between amateur and professional I guess. It's a bit pricey so I am not going to jump right into it but it's definitely something I will consider in the future. Out of curiosity, is this certificate recognized anywhere?
Hi, i have a question about the aerodynamic limitations of the cars. You said they could only have one varible aerodynamic feature, like a rear wing, diffusor, ect. Is there a possibiliy of using the groundeffect, essentially exchanging the diffusor for a giant wing in the middle, can change its form? I'm curious as this would mean, that you could have one variable aerodynamic feature wich allows you to change the downforce ballance at maximum possible downforce.
@@michaelgomez4994 all bad examples when comparing them to Peugeot. All of those were shoe string budgets trying to punch over their weight. Peugeot will come at this with vast resources and the intention of winning. Peugeot has also they’ll abandon the concept if they can’t make it work. We will definitely see Peugeot fighting at the top.
Now THIS is what I like! Thank you! Great content! I haven't been paying too much attention to the regulations but seems a great way to get some OEM features on the cars. Much needed on WEC for my liking!
Theory of mine: The little parts in the front intake are there in fact to make the aero/drag worse to not overshoot the targets... also the cutoffs at the rear diffusor! With that little overbody aero i'd guess this thing is slipping through air like a hot knife through butter. Maybe they need some parts that create more drag?! Btw... this car just looks insanely good. Maybe best looking car ever... to me at least.
Super interesting, one question I have is, given the single adjustable element constraint, would the central low-pressure of the floor allow for it to be treated as a fulcrum such that simple balance of the system can be achieved by just the front element? For example could a change on the front effectively stall the floor at the same rate or is the floor fixed in it's effectiveness?
You could have one adjustable flap, and also play with the ride height to change the floor effectiveness, which is basically one giant unregulated flap.
id guess the best way to circumvent this type of regulation would be an adjustable splitter and then playing with rake until the car was on point, effectively using rake as an adjustable spoiler. unless that's illegal somewhere in the suspension rules
I've just discovered this channel and I found a large variety of really interesting topics covered for a mechanical engineering student and formula SAE team member like myself.
I know you traditionally do racing performance related aerodynamics analysis but would you consider doing a video or two on fuel efficiency aerodynamics as in Aptera trike, Arcimoto trike, or even semi truck? It would help diversify reach in audience and potential students.
It's right there in front of us! Kudos to the design team! They are taking the forward air Resistance and killing the rear Drag coefficients! This is a air conversion system.
Do you think you could either share the model of the car or show how to make a model like it? Also do you think you could share what CFD software you use because I am very interested in CFD and I was looking into learning more about it.
Definitely rooting for Peugeot in 2023, for the sole reason their car just looks so freaking cool. Crazy how in a field with factory Porsches and Ferraris the Peugeot is the best looking.
Holy crap I'm super impressed by that model you can just throw out like it's nothing hahah. Specifically if it's meant to run analysis on. Because I have made several CFD runs for my college team of Aero Design (RC aircraft) and I struggle massively when my geometry isn't super clean. As a struggling student and admirer of your work I would love to see that CAD video, I hope it's already out there
That Kicker as you call it on the back is actually a Kamm Tail wing … so no rear wing is just a generous interpretation of the design. It’s well done I admit and no doubt effective …
The car looks marvelous, although if a driver chose to take a curb that would be slightly too high it seems like the race for him would be over at that point since the floor is the main aerodynamic factor on this car.
I know maybe its hard. but this things is buzzing my ear What if you do some interview with Frank Stephenson (yeah now he has youtube channel and make a lot of new content) on how to design car that looks good but also has a lot of aerodynamics function. I want to know your response, Thank You
When the car was shown I was a bit surprised but after thinking about the concept it is quite obvious why they did it. The regulations are limiting the concepts quite much and with a set C_x and C_z I would also go for the diffusor instead of a wing to produce downforce because it is way less sensitive to drag and other conditions. With considering that Peugeot wants to win Le Mans and therefor might accept worse results on other tracks there is also no reason to place a super flat wing on the back. But the exhausts might be just a design for the lounge. They are really weird looking and (without doing a cfd analysis) look like they waste the airflow over the car that should be really efficient without them. One thing I am not sure about is the big height difference between diffusor and top of the rear. There should be so much bad air in between. And usually noone wants that in the rear of the car. Even with the regulations and the need for some drag I don't think it should be there. Nice video! Thanks for the work!
i would love to see an aero analysis of the 2022 F1car. its probably the most overengineered aero concept ever. i think whats interesting is how they get maximum downforce with creating minimum vorticies to reduce dirty air. so i am very curious about the details of the floor, how they seal it etc
I would love to see an aerodynamic comparison between an open wheel car with a halo, an open wheel car with a full aeroscreen, and an open wheel car with neither. I also would like to see some other miscellaneous aerodynamic experiments... like covering a car in fur, or using forward-swept wings, or some other crazy stuff like that.
Is there anything in the rules preventing the teams from getting their numbers from an unrealistic configuration? Such as the mentioned high ride height to reduce downforce for the relevant test and then get more downforce in the actual race?
From what I’ve found online, any change made to the car must be noted with the FIA and they’ll send scrutineers to check that it still fits with the rules. I haven’t found anything preventing changes in setup that gain an advantage
The channels in the central front fairing is to direct the air to cool the engine, some to the air filter, and to provide some downforce, directing it to the back wings, across the wheels to the rear winglets, it's nothing to do with style, although you might think that because of the way that they look, similar to the lights. The side scoops are just to cool the brakes, no style thing going on either, it's simply to provide air and cooling to the brakes. The scoop in the centre of the car, across the roof through to the rear type of spoiler, is to push down the spoiler with a trumpet like outlet to increase the air out like a silencer on an exhaust, to provide downforce, clever
As a video idea, because I am very interested in this: Could you do something like this (design a own car or aerodynamics) but with a front mounted engine, for example the Panoz gt1 or lmp1 car but as a modern interpretation. because I think it would be interesting to see if you can do a ground effect car but with a front engine. (just a front engine, so still a rear wheel drive car, not like the Nissan lmp1 car....)
A review of the Vision 1789 aerodynamics would be a great watch. Also, maybe you could do a series reviewing the aero of the more extreme Vision Gran Turismo cars like the Mclaren Ultimate Vision Gran Turismo.
The Design is certainly something different, exciting imho and it aligns itself perfectly with the current road car design philosophy especially with the upright lights, as to the winglessness, which at least shows a different way of going about stuff instead of keeping with old formulas, Königsegg also removed the wing for the highspeed model adding two straight lines for side stability and probably quite a few more will follow with the design direction
First, Kyle your videos are incredible. I have been a ME for 5 years now, and wasn't sure what discipline I wanted to end up in. With other influences including your channel I have fully decided where I want my career to end up. I am finding all of the aero, suspension, and power train elements of all of LMP2, GTE AM, F1, Indy, and other racing divisions so intriguing that I am determined to seat myself in a development position in motorsport. I hope to be as successful as you, but as you have shown, it is obtainable which has opened my eyes SO MUCH. Thank you. As for adding PayPal for the course, will there be a fee associated? I'd much prefer a PayPal purchase if possible :)
something I'd like to hear more about is the difference in downside and drag for prototype/ sportscars having a splitter Vs a front wing. Seems designers in the past have gone one way or another but I'd love to know the science behind those decisions!
Great Vid. We've known for decades that cars with ground effects don't need wings. F1 in the ground effects era had cars that would in some races use a front wing and some races not. When the car had a front wing quite often it was there to balance the car front to back. when the front wing was missing it was the rear wing that was used to trim the car out. My bigest question about the 9x8 is how they balance the car out in changing condisions. We all know how rain effects what a car needs but a race track is a living breathing entity. Its total grip level can change especially in a 24 hour race. The tires can even react differntly from 1 race to the next or even 1 practice session to the next , so how do they deal with it. and what do they do if the main floor gets danaged slightly. the other cars can adress these problems by adjusting the wing
Nissan built a front wheel drive prototype racer a few years back to get better aero and downforce while Peugeot built a wingless car for better styling. Why would Nissan go to such lengths when a wingless car would have been ok? Are the downforce requirements of the current Hypercar class lower than the prototype racers during the year that Nissan FWD racer competed? Edit: commented before watching the vid. The vid answered my question.
2am thought, does the Murray T.50 fit into these regulations? I'd assume the fan would be the movable/adjustable aerodynamic device here. I haven't checked back over the T.50 details, so I could easily be wrong.
It can be fit, but competitive is different ball of game. As he said, the downforce to drag ratio is still high. Whereas the fan itself is only for adjusting diffuser flow, not sucking heck lot of air like 2J (source : Engineering Explained). You do need more and bigger wing to competitively, which more regulation workaround (trust me, it's pain in the butt). We still don't talked about the power unit, especially the gearbox. You change it to something else, It's both another difficult level and insult to Gordon Murray's original vision
What about cheating the regulations? Have flex panels after a certain speed or load and load can be multi plane. Would having no rear wing be extreme disadvantage if you were planning to flex panels at speed since only one can be adjusted race to race? Also would it be possible to have a flexible floor?
carbon fiber parts can be made flex in almost any fashion. i dont really know how they check for the 4:1 stuff etc. depending on that you can almost expect flex parts
@@Cynyr Or they could even just have 3-axis load cells on each wheel and an inertial measurement unit. You know the traction loads on each wheel so you know the total friction force due to the wheels, but the acceleration will be less than naively calculated from the traction loads due to drag. Vertical loads will also give downforce info, so then L/D can be worked out.
I think the new rules will make for different looking cars with similar aero, and with power limitations we can have different designs but cars that are reasonably similar on performance. Here's to looking at more interesting designs.
You should reference the TT mr1... I own one. Perfect example where you feel sorry for a full recall. I mean my TT has a considerable chunk of weights securely fastened to the left rear, along with a rear spoiler. At auto barn speed the original TT spun around(160-200kkph)
So good that they've eased the restrictions on aero. All the cars looked identical and tbh were a bit ugly. Nice to actually be able to see the differences between the cars.
thoroughly entertaining and informative video!! Super awesome to gain an understating of how the Peugeot will work on a track!!! could you analyse the other current hyper car spec cars (the Glickenhaus and Toyota) for comparison???
That video was awesome! How about handling? Would it be more on a knife edge or less? Thanks again for the off the charts -I wish I was more qualified to understand better- content.
So for this category, since the regulations place limits on the aerodynamic performance (like lift/drag coefficients, etc.), what would the aerodynamicists look to optimize? To clarify - once they reach the aerodynamic limits prescribed by the regulations, what can be done to increase the car's performance further without breaking the rules?
I guess they'd try to optimize the front/rear aero balance, along with optimizations to ensure that the downforce works well with the suspension setup of the car. Higher downforce numbers usually require stiffer springs to prevent the bottoming-out of the suspension. Lower downforce allow for slightly softer springs to allow compliance, which would help on tracks that are not F1-smooth. The aero characteristics of a car can also change during acceleration (from a bit of squat) and braking (from a bit of dive). Slip angle during turns also affect the aero of a car. If the regulatiors measure the car's aero with zero slip angle, teams can try to make the car exceed the aero targets when the car is on a slip angle though i am not sure that would be feasible.
I remember watching this video when it went live, one of the first I saw of yours Kyle. Absolutely love the intent of the LMH regs, I'm still astonished and disappointed that on Peugeot has decided to go along this route. Quick side question: as the car that was cheekily entered into more le mans that it was really eligible for, how would the Porsche 962 fair for these new HyperCar regs? Would a new engine/hybrid system and a pick of paint be enough to make it able to take part in yet another le mans race it wasn't really designed for?
Is it forbidden to use the wheels spokes as aerodinamically active elements? It seems to me that they have a lot of potential, as they have an aerospeed that is twice that of the car on the top (and zero on the lower part) and they point differently than the rest of the car in curves (for the front ones), which I suppose one could cleverly design so they increase downforce in curves but stall and reduce drag in straight sections..
You mentioned using some inlets at the lower front corners for possible brake cooling. Would the direction of those internal ducts have a noticeable effect on the aerodynamic performance of the car?
With this "no rear wing" and having the regulations in mind( both examples with the same amount of downforce) you will have more downforce on the dirty air than a car with rear wing or is almost the same? Great video 👍👍👍
Hey Kyle, What CAD software do you use? I’m a Mechanical Engineering major and used Solidworks and Fusion 360. I’ve loved this car since it first came out.
Couldnt you make a splitter run under a car to the back and make it a “spoiler” also. Its just a splitter that runs all the way back, which allows an adjustable splitter that doubles as a spoiler?
A quick reminder that my Aerodynamics course has now launched over at courses.jkfaero.com/ ! The number of people signing up so far has been amazing, exceeding my expectations! I hope everyone is enjoying it and learning lots!
p.s. I'm working currently to bring PayPal as an alternative payment solution, looks like it should be available early next week.
I personally can’t afford it but I’m glad that you’re getting success. Keep making the great content!!
That's good that you made course that will turn amateur into ... ? (not sure who) someone between amateur and professional I guess. It's a bit pricey so I am not going to jump right into it but it's definitely something I will consider in the future.
Out of curiosity, is this certificate recognized anywhere?
Hi, i have a question about the aerodynamic limitations of the cars.
You said they could only have one varible aerodynamic feature, like a rear wing, diffusor, ect.
Is there a possibiliy of using the groundeffect, essentially exchanging the diffusor for a giant wing in the middle, can change its form?
I'm curious as this would mean, that you could
have one variable aerodynamic feature wich allows you to change the downforce ballance at maximum possible downforce.
great video mate!
Pp]
kyle struggling to make a car inefficient enough to meet reg is gold
Yeah seem just dump cheap RW on it is easy route. Heh
Love it, great analysis that quiets the critics. Love the rules of the LMH and the freedom it gives manufacturers.
O hey! Ive been watching your channel for some while hahah, your NSX is a beast
@@NXAlpha That's awesome! Thank you for watching!
if i doesn’t win there just gonna end up looking dumb. examples delta wing,panoz hybrid,gtr lmp1 list goes on
@@michaelgomez4994 all bad examples when comparing them to Peugeot. All of those were shoe string budgets trying to punch over their weight. Peugeot will come at this with vast resources and the intention of winning.
Peugeot has also they’ll abandon the concept if they can’t make it work. We will definitely see Peugeot fighting at the top.
@@RSFuture listen to this peugeot is going up against toyota they don’t have that cash either
Amazing analysis and case study!! Peugeot designers would be fighting to have you on their aero team; they'd have a lot more artistic freedom hahaha
Or Peugeot just said:
"since we are not allowed aero anymore, all of our aerodynamicists can roll a dice and the 6's get to stay"
They already have the bests money can buy, they are the one that came up with the design to begin with, he's offering an analyse.
Really great video. I now understand the motivation behind this category. Guess we could see a lot of manufacturer interest over the next few years.
Now THIS is what I like! Thank you! Great content! I haven't been paying too much attention to the regulations but seems a great way to get some OEM features on the cars. Much needed on WEC for my liking!
Seeing you CAD up a car yourself like this was really instructive. I'd love to see you do something like that again in the future!
Who the hell unliked this video haha, I really like how you’re building these demonstrators in CFD!
Rear wing enthusiasts lol
Theory of mine: The little parts in the front intake are there in fact to make the aero/drag worse to not overshoot the targets... also the cutoffs at the rear diffusor! With that little overbody aero i'd guess this thing is slipping through air like a hot knife through butter. Maybe they need some parts that create more drag?!
Btw... this car just looks insanely good. Maybe best looking car ever... to me at least.
Super interesting, one question I have is, given the single adjustable element constraint, would the central low-pressure of the floor allow for it to be treated as a fulcrum such that simple balance of the system can be achieved by just the front element? For example could a change on the front effectively stall the floor at the same rate or is the floor fixed in it's effectiveness?
You could have one adjustable flap, and also play with the ride height to change the floor effectiveness, which is basically one giant unregulated flap.
id guess the best way to circumvent this type of regulation would be an adjustable splitter and then playing with rake until the car was on point, effectively using rake as an adjustable spoiler.
unless that's illegal somewhere in the suspension rules
I've just discovered this channel and I found a large variety of really interesting topics covered for a mechanical engineering student and formula SAE team member like myself.
I know you traditionally do racing performance related aerodynamics analysis but would you consider doing a video or two on fuel efficiency aerodynamics as in Aptera trike, Arcimoto trike, or even semi truck? It would help diversify reach in audience and potential students.
Great to see the CFD analysis. Although the modeling makes it clear Kyle is an engineer and not a designer ;)
The car looks amazing. I am supporting Peugeot this year
It's right there in front of us! Kudos to the design team! They are taking the forward air Resistance and killing the rear Drag coefficients! This is a air conversion system.
I bet Jim Hall loves this!!! 😊
Fantastic video Kyle as usual, really enjoyed this one
Do you think you could either share the model of the car or show how to make a model like it? Also do you think you could share what CFD software you use because I am very interested in CFD and I was looking into learning more about it.
Can you do an updated video of the 9X8? They showed off the actual race car in May I believe.
Nice one Kyle, that's one of your best yet. Keep up the good work.
Aero lessons for dummies - well I understood it! Brilliant vid
Just love your videos. Not my area of expertise but been learning a lot from you. Thanks you for sharing
Definitely rooting for Peugeot in 2023, for the sole reason their car just looks so freaking cool. Crazy how in a field with factory Porsches and Ferraris the Peugeot is the best looking.
Holy crap I'm super impressed by that model you can just throw out like it's nothing hahah. Specifically if it's meant to run analysis on. Because I have made several CFD runs for my college team of Aero Design (RC aircraft) and I struggle massively when my geometry isn't super clean. As a struggling student and admirer of your work I would love to see that CAD video, I hope it's already out there
That Kicker as you call it on the back is actually a Kamm Tail wing … so no rear wing is just a generous interpretation of the design. It’s well done I admit and no doubt effective …
The car looks marvelous, although if a driver chose to take a curb that would be slightly too high it seems like the race for him would be over at that point since the floor is the main aerodynamic factor on this car.
I know maybe its hard. but this things is buzzing my ear
What if you do some interview with Frank Stephenson (yeah now he has youtube channel and make a lot of new content) on how to design car that looks good but also has a lot of aerodynamics function. I want to know your response, Thank You
There is hope that the prototypes might recapture the beauty of earlier eras. I may again become a fan this upcoming season.
When the car was shown I was a bit surprised but after thinking about the concept it is quite obvious why they did it. The regulations are limiting the concepts quite much and with a set C_x and C_z I would also go for the diffusor instead of a wing to produce downforce because it is way less sensitive to drag and other conditions.
With considering that Peugeot wants to win Le Mans and therefor might accept worse results on other tracks there is also no reason to place a super flat wing on the back.
But the exhausts might be just a design for the lounge. They are really weird looking and (without doing a cfd analysis) look like they waste the airflow over the car that should be really efficient without them.
One thing I am not sure about is the big height difference between diffusor and top of the rear. There should be so much bad air in between. And usually noone wants that in the rear of the car. Even with the regulations and the need for some drag I don't think it should be there.
Nice video! Thanks for the work!
Awesome video! I would love to see you talk about Fusion 360 and/or your modeling process!
Great video, really nice of someone of your abilities to explain all the details 👍
This makes me wonder how many modifications would be necessary to convert any Koenegsegg to the LMDh rules
Would definitely like to see you analyze some group c / imsa GTP cars. They had some huge downforce claims.
i would love to see an aero analysis of the 2022 F1car. its probably the most overengineered aero concept ever. i think whats interesting is how they get maximum downforce with creating minimum vorticies to reduce dirty air. so i am very curious about the details of the floor, how they seal it etc
Wow, amazing. I would love to see analysis like this of Red Bull X2010 :-)
I would love to see an aerodynamic comparison between an open wheel car with a halo, an open wheel car with a full aeroscreen, and an open wheel car with neither.
I also would like to see some other miscellaneous aerodynamic experiments... like covering a car in fur, or using forward-swept wings, or some other crazy stuff like that.
Forward swept wings would create more drag BUT it would produce downforce at lower speeds
I’ve been waiting for this.
Is there anything in the rules preventing the teams from getting their numbers from an unrealistic configuration? Such as the mentioned high ride height to reduce downforce for the relevant test and then get more downforce in the actual race?
From what I’ve found online, any change made to the car must be noted with the FIA and they’ll send scrutineers to check that it still fits with the rules. I haven’t found anything preventing changes in setup that gain an advantage
The channels in the central front fairing is to direct the air to cool the engine, some to the air filter, and to provide some downforce, directing it to the back wings, across the wheels to the rear winglets, it's nothing to do with style, although you might think that because of the way that they look, similar to the lights. The side scoops are just to cool the brakes, no style thing going on either, it's simply to provide air and cooling to the brakes.
The scoop in the centre of the car, across the roof through to the rear type of spoiler, is to push down the spoiler with a trumpet like outlet to increase the air out like a silencer on an exhaust, to provide downforce, clever
Amazing analysis of the car, Kyle. Lets see how the car does in testing.
This is my kind of video, just nerds out on how something works, you got a new sub ⬆️
Thank you very much. I learned a lot in a short time, my kind of teacher!
As a video idea, because I am very interested in this: Could you do something like this (design a own car or aerodynamics) but with a front mounted engine, for example the Panoz gt1 or lmp1 car but as a modern interpretation. because I think it would be interesting to see if you can do a ground effect car but with a front engine. (just a front engine, so still a rear wheel drive car, not like the Nissan lmp1 car....)
A review of the Vision 1789 aerodynamics would be a great watch. Also, maybe you could do a series reviewing the aero of the more extreme Vision Gran Turismo cars like the Mclaren Ultimate Vision Gran Turismo.
Fantastic video! Interesting that the regulations are set up to (sort of) encourage styling for aesthetic purposes.
The Design is certainly something different, exciting imho and it aligns itself perfectly with the current road car design philosophy especially with the upright lights, as to the winglessness, which at least shows a different way of going about stuff instead of keeping with old formulas, Königsegg also removed the wing for the highspeed model adding two straight lines for side stability and probably quite a few more will follow with the design direction
These lmh cars look beautiful. I'm excited to see what volkswagen's cars will look like.
First, Kyle your videos are incredible. I have been a ME for 5 years now, and wasn't sure what discipline I wanted to end up in. With other influences including your channel I have fully decided where I want my career to end up. I am finding all of the aero, suspension, and power train elements of all of LMP2, GTE AM, F1, Indy, and other racing divisions so intriguing that I am determined to seat myself in a development position in motorsport. I hope to be as successful as you, but as you have shown, it is obtainable which has opened my eyes SO MUCH. Thank you.
As for adding PayPal for the course, will there be a fee associated? I'd much prefer a PayPal purchase if possible :)
something I'd like to hear more about is the difference in downside and drag for prototype/ sportscars having a splitter Vs a front wing. Seems designers in the past have gone one way or another but I'd love to know the science behind those decisions!
Great Vid. We've known for decades that cars with ground effects don't need wings. F1 in the ground effects era had cars that would in some races use a front wing and some races not. When the car had a front wing quite often it was there to balance the car front to back. when the front wing was missing it was the rear wing that was used to trim the car out. My bigest question about the 9x8 is how they balance the car out in changing condisions. We all know how rain effects what a car needs but a race track is a living breathing entity. Its total grip level can change especially in a 24 hour race. The tires can even react differntly from 1 race to the next or even 1 practice session to the next , so how do they deal with it. and what do they do if the main floor gets danaged slightly. the other cars can adress these problems by adjusting the wing
Nissan built a front wheel drive prototype racer a few years back to get better aero and downforce while Peugeot built a wingless car for better styling.
Why would Nissan go to such lengths when a wingless car would have been ok? Are the downforce requirements of the current Hypercar class lower than the prototype racers during the year that Nissan FWD racer competed?
Edit: commented before watching the vid. The vid answered my question.
I would really like to see you designing the model step by step , Pls make one !
2am thought, does the Murray T.50 fit into these regulations? I'd assume the fan would be the movable/adjustable aerodynamic device here. I haven't checked back over the T.50 details, so I could easily be wrong.
It can be fit, but competitive is different ball of game.
As he said, the downforce to drag ratio is still high. Whereas the fan itself is only for adjusting diffuser flow, not sucking heck lot of air like 2J (source : Engineering Explained). You do need more and bigger wing to competitively, which more regulation workaround (trust me, it's pain in the butt).
We still don't talked about the power unit, especially the gearbox. You change it to something else, It's both another difficult level and insult to Gordon Murray's original vision
What about cheating the regulations? Have flex panels after a certain speed or load and load can be multi plane. Would having no rear wing be extreme disadvantage if you were planning to flex panels at speed since only one can be adjusted race to race? Also would it be possible to have a flexible floor?
carbon fiber parts can be made flex in almost any fashion. i dont really know how they check for the 4:1 stuff etc. depending on that you can almost expect flex parts
@@richardtickler8555 3d scan the car, stuff in wind tunnel, measure, then confirm by 3d scanning cars before races?
@@Cynyr Or they could even just have 3-axis load cells on each wheel and an inertial measurement unit. You know the traction loads on each wheel so you know the total friction force due to the wheels, but the acceleration will be less than naively calculated from the traction loads due to drag. Vertical loads will also give downforce info, so then L/D can be worked out.
Great work buddy. Your effort is impressive.
I think the new rules will make for different looking cars with similar aero, and with power limitations we can have different designs but cars that are reasonably similar on performance. Here's to looking at more interesting designs.
Awesome video, thanks for uploading this
i´m guessing one reason to why they did this is to stand out, and become something people talks about, while still being able to be competitive
Love the video. It would be awesome if you could make one specifically on the aerodynamical advantage of a footplate at the front wing of an F1 car.
You should reference the TT mr1... I own one.
Perfect example where you feel sorry for a full recall.
I mean my TT has a considerable chunk of weights securely fastened to the left rear, along with a rear spoiler.
At auto barn speed the original TT spun around(160-200kkph)
So good that they've eased the restrictions on aero. All the cars looked identical and tbh were a bit ugly. Nice to actually be able to see the differences between the cars.
Group C vibes
Would love to see your opinions on the next gen nascar.
I just found this channel and I love it
Does this potentially make the car better at following and overtaking because it is isn't relying on over body aero?
Kyle you should do an update video for this car now that the final version has been released!
Reallly nice video. What CAD and CFD softwares you use?
Would you be able to show a tutorial on how you mocked up this concept in CAD? Thank you.
This is AMAZING! So interesting and informative. You earned a subscriber for sure this is such a well made video and well explained! Thank you
thoroughly entertaining and informative video!! Super awesome to gain an understating of how the Peugeot will work on a track!!! could you analyse the other current hyper car spec cars (the Glickenhaus and Toyota) for comparison???
That video was awesome!
How about handling? Would it be more on a knife edge or less?
Thanks again for the off the charts -I wish I was more qualified to understand better- content.
Don't you think that the position of those exhausts help with downforce at that curve at the back, like how it would be with a blown diffuser?
Would a concave design wheel dissipate more brake heat than a regular flat design wheel?
Elite content. More of this, please
I'd say it's got some inspiration from Ferarri's FXX and FXXK, which neither have rear wings to speak of.
So for this category, since the regulations place limits on the aerodynamic performance (like lift/drag coefficients, etc.), what would the aerodynamicists look to optimize? To clarify - once they reach the aerodynamic limits prescribed by the regulations, what can be done to increase the car's performance further without breaking the rules?
I guess they'd try to optimize the front/rear aero balance, along with optimizations to ensure that the downforce works well with the suspension setup of the car.
Higher downforce numbers usually require stiffer springs to prevent the bottoming-out of the suspension. Lower downforce allow for slightly softer springs to allow compliance, which would help on tracks that are not F1-smooth. The aero characteristics of a car can also change during acceleration (from a bit of squat) and braking (from a bit of dive). Slip angle during turns also affect the aero of a car.
If the regulatiors measure the car's aero with zero slip angle, teams can try to make the car exceed the aero targets when the car is on a slip angle though i am not sure that would be feasible.
I remember watching this video when it went live, one of the first I saw of yours Kyle. Absolutely love the intent of the LMH regs, I'm still astonished and disappointed that on Peugeot has decided to go along this route.
Quick side question: as the car that was cheekily entered into more le mans that it was really eligible for, how would the Porsche 962 fair for these new HyperCar regs? Would a new engine/hybrid system and a pick of paint be enough to make it able to take part in yet another le mans race it wasn't really designed for?
Video suggestion. Remember that Mastercard Lola car that that no wind tunnel testing and was therefore terrible? I wonder how bad it really was.
Well they made it real, and we will see if this works at Monza in July !
Is it forbidden to use the wheels spokes as aerodinamically active elements? It seems to me that they have a lot of potential, as they have an aerospeed that is twice that of the car on the top (and zero on the lower part) and they point differently than the rest of the car in curves (for the front ones), which I suppose one could cleverly design so they increase downforce in curves but stall and reduce drag in straight sections..
Can you use the CFD to show how to adjust the balance while changing the downforce levels please?
Great vid, nice analysis
Please what application was that ?
What cfd and cad software do you use?
Very cool and informativ videos but one question which programm ist this? Thank you for ur fast awnser and have a great one
Cypertruck aerodynamics analysis would be very interest.
What I wanna know is why manufacturers don't mount a wing closer to the spoiler to provide high energy airflow underneath it
You mentioned using some inlets at the lower front corners for possible brake cooling. Would the direction of those internal ducts have a noticeable effect on the aerodynamic performance of the car?
Learning a lot! Thank you so much !!!
With this "no rear wing" and having the regulations in mind( both examples with the same amount of downforce) you will have more downforce on the dirty air than a car with rear wing or is almost the same?
Great video 👍👍👍
Hi there. Awesome video. Are you going to analyse the aerodynamics of ferrari 499p as well? Unless you have already and I've missed the video...
it looks almost seamless, i wonder how they would go about changing front and rear clips like you can on lmp1 cars
Hey Kyle, What CAD software do you use?
I’m a Mechanical Engineering major and used Solidworks and Fusion 360. I’ve loved this car since it first came out.
Hey Kyle! what software did you use to run this analysis?
Please do more LMH and F1 aero videos.
The Porsche 917 always seemed to cope quite well without a rear wing and that was raced 50+ years ago.
Looove your videos. Thank you so much! Ehat cad software do u use? I have a dream of drawing my own car
Couldnt you make a splitter run under a car to the back and make it a “spoiler” also. Its just a splitter that runs all the way back, which allows an adjustable splitter that doubles as a spoiler?
Can you make a tutorial for step by step CFD analysis
How do they verify compliance of the 4:1 ratio? (i.e. do they check all cars in wind tunnels before race day or do teams submit CFD results?)
please make a video on the cad modelling
Very interesting ! What kind of CAD are you using ? 3 DS ?