FORMULA ONE Rear Wings: a very specific video.
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 พ.ค. 2024
- The rear wing since the new regulations set was introduced has been an area which there has been a significant amount of diversity. Particularly around the junction between the main plain and second element. This CFD analysis focuses on this junction area pulling out the main themes and extracting surface forces.
- วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
Rare goldmine of a technically focused channel you got, awesome
Could you make a video about blown diffusers? Have comparisons of different horizontal and vertical placements as well as if it's better to have it further in or out in the diffuser. Also if the best way to use it is to increase mass flow or to seal of the edges.
my early videos of the mclarens had this. warning the quality of video isn't great..... they really need to be remade.
@@nelsonphillips Looking forward to a remade and "very specific video" about blown diffusers then ;)
@@nelsonphillips could you add something about the 90's style with the exhaust in the lower expasion side
Just started, the audio is so good now! I know the video will be fantastic and informational already! :D
Greetings: Amazing. Angle of attack should not be too low or too high.
It should be balanced to get down force. Ideal wing design SPOON wings.
The design used for domestic cars is more a show and lacks proper design with plates.
Wonderful Day
Iteration 6 works better in yaw conditions as well, because the loading on the tip remains more consistent than with other designs. I'm anxious to see a comparison between the overbite and conventional sidepod inlet. From what I've seen it increases drag from the fences and the pressure in the undercut. You should study sail boats, they seem to be a good inspiration for the upper plane tips.
I still think the design philosophy of these new rear wings looks REALLY strange but it's still very interesting to see how the engineers work around this new ruleset they've been given.
I suspect for an "iteration 5" type wing that there is additional synergistic benefit of one or both of (i) reduced mass (ii) second element deflects more favourably or predictably (within the legal flexibility limits).
Super interesting as always.
If somebody struggles (like me) to get the name of the “paint” at 5:10. It’s “flow viz”.
PS: i guess after mankind solved the less complex issues, like black holes and string theory, we still will be struggling with fluid dynamics 😁
What software do you use to analyze the data?
Wouldn't seperating the 2nd elements junction increases the wingtip vortices that the FIA is trying to cut down to improve racing?
Any chance you could model a 1993 Mazda RX-7 R1.
What is sCz?
If someone more knowledgeable can share their opinion: What I never understood about this rear wing type is why all teams seem to have a raised leading edge over the cambered bottom surface. The pitch of a car is "almost" fixed, and that concave camber in an airplane wing only helps at high aoa, which will never happen for the rear wing of a car. The only other option I might imagine for why it's there is for reducing downforce when the DRS is opened, but seems a wasteful method to produce less drag at very short parts of the race.
how would one go about trying to understand like 1% of this LMAO. any books or readings u recommend?
As 10 year F1 fan I don’t know about everyone else but this is easily my least favourite formula 1 era. They look completely un sophisticated compared to the last generations, and the whole point of improving racing I don’t think has really been as dramatic as imagined. They’ve fat and gross looking like someone ran over a formula one car with a steam roller and made it comic sans. Yes there’s still so much development from the teams developing the cars from within the new specs but previously there was so much more to look at and much more freedom. I miss seeing the headlines of what intricate aero modifications a team had done and brought to the weekends race, how it was only barely within the regs and you could notice the new cuts and shapes they added to the edge of the flat floor or wings. Now I’m just like “cool they changed a radius, I can barely tell”…
I hear this stuff since 30 years…
Last years F1 regulation always was better than this years F1 regulation.
Back “in the good old days” they had higher revs, the engine sounded better, more pitstops where way more fun, halos just look goofy and ruined F1, etc 😂
The era between 2006 and 2022 regulations saw some of the worst looking cars in the sport, real atrocities. I'm glad we're way past that.
Current cars aren't perfect and they really need to be considerably lighter, smaller, narrower and shorter. But at least they don't have a profusion of weird looking aero devices all over the surface.
I started watching Formula 1 in 2022, and I personally prefer this era to any other I got to see. But it may be due to the fact I never had the opportunity to become familiar with them.
@@fr3ddyfr3sh Those are true though
>"They look bad"
Well that's just your opinion
>"It doesn't really improve racing"
Except it really did, the stats don't lie
>"Barely any Aerodynamic changes"
They are absolutely there, i had a field day checking reddit for every single weekend to check out what teams are changing on a regular basis
Please don't let yourself get blinded by nostalgia