I have a degree in aerospace engineering so there's nothing here that I don't already know, but these videos are still an absolute delight to watch. On top of that, the way you visualized the air molecules separating from each other underneath the wing is genius, and I've never seen it like that before. Bravo!
Andrew Slovak I’m an Aerospace Engineering student, I graduate next year. But I completely agree, this is all so simple, but I still love videos going over it all again.
@@Corndog4382 I want to get into aerospace engineering when I'm older do you have any resources where I can learn all this in more depth due to curiosity?
@@vitocipponeri6773 I might be a bit late, but I am an Aerospace student too. Feel free to ask me any question, also, I could send you a pdf of an aerodynamics textbook that we are using
You could be a lecturer/teacher, you’re brilliant at explaining things while keeping it entertaining. Keep up the fantastic content, this is my go-to place for Formula 1 content on TH-cam :)
One major reason I like F1 is the science that goes behind it. The way you present everything here just makes everything even better!! Man I can't wait for the new season.
First of all, I'm excited for this aerodynamic series because F1's aerodynamic is one of the main thing that got me into watching F1. Second of all, I haven't finished watching this video yet, because you just explain the word "aerodynamic" as "aero" and "dynamic" it's a whole new word to me now.
ThefatGerbil "∴ Comment = Pointless waste of time" Yup, you were doing some funky shit with algebra near the end there. Early you implied that Aero + Hydro = Fluid, but then later you said Aero = Fluid and Hydro = Fluid, which would imply that Fluid ^ 2 = Fluid, which is nonsense.
I love physics and that's how I got here, but I've never watched F1 except maybe with the sound off at a sports bar. After watching a bunch of these videos, that may be changing soon.
You should definitely start a channel for basics of physics.... Kudos dude... Great job..... You have explained the magnus effect, the swinging of a ball, how a plane flies and a whole lot of other stuff
Bonus fact: Airplanes works the same way, except that the wings are in the opposite direction. Generating lift instead downforce. The physics are the same :)
Well, really the answer is that a wing upside down still produces lift, but it requires a higher angle of attack and is a bit less efficient if it's asymmetric. Generally it'd be pretty difficult to fly a highly cambered airfoil upside down, but a symmetric or nearly symmetric airfoil will fly similarly either way.
Does this mean that when air is accelerated under the wing creating a lower pressure zone creating downforce and air being pushed upward by the wing are two different processes that both happen to create downforce?
Incredebly well made video I love it! also love how you started editing your voice and audio. First Video I've seen by you was your tyre guide in 2016. You've come a long way since and I hope you grow even more :) much love from Germany
The moment those particles separated I knew everything I'd been hoping to learn. Always hear about high pressure and low pressure but I simply could not visualise it. Wonderful, straightforward video thank you so much!
I'm gonna be taking AeroSpace engineering next year in highschool so the fact that your covering this is really cool. from alot of what my friends told me this is what we will be covering in the first month. So thanks I guess!
WhatsUpGaming Good luck in your studies, I'm currently in my final year and yes a lot of this video will be covered in more detail over your first year
I always wondered about the difference between high pressure and low pressure air flow over a wing. (As in generally, including aircraft wings). This visual made a ton more sense than any other explanation, so thanks !
As someone finishing up a semester studying aerodynamics, this is a really solid explanation of how airfoils function (as downforce is just upside-down lift)! It's always impressive when something complicated can be simplified down to a few minutes without resorting to partially true explanations.
The whole continuity principle it’s always been a mystery for me. It makes perfect sense in a closed tube but then you see it explained on open flow fluids. I remember there’s an experiment on TH-cam where it can be seen that the air going above and below the wing don’t get to the end of it at the same time hence continuity doesn’t apply. But does the air still accelerates on the button of the wing? By the way, it’s an amazing video and I’m looking g forward for the rest of the series. BR
I really hope to work in F1 as an engineer when I grow up, and I think I'll have a great understanding of the science of what I plan on doing by the time I finish this series. Thanks a lot, I owe my future career (if any) to you! :P Also, if you don't mind me asking - do you have a background in F1, since you seem to be knowing the sport so damn thoroughly well?
Venturi's theory isn't quite a correct explanation of lift for several reasons including the 'phantom' boundary assumption. The true reason is far too complex to fit in this video but if anyone is interested in further explanation here's a link to NASA's page on the matter : www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/wrong3.html
Splitting the rear wing and making it more parallel with the plane of the car greatly reduces drag at the cost of downforce. That's why DRS is allowed only on straight parts of the track.
Because the rear wing stops working and there are way less downforce pushing the car to the ground. So less downforce equals greater top speed and acceleration. This is why DRS is not allowed in the corners. Drivers could not push at all because of oversteer created by the lack of downforce on the rear end.
A 'byproduct' of downforce is drag, the nasty thing about it is that you create a lot more drag with a bit more downforce. The F1 car designers choose high cornering speeds and better acceleration (high downforce) over high top speed (low downforce) because an F1 car will spend most it's time accelerating or cornering and has plenty power anyway. DRS reduces a bit of downforce but quite a lot of drag, allowing the car a slightly higher top speed. Right Chain Bear?
So there is a certain resultant force in the forward movement direction which causes a car to accelerate. This resultant force is reduced by drag. Drag is basically friction caused by air particles hitting the surface of the car. In terms of energy, this friction will cause some of the kinetic energy of the car to be dissipated as thermal energy through friction and as we know (Ek = 1/2 mv^2) a lower kinetic energy will result in a lower velocity. So we said that drag is caused by air particles hitting the surface of the car. This same principle applies to the rear wing. Some air particles will hit the surface of the wing, causing drag. If you reduce the angle of attack of the wing (making it flatter) air will flow much more smoothly over the wing and therefore reduce drag which will increase the resultant force accelerating the car forwards. However, this will also result in less downforce produced by the car so it is usually mostly suitable to use in long straights as you will have less grip around corners with lower downforce. Hope this helps!
Fantastic video, I've just started my aerodynamics degree and whilst I understand this already, seeing it in such a simple way is brilliant. Definitely helped me think about how I'm going to move forward with my design. Bravo!
Great video, I can't wait to learn more from your channel!! În the future would it be possible to do a video or series of videos on suspension, like explaining what the suspension system is made up from (ie pushrod, wishbones, etc)
Great videos Chain Bear, I am really enjoying all the educational videos on how F1 works :) This has allowed me to enjoy F1 and racing even more then just watching cars go around tracks xD
This is the best explanation I’ve ever seen simplified for the average person but all the details are still there they haven’t been summed up into one thing and forgotten love this
Im probably an idiot, still. pV = nRT => p = (nRT) / V this means, if you decrease volume, you increase pressure. Now, what I dont understand, and I do understand the visuals, is: less moluces due to faster airflow equals less pressure, as you illustrated at 6:37. And thats the point where I get confused. I thought high pressure equals faster airflow. While Im writing it, im actually getting it (I think).I think my issue is that I have to take the boundaries into the equation, isnt it? At the Point where we release high pressure air into low pressure environment, the speed increases? Is that correct? I think my issue comes from the illustration at 3:25. There you say small volume increases the airflows speed. So decreasing volume, increases pressure and increases speed. Now im confused again. EDIT: So the air under the wing is faster under low pressure, because it is generated in high pressure and then released when it hits the wing beneath it?
you should also apply the 3rd law at the horizontal axis. Air hits the wing in the horizontall axis causing a backwards force called drag and offcourse the wing hits the molecules of air pushing them forward. I dont know if I am right, I only studied math
This is an incorrect explanation of how wings work. It is sad to see how many people here are being misled by this person and being taught incorrect aerodynamic principles.
I personally think that the aerodynamics in F1 are one of the most important parts that make it so interesting. Its also why I really don't care about IndyCar or fe.
good video. 23% of the downforce is at the rear wing and 17% of the downforce is at the front wing for 2017 and 2018 cars. 60% of the downforce of these 2017 and 2018 cars is the floor and rear diffuser (vortices) that suck the car to the ground. The problem with all these aero "tidbits" ala CFD is that the lead car leaves so much of a wake (rear diffuser) that the following car looses front wing downforce (grip) that it is difficult to pass hence the advent of the the DRS system (normally on the straights) as is the case with Ferrari, Mercedes Benz and at times RedBull. DRS, since its inception(2011) due to the aerodynamics of these cars, was to increase the overtaking.
Where the f did you come from? This shit is brilliant! The way you explain things is so clear AND concise that I'm amazed that no one had ever explained it like this before. Needless to say, I'm pumped for the next videos.
Love the video's , it's great having someone with great knowledge explain things in such detail. Would you (or anyone else) be interested in joining a discord group where we discuss the technical side of F1 ? With testing just days away, there will be plenty to discuss and share. Keep up the great work!
funny how the Title and Describtion are in german but Video isn't.. talking about false advertivement.. jk, but autotranslation of TH-cam seriously sucks
This explanation amounts to another repetition of the Bernoulli explanation, which has been debunked as insufficient to explain the amount of lift a wing actually produces. That is why it is generally acknowledged that there is STILL no universally-agreed-upon explanation for the lift of a wing. Irs not just the difference in airspeed from the top and bottom of the wing that causes lift. I'm surprised to see comments by supposed "aerodynamicists" not mentioning this glaring beginner error in this oft-cited yet insufficient explanation for aerodynamic lift. Amazing how long we go on with the Bernoulli explanation still being repeated.
l can say . with out any imbelishing that l always loose interest very quickly when l listen to most people discussing technical matters The exception to this was my grade 11/12 law teacher and my best friend who is a teacher of mechanics working for G M in canada.And now l say to you for your choice of topics and your way of teaching,welcome to my group.Thank you for another excellent video.
Hey Chain Bear, writing a sheet about aerodynamics of F1 cars for my school. Unfortunately I need a source for presenting some information of your video. You do not have any sources given in your video description could you maybe send me some pages you have looked through or can you remember where you got all these informations? Yours, Paul
Could you not remove that horrible 'carbon fibre' background and just have the entire screen as the 'graph paper' - the background seems a bit pointless and just makes the viewing area smaller?!
Can you make a video on what's legal and what's not during cornering, like moving during braking and blocking or pushing people off the track, I really don't know much about that topic
Why do you constantly apologize for going i depth Its why I'm watching the fucking video have respect for your audience and just present as it is I'm not gonna moan and groan like a middle schooler....
One thing i notice in this video is how many questions im asking myself : p jk and thank you immensely for these brilliant videos, I have been getting into f1 car models and now I am just extremely curious as to everything regarding the shapes, designs, reasonings behind all the pieces of an f1 car. Thank you.
Maybe im just stupid, but when you talk about the airfoil shape rear wing, you say the air on the bottom of the wing gets squeezed and moves faster. Yes, i agree, but wouldnt this squeezing create more high pressure than the low pressure of the molecules being spread out? Relating this to the hose analogy, if you cover the end of a hose partially, the water will he squeezed through a tight hole and move really fast, but this squeezing pushed your hand outward, and you can totally feel this pressure overpowering the low pressures. Whats the difference with the airfoil?
At what speed does the wing exert downforce that will actually be effective? I know it always exerts downforce as long as the car is moving, but at freeway speeds the downforce is probably less then 20 lbs.
this is a triumph, huge success. ... Anyway the cake is great and so Delicious and moist. ... oh glados, we miss you. You don´t miss us, but we know both the truth: As long as their are subjects to test, you keeping on trying until you run out of cake.
How is it that the diffuser increases the downforce, when its profile is shaped upwards (it has a bigger cross section area compared to the floor, hence lower velocity and higher pressure), and we know from the Venturi tunnels that downforce increases from higher pressure to lower pressure, but the diffuser has a bigger area compared to the floor of the car, yet the downforce is increasing? What am I missing? Basically I'm asking how is it that at the front of the car the regular rule of the Venturi pipes applies (low pressure on the floor of the front wing compared to the upper body thus generating downforce) but at the back of the car is the opposite.
Spoilers are different to wings in that their design is to decrease drag rather than increase downforce, they achieve this by 'spoiling' the existing airflow over the car prior to the spoiler being fitted to the car
The authors have two wrong scientific approaches: researching the creation of Lift force and Low pressure at upper side of the wing, relative to the ground surface and Earth. I explain the aerodynamic cavitation and existence of Lee side aerocavern, and creation of Aerodynamic force.
Hey the video was awesome and gave me an outlook about Physics of air like never before. I have one small question though. We saw that air gets squeezed at the lower surface near the leading edge because of the curve. That results in increase in velocity. Why doesn't the air get squeezed in the upper surface of the airfoil on the trailing edge part since that is also curved?
The air molecules in the balloon naturally wants to expand outwards to fill the space they inhabit. The air wants to expand but the sides of the balloon is in the way wich makes tue air molecules push ut outwards, the air sant expand evenly because the air molecules reppel eachother due to having very simular charges. 1:22
i have a question, so i want to go into aerodynamics for cars, but everywhere i go to do research, it says to get a degree in physics, aeronautical, and/or aerospace. i love military jets, but i want to work with cars.
I have a degree in aerospace engineering so there's nothing here that I don't already know, but these videos are still an absolute delight to watch. On top of that, the way you visualized the air molecules separating from each other underneath the wing is genius, and I've never seen it like that before. Bravo!
Andrew Slovak I’m an Aerospace Engineering student, I graduate next year. But I completely agree, this is all so simple, but I still love videos going over it all again.
@@Corndog4382 I want to get into aerospace engineering when I'm older do you have any resources where I can learn all this in more depth due to curiosity?
same.
Totally agree. Beautyful video.
@@vitocipponeri6773 I might be a bit late, but I am an Aerospace student too. Feel free to ask me any question, also, I could send you a pdf of an aerodynamics textbook that we are using
Am I the only one who inhaled air and blew it out at 4:07 ? :D
No i did it too😂
It did it too
Apfelmus000 that depends on exit lol.
Nope, I did it too
Me
You could be a lecturer/teacher, you’re brilliant at explaining things while keeping it entertaining. Keep up the fantastic content, this is my go-to place for Formula 1 content on TH-cam :)
“It is a bit of a physics lesson but brought I a ballon! So it’s fun”
Ford galaxie Fan club! Hahahahahaha xD
He wasn't wrong
One major reason I like F1 is the science that goes behind it. The way you present everything here just makes everything even better!! Man I can't wait for the new season.
Great finishing music! Portal fan?
Couldn't myself help singing along with the music, and now I cannot get the song out of my head. Plz send help.
Stopped paying attention as soon as it started playing ;_;
First of all, I'm excited for this aerodynamic series because F1's aerodynamic is one of the main thing that got me into watching F1. Second of all, I haven't finished watching this video yet, because you just explain the word "aerodynamic" as "aero" and "dynamic" it's a whole new word to me now.
and for boats it's hydrodynamic. MIND=BLOWN
For boats it's both, so DOUBLE mindblown!
Thermodynamics *boom headshot*
Aerodynamics + Hydrodynamics = Fluid dynamics
∴ Aerodynamics + Hydrodynamics - dynamics = Fluid
(Aero + Hydro - 1)dynamics = Fluid
Dynamics = Fluid/(Aero + Hydro - 1)
Since: Aero = Air = Fluid
Since: Hydro = Water = Fluid
⤷ Fluid/(Aero + Hydro - 1) = Fluid/(Fluid + Fluid - 1)
∴ Dynamics = Fluid/(2Fluid - 1)
Since: Dynamics = Movement
⤷ Movement = Fluid/(2Fluid - 1)
∴ Comment = Pointless waste of time
ThefatGerbil "∴ Comment = Pointless waste of time" Yup, you were doing some funky shit with algebra near the end there. Early you implied that Aero + Hydro = Fluid, but then later you said Aero = Fluid and Hydro = Fluid, which would imply that Fluid ^ 2 = Fluid, which is nonsense.
Best F1 channel on youtube by miles. Love the videos.
This is incredible! You know WAY more about aerodynamics than my year 11 physics teacher. Wanna come teach us physics?
Yeah, an 11-year old should know more about it
Last song was portal still alive 😀😀
I love physics and that's how I got here, but I've never watched F1 except maybe with the sound off at a sports bar. After watching a bunch of these videos, that may be changing soon.
Brett Cooper if you like physics you will love F1
And this is ladies and gentleman how high quality content looks like +++++
You should definitely start a channel for basics of physics.... Kudos dude... Great job..... You have explained the magnus effect, the swinging of a ball, how a plane flies and a whole lot of other stuff
0:44 but I brought a balloon so it's fun
Lol XD
Wait a minute, that outro music is a version of Still Alive from Portal! Well played mate, science is always fun on this channel.
I knew I had heard that music somewhere, but couldn't quite tell where, thanks
If only I had some spare money to support you ;-;
you know when you decide to hang it up on TH-cam an aerodynamicist professor should be considered lol
Greetings from r/formula1! Keep up the good work.
Ferrator best subreddit :)
Wow f1 need to hire you! So informative and easy to understand! Well done 😁👍
I've learned more from this video than physics class in school.
Same
So true, i might show my physics teacher this video for people in lower classes who have trouble with this :P
I am not into F1 races yet I'm watching
Duuuuude give it a shot! The season starts later in march, so why not check out the opener?
I encourage everyone to watch Formula One because it truly is the Pinnacle of auto racing!
I will give it a shot, thanks for the advice guys
First time somebody made this science easy n fun.
I got a bachelor degree in automobile engineering and still I found this video to be immensly interesting for myself, keep this up!
A+ video
Bonus fact: Airplanes works the same way, except that the wings are in the opposite direction. Generating lift instead downforce. The physics are the same :)
Javier Tan bonus question: if thats the way lift works then how can airplanes fly upside down?
They can counter steer with the horizontal stabilizer at the end of the plane
Well, really the answer is that a wing upside down still produces lift, but it requires a higher angle of attack and is a bit less efficient if it's asymmetric. Generally it'd be pretty difficult to fly a highly cambered airfoil upside down, but a symmetric or nearly symmetric airfoil will fly similarly either way.
Does this mean that when air is accelerated under the wing creating a lower pressure zone creating downforce and air being pushed upward by the wing are two different processes that both happen to create downforce?
Great explanation mate!
"Still alive" at the end makes this an A++ Video :D
Incredebly well made video I love it! also love how you started editing your voice and audio. First Video I've seen by you was your tyre guide in 2016. You've come a long way since and I hope you grow even more :) much love from Germany
I already had a basic idea on how airflow works, but you showed it in ways I never thought before. Thank you!
The moment those particles separated I knew everything I'd been hoping to learn. Always hear about high pressure and low pressure but I simply could not visualise it. Wonderful, straightforward video thank you so much!
I'm gonna be taking AeroSpace engineering next year in highschool so the fact that your covering this is really cool. from alot of what my friends told me this is what we will be covering in the first month. So thanks I guess!
WhatsUpGaming Good luck in your studies, I'm currently in my final year and yes a lot of this video will be covered in more detail over your first year
Thanks for the info man!
Because of this aerodynamics i love f1
I always wondered about the difference between high pressure and low pressure air flow over a wing. (As in generally, including aircraft wings). This visual made a ton more sense than any other explanation, so thanks !
As someone finishing up a semester studying aerodynamics, this is a really solid explanation of how airfoils function (as downforce is just upside-down lift)! It's always impressive when something complicated can be simplified down to a few minutes without resorting to partially true explanations.
As an aerospace engineer , this was accurate yet simple and fun. thumbs up
Very awesome video. Clearly explained, and well done. Thank you.
I wanna be a race engineer so I feel like watching these videos give me way more understanding! And they're enjoyable!
Thanks stuart
The whole continuity principle it’s always been a mystery for me. It makes perfect sense in a closed tube but then you see it explained on open flow fluids. I remember there’s an experiment on TH-cam where it can be seen that the air going above and below the wing don’t get to the end of it at the same time hence continuity doesn’t apply. But does the air still accelerates on the button of the wing?
By the way, it’s an amazing video and I’m looking g forward for the rest of the series. BR
Thank you for your video. You’re very smart. ❤️
I’d like to know, is there such thing as the perfect aerodynamic design for an f1 car, to the point where it cannot be improved anymore?
A bit of further information and a demonstration of an aerofoil/wing: www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/how-wings-really-work
I really hope to work in F1 as an engineer when I grow up, and I think I'll have a great understanding of the science of what I plan on doing by the time I finish this series. Thanks a lot, I owe my future career (if any) to you! :P
Also, if you don't mind me asking - do you have a background in F1, since you seem to be knowing the sport so damn thoroughly well?
onestly, i don't think so
Venturi's theory isn't quite a correct explanation of lift for several reasons including the 'phantom' boundary assumption. The true reason is far too complex to fit in this video but if anyone is interested in further explanation here's a link to NASA's page on the matter : www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/wrong3.html
th-cam.com/video/w78JT6azrZU/w-d-xo.html
Wow didn't know how many patreons we are atm
greetings to you all and thanks Stuart!
I have another question
Why is the car faster when DRS is open?
Splitting the rear wing and making it more parallel with the plane of the car greatly reduces drag at the cost of downforce. That's why DRS is allowed only on straight parts of the track.
Because the rear wing stops working and there are way less downforce pushing the car to the ground. So less downforce equals greater top speed and acceleration. This is why DRS is not allowed in the corners. Drivers could not push at all because of oversteer created by the lack of downforce on the rear end.
A 'byproduct' of downforce is drag, the nasty thing about it is that you create a lot more drag with a bit more downforce. The F1 car designers choose high cornering speeds and better acceleration (high downforce) over high top speed (low downforce) because an F1 car will spend most it's time accelerating or cornering and has plenty power anyway. DRS reduces a bit of downforce but quite a lot of drag, allowing the car a slightly higher top speed. Right Chain Bear?
So there is a certain resultant force in the forward movement direction which causes a car to accelerate. This resultant force is reduced by drag. Drag is basically friction caused by air particles hitting the surface of the car. In terms of energy, this friction will cause some of the kinetic energy of the car to be dissipated as thermal energy through friction and as we know (Ek = 1/2 mv^2) a lower kinetic energy will result in a lower velocity. So we said that drag is caused by air particles hitting the surface of the car. This same principle applies to the rear wing. Some air particles will hit the surface of the wing, causing drag. If you reduce the angle of attack of the wing (making it flatter) air will flow much more smoothly over the wing and therefore reduce drag which will increase the resultant force accelerating the car forwards. However, this will also result in less downforce produced by the car so it is usually mostly suitable to use in long straights as you will have less grip around corners with lower downforce. Hope this helps!
DRS - Drag Reduction System
Awesome that you brought a balloon. That was funny. Great video :)
great video as always, may actually go into this seasons F1 knowing what everyone is going on about after watching all your videos!
Think you might have explained it better than my physics teacher
Fantastic video, I've just started my aerodynamics degree and whilst I understand this already, seeing it in such a simple way is brilliant. Definitely helped me think about how I'm going to move forward with my design. Bravo!
Much better than most other videos and is this also preparation for car analasys?
Typo I noticed, in the graphic at the end of the video you spelled turbulence without the second “U”
Great video, I can't wait to learn more from your channel!! În the future would it be possible to do a video or series of videos on suspension, like explaining what the suspension system is made up from (ie pushrod, wishbones, etc)
Chain Bear, your videos are AWESOME. So easy to understand and follow and yet teaching things that are so very interesting. Thanks man!
Do a video on bargeboards across F1 teams!
Great videos Chain Bear, I am really enjoying all the educational videos on how F1 works :) This has allowed me to enjoy F1 and racing even more then just watching cars go around tracks xD
What an awesome job! Congrats
Man! I love how you explain everything! Thank you for all!!!!
This is the best explanation I’ve ever seen simplified for the average person but all the details are still there they haven’t been summed up into one thing and forgotten love this
Im probably an idiot, still.
pV = nRT
=> p = (nRT) / V
this means, if you decrease volume, you increase pressure.
Now, what I dont understand, and I do understand the visuals, is:
less moluces due to faster airflow equals less pressure, as you illustrated at 6:37.
And thats the point where I get confused.
I thought high pressure equals faster airflow.
While Im writing it, im actually getting it (I think).I think my issue is that I have to take the boundaries into the equation, isnt it?
At the Point where we release high pressure air into low pressure environment, the speed increases? Is that correct?
I think my issue comes from the illustration at 3:25.
There you say small volume increases the airflows speed.
So decreasing volume, increases pressure and increases speed.
Now im confused again.
EDIT:
So the air under the wing is faster under low pressure, because it is generated in high pressure and then released when it hits the wing beneath it?
you should also apply the 3rd law at the horizontal axis. Air hits the wing in the horizontall axis causing a backwards force called drag and offcourse the wing hits the molecules of air pushing them forward. I dont know if I am right, I only studied math
i love his accent , soo english!!
This is an incorrect explanation of how wings work. It is sad to see how many people here are being misled by this person and being taught incorrect aerodynamic principles.
*That balloon made me watch to the end*
I personally think that the aerodynamics in F1 are one of the most important parts that make it so interesting. Its also why I really don't care about IndyCar or fe.
amazingly well done there was no use of mathematical statements or bernoulli's theorem, SIMPLY PURE INTUITION WELL DONE!
good video. 23% of the downforce is at the rear wing and 17% of the downforce is at the front wing for 2017 and 2018 cars. 60% of the downforce of these 2017 and 2018 cars is the floor and rear diffuser (vortices) that suck the car to the ground. The problem with all these aero "tidbits" ala CFD is that the lead car leaves so much of a wake (rear diffuser) that the following car looses front wing downforce (grip) that it is difficult to pass hence the advent of the the DRS system (normally on the straights) as is the case with Ferrari, Mercedes Benz and at times RedBull. DRS, since its inception(2011) due to the aerodynamics of these cars, was to increase the overtaking.
great content as always!
Where the f did you come from? This shit is brilliant! The way you explain things is so clear AND concise that I'm amazed that no one had ever explained it like this before.
Needless to say, I'm pumped for the next videos.
Love the video's , it's great having someone with great knowledge explain things in such detail. Would you (or anyone else) be interested in joining a discord group where we discuss the technical side of F1 ? With testing just days away, there will be plenty to discuss and share.
Keep up the great work!
funny how the Title and Describtion are in german but Video isn't.. talking about false advertivement.. jk, but autotranslation of TH-cam seriously sucks
This explanation amounts to another repetition of the Bernoulli explanation, which has been debunked as insufficient to explain the amount of lift a wing actually produces. That is why it is generally acknowledged that there is STILL no universally-agreed-upon explanation for the lift of a wing. Irs not just the difference in airspeed from the top and bottom of the wing that causes lift. I'm surprised to see comments by supposed "aerodynamicists" not mentioning this glaring beginner error in this oft-cited yet insufficient explanation for aerodynamic lift. Amazing how long we go on with the Bernoulli explanation still being repeated.
l can say . with out any imbelishing that l always loose interest very quickly when l listen to most people discussing technical matters The exception to this was my grade 11/12 law teacher and my best friend who is a teacher of mechanics working for G M in canada.And now l say to you for your choice of topics and your way of teaching,welcome to my group.Thank you for another excellent video.
Keep going
Are we mixing F1 and science videos? Are we creating the perfect TH-cam Channel? Interesting.
Hey Chain Bear,
writing a sheet about aerodynamics of F1 cars for my school. Unfortunately I need a source for presenting some information of your video. You do not have any sources given in your video description could you maybe send me some pages you have looked through or can you remember where you got all these informations?
Yours,
Paul
Could you not remove that horrible 'carbon fibre' background and just have the entire screen as the 'graph paper' - the background seems a bit pointless and just makes the viewing area smaller?!
What software do you use for presenting man? May we know please ...
Can you make a video on what's legal and what's not during cornering, like moving during braking and blocking or pushing people off the track, I really don't know much about that topic
Why do you constantly apologize for going i depth
Its why I'm watching the fucking video have respect for your audience and just present as it is I'm not gonna moan and groan like a middle schooler....
One thing i notice in this video is how many questions im asking myself : p jk and thank you immensely for these brilliant videos, I have been getting into f1 car models and now I am just extremely curious as to everything regarding the shapes, designs, reasonings behind all the pieces of an f1 car. Thank you.
Maybe im just stupid, but when you talk about the airfoil shape rear wing, you say the air on the bottom of the wing gets squeezed and moves faster. Yes, i agree, but wouldnt this squeezing create more high pressure than the low pressure of the molecules being spread out? Relating this to the hose analogy, if you cover the end of a hose partially, the water will he squeezed through a tight hole and move really fast, but this squeezing pushed your hand outward, and you can totally feel this pressure overpowering the low pressures. Whats the difference with the airfoil?
F1 cars AND balloons? You sure know your stuff!
Seriously though, love your videos.
At what speed does the wing exert downforce that will actually be effective? I know it always exerts downforce as long as the car is moving, but at freeway speeds the downforce is probably less then 20 lbs.
this is a triumph, huge success. ... Anyway the cake is great and so Delicious and moist. ... oh glados, we miss you. You don´t miss us, but we know both the truth: As long as their are subjects to test, you keeping on trying until you run out of cake.
How is it that the diffuser increases the downforce, when its profile is shaped upwards (it has a bigger cross section area compared to the floor, hence lower velocity and higher pressure), and we know from the Venturi tunnels that downforce increases from higher pressure to lower pressure, but the diffuser has a bigger area compared to the floor of the car, yet the downforce is increasing? What am I missing?
Basically I'm asking how is it that at the front of the car the regular rule of the Venturi pipes applies (low pressure on the floor of the front wing compared to the upper body thus generating downforce) but at the back of the car is the opposite.
Very good explained! Thumbs up & subbed! :-)
I wonder how spoilers work in relation to wings because there is no gap below for faster air
Spoilers are different to wings in that their design is to decrease drag rather than increase downforce, they achieve this by 'spoiling' the existing airflow over the car prior to the spoiler being fitted to the car
I'm a newly-minted F1 fan.
This explains so much of what I've heard mentioned by the commentators.
I’m here because I run RC cars at super high speeds and I want to increase their likelihood of staying grounded.
Thanks a lot!! 😁
The authors have two wrong scientific approaches: researching the creation of Lift force and Low pressure at upper side of the wing, relative to the ground surface and Earth. I explain the aerodynamic cavitation and existence of Lee side aerocavern, and creation of Aerodynamic force.
Hey the video was awesome and gave me an outlook about Physics of air like never before. I have one small question though. We saw that air gets squeezed at the lower surface near the leading edge because of the curve. That results in increase in velocity. Why doesn't the air get squeezed in the upper surface of the airfoil on the trailing edge part since that is also curved?
The air molecules in the balloon naturally wants to expand outwards to fill the space they inhabit. The air wants to expand but the sides of the balloon is in the way wich makes tue air molecules push ut outwards, the air sant expand evenly because the air molecules reppel eachother due to having very simular charges. 1:22
1:32 "millions and millions" isn't entirely accurate, it's more like 10^23, which is of course much more than a million
The algorithm just served up this gem. Where you at ChainBear? Miss you and hope you’re ok.
WE NEED MORE FORMULAS!!! Hmm okayy i'll go to 3E channel lol
Does aero only work from 100km/h onwards ? Does it work in low speed ? What are the threshold/s (If any)?
i have a question, so i want to go into aerodynamics for cars, but everywhere i go to do research, it says to get a degree in physics, aeronautical, and/or aerospace. i love military jets, but i want to work with cars.
@chain bear f1 where are the other 2 parts...I am very much interested.. Looking forward for the more awesomeness
I’m fairly certain that it’s the Bernoulli principle and not the Venturi effect, as the Venturi effect only applies to incompressible fluid