To end up in that position you need more than just talent and skill, you will need a lot of connections. However it would be such an inspiration if a TH-camr become an official analyst.
@@sevegarza Had a good chuckle at the qualifying predictions that popped up during FP2. AT out-qualifying both Red Bulls and Latifi out-qualifying Russel are both possible, but not exactly what would be predicted based on anything even remotely sane. For a system that supposedly draws from all these different data sets and has so much intelligence it sure seems to love copy pasting whatever the results are from the current session.
@Harry Hollaway Yes, but there are plenty of errors in this one. Namely, the concept of air pushing down on the car and secondly the notion only a third of the cars total downforce is created by the floor/diffusor. In reality current cars are infact ground effect cars and they create over 65% of their downforce from the floor. The vast majority of the surface furniture "winglets" don't create downforce but vortices which enhance the effectiveness of the floor.
@@MsZeeZed ah yes because it's simple copy paste ,that's not how it works even if they copied the philosophy they still have to figure out to make it work with the rest of the car ,they totally understand the concept, the problem was they thought they would pull the pink Mercedes for 2020 and then do their own thing for new regulations in 2021 but due to covid it got pushed to next year, the only wrong thing that happened was that the regulation change was really a surprise and did hurt them a lot, but what otmar and others are doing is just laughable and insane crying all the time, hopefully they figure it out
Your production value skyrocketed in the past couple of years. Your ability to explain complicated stuff in simple terms and those ever increasing animation skills are amazing combo. Great work, good Sir. Kudos and thank you!
This was so well put together! I have never learned so much about aerodynamics than during 9 minutes of this video. All of sudden all the bits and pieces around the floor make sense. Fascinating!
Finally somebody who explains it correctly. I'm not an aerodynamicist, but it was part of my studies, so I do have a good understanding. I've commented on a lot of videos that tried to explain it, telling them that the impact of making it harder to seal the floor is bigger for a car that has it's focus on making the floor do it's work as efficient as possible than for a car that has some dirty air coming in as part of their concept. I've seen explainations like the angle of the floor generating more downforce on top of the floor or the bit being cut away reducing the drag of the airflow over the floor having a bigger impact on hige rake cars. Good work as always. When it comes to explaining the technical side of F1, Chain Bear must be one of the best around.
Wait are you saying some people believe rake influences downforce because of the air flowing over the floor now has a different angle of attack ??? And thus reducing the area of the floor would reduce drag ?? That’s … creative of them
@@KillCamEditoR it were two different video's. Let me try and remember the words they used. One was talking about the floor being in the "driving wind" and the cutout providing a larger reduction of the "air resistance" on a high rake car. The other was talking about the higher angle of attack of the floor creating more downforce because of the larger frontal area (at least he was using the right words) being the reason for the high rake advantage, although I didn't understand how the rulechange fitted into his reasoning. Basically that was their way of explaining why the changes favoured the high rake cars (but off coarse in a 10 minute video with plenty of self promotion).
Nobody explained Rake better than you. Not a single F1 based channel. Everybody kept saying stuff as if everyone else understood things as a matter of fact. Thank you. Finally subscribed.
Scarbs had an interesting point in his video. The higher rake cars rear brake ducts are better positioned to help seal the diffuser against tire squirt.
Yep, this is key. This video explains everything very well but misses the actual reason why the high rake cars are less affected. Which is ironic given the title of the video.
@@rhyswebb7309 I think he does a good job of explaining the majority of the reasoning. It's only Scarbs I've heard make that point about rear brake ducts. Prior to that I think rear brake ducts have been seen as less effective overall due to the lack of fins etc now.
As a sports junkie who discovered a passion for F1 this year, this channel has fed me all the nerdy insider detail I’ve needed to fulfill what has quickly become an obsession in formula one.
I think I now understand the theory of why the 2022 ground effect cares are intended to bring closer racing. No gap in the floor means no need for the vortices which (hopefully) clears up the trailing air and allows closer racing.
In the 1970's, yes I'm old, there was a thing called the NASCAR rake. It was an aerodynamic principal that worked then and still works now. I copied this by lowering the front end of my 69 Dodge Charger and installing Highjacker air shocks in the rear. It didn't do anything for a street car, but it looked cool at the time.
Appreciate it mate. You are a dear soul. Just yesterday, got back to my long-ignored F1 game. While i had already internalised aero specs from you r prev vids, i was completely lost as far as rake was concerned. I have been an F1 enthusiast since late 1990's (Schumi baby!) and a slightly late convert to F1 games. But your explanatory vids have helped me understand the finer nuances of setting up a car for specific tracks - and more importantly enjoy the process and the tracks more than i ever thought possible. Thank you and take care.
I am a simple man. I see chain bear and get out my notebook. Great video. Much appreciated. I dont think i have seen anyone tackle this (and other concepts to be fair) as simply and well illustrated as you. Looking forward to the next one.
Ferrari are quite high-rake and I'm surprised their re-discovered form this year wasn't also mentioned in this video. They've certainly benefited from these new regs too, as have Alpha Tauri.
Increase yes, "massive" not so much. Ferrari have also improved considerably this year with their high-rake car. FIA helping them yet again as they looked like chumps last year.
Scarbs presented an interpretation on Peter Windsors channel that pointed out that the higher rake cars can seal off the space between the rear brake ducts and the floor whereas the lower floor on the low rake leaves a gap. He said that that gap was previously not a problem because the floor could seal off that area differently. Obv. he goes into much more detail and I can't fully explain it but I thought it was a convincing explanation. Everyone more interested in the topic should check that out
Yes, that change in the rules ( and you got to admit, that if you built a winning car years and years of development) against a seven year winner. The thought would cross your mind " They couldn't fix their car, so they fixed ours."
Hey, Stuart! Great video as always man! Also, I've noticed, the audio became much worse recently... Can you please use a pop filter and check your EQ settings for high frequencies, so that the audio would stop being painful to listen to in earbuds?
I always heard vortices here. AERO clean up there. But never the why. You have clear alot of things up for me chainbear. Thank you for your science communication on all aspects of motor racing that you cover. You always explain it in a very simple but not too overly simple way.
You're the person each and every F1 fan out there deserves.... Mind blowing work! You explained it so so beautifully... Your conceptual explanations make me go back to my engineering days... Keep up the good work bro! Kudos 🌻
@@MidlifePanda Why would it be less of a problem? That doesn't decrease cornering speeds. Better tires are just a parameter on what the eventual cornering speeds will be. I just wanted to point out that FIA's banning of ground effect was both stupid and ineffective, and their oft-repeated excuse that cornering speeds were high is false. The real danger was in the skirt's volatility. If due to track unevenness or or bad kerb usage the seal breaks to the ground a huge chunk of grip is lost at an instant.
'Dangerous speeds' as in 'if you crash at this speed it's likely you're going to get seriously hurt', which is a number that would go up as the cars get safer.
@@boheyo Sure, but they didn't accomplish anything by banning ground effect outright, outside maybe getting Senna killed. Cars got a lot faster rather quickly.
The thing that i still dont understand is in f1 vortex is used to separate 2 airflows that has pressure different while on street cars the vortex generator is placed on the roof so the airflow on the rear window wouldnt be separated
It helps you if you're seeing the ads that much. Some of the creators wouldn't be able to have kept producing quality videos without Skillshare's financial contribution.
This is missing a pretty important aspect centered around the rear brake duct vanes and their interaction with the diffuser. Do a search for Scarbs’ analysis when talking to Peter Windsor. It explains why the high rake cars are less affected.
This does explain that its not really the rake. Its the cars with shorter wheel-bases that have manage to mitigate the floor changes most effectively. Although that gives you less stability in a straight-line, that upgraded Honda engine is making up the difference for Red Bull. McLaren’s trick with the strakes is a good solution, looking even better with an engine upgrade too. Aston Martin are struggling because they don’t really understand the car that they bought. Haas have a short car, but as they haven’t expended budget on addressing the floor changes they have just lost downforce overall. This makes sense.
Seeing those hiked up turning vanes on the cars. I suddenly got an image of someone huffing, puffing, and blowing with all their might against a forest fire. -_-
Good video, but I really can't understand why the air below the car is lower pressure. Like there is a high volume of air that goes through a small place, doesn't that mean that it would have a higher pressure?
This also explains why cars create such dirty air. Since skirts are banned and all undersides need to be flat, these vortices are the only way cars can protect that low pressure zone underneath the car to maintain downforce. The new 2022 regs basically allow cars to create low pressure zones underneath the car using underside aerodynamics and Venturi tunnels, so the vortices are no longer needed and the air should be much cleaner.
Hey man, I'm watching on splitscreen on Android, so the like button isn't showing up. I will remember to like the video later. Thanks for the content. It's fking badass
I‘m really excited for how RedBull will adapt to the 2022 regulations as it‘ll probably force them away from their high rake concepts they‘ve been refining for years now
But will it? The increased rake on the Red Bull allows a shorter car with faster corner rotation, without sacrificing downforce. I don’t think there is any change in the 2022 regs for rake angle or wheelbase size? I am sure Adrian Newey has a better handle on this than us tho 😹
@@MsZeeZed 2022 cars will depend much more on ground effect to generate downforce. For that you usually want to stick the car as low to the ground as possible, and stop air rushing from the sides from entering beneath the car, to create the succion effect. So, at least on principle, lifting the rear should be counter intuitive for ground effect purposes. The simplification of the 2022 cars aero will probably not let the cars create the vortices they now use to separate the airflows.
@@miguelangeloeiramartins6241 as I see it from the FIA mock-up in 2022 there are sealed Venturi tunnels for ground-effect on the sides of the car & the barge boards, that currently create the sealing vortices, are banned. So you are right that the sealing vortices will be gone & replaced by a sealed floor. However, rake will come into play in keeping those tunnels level with the track when the car hits top speed and the rear wing pushes the back of the car down on its suspension, so car rake must surely still be a factor for 2022?
@@miguelangeloeiramartins6241 Digging into the original idea for the 2021 regulations it was planned that the exit of the Venturi tunnels at the rear of the car were attached to the rear brake ducts, meaning they move with the wheels & not the chassis. That would eliminate the one of the needs for a high-rake, rear car compression under maximum downforce. However, given the other reason for a high-rake, increasing the volume of the diffuser, there could still be an advantage in raising the rear height of the chassis as it wouldn’t expose the rear diffuser to turbulent air if the tunnels were fixed relative to the wheels.
eventually the FIA is gonna make some regulation trying to eliminate downforce that's going to cause cars to flip over way too often. It seems to me like their chase of slowing down cars around corners and removing wing elements/downforce is eventually going to mean that either cars are going to have to be lifted so much they need to take corners at less than half straight speed, or the floor is going to start causing lift from how much high-pressure air the FIA is trying to throw under the cars to counter down-force effects
I think the high rake concept moves the underfloor downforce forward nearer the middle of the car. If that is the case, it may be the high rake teams had largely abandoned downforce effect of pulling the low pressure underfloor air all the way to the very rear of the car and already had to do more with the rear wing and generate higher pressure on the upper side of the floor to generate rear downforce, so the rule changes are not hurting them as much.
When you draw your vortices they seem to be going in the wrong direction. As drawn they would be forcing air under the car. Also check out Peter Windsor's channel where Craig Scarborough discusses the impact of the change to the rear brake ducts and the combined effect that the rake of the floor has with managing the effectiveness of the rear diffuser. "Secrets of Merc's F1 rake problems with Scarbs by Peter Windsor"
Here's some data from qualification results at two GPs we already had (comparsion of top results by team on the same track): Mercedes: +2,121 in Bahrain, +0,802 at Imola Red Bull: +1,319 in Bahrain, +0,270 at Imola So far it seems MErcedes has been hit by new regulations much harder. But, of course, this data is barely reliable. Maybe some folks in AWS can do it better with big data analysis, or we should do such comparsion for at least 5 GPs and for every team, dividing them into high and low rake categories. Maye then we could say this data is somewhat reliable and find out, who lost most due to change of regulations. On the other hand, comparing current pace is more relevant, because even though it seems Mercedes lost more, they weren't even, and who is going to be the fastest overall throughout the season is much more important. Not operating with data this time, I kinda feel Mercedes still have what it takes to come out on top. Still, at least their battle with Red Bull should be more thrilling this year.
the reason why i think FIA has dramatically changed the car regs for next year is probaly to stop teams using old components on new cars e.g Racing Point brake ducts
Incredible video. Something that is really tricky to explain thoroughly. I do think the graphic at 1:07 is incorrect though. The faster moving air is at lower pressure, and slower is at higher pressure. I also thought the downforce coming from a wing is primarily due to the force to deflect the air and minimally due to pressure gradients from the shape of the wing. If someone has more insight, lmk below
There's moments where I wish they would bring back the side skirts. Open things up and see what the cars can really do around corners. Ah well. I get it.
It is to my understanding not the pressure above the car that pushes the car down, but rather the lack of pressure underneath the car that "sucks" it to the ground. Can someone that knows a little bit more on aerodynamics clarify perhaps? EDIT: The same goes for planes if I am correct; the air doesn't push the plane into the air, but rather the air above it sucks it up into the air.
It’s a bit of both. Lift is the result of a pressure differential over an area, as well as “turning” the air. So in a way the lack of air (low pressure) pulls the wing, and the reaction of the air being diverted pushes the wing up. Sadly, it’s not a phenomenon that’s easy to simplify, the complete explanation would take a while. Furthermore, there are many misconceptions about how it works. The main one is “equal transit time”. The other one is how Newton first envisioned the interaction between fluids and solids. I believe that’s what you mean by being pushed. In which case you are correct, air doesn’t push the wing. For underbody flow, you have to think of it as a Venturi tunnel. Air has unlimited space to be in. Relative to the car it goes at a certain speed (speed of the car +- any wind). Then suddenly it is constricted into the tiny gap between the track and the tea tray. Bernoulli’s Principle tells us that flow has to speed up to verify conservation of mass (the air has to get through). Therefore the air speeds up, so pressure drops. That variation of pressure along all the floor, integrated, gives the downforce generated by the underbody flow.
@@KillCamEditoR This is exactly the answer I hoped to get; simple enough to be understandable and at the same time complex enough to make it intriguing. Your answer cleared it up two bits, thank you.
You cannot seperate high pressure on top of the from the low pressure underneeth the car and stating what percentage they are responsible for. It is the pressure difference between them that creates the downforce. Higher rake lowers the airspeed under the floor and therefor creates less downforce. The diffusor does not suck the air out, it equalises the pressure to ensure a nice relase of the air without to much turbulance and drag. A low rake accelerates the air much more underneeth the car and therefore needs more vortexes to protect the low pressure. This is what they lose with the new floor rules.
Another great lesson, thanks. They say new Honda PU is quite a beast. Given RedBull was closing in at the end of 2020, is it possible to estimate how many tens comes from the rake vs extra horses?
the slots to let out tyre squirt from underneath the floor would have been more powerful on the mercedes than on the redbull, and so, by removing them, mercedes suffer more than redbull
@@KillCamEditoR but the height difference in the middle of the car from floor to ground is bigger on high rake cars which should lead to more downforce generated on the front to mid of the car. I think thats what he means.
@@MidlifePanda could be what he meant yes. He used leading edge though. Maybe I took that too literally. I’m not sure about pressure distributions differences between the concepts. I could run some basic tests and see. Pretty sure if redbull manage to eliminate flow separation then they’ll have more downforce because downforce scales linearly with area but quadratically with speed of flow. Personally I believe that was redbull’s problem last year, which is why sometimes the rear end just detached and it was unpredictable. Seems like they’ve fixed it this year. Mercedes didn’t look slower, just less planted. Rest of the season should be fun
And Mercedes on pole, while this change might not have been intended to hurt them, I'm okay with it. This season might be the closest one of the hybrid era.
Haas are currently undergoing high rake tests...for ground clearance in the gravel
Let's just hope Mazespin doesn't venture into the gravel this weekend...oh...oh wait.
mazes🅱️in
@@nathanevans4254 this aged well after practice
@@nathanevans4254 Schumacher spun at Bahrain aswell but okay lol
@@nathanevans4254 Soon he will be just as great as Vettel
You make this kinda stuff so much easier to wrap my simple head around man.😅🙌
Have you invited Stuart for an episode of the podcast yet, Tom? 😉
Video sponsored by Skillshare = Tommo comments...
Coincidence? I think not!
Very kind of you to say!
Just like your beautiful body makes us want to wrap our arms around and give you a big warm hug, you handsome lovely Tommo!
Go away tommo
I don’t know why sky sports hasn’t commissioned you to do analysis videos for them yet
To end up in that position you need more than just talent and skill, you will need a lot of connections. However it would be such an inspiration if a TH-camr become an official analyst.
He's already doing videos for autosport
Sky sports doesn't have time between all of the BS AWS statistics they are contractually obligated to spew out.
@@sevegarza Had a good chuckle at the qualifying predictions that popped up during FP2. AT out-qualifying both Red Bulls and Latifi out-qualifying Russel are both possible, but not exactly what would be predicted based on anything even remotely sane.
For a system that supposedly draws from all these different data sets and has so much intelligence it sure seems to love copy pasting whatever the results are from the current session.
Ch4 have got a local radio DJ for commentary so why not?
Honestly Chain Bear you are the best technical channel for in depth details of F1. Love your work keep it up
What he said ☝
Facts
@Harry Hollaway Yes, but there are plenty of errors in this one. Namely, the concept of air pushing down on the car and secondly the notion only a third of the cars total downforce is created by the floor/diffusor. In reality current cars are infact ground effect cars and they create over 65% of their downforce from the floor. The vast majority of the surface furniture "winglets" don't create downforce but vortices which enhance the effectiveness of the floor.
This guy 👌
Otmar saying there is potential for Aston Martin to sue F1 over the regulation change is insane
I want them to go through with it only because I'll greatly enjoy seeing them slapped down. AM's claims are beyond laughable.
Especially after the pink Mercedes last year lol aston Martin is a joke
They had their year in the sun. Now time for them to go back to being low midfielders. Good riddance
Aston Martin would have more of a case if they’d designed a car to adapt to the regulations and not just bought a fast one they don’t understand.
@@MsZeeZed ah yes because it's simple copy paste ,that's not how it works even if they copied the philosophy they still have to figure out to make it work with the rest of the car ,they totally understand the concept, the problem was they thought they would pull the pink Mercedes for 2020 and then do their own thing for new regulations in 2021 but due to covid it got pushed to next year, the only wrong thing that happened was that the regulation change was really a surprise and did hurt them a lot, but what otmar and others are doing is just laughable and insane crying all the time, hopefully they figure it out
Your production value skyrocketed in the past couple of years. Your ability to explain complicated stuff in simple terms and those ever increasing animation skills are amazing combo. Great work, good Sir. Kudos and thank you!
This was so well put together! I have never learned so much about aerodynamics than during 9 minutes of this video. All of sudden all the bits and pieces around the floor make sense. Fascinating!
Bits and pieces😏 quite literally 👍
Surely I'm not the only one who watches Chain bear videos, attentively, is very entertained but won't recall much information a week later😂
But I think this one I'll remember 😂😂
@@mzatzk5135 Best of luck to us both on this quest
Sums up my entire academic endeavors.
"Education is what is left after you've forgotten all that they taught you." -- ascribed to Einstein
Finally somebody who explains it correctly. I'm not an aerodynamicist, but it was part of my studies, so I do have a good understanding. I've commented on a lot of videos that tried to explain it, telling them that the impact of making it harder to seal the floor is bigger for a car that has it's focus on making the floor do it's work as efficient as possible than for a car that has some dirty air coming in as part of their concept. I've seen explainations like the angle of the floor generating more downforce on top of the floor or the bit being cut away reducing the drag of the airflow over the floor having a bigger impact on hige rake cars.
Good work as always. When it comes to explaining the technical side of F1, Chain Bear must be one of the best around.
Wait are you saying some people believe rake influences downforce because of the air flowing over the floor now has a different angle of attack ???
And thus reducing the area of the floor would reduce drag ?? That’s … creative of them
@@KillCamEditoR it were two different video's. Let me try and remember the words they used. One was talking about the floor being in the "driving wind" and the cutout providing a larger reduction of the "air resistance" on a high rake car.
The other was talking about the higher angle of attack of the floor creating more downforce because of the larger frontal area (at least he was using the right words) being the reason for the high rake advantage, although I didn't understand how the rulechange fitted into his reasoning.
Basically that was their way of explaining why the changes favoured the high rake cars (but off coarse in a 10 minute video with plenty of self promotion).
So well said, Stuart is one of the best and funniest educators I’d say!
Nobody explained Rake better than you. Not a single F1 based channel. Everybody kept saying stuff as if everyone else understood things as a matter of fact.
Thank you. Finally subscribed.
Chain Bear videos are a gift to all F1 fans, thank you so much for making them!
Scarbs had an interesting point in his video. The higher rake cars rear brake ducts are better positioned to help seal the diffuser against tire squirt.
Yep, this is key. This video explains everything very well but misses the actual reason why the high rake cars are less affected. Which is ironic given the title of the video.
@@rhyswebb7309 I think he does a good job of explaining the majority of the reasoning. It's only Scarbs I've heard make that point about rear brake ducts. Prior to that I think rear brake ducts have been seen as less effective overall due to the lack of fins etc now.
Finally! Somebody that talks about pressures and pressure differentials. Nicely done, most just ramble about “airflow hits that and goes there”
As a sports junkie who discovered a passion for F1 this year, this channel has fed me all the nerdy insider detail I’ve needed to fulfill what has quickly become an obsession in formula one.
I think I now understand the theory of why the 2022 ground effect cares are intended to bring closer racing. No gap in the floor means no need for the vortices which (hopefully) clears up the trailing air and allows closer racing.
I only know a bit about the F1 cars themselves, and this was really well made and informative! Thank you!
In the 1970's, yes I'm old, there was a thing called the NASCAR rake. It was an aerodynamic principal that worked then and still works now. I copied this by lowering the front end of my 69 Dodge Charger and installing Highjacker air shocks in the rear. It didn't do anything for a street car, but it looked cool at the time.
Another top tier video from Chain Bear, your ability to make complex technical aspects of the sport easy to understand is incredible
Appreciate it mate. You are a dear soul. Just yesterday, got back to my long-ignored F1 game. While i had already internalised aero specs from you r prev vids, i was completely lost as far as rake was concerned. I have been an F1 enthusiast since late 1990's (Schumi baby!) and a slightly late convert to F1 games. But your explanatory vids have helped me understand the finer nuances of setting up a car for specific tracks - and more importantly enjoy the process and the tracks more than i ever thought possible.
Thank you and take care.
I am a simple man. I see chain bear and get out my notebook.
Great video. Much appreciated. I dont think i have seen anyone tackle this (and other concepts to be fair) as simply and well illustrated as you.
Looking forward to the next one.
Me: Those technical things of f1 are too hard for me to understand.
ChainBear: Allow me to introduce myself.
I was literally asking this question minutes before this video popped up in my main screen. Chain Bear never disappoints.
I am new to F1, so you explaining everything feel so nice. Everyone talking about such high level stuff always confuses me
You make make F1 a much more tastier affair than it already is, by explaining all these concepts to the masses, and I thank you for this!
I dont know why but that deflating balloon animation gave me a good chuckle
when talking about rake, people always mention RB for being high rake and Merc for being low rake, but where are other teams on this scale?
Merc and Aston are the only low-rake teams.
Ferrari are quite high-rake and I'm surprised their re-discovered form this year wasn't also mentioned in this video. They've certainly benefited from these new regs too, as have Alpha Tauri.
@@gabor6259 Merc and Merc copy
This is the best technical explanation ever.. so easy to understand the complex thing
Might be the best video on technical regulations I've ever watched. Chapeau & thank you.
I have "Tired Squirt" but that just when I get really tired and...
The change in engine performances also plays a big part in the change of pace with Merc vs RB. Honda have done a massive leap in performance.
Increase yes, "massive" not so much. Ferrari have also improved considerably this year with their high-rake car. FIA helping them yet again as they looked like chumps last year.
The changes in regulation is just to slow down Mercedes. That's it. Nothing more nothing less.
Mercs: Are you sure about that??
This man sure knows Blender, After Effects, Nuke or Natron. It's so much graphical stuff going on to help explain things. Very nice.
I caught your appearance on driver61 where you mentioned you were working on this video. Couldn't wait
1:44 "How are rake angles affects?" my brain hurt reading that
Scarbs presented an interpretation on Peter Windsors channel that pointed out that the higher rake cars can seal off the space between the rear brake ducts and the floor whereas the lower floor on the low rake leaves a gap. He said that that gap was previously not a problem because the floor could seal off that area differently. Obv. he goes into much more detail and I can't fully explain it but I thought it was a convincing explanation. Everyone more interested in the topic should check that out
Yes, that change in the rules ( and you got to admit, that if you built a winning car years and years of development) against a seven year winner. The thought would cross your mind " They couldn't fix their car, so they fixed ours."
Hey, Stuart!
Great video as always man!
Also, I've noticed, the audio became much worse recently... Can you please use a pop filter and check your EQ settings for high frequencies, so that the audio would stop being painful to listen to in earbuds?
I always heard vortices here. AERO clean up there. But never the why. You have clear alot of things up for me chainbear. Thank you for your science communication on all aspects of motor racing that you cover. You always explain it in a very simple but not too overly simple way.
You're the person each and every F1 fan out there deserves.... Mind blowing work! You explained it so so beautifully... Your conceptual explanations make me go back to my engineering days... Keep up the good work bro! Kudos 🌻
great content! I also saw your animation contribution to Cracking the Cryptic and it was great
Redbull Be like:
----- That's
----- The
----- Car
4:55
Dangerously high, meaning a LOT less than today.
but the tires also got muuuuch better compared to back then so its less of a problem i guess
@@MidlifePanda Why would it be less of a problem? That doesn't decrease cornering speeds.
Better tires are just a parameter on what the eventual cornering speeds will be.
I just wanted to point out that FIA's banning of ground effect was both stupid and ineffective, and their oft-repeated excuse that cornering speeds were high is false.
The real danger was in the skirt's volatility. If due to track unevenness or or bad kerb usage the seal breaks to the ground a huge chunk of grip is lost at an instant.
'Dangerous speeds' as in 'if you crash at this speed it's likely you're going to get seriously hurt', which is a number that would go up as the cars get safer.
@@boheyo Sure, but they didn't accomplish anything by banning ground effect outright, outside maybe getting Senna killed.
Cars got a lot faster rather quickly.
I hope F1 collaborates with you directly on their technical videos. ❤️
Excellent video, makes it much easier to understand the concept of downforce. Thanks!
This is the best channel on TH-cam. Thank you so much for this.
honestly, it feels like everytime a team innovates an advantage, FIA is right on them. it literally seems like the FIA is trying to kill the sport.
Probably your best video to date. One of the best TH-cam channels I've seen.
The thing that i still dont understand is in f1 vortex is used to separate 2 airflows that has pressure different while on street cars the vortex generator is placed on the roof so the airflow on the rear window wouldnt be separated
The rear of the floor on high rake cars are closer to the rear brake vanes making it easier to seal the chopped off rear.
I've seen Skillshare ads for must be over 3 years on youtube now and I've never seen a comment about how it helped any viewer
It helps you if you're seeing the ads that much. Some of the creators wouldn't be able to have kept producing quality videos without Skillshare's financial contribution.
Now I have the Dirty Air song stuck in my head, but it's Squirty Air. Not sure how to feel about that.
This is missing a pretty important aspect centered around the rear brake duct vanes and their interaction with the diffuser. Do a search for Scarbs’ analysis when talking to Peter Windsor. It explains why the high rake cars are less affected.
let’s talk about 2023’s high vs low rake.
Red Bull + Aston Martin + McLaren = Low Rake vs High Rake Merc + Ferarri + Alpine
This does explain that its not really the rake. Its the cars with shorter wheel-bases that have manage to mitigate the floor changes most effectively. Although that gives you less stability in a straight-line, that upgraded Honda engine is making up the difference for Red Bull. McLaren’s trick with the strakes is a good solution, looking even better with an engine upgrade too. Aston Martin are struggling because they don’t really understand the car that they bought. Haas have a short car, but as they haven’t expended budget on addressing the floor changes they have just lost downforce overall. This makes sense.
Love your videos, one quick tip though your voice really hits the ears sharply for some reason in this video, try fiddling with the sound to fix it?
Looking forward to your analysis on the Bottas-Russell incident.
Seeing those hiked up turning vanes on the cars. I suddenly got an image of someone huffing, puffing, and blowing with all their might against a forest fire. -_-
Good video, but I really can't understand why the air below the car is lower pressure. Like there is a high volume of air that goes through a small place, doesn't that mean that it would have a higher pressure?
This also explains why cars create such dirty air. Since skirts are banned and all undersides need to be flat, these vortices are the only way cars can protect that low pressure zone underneath the car to maintain downforce. The new 2022 regs basically allow cars to create low pressure zones underneath the car using underside aerodynamics and Venturi tunnels, so the vortices are no longer needed and the air should be much cleaner.
Wow, what an awesome video with great in depth details! Seriously, nothing to add to that.
Wow, I was clueless about this rake business but now I can explain this to my F1 buddies.
Hey man, I'm watching on splitscreen on Android, so the like button isn't showing up. I will remember to like the video later. Thanks for the content. It's fking badass
I came back and liked it
Can you please make a video on why the tires are being changed to 18 inch and what better can we expect from them over the current tires?
I‘m really excited for how RedBull will adapt to the 2022 regulations as it‘ll probably force them away from their high rake concepts they‘ve been refining for years now
But will it? The increased rake on the Red Bull allows a shorter car with faster corner rotation, without sacrificing downforce. I don’t think there is any change in the 2022 regs for rake angle or wheelbase size? I am sure Adrian Newey has a better handle on this than us tho 😹
@@MsZeeZed 2022 cars will depend much more on ground effect to generate downforce. For that you usually want to stick the car as low to the ground as possible, and stop air rushing from the sides from entering beneath the car, to create the succion effect. So, at least on principle, lifting the rear should be counter intuitive for ground effect purposes. The simplification of the 2022 cars aero will probably not let the cars create the vortices they now use to separate the airflows.
@@miguelangeloeiramartins6241 as I see it from the FIA mock-up in 2022 there are sealed Venturi tunnels for ground-effect on the sides of the car & the barge boards, that currently create the sealing vortices, are banned. So you are right that the sealing vortices will be gone & replaced by a sealed floor. However, rake will come into play in keeping those tunnels level with the track when the car hits top speed and the rear wing pushes the back of the car down on its suspension, so car rake must surely still be a factor for 2022?
@@miguelangeloeiramartins6241 Digging into the original idea for the 2021 regulations it was planned that the exit of the Venturi tunnels at the rear of the car were attached to the rear brake ducts, meaning they move with the wheels & not the chassis. That would eliminate the one of the needs for a high-rake, rear car compression under maximum downforce. However, given the other reason for a high-rake, increasing the volume of the diffuser, there could still be an advantage in raising the rear height of the chassis as it wouldn’t expose the rear diffuser to turbulent air if the tunnels were fixed relative to the wheels.
eventually the FIA is gonna make some regulation trying to eliminate downforce that's going to cause cars to flip over way too often. It seems to me like their chase of slowing down cars around corners and removing wing elements/downforce is eventually going to mean that either cars are going to have to be lifted so much they need to take corners at less than half straight speed, or the floor is going to start causing lift from how much high-pressure air the FIA is trying to throw under the cars to counter down-force effects
I think the high rake concept moves the underfloor downforce forward nearer the middle of the car.
If that is the case, it may be the high rake teams had largely abandoned downforce effect of pulling the low pressure underfloor air all the way to the very rear of the car and already had to do more with the rear wing and generate higher pressure on the upper side of the floor to generate rear downforce, so the rule changes are not hurting them as much.
I didn't really understand this until now, thanks!!
Keep up the great work mate!
I think 2 live crew had a song about steep rake
His vortices are rotating the wrong way, the yk250 vortice runs along the underfloor not the outer vortices
When you draw your vortices they seem to be going in the wrong direction. As drawn they would be forcing air under the car. Also check out Peter Windsor's channel where Craig Scarborough discusses the impact of the change to the rear brake ducts and the combined effect that the rake of the floor has with managing the effectiveness of the rear diffuser. "Secrets of Merc's F1 rake problems with Scarbs by Peter Windsor"
Here's some data from qualification results at two GPs we already had (comparsion of top results by team on the same track):
Mercedes: +2,121 in Bahrain, +0,802 at Imola
Red Bull: +1,319 in Bahrain, +0,270 at Imola
So far it seems MErcedes has been hit by new regulations much harder. But, of course, this data is barely reliable. Maybe some folks in AWS can do it better with big data analysis, or we should do such comparsion for at least 5 GPs and for every team, dividing them into high and low rake categories. Maye then we could say this data is somewhat reliable and find out, who lost most due to change of regulations.
On the other hand, comparing current pace is more relevant, because even though it seems Mercedes lost more, they weren't even, and who is going to be the fastest overall throughout the season is much more important. Not operating with data this time, I kinda feel Mercedes still have what it takes to come out on top. Still, at least their battle with Red Bull should be more thrilling this year.
the reason why i think FIA has dramatically changed the car regs for next year is probaly to stop teams using old components on new cars e.g Racing Point brake ducts
Incredible video. Something that is really tricky to explain thoroughly. I do think the graphic at 1:07 is incorrect though. The faster moving air is at lower pressure, and slower is at higher pressure. I also thought the downforce coming from a wing is primarily due to the force to deflect the air and minimally due to pressure gradients from the shape of the wing. If someone has more insight, lmk below
Fantastic video, keep it up!
There's moments where I wish they would bring back the side skirts.
Open things up and see what the cars can really do around corners.
Ah well. I get it.
I really enjoyed this and learned a lot. Only one thing though, the backwheels at 6:03 are turning backwards? :)
amazing hiw far f1 has gone, great video thanks
Nice one! Interesting and very understandable video as always.
Keep up the great work!
And this is why I love F1.
Woooo your explanations are amazing
Short answer: maybe.
Short answer: yes.
At least according to The Race charts.
Tyre squirt ... best name ever !
Thanks for the music. That reminds me of the Smiths.
It is to my understanding not the pressure above the car that pushes the car down, but rather the lack of pressure underneath the car that "sucks" it to the ground. Can someone that knows a little bit more on aerodynamics clarify perhaps?
EDIT: The same goes for planes if I am correct; the air doesn't push the plane into the air, but rather the air above it sucks it up into the air.
It’s a bit of both. Lift is the result of a pressure differential over an area, as well as “turning” the air. So in a way the lack of air (low pressure) pulls the wing, and the reaction of the air being diverted pushes the wing up.
Sadly, it’s not a phenomenon that’s easy to simplify, the complete explanation would take a while.
Furthermore, there are many misconceptions about how it works. The main one is “equal transit time”. The other one is how Newton first envisioned the interaction between fluids and solids. I believe that’s what you mean by being pushed. In which case you are correct, air doesn’t push the wing.
For underbody flow, you have to think of it as a Venturi tunnel. Air has unlimited space to be in. Relative to the car it goes at a certain speed (speed of the car +- any wind). Then suddenly it is constricted into the tiny gap between the track and the tea tray. Bernoulli’s Principle tells us that flow has to speed up to verify conservation of mass (the air has to get through). Therefore the air speeds up, so pressure drops. That variation of pressure along all the floor, integrated, gives the downforce generated by the underbody flow.
@@KillCamEditoR This is exactly the answer I hoped to get; simple enough to be understandable and at the same time complex enough to make it intriguing. Your answer cleared it up two bits, thank you.
"Tyre squirt" hehe
great illustrations as always
You should be teacher of Aerodynamic in my college.
You cannot seperate high pressure on top of the from the low pressure underneeth the car and stating what percentage they are responsible for. It is the pressure difference between them that creates the downforce. Higher rake lowers the airspeed under the floor and therefor creates less downforce. The diffusor does not suck the air out, it equalises the pressure to ensure a nice relase of the air without to much turbulance and drag. A low rake accelerates the air much more underneeth the car and therefore needs more vortexes to protect the low pressure. This is what they lose with the new floor rules.
By Jove I think I’ve got it! Great video. Thanks for all your hard work.
Rake's Witnesses. Damn you.
Absolute quality my guy 👌
Another great lesson, thanks. They say new Honda PU is quite a beast. Given RedBull was closing in at the end of 2020, is it possible to estimate how many tens comes from the rake vs extra horses?
the slots to let out tyre squirt from underneath the floor would have been more powerful on the mercedes than on the redbull, and so, by removing them, mercedes suffer more than redbull
This is Russel!!!
Chain bear, much more reliable than belt bear
I think it might be, because that high rake floor is more effective at the leading edge, that hasn't been affected by the rules.
Why would it be more effective at the leading edge ? The throat of the tunnel should be about the same size for high and low rake cars, shouldn’t it ?
@@KillCamEditoR but the height difference in the middle of the car from floor to ground is bigger on high rake cars which should lead to more downforce generated on the front to mid of the car. I think thats what he means.
@@MidlifePanda could be what he meant yes. He used leading edge though. Maybe I took that too literally. I’m not sure about pressure distributions differences between the concepts. I could run some basic tests and see. Pretty sure if redbull manage to eliminate flow separation then they’ll have more downforce because downforce scales linearly with area but quadratically with speed of flow. Personally I believe that was redbull’s problem last year, which is why sometimes the rear end just detached and it was unpredictable. Seems like they’ve fixed it this year. Mercedes didn’t look slower, just less planted. Rest of the season should be fun
@@MidlifePanda That's what i was thinking yes
Can you elaborate on the cars with the corner speeds that were too high?
Is high rake better for longer car with bigger floor or shorter car ?
And Mercedes on pole, while this change might not have been intended to hurt them, I'm okay with it. This season might be the closest one of the hybrid era.