Red Bull RB18

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter do not belong here.
silver
silver
5
Joined: 23 Feb 2021, 06:50

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

Image

User avatar
godlameroso
309
Joined: 16 Jan 2010, 21:27
Location: Miami FL

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

chrisc90 wrote:
08 Apr 2022, 18:21
Are all the little wires and boxes sensors to measure what the airflow underneath is doing?
Good question, it would make sense to have pressure sensors, and from there you can accurately translate that to flow velocity. However there are more practical ways to get a read on the airflow working properly. Like load sensors on the suspension, if you have a certain downforce level and you know your suspension and chassis stiffness, if the chassis and suspension deflect a certain amount, then that value can be normalized. If observed values deflect from that normalized value you can assume something is wrong, like damage, or something.
Saishū kōnā

Mchamilton
Mchamilton
24
Joined: 26 Feb 2011, 17:16

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

PlatinumZealot wrote:
08 Apr 2022, 18:34
vorticism wrote:
08 Apr 2022, 17:07
haha think i figured it out. This is their interpretation of the floor wing allowance. "Six support structures," and notice how many slats it has...
Bodywork declared as “Floor Edge Wing” must:
a. LiewithinRV-FLOOR-EDGE.
b. Beasinglevolumewithnoapertures.
c. Its complete surface, when intersected with any X-plane must produce only a single section that is continuous and closed, having cross-sectional area no greater than 2000mm2. This section must be between 5mm and 20mm distant from the curve produced by intersection of the Floor Body with the same X-plane, at its closest point.
d. Itscompletesurface,whenintersectedwithanyZ-planemustproduceonlyasingle section that is continuous and closed.
e. Itscompletesurfacemustbetangentcontinuousandanyconcaveradiusofcurvature must be greater than 25mm.
For the sole purpose of providing a structural connection between the Floor Edge Wing and the Floor Body, it is permitted to add up to six support brackets per side of the car. These brackets, which need not comply with parts (a) to (e), will nevertheless be considered part of the Floor Edge Wing and must:
f. Be in their entirety within 40mm of the Floor Body and 30mm of the Floor Edge Wing.
g. Benomorethan5mmthick.Afilletradiusnogreaterthan2mmwillbepermitted where these brackets join to the components they connect.
h. Benolargerthan40mmintheX-directionandhavenodimensionthatexceeds 60mm.
i. Not be closer than 50mm at any point to any other such support bracket.
j. Not be visible from below.
Whereas McLaren and others made a horizontal wing with six swans necks, RB made a vertical wing with six slots at its base. Brilliant.
So they are using the allowed supporting brackets as giant vanes and putting them underneath the floor and the brackets need not comply with sections a) to e).

Hmm. The problem with this however is that the other teams will argue that the brackets need not be so large for the "sole purpose" of supporting the edge wings!
Their floor edge wing is not very large, and the 'supporting brackets' are pretty tiny. So im not sure youre talking about the same thing

User avatar
godlameroso
309
Joined: 16 Jan 2010, 21:27
Location: Miami FL

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

Mchamilton wrote:
08 Apr 2022, 18:36
Vanja #66 wrote:
08 Apr 2022, 18:13
Mchamilton wrote:
08 Apr 2022, 18:06
Would it not shed off the tip of the vane at all then?
No, the highest pressure is formed where the convex curve is and this air then starts to spill. Once it starts spilling, the pressure is lower, but the low-pressure vortex core is now sucking the air towards it and it keeps spinning. Vortices break up when the flow is disturbed enough to cut-off the airflow towards the core, which doesn't usually happen with race cars since their VGs are very potent.
Comparing the images of the RB and Merc floors. The merc looks to have a completely flat tunnel roof whereas the RB looks like it has a convex roof through the throat area.
Would the convex roof be better for maintaining more stable vortices?
What makes a stable vortex? The rotational momentum, will air have more rotational momentum around a square or curved box?
Saishū kōnā

User avatar
ispano6
153
Joined: 09 Mar 2017, 23:56
Location: my playseat

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

Image

User avatar
godlameroso
309
Joined: 16 Jan 2010, 21:27
Location: Miami FL

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

PlatinumZealot wrote:
08 Apr 2022, 18:34
vorticism wrote:
08 Apr 2022, 17:07
haha think i figured it out. This is their interpretation of the floor wing allowance. "Six support structures," and notice how many slats it has...
Bodywork declared as “Floor Edge Wing” must:
a. LiewithinRV-FLOOR-EDGE.
b. Beasinglevolumewithnoapertures.
c. Its complete surface, when intersected with any X-plane must produce only a single section that is continuous and closed, having cross-sectional area no greater than 2000mm2. This section must be between 5mm and 20mm distant from the curve produced by intersection of the Floor Body with the same X-plane, at its closest point.
d. Itscompletesurface,whenintersectedwithanyZ-planemustproduceonlyasingle section that is continuous and closed.
e. Itscompletesurfacemustbetangentcontinuousandanyconcaveradiusofcurvature must be greater than 25mm.
For the sole purpose of providing a structural connection between the Floor Edge Wing and the Floor Body, it is permitted to add up to six support brackets per side of the car. These brackets, which need not comply with parts (a) to (e), will nevertheless be considered part of the Floor Edge Wing and must:
f. Be in their entirety within 40mm of the Floor Body and 30mm of the Floor Edge Wing.
g. Benomorethan5mmthick.Afilletradiusnogreaterthan2mmwillbepermitted where these brackets join to the components they connect.
h. Benolargerthan40mmintheX-directionandhavenodimensionthatexceeds 60mm.
i. Not be closer than 50mm at any point to any other such support bracket.
j. Not be visible from below.
Whereas McLaren and others made a horizontal wing with six swans necks, RB made a vertical wing with six slots at its base. Brilliant.
So they are using the allowed supporting brackets as giant vanes and putting them underneath the floor and the brackets need not comply with sections a) to e).

Hmm. The problem with this however is that the other teams will argue that the brackets need not be so large for the "sole purpose" of supporting the edge wings!
Is that bracket part of the floor or edge wing?
Saishū kōnā

Mchamilton
Mchamilton
24
Joined: 26 Feb 2011, 17:16

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

godlameroso wrote:
08 Apr 2022, 18:54
Mchamilton wrote:
08 Apr 2022, 18:36
Vanja #66 wrote:
08 Apr 2022, 18:13


No, the highest pressure is formed where the convex curve is and this air then starts to spill. Once it starts spilling, the pressure is lower, but the low-pressure vortex core is now sucking the air towards it and it keeps spinning. Vortices break up when the flow is disturbed enough to cut-off the airflow towards the core, which doesn't usually happen with race cars since their VGs are very potent.
Comparing the images of the RB and Merc floors. The merc looks to have a completely flat tunnel roof whereas the RB looks like it has a convex roof through the throat area.
Would the convex roof be better for maintaining more stable vortices?
What makes a stable vortex? The rotational momentum, will air have more rotational momentum around a square or curved box?
Yeah i was kinda assuming the answer, but thought id ask Vanja the question anyway

User avatar
Stu
Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2019, 10:05
Location: Norfolk, UK

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

PlatinumZealot wrote:
08 Apr 2022, 18:34
vorticism wrote:
08 Apr 2022, 17:07
haha think i figured it out. This is their interpretation of the floor wing allowance. "Six support structures," and notice how many slats it has...


Whereas McLaren and others made a horizontal wing with six swans necks, RB made a vertical wing with six slots at its base. Brilliant.
So they are using the allowed supporting brackets as giant vanes and putting them underneath the floor and the brackets need not comply with sections a) to e).

Hmm. The problem with this however is that the other teams will argue that the brackets need not be so large for the "sole purpose" of supporting the edge wings!
They will struggle to argue that when their own mirror mounts do not connect to the mirror….
Perspective - Understanding that sometimes the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.

User avatar
Vanja #66
1569
Joined: 19 Mar 2012, 16:38

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

Mchamilton wrote:
08 Apr 2022, 18:36
Comparing the images of the RB and Merc floors. The merc looks to have a completely flat tunnel roof whereas the RB looks like it has a convex roof through the throat area.
Would the convex roof be better for maintaining more stable vortices?
It also depends where you want to place the vortex, but yes, convex surface increases the pressure difference which strengthens the vortex.
And they call it a stall. A STALL!

#DwarvesAreNaturalSprinters
#BlessYouLaddie

TimW
TimW
36
Joined: 01 Aug 2019, 19:07

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

PlatinumZealot wrote:
08 Apr 2022, 18:34
vorticism wrote:
08 Apr 2022, 17:07
haha think i figured it out. This is their interpretation of the floor wing allowance. "Six support structures," and notice how many slats it has...
Bodywork declared as “Floor Edge Wing” must:
a. LiewithinRV-FLOOR-EDGE.
b. Beasinglevolumewithnoapertures.
c. Its complete surface, when intersected with any X-plane must produce only a single section that is continuous and closed, having cross-sectional area no greater than 2000mm2. This section must be between 5mm and 20mm distant from the curve produced by intersection of the Floor Body with the same X-plane, at its closest point.
d. Itscompletesurface,whenintersectedwithanyZ-planemustproduceonlyasingle section that is continuous and closed.
e. Itscompletesurfacemustbetangentcontinuousandanyconcaveradiusofcurvature must be greater than 25mm.
For the sole purpose of providing a structural connection between the Floor Edge Wing and the Floor Body, it is permitted to add up to six support brackets per side of the car. These brackets, which need not comply with parts (a) to (e), will nevertheless be considered part of the Floor Edge Wing and must:
f. Be in their entirety within 40mm of the Floor Body and 30mm of the Floor Edge Wing.
g. Benomorethan5mmthick.Afilletradiusnogreaterthan2mmwillbepermitted where these brackets join to the components they connect.
h. Benolargerthan40mmintheX-directionandhavenodimensionthatexceeds 60mm.
i. Not be closer than 50mm at any point to any other such support bracket.
j. Not be visible from below.
Whereas McLaren and others made a horizontal wing with six swans necks, RB made a vertical wing with six slots at its base. Brilliant.
So they are using the allowed supporting brackets as giant vanes and putting them underneath the floor and the brackets need not comply with sections a) to e).

Hmm. The problem with this however is that the other teams will argue that the brackets need not be so large for the "sole purpose" of supporting the edge wings!
I guess it is similar to 'mirror supports' from Mercedes.

After pre season testing I read an article, don't recall where, that Red Bull did not want to protest Mercedes mirrors because they had something similarly 'protestable' themselves, could have been this.

User avatar
vorticism
323
Joined: 01 Mar 2022, 20:20

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

Didn't one of Newey Layton House Marches have a barrel vault diffuser?
𓄀

Jakxy
Jakxy
1
Joined: 16 Apr 2021, 12:03

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

I ve looked at RB cars footages a lot where other cars struggles.

Seems like it is only back end of the car porpoising. Front of the floor not going down as much as back end. Kind of inclined porpoising.

May be due to Pull Rod

wesley123
wesley123
204
Joined: 23 Feb 2008, 17:55

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

Jakxy wrote:
09 Apr 2022, 10:31
Seems like it is only back end of the car porpoising. Front of the floor not going down as much as back end.
:roll:
Obviously the front doesn’t appear to drop as much as the suction peak happens closer to the rear end of the wheelbase. This is the same for every car on the grid.

There’s no such thing as only the back porpoising as it is an effect of the underbody.
"Bite my shiny metal ass" - Bender

User avatar
Ashwinv16
60
Joined: 15 Jul 2017, 12:04

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

gandharva wrote:
08 Apr 2022, 16:45
To me it looks more and more like the car lacks downforce (compared to F1-75) or they cannot add more because of engine deficit.
It's weight related. Which is why the car is fast in High speed corners but not in traction zones. RB can't add ballast to the front thus they have to run lower downforce due to balance.
Halo not as bad as we thought

User avatar
Vanja #66
1569
Joined: 19 Mar 2012, 16:38

Re: Red Bull RB18

Post

Ashwinv16 wrote:
09 Apr 2022, 12:30
It's weight related. Which is why the car is fast in High speed corners but not in traction zones. RB can't add ballast to the front thus they have to run lower downforce due to balance.
It's not just weight (btw didnt they loose 6-7kg this weekend?), the car is limited with front downforce, the balance is to much to the rear due to overall aero concept. Juzh pointed this out very early in race threads, even after Bahrain FP1/2... Helmut Marko also mentioned their sidepods from solved a lot of understeer problems which launch spec had, and yet they still have understeer.
And they call it a stall. A STALL!

#DwarvesAreNaturalSprinters
#BlessYouLaddie