Red Bull RB20

[vorticism]

Image by Nicolas Carpentiers
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GH6osT0WEAA ... ame=medium

I won't even call that the centerline cooling, that's top level cooling, Guessing the tube is another cooling duct running to some sort of cooler on top of the gearbox? What could those blue arrow, cockpit inlet rads be for?

+1 Illustrative. An example of aero overriding CoG concerns. Have we ever seen this much radiator installed this high? Although if they're using ballast this year, then the CoG height might not be greatly different.

The flow properties look good here. Lots of volume aft of all the radiators. Good extraction. All the the main radiator outflows combine rather early, atop the engine, before necking into the cannon exit. Previously outflow was combined farther aft.

[Henk_v]

The bits that are visible, and they’ve obviously caused quite a lot of attention, obviously, we’re pursuing aerodynamic gains there, but the visual change is actually much, much larger than the performance change you get from that and there are other much more subtle bits, that people haven’t noticed, that are probably responsible for a bigger gain.

Lets go easter egg hunting!

[TEHNOS]

Cant imagine turbo intake manifold being up there also,so it is indeed "high flow turbomachine assisted combustion heated air pump S-duct"

[Farnborough]

This RB20 has variously been described as Evolution & Revolution etc. Looks more Evolution in that the sidepod intake horizontal is in almost exactly the same location as 19 chassis, just the lip being flipped in front of it.

I know it's not that simple but with last iteration of 19 bringing the entry lip to highest point we've seen prior to then (I felt it both looked good and seemed effective) that may have brought more "shadow" to the intake flow as recent flowvis clearly shows substantial rise in air direction coming toward that area, to then be kept attached to the "underbite" and fulfil primary cooling flow targets appear to be getting more compromised. The move from under to over bite then appears both logical and efficient given the resulting flowvis streams now show a very good capability in directly entering the intake horizontal, which can also be smaller now. That's just evolution and very careful development on their part,, entirely logical too.
The vertical entry is now more revolutionary, for their chassis, and it's development course/profile in concept.

I'd use another "tion" for the overall cooling strategy though "Devolution" as it appears to give some level of autonomous and bespoke flow path to each function in comparison to what we've previously seen in regards to entry and exit porting within the aero concept. Perhaps more complex, but with more fine adjustment potential to run each of those elements right up to their margin without interference from being forced to make simple "overall" cooling changes in adaption to different ambient and circuit demands.

[Sevach]

In terms of "outer aerodynamics concept" it's an evolution.
The "concept" of the RB18/19 was large downwashing sidepods, the sidepods of the RB20 are still large and they downwash.
It for damn sure isn't a zero pod, zero pod was never about vertical inlets, it was about making the sidepods as compact as possible, which is not what Red Bull has done with RB20.

RBR has been quite creative under the skin with how they cool things and integrated some ideas seen on other cars into their design, but in terms of aero balance and how they setup the car i suspect they can draw a lot from the RB19.

[Watto]

In terms of "outer aerodynamics concept" it's an evolution.
The "concept" of the RB18/19 was large downwashing sidepods, the sidepods of the RB20 are still large and they downwash.
It for damn sure isn't a zero pod, zero pod was never about vertical inlets, it was about making the sidepods as compact as possible, which is not what Red Bull has done with RB20.

RBR has been quite creative under the skin with how they cool things and integrated some ideas seen on other cars into their design, but in terms of aero balance and how they setup the car i suspect they can draw a lot from the RB19.

Though much the same - though I’m not an aerodynamic that much - the same core principles seem to be very much the same. With some obviously new principles/ ideas too, As opposed to the principles behind a zeropod from Mercedes.

[Vanja #66]

Completely new low-level wing from RB in Jeddah. Smaller AoA on tips continues lineary before increasing in the middle, RB is searching for even lower drag with DRS on I'd say

Fabrega

[venkyhere]

AoA/downforce :

Bahrain :
--B---Y---B---I---T--
medium-->high-->very high<--high<--medium

Jeddah :
--B---Y---B---I---T--
low-->high-->medium<--high<--low

[Cs98]

Looks completely redesigned. Very cranked upper flap for DRS gains. I'd say the version in the picture is more of a medium-low configuration, and with a cutout on the upper flap it can be converted to Monza/Vegas spec.

[vorticism]

Cant imagine turbo intake manifold being up there also,so it is indeed "high flow turbomachine assisted combustion heated air pump S-duct"

There would still be room--the intake plenums for the front compressor cars always exhibit a relatively sharp 90* downward bend. In this application it would be partially nested inside the "ears" of the radiator ducting and thus not visible from the side. The reason I keep suggesting the other option is because I think it would be beneficial (think reverse EBD at the front of the floor) and it seems like it would not, oddly enough, contravene the rulebook.

[organic]

[Venturiation]

Even if the car is stable max says the bouncing is too violent


James Allison has said before that even if the redbull looks stable the drivers are suffering amd it's because these regulations are mistake in terms of suspensions

[vorticism]

The intake is in the rollhoop like ever year before. First of all the intake would be to big for such a small cooler, and second this small intakes beside the monocoque are partially blocked in front view from the suspension, which is forbidden by rules (5.15). And aren't they too far ahead?

I agree about the size discrepancy. As for 5.15, no specific angle/orientation of view is specified, only the phrase "when viewed from the front of the car" is used. That's why I chose the angle I did in the original illustration. Approximate dimensions are in the other illustration.

The roll hoop looks too large relative to the radiator that's behind it i.e. the roll hoop looking like it's not 100% cooling inlet

Edit- compiling posts.

[michl420]

Cant imagine turbo intake manifold being up there also,so it is indeed "high flow turbomachine assisted combustion heated air pump S-duct"

There would still be room--the intake plenums for the front compressor cars always exhibit a relatively sharp 90* downward bend. In this application it would be partially nested inside the "ears" of the radiator ducting and thus not visible from the side. The reason I keep suggesting the other option is because I think it would be beneficial (think reverse EBD at the front of the floor) and it seems like it would not, oddly enough, contravene the rulebook.

The intake is in the rollhoop like ever year before. First of all the intake would be to big for such a small cooler, and second this small intakes beside the monocoque are partially blocked in front view from the suspension, which is forbidden by rules (5.15). And aren't they too far ahead?

[skwdenyer]

Even if the car is stable max says the bouncing is too violent


James Allison has said before that even if the redbull looks stable the drivers are suffering amd it's because these regulations are mistake in terms of suspensions

Give the claim of F1 to be a technical pinnacle, and how relatively cheap they are to deploy, I really don’t understand why hydraulic interconnections were banned.

In a ground effect era, separating suspension modes is precisely what’s needed. Because trying to chase aero solutions will be far, far more expensive.