shelly wrote:I think it is quite tricky to simulate in cfd.
But if we take into account that air under the floor is travelling at more than 120% car speed and that is far denser than exhausts, then deflection of the exhausts by the flow will be significant. Influence of low and high pressure zones in the car will be felt and force the exhausts inward
That was automatically accounted for in the cfd.
The air under the floor is denser in truth, but it is actually helping the cause.
The exhuast position is in such a way that it cannot be defflected inward by anything on the inside of it, which is the flow under the car in your situation.
That is only possible if the floor is sucking it, which is not happen.
It wont and cannot force the air to bend 90 degrees and go under the floor.
A sharp 90 bend in any fluid stream requires a lot of force.
If you look at plumbing, and if you know how much force the water puts on the elbow when it changes direction, you could see why those kinds of angles are unnatural in free flow.
There is little or no examples in nature where a flow is not only turning 90 degrees by another flow, but reflexing to angles over that amount and holding its general shape.
I think Renault are learning to increase the virtual size of their floor as the season progresses. That may be an explanation for the increasing angles.
Shelly tell me; why do you feel compelled to support a certain argument because it came from above the likes of anyone in these forums?
Even when it has no logical support, just stamp of approval from the media.
Notice none of them are coming back in here with the F1 big boy quotes anymore?
F1 technical needs a Peter Windsor episode, we got more F1 info on here than anywhere else.