Red Bull RB8 Renault

[jordangp]

You couldn't put anything there? It's the headrest. Surely you couldn't on safety grounds? There is no vent? Just a dodgy seam?

[Intego]

I would rather say well polished.

But in the last pic it's interesting that the radiator/cooling opening at the top leading edge of the sidepod is open on the right and closed on the left side ...


EDIT: There are several details different on each side: a vane or sth. similar just below the left mirror, a tape behind that, a fan or winglet on the right sidepod ...

[Owen.C93]

If you were wondering what the yellow stripe is it's a refection from the roll hoop that hangs over it.

Hey maybe all the car's body work is porous and it's one big duct.

[Crucial_Xtreme]

If you were wondering what the yellow stripe is it's a refection from the roll hoop that hangs over it.

Hey maybe all the car's body work is porous and it's one big duct.

Yeah it's the reflection. I'll be damned if it doesn't look like one from that angle though. My apologies.

[PlatinumZealot]

New air intake on the RB8 I haven't seen mentioned. They even went so far as to cover it up. Right click>view image

Hiding/different bodywork
Open vent
Open vent 2

Your sure that's a vent and not a cataract in your eye? lol

[volarchico]

there is tremendous amount of energy in the splitter area. It does not need any assistance from a constricted duct with a lot of bends in it to assist it.
Flow through that duct will be slower than the freestream under the splitter.
Ducting air to places of higher energy isn't really helpful.

You have to think of low energy areas, which are usual leeward surfaces or regions, before you assign ducted air to an area. The fact of the matter is air moving through a duct loses a lot of energy due to friction and direction changes. The longer the duct the more energy and pressure loss.

Ouside of cooling purposes i dont think a duct in the nose going to anywhere at the front of the car will be of any use. The duct is too small, cramped and long.

+1. I'm not sure why all the conspiracy theories on ducted flow to the front wing, or to the diffuser, or to the splitter. Makes no sense. Driver cooling used to be at the tip of the nose. They moved it back to the hump. Why is that so hard to believe?

[hardingfv32]

Makes no sense. Driver cooling used to be at the tip of the nose. They moved it back to the hump. Why is that so hard to believe?

I am not going to argue that the slot is not needed for some aero reason, but its first priority is not driver cooling. The strength of the front bulk head is compromised with a hole this close to its top surface. This strength can be reclaimed, but it is going to add weight. If driver cooling is the only goal it is much simpler to use the nose tip hole and the void normally found in the center of the front bulkhead.

Brian

[dren]

It could always be a manufacturing defect. Newey said it was for driver cooling because he was embarrassed it passed QAQC.

But likely it's for something we haven't spotted yet, if it's for more than driver cooling.

[Maynard G. Krebs]

Makes no sense. Driver cooling used to be at the tip of the nose. They moved it back to the hump. Why is that so hard to believe?

I am not going to argue that the slot is not needed for some aero reason, but its first priority is not driver cooling. The strength of the front bulk head is compromised with a hole this close to its top surface. This strength can be reclaimed, but it is going to add weight. If driver cooling is the only goal it is much simpler to use the nose tip hole and the void normally found in the center of the front bulkhead.

Brian

I don't see a problem with strength. If you cut away 1" from the top of the "O" shaped bulkhead, just add 1" to the bottom (inside) edge of the top of the "O".
I would think that there is additional benefit to having the slot though: As I think has already been said, that slot is probably less disruptive to airflow over the body that the plain ramp all the others have.

[volarchico]

Makes no sense. Driver cooling used to be at the tip of the nose. They moved it back to the hump. Why is that so hard to believe?

I am not going to argue that the slot is not needed for some aero reason, but its first priority is not driver cooling. The strength of the front bulk head is compromised with a hole this close to its top surface. This strength can be reclaimed, but it is going to add weight. If driver cooling is the only goal it is much simpler to use the nose tip hole and the void normally found in the center of the front bulkhead.

Brian

I guess we'll see with the first nose change picture. I don't have a good grasp on the load path through that particular bulkhead, but it had to have had an opening in the past for driver cooling coming all the way from the nose, so why would it be so difficult to relocate that gap towards the top of the bulkhead?

[myurr]

Makes no sense. Driver cooling used to be at the tip of the nose. They moved it back to the hump. Why is that so hard to believe?

I am not going to argue that the slot is not needed for some aero reason, but its first priority is not driver cooling. The strength of the front bulk head is compromised with a hole this close to its top surface. This strength can be reclaimed, but it is going to add weight. If driver cooling is the only goal it is much simpler to use the nose tip hole and the void normally found in the center of the front bulkhead.

Brian

I guess we'll see with the first nose change picture. I don't have a good grasp on the load path through that particular bulkhead, but it had to have had an opening in the past for driver cooling coming all the way from the nose, so why would it be so difficult to relocate that gap towards the top of the bulkhead?

You're overlooking the fact that the nose is now smaller in terms of volume yet will need to contain the same amount of material in order to pass the crash tests. It's entirely possible that the team can no longer run with a nose tip cooling hole as they do not have room in the construction. The Williams walrus nose did not have a cooling hole, nor do the other really thin noses like the Ferrari F2012.

[hardingfv32]

It's entirely possible that the team can no longer run with a nose tip cooling hole as they do not have room in the construction.

Are you claiming the nose is a solid structure?

Brian

[hardingfv32]

so why would it be so difficult to relocate that gap towards the top of the bulkhead?

It is not difficult, just not the optimum design for maximum chassis strength with the lowest possible weight. If this design is some kind of aero benefit then maybe it is worth the compromise. Driver cooling is not a valid reason for such a compromise. Ducting for driver cooling is far from a universal option in F1 car design.

Brian

[ringo]

Makes no sense. Driver cooling used to be at the tip of the nose. They moved it back to the hump. Why is that so hard to believe?

I am not going to argue that the slot is not needed for some aero reason, but its first priority is not driver cooling. The strength of the front bulk head is compromised with a hole this close to its top surface. This strength can be reclaimed, but it is going to add weight. If driver cooling is the only goal it is much simpler to use the nose tip hole and the void normally found in the center of the front bulkhead.

Brian

That's like saying a steel pipe with its end covered with a plastic bag is going to be compromised if you poke a hole in the plastic bag. The tub strength is mostly in the walls, just look back to the pit garage images with all the brake fluid reservoirs electrons steering rack etc. tucked up in the hole in the tub.

Having a cooling hole there, is much better than having it in the tip. Mor air flow, more pressure, and it can cool not only the driver, maybe brake fluid, electronics etc. You never know, but it's harder to see it have in sinister purpose to break the rules.

[hardingfv32]

That's like saying a steel pipe with its end covered with a plastic bag is going to be compromised if you poke a hole in the plastic bag. The tub strength is mostly in the walls, just look back to the pit garage images with all the brake fluid reservoirs electrons steering rack etc. tucked up in the hole in the tub.

Not even close to being a valid example.

I am assuming the chassis are built to a design limit that has been set by the teams. Putting a slot at the top of the bulkhead effectively reduces its exterior dimension and thus its strength. If you want to to get back to your design limit you are going to have to add material to strengthen the bulkhead. So, if you are designing to a limit, not beyond, and wish to maintain that limit, then something is going to need changing. Assuming the chassis is as light as you can make it, any change means more weight. Why add weight ONLY to accommodate driver cooling. We have no indication, from observing other cars, that driver cooling is mandatory on every car.

Brian