I think our monkey seat is a little higher than others maybe. Maybe. Hard to tell.
Top cooling outlet has made an apperance.
today
yesterday
- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
Team: Pat Fry (TD), Nikolas Tombazis (CD), Stefano Domenicali (MD)
Drivers: Fernando Alonso (5), Felipe Massa (6)
They don't meet, but even the beam wing reduces the efficiency of both wings by a not insignificant amount.amouzouris wrote:they don't really dilute each other..the high pressure flow of the monkey seat and the low pressure flow of the rear wing will never meet...they are too far away...the flow can only have an effect on the surface it is attached to...Lycoming wrote:wonder why they did that... the higher it is, the less it drives the diffuser and the less downforce both it and the rear wing make as their high and low pressure zones mix and dilute each other...
Perhaps this puts it in cleaner air, but I can't think of how that would be more beneficial than driving the diffuser.
If it wasn't beneficial though they wouldn't be running it.....and i remember pre-2009 when teams were running elements on top of the other on the rear wingLycoming wrote:They don't meet, but even the beam wing reduces the efficiency of both wings by a not insignificant amount.amouzouris wrote: they don't really dilute each other..the high pressure flow of the monkey seat and the low pressure flow of the rear wing will never meet...they are too far away...the flow can only have an effect on the surface it is attached to...
Well yes the addition of a small wing outweighs the losses in RW and diffuser efficiencies.amouzouris wrote:If it wasn't beneficial though they wouldn't be running it.....and i remember pre-2009 when teams were running elements on top of the other on the rear wingLycoming wrote:They don't meet, but even the beam wing reduces the efficiency of both wings by a not insignificant amount.amouzouris wrote: they don't really dilute each other..the high pressure flow of the monkey seat and the low pressure flow of the rear wing will never meet...they are too far away...the flow can only have an effect on the surface it is attached to...
Depends really, if it was behind them it would probably help both, but right now it's incrasing pressure below the RW and decreasing it above the diffuser. That's what I'd imagine if we talk simply in pressure deltas.amouzouris wrote:the diffuser can actually work more efficiently...its the rear wing that has the small negative effect...
its too far away to make any real difference.....its the same logic when stalling a wing...there is low pressure flow below the wing but because it is not attached to it it doesnt produce much downforce...only very very littleOwen.C93 wrote:Depends really, if it was behind them it would probably help both, but right now it's incrasing pressure below the RW and decreasing it above the diffuser. That's what I'd imagine if we talk simply in pressure deltas.amouzouris wrote:the diffuser can actually work more efficiently...its the rear wing that has the small negative effect...
I thought about that but I think that they would have less separation issues in the middle of the wing.MIKEY_! wrote:Maybe (and that's a big maybe) it helps keep flow attached to the centre of the rear wing by increasing pressure in that area. Mclaren had a wing support which was supposed to do something similar in 2008 IIRC.
I don't think it's mounted any higher than any other team. IMHOLycoming wrote:Well thats interesting. I wonder how it helps the rear wing... if thats correct it may explain why it seems to be mounted so high.
