Red Bull RB12 TAG-Heuer

[lio007]

[ringo]

I'm surprised that no one has copied the multi element barge boards on the merc as yet.
maybe we could see it on the redbull after the break?

[DiogoBrand]

I'm surprised that no one has copied the multi element barge boards on the merc as yet.
maybe we could see it on the redbull after the break?

It may work for Mercedes, but it doesn't actually mean it will work for everybody. The people at Red Bull probably have a good idea of how to make it work, but maybe it increases drag too much, which for Red Bull with their Renault power is a no-no.

[Ozan]

I'm surprised that no one has copied the multi element barge boards on the merc as yet.
maybe we could see it on the redbull after the break?

I think the "multi barge board" thingy is long developed with the accordance of front wing on w05-06 and finally 07. the front wings on rbr and merc are different in terms of diverting the air around the tyres and the tea tray area. so maybe copying the thing wouldn't work for them or doesn't worth wasting money and time as they shifted their development attention to '17 car.

[ringo]

It will work. The front wings all do the same general thing. The flow control is not that specific; and all the teams want the air in the same general places. Some wings do the job better than others, but they all have the same function and target the same areas.

[turbof1]

It will work. The front wings all do the same general thing. The flow control is not that specific; and all the teams want the air in the same general places. Some wings do the job better than others, but they all have the same function and target the same areas.

Aero is not the same as Lego blocks: you can't just slap on a random device and assume it will work in an area where even a change of a few milimetres can complete change the whole aero structure at the front.

And the flow is specific. Highly, highly specific. What you are saying is comparable to bathing yourself in beer. Washing yourself with fluids, same basic principle right?

[Pierce89]

I'm surprised that no one has copied the multi element barge boards on the merc as yet.
maybe we could see it on the redbull after the break?

I'm not convinced it's a very powerful change.

[ClarkBT11]

Edit: sorry wrong thread.

[Mamba]

https://imageshack.com/i/pl7cuTW6j

Mods please move this post to the STR 11 thread.

MAMBA

[ringo]

It will work. The front wings all do the same general thing. The flow control is not that specific; and all the teams want the air in the same general places. Some wings do the job better than others, but they all have the same function and target the same areas.

Aero is not the same as Lego blocks: you can't just slap on a random device and assume it will work in an area where even a change of a few milimetres can complete change the whole aero structure at the front.

And the flow is specific. Highly, highly specific. What you are saying is comparable to bathing yourself in beer. Washing yourself with fluids, same basic principle right?

I have had multiple discussions on this forum over the years, and yes it is like lego blocks.
You will see a change. What makes the effectiveness of the change is that you refine the design. Each year i say something should be copied, it's met with protest, and then sure enough teams copy each other and get the results they were looking for.

Aero is sensitive yes indeed, however you can place a general shape in a specific area, for example a batwing, and see an improvement as the formula1 cars all do the same thing aerodynamically. You then fine tune that change to suit your car.
Too many examples to list; S duct, Front wing tunnels, covered driveshafts, monkey seats, bat wings, side pod inlet winglets and many more. Soon it will be multi element bargeboards and hair comb floors, or whatever you call it at the front of the merc floor.

[DiogoBrand]

I have had multiple discussions on this ... go blocks.
You will see a change. What makes the effectiveness of the change is that you refine the design. Each year i say something should be copied, it's met with protest, and then sure enough teams copy each other and get the results they were looking for.

Aero is sensitive yes indeed, however you can place a general shape in a specific area, for example a batwing, and see an improvement as the formula1 cars all do the same thing aerodynamically. You then fine tune that change to suit your car.
Too many examples to list; S duct, Front wing tunnels, covered driveshafts, monkey seats, bat wings, side pod inlet winglets and many more. Soon it will be multi element bargeboards and hair comb floors, or whatever you call it at the front of the merc floor.

Assuming you're right, the only reason for them not to copy that innovation straight away is because they don't want the extra performance. Even if their aero department was incredibly incompetent, they'd just need to cut some slots into their bargeboard/floor and voilá! They have a faster car.
Do you think that would make any sense?

[turbof1]

Aero is sensitive yes indeed, however you can place a general shape in a specific area, for example a batwing, and see an improvement as the formula1 cars all do the same thing aerodynamically. You then fine tune that change to suit your car.

But the batwing is not the same for Red Bull and Mercedes. Far from it infact. Red Bull for instance uses a lift-inducing winglet above the splitter, while Mercedes uses a more neutral winglet a bit higher up.

Again it's not Lego: you can't just take a Mercedes piece and put it on the Red Bull. That piece has to be molded and finetuned first, with hundreds of hours of cfd and windtunnel put in. I can guarantee you if you'd use a full on copy of the batwing from the Mercedes on the Red Bull, you'd instantly loose performance on the Red Bull.

Batwings are not general shapes. They are highly specific. Underchassis turning vanes generally are general shapes. However, ever since 2009 these have been highly finetuned up to a point where you are deep into diminishing returns. I'll go one further: there is not a single solution out there in the field anymore that would be a slap-on-instant-improvement. New solutions require adaptation of surrounding parts as well before you'd extract a surplus of performance out of it.

So the same for the bargeboards. Mercedes and Red Bull have different philosophies starting at the front of the car:

You can't make Mercedes bargeboards work correctly if your nose, front wing, underchassis turning vanes, suspension, splitter, floor,... aren't properly adapted as well. I just listed up half of the car requiring to change in order to integrate one new concept. That's great perhaps if you are building a new car for next season, but during the season you simply do not have time nor resources to do this.

[TAG]

TAG is doing a horrible PR job at getting their money's worth from their branded engine. It wasn't until they came in that they turned Red Bull around.

[lio007]

Nice analysis on the RB12:
http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/tech- ... 06747/?s=1

[Atticus]

Nice analysis on the RB12:
http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/tech- ... 06747/?s=1

I don't find it so nice.

What it basically does:

1) Tells us the news that Red Bull is running an advanced chassis dyno (which is not analysis),
2) Messes up an explanation of the high rake (there's no rear wing stall involved at the loads decreasing the rake at high straightline speeds, it's just a shallower angle of attack on the wing),
3) Once again, tells us the news that Red Bull modified its suspension design,
4) Speculates that said suspension design makes for 'unrivalled' turn-in just days after AMuS unearthed GPS data comparing Hamilton and Verstappen in Silverstone qualifying which clearly showed us that Hamilton is not only matching Verstappen's corner entries but is gaining huge chunks of times there, losing only a small part of them on the exits (see my Twitter).

The only thing it gets right is about the monkey seat in the penultimate paragraph.