Compared to the work of the genius
- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
Team: Eric Boullier (RD), Jonathan Neale (COO), Neil Oatley (Director of Design & Development), Tim Goss (TD), Simon Roberts (OD), Matt Morris (Engineering Director), Peter Prodromou (CE), Paul James (TM), Guillaume Cattelani (HA), Stephen Watt (Head of Engineering), Marianne Hinson (Head of Aerodynamic Design and Technology), Christian Schramm (Head of Racing Technology), Philip Prew (CE), Mark Ingham (Head of Design), Kari Lammenranta (CM)
Drivers: Fernando Alonso (14), Stoffel Vandoorne (2)
Team name: McLaren Honda
The way I see it, intake inlet is a bubble oh high pressure zone, surrounded by a few smaller ones where stagnation occurs. It's easier to go around a hill (or a bubble in this instance) the to go over it. Also, undercut and all the elements on top intake lip are what makes the air want to go down and around... Bigger radius on floor leading edge probably helps as well...Jef Patat wrote:I wasn't expecting all flow below the upper stagnation point to go downwards, I would have expected a bigger part of it to go upwards.
That's what it looks like to me, yes.f1rules wrote:well it seems mclaren and rb do exactly the same with their suspension arms, like 95% of all other team also, the difference it seems, is mclaren with their horisontal flowconditioner attached to the chassis and front bargeboard try to force more air down and around the undercut. Its mounted higher, and just so the front supension dont disturb the flow. Because its higher up its also angled more downwards, then the susepnsion arms which are regulated also. Actually i see this as a sign a lot of good flow is forced down and around early. Ferrari are doing the same with flow conditioners all the way down the front monoqoque and their special sidepod design.
Apparently I'm not making myself clear enough. What I mean is that bubble that you refer to is apparently not very sphere like as I intuitively would think. I kind of expect the bubble to be somewhat symmetric forcing air over and under the intake. It seems a lot more air is pushed downwards. Probably this is also due to the horizontal flow conditioner that connects the top of the bargeboard to the main body, not only forcing air down but also forcing air that passes above it to move down as well. It's always a pity we don't have more 3D info and have to do with the boundary layer info.Vanja #66 wrote:The way I see it, intake inlet is a bubble oh high pressure zone, surrounded by a few smaller ones where stagnation occurs. It's easier to go around a hill (or a bubble in this instance) the to go over it. Also, undercut and all the elements on top intake lip are what makes the air want to go down and around... Bigger radius on floor leading edge probably helps as well...Jef Patat wrote:I wasn't expecting all flow below the upper stagnation point to go downwards, I would have expected a bigger part of it to go upwards.
Considering the intake shape of the Ferrari it is reasonable to assume that that isn't bad.FW17 wrote:Just look at the airflow from where the Richard is...... Air stream from so high up is going down the undercut
The flow-vis expands the closer it gets to the sidepod intake, its trail seem to match the flow-vis on the McLAren fairly well. The green flow-vis seems to align with the top and bottom of the intake, and the same goes for the McLaren.The red bull on the other hand, the air feeding the side pod inlet goes straight in with no disturbances
The Red Bull image hardly gives the whole situation as only the lower part has received flow-vis, and here too you see a very similar pattern; Air flowing downwards.a separate channel is provided for the undercut. And look for the disturbance, hardly any
Jef Patat wrote:Apparently I'm not making myself clear enough. What I mean is that bubble that you refer to is apparently not very sphere like as I intuitively would think. I kind of expect the bubble to be somewhat symmetric forcing air over and under the intake. It seems a lot more air is pushed downwards. Probably this is also due to the horizontal flow conditioner that connects the top of the bargeboard to the main body, not only forcing air down but also forcing air that passes above it to move down as well.
Indeed...Jef Patat wrote:It's always a pity we don't have more 3D info and have to do with the boundary layer info.
FW17 wrote:What a mess!!
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C6ZjZL5WUAAVgqC.jpg
Compared to the work of the genius
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C6Yz_80XQAAZ44N.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C6Yz5PQXMAE2dIQ.jpg:large
Let us rephrase that. Why do you think air is coming from up that high? The way I was expecting it is that air was hitting the input more straight (parallel to ground), the way you draw it air is already coming downwards. I think you are correct there and that is the part that amazes me. I didn't expect air to be going down that early.Vanja #66 wrote:As illustrated here, I think it's because of air coming at an angle towards the bubble (green dot is where it starts to diverge), which is what wishbones and that conditioner (although I wouldn't call it that way) are supposed to do. Since top sidepod inlet flap is used to increase pressure and discourage air coming that way, I believe it should included in this consideration and with it I think there is still a possibility of proper symmetric bubble. And yes, this is borderline story telling...
