Reducing the drag of a two element wing through stall

[neilbah]

Is it possible that using this ram effect of air into the cockpit opening decreases drag of the drivers helmet helping more air to flow over into the airbox, sorry if its not technical enough for this forum, im just assuming the outlet could be fanned out infront of the driver somehow similar to the solution used by the renault sport spider which had no windscreen. Any guesses at how much air could be drawn through said opening at 180-190mph?
For one i find it curious that Mclaren seem to like assymetrical design. For example if we look at the various exhaust solutions used last year, ok KERS was an obvious reason for some of the differences, im pretty sure one of the DDDs used wasnt symmetrical. They certainly are thinking outside the box, sometimes too far, but i love all of this speculation it creates!

cosidering options for possible uses of the snorkel..
where do people think the outlet of this air is more likely to go?..
To cool an electrical or mechanical component in the area directly below it or in the nose section? That would seem strange because none of the other teams feel the need. What could use a radiator in the front of the car..oil damping?
I dont know enough of the rules to know what is legal or not. I assume it isnt illegal for air to be routed internally through the tub construction as long as it still passes a crash test?
I dont think a driver operated air control device as described during the thread is really viable for reliable/consistent results, some will disagree.
Can it be used to cool the fuel tank in some way if allowed? Could there be an outlet on the underside of the nose in a kind of opposite way of thinking to Ferraris old concept to get more air under the car? I like many others im sure look forward to the answer although i fear it wont be nearly as interesting as we hope.

[horse]

Is Vettel like a reverse Alien? A smaller, second smaller head comes out the back of his helmut to blow out of the vast orifice of the RB6.

[Shrek]

its balloon boy, he was hiding in the RB6 all this time

[Fil]

Why wouldn't they use Nikki Lauda, or Jackie Stewart?

No one blows more hot air in F1 then those two..

[ringo]

more fuel to the flames.



and i don't even have a logical explanation for it.

[ringo]

edit. I still think the hole is for cooling. That was just a joke, by the way.

[Raptor22]

generally when we want to find total drag we simply find the sum of parasitic and induced drag. Over a given wing they have a fied relationship for a given air density and velocity.
However thats holds true for conventional wings or profiles working on their own.
There is also an opposing force that results from the disruption of air flow from the one body over the next thats sometimes called Interference drag; in a 2 elements F1 wing that would be the effect of the main plane pulling the boundary layer away from the plane above it, thus increasing parasitic drag but reducing induced drag for that plane.

So for a given profile and arrangement between the two components there is a total drag which is a constant for a given air density at a given velocity.

when the wing is stalled then the loss of induced drag and associated (perhaps proportional) increase in pressure drag also results in an increase in Interference drag.
This should increase the total drag to beyond what you have for coupled flow and therefore stalling the wing would be undesirable.

What I think Ferrari tried in the past with the flexible wings was not to stall the wings but to reduce the Angle of attack by a few degrees which reduced induced drag at speed but also cut the Intereference drag, reducing the total drag. the form drag would also reduce since there is a flattening of the wing element and a slight slacking of the AoA of the element.

What the flap blowing is designed to do is reduce the interefence drag through maintaining coupled flow.

Now to achieve a reduction in drag through stall, one would need to smooth out the form drag which is now much higher through adding a large volume of air behind the wing to raise the presure there.
the slot on in the wing can't provide the volume of air required.

But essentially the 3rd force missing from this discussion is the Interference drag that results from the interaction between the two wing elements.


I'll work on articulating my thinking a little more here but I think this is the missing element that explains why a stalled wing shouldn't work

[pgj]

I am enjoying this thread enormously. A really dumb question though. Is drag, in the general sense, a cost of moving something through air or is it the only cost?

[Raptor22]

Drag is an opposing force to moving anything through a fluid. it is a cost.

there is also a cost to thrust a cost to lift and mass.

Then in aircraft there is lift to drag ratio's wing loading and the list goes on.

With aircraft through, the drag reduces the higher the aircraft flies while thrust usually improves up to a certain point before fallng off again.

for F1 cars drag is also a cost of forward motion. Theres also adhesion that needs to be accounted for. F1 cars do not obey laws of friction out on track, laws of adhesion are more important.

[greenall]

Could there be an outlet on the underside of the nose in a kind of opposite way of thinking to Ferraris old concept to get more air under the car?

I think thats exactly whats going on, on the barge board there is 1 1/2 inch at the front which disrupts the airflow somewhat, i think this snorkle comes through the car and infront of this bargeboard creates enough pressure to let the airflow skim over this inch or so, providing more slippery air to hit the diffuser in a much more effience manner. i'm certain in fact

[Just_a_fan]

Anyone else notice that there is only one 'shoulder' vent and that it's on the same side as the snorkel? Perhaps the shoulder vent and the snorkel are linked. Perhaps the sidepod intake is designed purely to deal with radiator air (it is smaller than last year's car). The snorkel might be ducted to cool something in the top of the sidepod which is vented by way of the shoulder vent. Perhaps the choice of which side the snorkel / vent depends on the direction of the circuit (clockwise, anticlockwise).

I think the test circuits are clockwise (mostly turning right) so the snorkel on the left side of the tub is less obstructive to the driver.

Putting the snorkel on the nose will have little impact on overall drag or quality of air flowing to the rear wing.

[thestig84]

[quote="Just_a_fan"]Anyone else notice that there is only one 'shoulder' vent and that it's on the same side as the snorkel? Perhaps the shoulder vent and the snorkel are linked.quote]

No they run 1, 2 or no sholder vents but keep the nose vent throughout.

[greenall]

Putting the snorkel on the nose will have little impact on overall drag or quality of air flowing to the rear wing.

But it will if it goes to the floor and feeds the diffuser??

[SLC]

The snorkel doesn't directly feed into the engine cover duct or the rear wing - it simply acts as an inlet to provide a reference pressure for the switching system (yes yes, the one operated by the driver's knee/leg/random appendage).

This does sound very implausible but it's what's on the grapevine!

[greenall]

If the snorkle is operated by a tube press by the leg il eat my hat, its about as likely as it been used to cool there nuts down from all the sexy pit girls!!