- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
Yes, that will happen as you say. Red Bull have even placed a rather large bulge in the bodywork just above the sidepods/exhaust channel to encourage even more outward push/barrier by this air. I'm just not sure this (and their other efforts) is going to be effective all the way through the speed range. Or that they want it to be.Crucial_Xtreme wrote:Newby can you answer or explain this? How off track or dead wrong am I?
Without sounding like a complete dummy, why is the air getting pushed further aft, assuming you mean towards the coke bottle?
This is why I asked you that question last night mate.
Isn't the air coming over the sidepods more plentiful & thus stronger than the air going around the sidepods?
What I'm saying is, wouldn't the air over the top of the sidepods act almost as a barrier to the flow coming around the sidepods(considering it takes slightly longer to get there) hence keeping the airflow on the same path it has at low speeds only higher up(just over brake fin area)??
That is an insightful quote... did you mean to say I have no idea what is going on or what the team is trying to do. Why are you bothering to post then?Adrian Newby wrote: I'm just not sure this (and their other efforts) is going to be effective all the way through the speed range. Or that they want it to be.
Why ask a question of someone you don't think should bother posting?hardingfv32 wrote:
Why are you bothering to post then?
Brian
Is this a temporary answer until you formulate something to respond to: an aerodynamic explanation for why the airflow on the top would ever want to come downward towards the end of the side-pod.Adrian Newby wrote:Why ask a question of someone you don't think should bother posting?
The request is simple: Please provide a aerodynamic explanation for why the airflow on the top would ever want to come downward towards the end of the side-pod.Adrian Newby wrote:Oh, so I am worthy to talk on your board now? Gee, thanks. :roll:
Or not at all? There is a reason Brian doesn't get his answers.cossie wrote:can't a lot of your 2's disagreements be done via pm's
I could not agree more. I hate when when one of my posts(normally a response to someone else's post)gets moved but without the surrounding posts(or whatever I was responding to). It makes me look like some fool with Tourette's(sic?) syndrome, just blurting crap out.bhallg2k wrote:[My comments made much more sense within the context - and thread - in which they were posted. In the future, please delete my comments outright if they're summarily deemed immaterial to their respective discussions rather than move them and render the thoughts completely neutered. Thank you.]
But, why should people have to shy away from pointing out flaws in a dubious(at best)theory? I don't want other people reading tripe and coming away thinking they've learned about aerodynamics, when in reality, they've just read somebody's fantasy.Adrian Newby wrote:Or not at all?cossie wrote:can't a lot of your 2's disagreements be done via pm's
It's not in the regs. it's a technical directive from No Fun Charlie.flynfrog wrote:how on earth do you plan to collect anything in an open free stream environment. redirect sure but no way you will collect anything.MIKEY_! wrote:Can anyone tell me what the regulations ban collection and redirection? I have looked already and found nothing.
Downwash.hardingfv32 wrote:
That is an insightful quote... did you mean to say I have no idea what is going on or what the team is trying to do. Why are you bothering to post then?
Please provide a aerodynamic explanation for why the airflow on the top would ever want to come downward towards the end of the side-pod.
I view the top and side of the front section of the side-pod as having similar surface area and thus similar flows. Now when you get to the rear, the side of the side-pod tappers to almost nothing while the top retains some of its original width. The flow along the side has no where to go but up into the top flow. There is no migration downward.
Brian
We're talking about the bickering and arguing and B.S., not the genuine discussion.Pierce89 wrote:But, why should people have to shy away from pointing out flaws in a dubious(at best)theory? I don't want other people reading tripe and coming away thinking they've leared about aerodynamics, when in reality, they've just read somebody's fantasy.Adrian Newby wrote:Or not at all?cossie wrote:can't a lot of your 2's disagreements be done via pm's
"just saying"Pierce89 wrote:I could not agree more. I hate when when one of my posts(normally a response to someone else's post)gets moved but without the surrounding posts(or whatever I was responding to). It makes me look like some fool with Tourette's(sic?) syndrome, just blurting crap out.bhallg2k wrote:[My comments made much more sense within the context - and thread - in which they were posted. In the future, please delete my comments outright if they're summarily deemed immaterial to their respective discussions rather than move them and render the thoughts completely neutered. Thank you.]