Is Red Bull's CFD/Wind tunnel correlation the best?

[Blackout]

Is it a recource shortage really?
How do we explain Renault banging out parts at an alarming rate and moving forward
in the grid with if at all comparable recources?

Renault

Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (White Blue)(Dave Richards)

I have the feeling Mercedes is facing the same problems that Renault faced in 2007.
the team who won the last championships (like Renault in 2006), made mistakes regarding weight and downforce distribution (like Renault in 2007)... the lack of resources (budget cuts, obsolete windtunnel for Renault) and a too compact car, were not helping them...
But unlike Renault, Mercedes made deep changes in the car (weight distribution) but doesn't have the possibility, I think, to really transfigure the aero.

[BreezyRacer]

Consider that if you don't have the aero infrastructure right .. the wind tunnel and CFD results coordinated to real world results .. it's really going to hurt this year because of the lack of testing.

You cannot just throw ideas and parts at it now .. there has to be some high confidence that they will work before you bring them to a race. That situation could be keeping the team conservative about upgrades.

[mx_tifoso]

Have Merc used any of their straight line testing days yet?

[twoshots]

They had a day at Rockingham, but I'm not sure if that was a shake-down.

[marcush.]

Consider that if you don't have the aero infrastructure right .. the wind tunnel and CFD results coordinated to real world results .. it's really going to hurt this year because of the lack of testing.

You cannot just throw ideas and parts at it now .. there has to be some high confidence that they will work before you bring them to a race. That situation could be keeping the team conservative about upgrades.

it´s the same for everyone.

Michael is prepared to take the risk,I´m sure.and I would play the Virgin scenario
with the drivers so evenly matched FP1+2 could help to get the gold sorted from the
waste if you are not confident in your development.
But to speed up development ,both would have to take on development parts (different areas) and this would enable them to get the optimum for FP3 and qualy .

[BreezyRacer]

Consider that if you don't have the aero infrastructure right .. the wind tunnel and CFD results coordinated to real world results .. it's really going to hurt this year because of the lack of testing.

You cannot just throw ideas and parts at it now .. there has to be some high confidence that they will work before you bring them to a race. That situation could be keeping the team conservative about upgrades.

it´s the same for everyone.

Michael is prepared to take the risk,I´m sure.and I would play the Virgin scenario
with the drivers so evenly matched FP1+2 could help to get the gold sorted from the
waste if you are not confident in your development.
But to speed up development ,both would have to take on development parts (different areas) and this would enable them to get the optimum for FP3 and qualy .

Well certainly the "no testing" part is the same for everyone. But consider all the il released aero mods over the years that made cars no better, or even worse.

Now consider that RBR has the ability to bring out updates that actually work as accurately forecast thru wind tunnel testing. They have never had a failed update in the last 2 years. That means that testing time is not needed for them.

Of all the teams that should also be able to replicate RBR's testing and production performance, you would have to think it would be McLaren. But look at how lost they were last year, till mid season. It's obvious that they don't have a direct connection between CFD and wind tunnel, vs on track performance. And while this is important for "in season" improvements, it means even more in the initial designs. I contend that this is reason number 1 why RBR is kicking every other team on the grid.

[WhiteBlue]

Of all the teams that should also be able to replicate RBR's testing and production performance, you would have to think it would be McLaren. But look at how lost they were last year, till mid season. It's obvious that they don't have a direct connection between CFD and wind tunnel, vs on track performance. And while this is important for "in season" improvements, it means even more in the initial designs. I contend that this is reason number 1 why RBR is kicking every other team on the grid.

I believe the strength of Red Bull is Adrian Newey's extreme focus on optimal aero packaging. No matter what other disadvantages it generates he always goes for the most radical sleekest solution available inside the law. Just remember his high ribs on the FW18 cockpit sides 1996 when Barnard took the rules literally and designed a truck called F310. Newey's side pots and cockpit sides were ways ahead in creative thinking. I will dig out some pics.










Just look at the free air space for the rear wing in the front view. The angle is slightly better for the Williams but if you imagine the corrected angle for the Ferrari where the driver's helmet top just touches the wing foil you see the difference.

[BreezyRacer]

I agree about Newey WhiteBlue, but without a well calibrated testing platform he couldn't do what he does in an environment that bans testing.

[marcush.]

there also was a long debate if the interpretation of Williams and Jordan was in the spirit of the rules...

but for sure newey has produced very sleek cars over the years and Bigois is famous for a few bumps in the surface ..

http://www.prostfan.com/hk/pictures/98- ... is-mon.jpg

not the most faamous car ...if this was simply because of Aero issues ,i´m not sure but..

[marcush.]

I´m pretty sure Mr.Newey has a very good gut feeling in terms of what is going to work and what does not work.
And the guy has a vision in mind with the whole car .All other cars look far less integrated in their thinking ....maybe this is unfair ...but the RBR looks far more
complete and finished in design .
the Mac is far more detailed but the base idea and concept is more dragged to reality ... and this is also true for the the MERc wich bring me back on topic..

[marcush.]

well at least they are still trying to catch up...as WB mentioned Mr.Brawn seems not to be prepared to tzhrow in the towel already for 2010 ..

In a ways my idea of development is not really based on a new car every year..and just how revolutionary may your new ideas be to render everything obsolete of the current car...
At the very last you would try to run updates on the current machine you will be able to carry over to the new machine...

[RacingManiac]

I figure the whole "stopping development" on current car to focus on the next car will only work if the rulebook is radically different like 2008-2009, or even to an extent from 2009-2010 since the tires is quite different and the whole refueling ban thing. Stable rules will promote evolution rather than revolution...now with 2011 new tires it might be another big change again. But since there is nothing you can really do until the tires are out, I think you might as well keep at it for 2010...

[segedunum]

At the moment both Red Bull and Renault seem to have a good idea as to what their cars are doing and hence, what they can improve.

The problem for Mercedes, McLaren and other teams like Williams is that they don't seem to understand what is wrong with their cars and are having to spend a lot of time working it out and going down a lot of blind alleys. In the climate of the current testing ban this also means putting updates on a car that don't work.

Adrian Newey is someone who designs cars with a central philosophy in mind having read through the rule book, and he always seems to be able to get down to the lowest common denominator of what is required. CFD is not going to give you that, and throwing random --- into a CFD system to see if lap times will increase as Williams seems to be doing is not going to give you that.

[feynman]

Well, if you wanted to be snarky, you could point to the quote from Horner, where he said they took off the protested diffuser bits, and the car went faster, to show there might still be a reasonable gap in the correlation ... but that's only if you wanted to be snarky - watching Webber drive away from the field with his elbow out the cockpit would surely disavow you of that intention.


As for throwing random in, anyone got an informed notion as to how long it takes the supercomputers to do a set of runs on a design these days ... is it minutes, hours, days? How soon before we see genetic algorithms used in car design.
That would be fun. Start with a random population, testing them in CFD, and keep breeding and mutating the 'fittest' designs. I guess probably a few more laps round Moore's Law before we get there.
Nick Wirthian natural selection versus the creationism/intelligent-design of a mysterious-ways-moving, pull-rod suspended, Adrian Newey. Double-helixes and talking snakes, place your bets.

[BreezyRacer]

Well, if you wanted to be snarky, you could point to the quote from Horner, where he said they took off the protested diffuser bits, and the car went faster, to show there might still be a reasonable gap in the correlation ... but that's only if you wanted to be snarky - watching Webber drive away from the field with his elbow out the cockpit would surely disavow you of that intention.

BTW, did anyone get to see what these parts/fins were? I would so love to know more ..


OTOH, if I had to makes mods to the request of a competitor, I would also state a quick "thanks" in claiming that the car is faster now .. it's just what racers do.