Idea: blowing air out of the sharkfin above rear wing

[doopie2you]

It is kind of the a F-duct system, but i am not studying for aerodynamics so i don't know if i am making some sort of stupid idea. If it is, just tell me. So i can try to think of something else

The idea is, to blow wind in FRONT of the wing, so that it will lift the air that is coming towards the rear wing. this way the wind that supose to hit the Rear Wing lifts over the wing, This way creating no drag on the wing.

And because the rear wing produces the most drag of the whole car, i thought maybe the drag that appearce when the wind out of the "so calld F-duct system" hits with the air that is rushing towards the rear wing would be less then the drag that the rear wing creates when it got hit by the wind at full speed.



Another thing that is on my mind, is the RB6 it's exhaust system. I think that most of the people now know that they got some sort of blown diffuser. But the problem is that at high RPM you got lots of exhaust fumes and at Low RPM you don't!

I already made a topic about that, but because no one repsonse i might also put it here. If the blown diffuser works on heated air, why don't they use the air that has past by the radiators as heated sucketion air for the diffuser?

F1 cars engines are always hot and the coolant is VERY HOT, the air flowing past the radiator is hot to, so why don't they make some sort of system that allows them to let the heated air from the radiators flow to the diffuser all the time, and when on straights you just make some sort of F-duct system that makes a valve close and then the heated air exit some place else, and that way the car has less sucktion from the diffuser and goes faster on the straight.

So that were my ideas for now, hope you can help me out by informing me.

[Ian P.]

To start with ....moveable aerodynamic devices are not permitted. Even if they look like Mass Dampers. Flaps and devices to change cooling airflow would not be allowed. Not sure how the F-Duct knee valve arrangement gets around this but it does.
The purpose of the rear wing is DOWNFORCE, drag is part of the price you pay. Cutting the drag is worthwhile but not at the expense of downforce when you want and need it. Deflecting the air over the wing is pointless. You are effectively moving the wing forward and reducing the pressure on the top of your main downforce creator. Not a good thing to do.
Blown difusers only care about gas velocity not temperature directly. This is a side issue. Blown difusers have been around for ages. Some reasons they fell out of favor are, the fluctuation in downforce (there's that word again) with throttle position (and revs) and the high rpm very short exhaust systems which terminate ahead of the difuser entrance (or exit).
As AN keeps saying, it is all about packaging. My bet is that the RB has a blown difuser because it was a better place to run the exhaust especially with the ultra-low rear bodywork on the RB. Partly a result of the pull-rod suspension.

[Belatti]

When you try this it happens that a mod comes and moves your post to a McLaren or Red Bull thread.

[doopie2you]

When you try this it happens that a mod comes and moves your post to a McLaren or Red Bull thread.

Why should it go there? I don't think RB or McLaren have a system that blows air over the wing? Does it? And i only usethat picture to clarify how the system would work.

[doopie2you]

To start with ....moveable aerodynamic devices are not permitted. Even if they look like Mass Dampers. Flaps and devices to change cooling airflow would not be allowed. Not sure how the F-Duct knee valve arrangement gets around this but it does.
The purpose of the rear wing is DOWNFORCE, drag is part of the price you pay. Cutting the drag is worthwhile but not at the expense of downforce when you want and need it. Deflecting the air over the wing is pointless. You are effectively moving the wing forward and reducing the pressure on the top of your main downforce creator. Not a good thing to do.
Blown difusers only care about gas velocity not temperature directly. This is a side issue. Blown difusers have been around for ages. Some reasons they fell out of favor are, the fluctuation in downforce (there's that word again) with throttle position (and revs) and the high rpm very short exhaust systems which terminate ahead of the difuser entrance (or exit).
As AN keeps saying, it is all about packaging. My bet is that the RB has a blown difuser because it was a better place to run the exhaust especially with the ultra-low rear bodywork on the RB. Partly a result of the pull-rod suspension.

Losing Downforce in the corner is not a good thing, when you use this thing on the straight it blows the wind OVER the wing and then the downforce that is normally created at the straight goes away. Wichs means there is less resistance because the wind isn't hitting the Rear Wing plates! What means that the car can go faster on the straight!

[Steven]

@doopie2you : please try to keep your topics seperate. The Red Bull this has nothing to do with what you are proposing here. Also, I renamed the thread to reflect your idea, a topic title as "What happens when you try this" is pretty useless.

As for your idea, it's interesting but I'm not convinced it is worthwile to research thoroughly. If you take part of the airbox air and push it out upwards somewhere at the top of the shark fin, you will create some turbulence. If may be that this will adversaly affect the rear wing, but I would need a CFD simulation to confirm that.

Basically what teams are trying to do is have an as clean as possible airflow onto the rear wing, and what you're doing MIGHT work the opposite way.

[doopie2you]

@doopie2you : please try to keep your topics seperate. The Red Bull this has nothing to do with what you are proposing here. Also, I renamed the thread to reflect your idea, a topic title as "What happens when you try this" is pretty useless.

As for your idea, it's interesting but I'm not convinced it is worthwile to research thoroughly. If you take part of the airbox air and push it out upwards somewhere at the top of the shark fin, you will create some turbulence. If may be that this will adversaly affect the rear wing, but I would need a CFD simulation to confirm that.

Basically what teams are trying to do is have an as clean as possible airflow onto the rear wing, and what you're doing MIGHT work the opposite way.

Well, i can't make computer models and can't test it with CFD.

Just putting the idea out here, that was it.

[raymondu999]

The airstream, I believe, would act like a wing made of air, and just move it forward. Besides, throwing the air up fast enough in itself would also produce drag/downforce anyways (Newton's 3rd)

[doopie2you]

The airstream, I believe, would act like a wing made of air, and just move it forward. Besides, throwing the air up fast enough in itself would also produce drag/downforce anyways (Newton's 3rd)

Yes but it doesn't shoot the air right up in the incoming air, it is bended a little so it will only crash with it in a way that the incoming wind wil move upwards a LITLLE. Just enough to get it moved over the rear wing.

Next generation wings: Air wings =D>

[raymondu999]

yes it wouldn't make any difference I believe. There would still be drag and downforce. Just that it happens more towards the front

[PlatinumZealot]

The idea is interesting and it should reduce flow over the rear wing itself. One I see with it is that the effect is only working for the middle 15cm of the wing. The other MAJOR issue is this: Lets say you get it over the whole span of the wing it is possible that the deflection of the air itself can even create more drag than the rear wing was making!

I made an analogy in the Mercedez thread about how you can get force from moving air over turbine blades. You can do it by using momentum change (impule turbine) or by reaction (pressure difference). The reaction way has less drag becuase it is basically using the fluid's own pressure against it self instead of using some surface to deflect the fluid.

This is similar to a wing profile. You can use the speed change over the wing to get a force (analgous to the reaction turbine) or you can tilt the wing to use the impulse of the fluid to get your force. So basically your method is be based on impulse; some object deflecting the air upwards after the air hits into it. So your device will more than likely cause more drag per width of wing.