Red Bull RB8 Renault

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter does not belong here.

Post Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:03 pm

I don't think it's a hole. In one of the shots I can see what appears to be solid material in the slot.

Is there any benefit to be had from making that area messy like that to create turbulence?

If it is a slot, I think it just cools the driver and they've taken the opportunity to stick it there as the hump is already there. Anything on top of the nosecone has little effect on the aero as a whole so it seems like a good spot as opposed to the very front of the nosecone where I imagine a hole has a greater effect.
JB2011
 
Joined: 15 Feb 2011

Post Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:43 pm

I've cracked it.. it's an in-tray for memos to WEB from Helmut and Dietrich.

(I expect this car, and the MP4-27, are about as close to the Melbourne spec as that thing Ren... cough.. Lotus showed at their launch).
#58
Gridlock
 
Joined: 27 Jan 2012

Post Mon Feb 06, 2012 9:41 pm

officialsushy wrote:McLaren haven't "got it wrong" as people are saying.! They've had a a different design philosophy to EVERYONE else since last year i.e they ran a lower front-end to everyone else using a type of "snow plough" at the front of the nose to help with air flow because of the lower nose section compared to everyone else. So they, like Redbull have carried on with there design and evolved it, they obviously believe this to be the best way to go, like they did in 2011 (and who ended up with the best race car by the end of the year..McLaren..) The Stepped nose is basically just the same as there previous years car but the top half is lower due to the new restrictions on height, so I see the nose having very little effect compared to last year, it will mainly be asthetic (otherwise why didn't they go with this stepped nose last year..?), whereas EBD ban.. big change!


McLaren's low nose concept dates back to 1993 with the MP4/8. The splitter was present but they maintained a low nose since that date.
In 1995 they tried that ridiculous car that look like a baracuda with a hat.
Even in 1996 through to 2000 (the Newey years) they maintained a low nose.
I cannot recall McLaren ever having a high nose car.
The philosophy is to not compromise the suspension performance for the sake of aero efficiency.
I believe it to be one of the reasons why the McLarens are always able to get closer to the others cars while running in their wake. It rewards an aggressive driver with an opportunity to get his car's nose into a corner an harrass the other driver.

This is possibly due to the downforce originating from almost the entire car and not just the floor and diffusor.

The philosophy of building race drivers cars has always been something Ron Dennis bought into and Neil Oatley believes in that philosophy wholeheartedly.

I doubt we will ever see a high nose McLAren while Dennis and Oatley are at McLaren.
Although Paddy Lowe is chief designer these days, the Oatley influence I suspect is very strong being director of Engineering
Raptor22
 
Joined: 7 Apr 2009

Post Mon Feb 06, 2012 9:45 pm





失败者找理由,成功者找方法
raymondu999
 
Joined: 4 Feb 2010

Post Mon Feb 06, 2012 10:01 pm

Raptor22 wrote:In 1995 they tried that ridiculous car that look like a baracuda with a hat.
Even in 1996 through to 2000 (the Newey years) they maintained a low nose.

Wasn't the MP4-13 of 1998 his first car at McLaren, while the beautiful FW18 of '97 was his last Williams?
BorisTheBlade
 
Joined: 21 Nov 2008

Post Mon Feb 06, 2012 10:01 pm

Red Bull RB8 2012 F1 car launch(HD)






Can't get it to embed. Could someone explain how to do so?
Last edited by Crucial_Xtreme on Mon Feb 06, 2012 10:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Crucial_Xtreme
 
Joined: 15 Oct 2011
Location: Charlotte

Post Mon Feb 06, 2012 10:25 pm

BorisTheBlade wrote:
Raptor22 wrote:In 1995 they tried that ridiculous car that look like a baracuda with a hat.
Even in 1996 through to 2000 (the Newey years) they maintained a low nose.

Wasn't the MP4-13 of 1998 his first car at McLaren, while the beautiful FW18 of '97 was his last Williams?



he has designed the FW18 in 1996. He left Williams the middle of that year to move over to McLaren. His official first McLaren was the 1998 MP4-13 but he made substantial input into the 12 or '97
Raptor22
 
Joined: 7 Apr 2009

Post Mon Feb 06, 2012 10:31 pm

Just a little thought RE the apparent slot/vent on the nose hump, has anyone considered the aero characteristics of hollow point ammunition?

Such ammo might appear to have the aero characteristics of a house brick, but is actually pretty good. The trick apparently is that the area directly in front of the hollow point forms a sort of bubble of high pressure air, which is what then encounters the oncoming air first, making the effective nose of the projectile a rounded ball, which has much better aero.

Or am I way off the mark here?
The answer to the ultimate question, of life, the Universe and ... Everything?
forty-two
 
Joined: 1 Mar 2010

Post Mon Feb 06, 2012 10:35 pm

Interesting thought 42, there will certainly be a pressure build up ahead of the bump that is for sure.

I myself was wondering what effect it would have on the local boundary layer, will it cause agitation, lowering drag?
"I continuously go further and further learning about my own limitations, my body limitations, psychological limitations. It's a way of life for me." - Ayrton Senna
Robbobnob
 
Joined: 21 May 2010
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Post Mon Feb 06, 2012 10:39 pm

forty-two wrote:Just a little thought RE the apparent slot/vent on the nose hump, has anyone considered the aero characteristics of hollow point ammunition?

Such ammo might appear to have the aero characteristics of a house brick, but is actually pretty good. The trick apparently is that the area directly in front of the hollow point forms a sort of bubble of high pressure air, which is what then encounters the oncoming air first, making the effective nose of the projectile a rounded ball, which has much better aero.

Or am I way off the mark here?



spot on actually
Raptor22
 
Joined: 7 Apr 2009

Post Mon Feb 06, 2012 10:43 pm

That could be the case, if that wasn't a vent (I'm not saying it is). Basically that would mean that where the "vent" is thought to be, is just basically a deep groove, no?
失败者找理由,成功者找方法
raymondu999
 
Joined: 4 Feb 2010

Post Mon Feb 06, 2012 10:46 pm

Robbobnob wrote:Interesting thought 42, there will certainly be a pressure build up ahead of the bump that is for sure.

I myself was wondering what effect it would have on the local boundary layer, will it cause agitation, lowering drag?


The pressure build up will be trapped and will create an infill ahead of the bump, tus smoothing the air flow over the entire nose. A little like the effect of putting a bulbous nose on a ship, so as to improve the water flow around the bow.
gilgen
 
Joined: 3 Apr 2010

Post Mon Feb 06, 2012 10:57 pm

The local stagnation point essentially will reside close to the slit forcing the boundary layer over it. This cheats the air into believing the chassis has a more gradual shape.

Stagnation point trick are old hat. It has used in a 1987 America's Cup British 12Metre that was nicknamed the Hippo because it had an ugly bump just under the bow.

In 2003 Team New Zealands NZL82 had a hull appendage (HulA) that was also a flow cheater device to fool the water into believing the hulls water line length was longer. Longer water line length = higher theoretical speed
Raptor22
 
Joined: 7 Apr 2009

Post Mon Feb 06, 2012 10:57 pm

forty-two wrote:Just a little thought RE the apparent slot/vent on the nose hump, has anyone considered the aero characteristics of hollow point ammunition?

Such ammo might appear to have the aero characteristics of a house brick, but is actually pretty good. The trick apparently is that the area directly in front of the hollow point forms a sort of bubble of high pressure air, which is what then encounters the oncoming air first, making the effective nose of the projectile a rounded ball, which has much better aero.

Or am I way off the mark here?


My first thought, exactly. Similar notion to rear spoilers and keeping a truck's tailgate up.
RB7ate9
 
Joined: 13 Jul 2011

Post Mon Feb 06, 2012 10:59 pm

Raptor22 wrote:The local stagnation point essentially will reside close to the slit forcing the boundary layer over it. This cheats the air into believing the chassis has a more gradual shape.

Stagnation point trick are old hat. It has used in a 1987 America's Cup British 12Metre that was nicknamed the Hippo because it had an ugly bump just under the bow.

In 2003 Team New Zealands NZL82 had a hull appendage (HulA) that was also a flow cheater device to fool the water into believing the hulls water line length was longer. Longer water line length = higher theoretical speed

How big would said stagnation point be? I mean, if not handled properly, wouldn't you basically just create a massive overhang with that stagnation point? Or would that just create another hollow "gorge," as it were, below it and basically the whole thing would BECOME home to a stagnation point?
失败者找理由,成功者找方法
raymondu999
 
Joined: 4 Feb 2010

PreviousNext

Return to F1 Car Hardware & Development

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AtOmIc, Blaze1, CCBot [Bot], ema00, gary123, joseff, JP44, Kiril Varbanov, konstantin, lio007, MercedesAMGSpy, Multiplex, PhilS13, speedy56 and 89 guests