Aerodynamic implications of nose inlets

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.

Post Sat Feb 11, 2012 6:22 pm

nice thing above the top inlet could eb also avoidin the two small vortices ont hes side of the step the other teams will probably have. less probleamtic for ferrari since they removed the pushrod from up there, so less interference
twitter: @armchair_aero
shelly
 
Joined: 5 May 2009

Post Sat Feb 11, 2012 7:38 pm

Adrian Newby wrote:
n smikle wrote:
bhallg2k wrote:
Otherwise known as a vent?

Yes, exactly, a vent. Newey is venting that high pressure air into the chassis to "cool the driver" and then exiting it through the cockpit opening.


Air Dams can have vents. It's just a vent in the air dam.
Ok... ...

One question:

Where the heck are you people seeing an air dam? The ramp portion of the RB8's hump is at a lower (more "streamlined") angle than any of the other step-nose cars. Immediately above and behind that is an open vent, allowing air to pass straight through, into the chassis. And all that is left is a small, half inch radius on the very top, which directs 1/4 inch of its flow into the vent, and the other 1/4 inch over the top of the chassis.[/quote]

Has anybody obtained any proof that there is actually a vent here? But even if there is a vent for drver cooling, the outlet can be a lot smaller than the inlet, thus creating an airdam, and smoothing the airflow over the hump.
gilgen
 
Joined: 3 Apr 2010

Post Sat Feb 11, 2012 7:43 pm

[quote="Adrian Newby"]Nope. I think clean, high-energy airflow between the front tires is more important to Adrian Newey than drag on top of the nose, or inside a vent.

The question is what is the most effecient way to handle the step on the top nose surface.

A vent that routes the air around the internal suspension components and the tightly packaged driver or the Ferrari's ramp nose?

Brian
hardingfv32
 
Joined: 3 Apr 2011

Post Sat Feb 11, 2012 7:46 pm

hardingfv32 wrote:
Adrian Newby wrote:Nope. I think clean, high-energy airflow between the front tires is more important to Adrian Newey than drag on top of the nose, or inside a vent.

The question is what is the most effecient way to handle the step on the top nose surface.

A vent that routes the air around the internal suspension components and the tightly packaged driver or the Ferrari's ramp nose?

Brian



Your first sentence is true.

Your second sentence implies you are still thinking the main concern is drag. And it isn't.
Adrian Newby
 
Joined: 7 Feb 2012

Post Sat Feb 11, 2012 7:48 pm

hardingfv32 wrote:
Adrian Newby wrote:What is the requirement for air flow if an engine is water cooled?


Expand please, your point is not clear.

Brian


Most things that are water cooled are also air cooled, engines (radiators) being a prime example.
Adrian Newby
 
Joined: 7 Feb 2012

Post Sat Feb 11, 2012 7:58 pm

gilgen wrote:Has anybody obtained any proof that there is actually a vent here? But even if there is a vent for drver cooling, the outlet can be a lot smaller than the inlet, thus creating an airdam, and smoothing the airflow over the hump.


Why would Adrian Newey make a midget 3/4 inch tall pseudo air dam who's effect wouldn't be any larger than a simple ramp (like Ferrari's), and which would spill air over the sides into air flow he was trying to keep clean?
Adrian Newby
 
Joined: 7 Feb 2012

Post Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:08 pm

Adrian Newby wrote:Your second sentence implies you are still thinking the main concern is drag. And it isn't.


So, what is the main concern when discussing the TOP surface of the nose?

Brian
hardingfv32
 
Joined: 3 Apr 2011

Post Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:12 pm

Adrian Newby wrote:Most things that are water cooled are also air cooled, engines (radiators) being a prime example.


So then it is your thesis that this air flow is fed to a air/water heat exchanger that services the KERS unit under the fuel cell?

Brian
hardingfv32
 
Joined: 3 Apr 2011

Post Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:16 pm

hardingfv32 wrote:
Adrian Newby wrote:Your second sentence implies you are still thinking the main concern is drag. And it isn't.


So, what is the main concern when discussing the TOP surface of the nose?

Brian


That it not foul up the air flow on the sides, especially in the area between the tires.
Adrian Newby
 
Joined: 7 Feb 2012

Post Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:28 pm

volarchico wrote:Why would we use the nose height as the length scale?


Well, I just needed something of the right order, but yeah, I guess the distance from the nose tip is better. I don't think my Reynolds number would be too different still.

volarchico wrote:Using turbulent boundary layer equation...

EDIT: Image of profile:
Image


So I guess the question I have is whether the boundary layer under the nose is turbulent or laminar? More desirable to have a laminar one, I would think, for air quality approaching the floor. So, do they trip the boundary layer deliberately? Or will the vortices from the wings do this?
"Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words." - Chuang Tzu
horse
 
Joined: 23 Oct 2009
Location: Edinburgh, UK

Post Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:49 pm

hardingfv32 wrote:
Adrian Newby wrote:Most things that are water cooled are also air cooled, engines (radiators) being a prime example.


So then it is your thesis that this air flow is fed to a air/water heat exchanger that services the KERS unit under the fuel cell?

Brian


I don't have a "thesis" regarding any particular cooling method once the air gets to the KERS unit/battery pack. I did not bring up water cooling, you did.

The air from the lower intake could be fed to a small radiator, or it could be fed past cooling fins, or into a fan first, or... who knows. I have not seen details on the Red Bull KERS cooling. I know that it was widely reported to be insufficient last year. I would say that this is not the RB8's only source for KERS cooling, if its requirements are anything like others I have seen in the past.
Adrian Newby
 
Joined: 7 Feb 2012

Post Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:54 pm

Adrian Newby wrote:
gilgen wrote:Has anybody obtained any proof that there is actually a vent here? But even if there is a vent for drver cooling, the outlet can be a lot smaller than the inlet, thus creating an airdam, and smoothing the airflow over the hump.


Why would Adrian Newey make a midget 3/4 inch tall pseudo air dam who's effect wouldn't be any larger than a simple ramp (like Ferrari's), and which would spill air over the sides into air flow he was trying to keep clean?


Because Neweys answer could trap air, and cause a more streamlined flow over the nose, as shown in earlier simulations in this thread. Ferraris bump will change the airflow twice, and is more likely to create drag.
gilgen
 
Joined: 3 Apr 2010

Post Sat Feb 11, 2012 10:10 pm

gilgen wrote:
Adrian Newby wrote:
gilgen wrote:Has anybody obtained any proof that there is actually a vent here? But even if there is a vent for drver cooling, the outlet can be a lot smaller than the inlet, thus creating an airdam, and smoothing the airflow over the hump.


Why would Adrian Newey make a midget 3/4 inch tall pseudo air dam who's effect wouldn't be any larger than a simple ramp (like Ferrari's), and which would spill air over the sides into air flow he was trying to keep clean?


Because Neweys answer could trap air, and cause a more streamlined flow over the nose, as shown in earlier simulations in this thread. Ferraris bump will change the airflow twice, and is more likely to create drag.



Even if it did work as an air dam, which it won't - especially not to the wildly exaggerated extent shown in that MS paint drawing earlier in this thread - it would spill lots of air over the sides, exactly where you don't want it, doing more harm than good.

Compared to clean air flow between the front tires:

Top nose drag does not matter. Top nose drag does not matter. Top nose drag does not matter.

I can't say it any plainer than that, so I can only repeat it.
Adrian Newby
 
Joined: 7 Feb 2012

Post Sat Feb 11, 2012 10:22 pm

Also, as I have pointed out before, that "hump air" that everyone is so worried about smoothing is mere microseconds away from running into the largest turbulent area on the entire car (with the exception of the spinning tires) - the gaping hole of the cockpit, the whirling eddies of the driver's helmet, the perpendicular slab of the airbox...

There just isn't much to be gained, and even if you did, you wouldn't have gained it for long.
Adrian Newby
 
Joined: 7 Feb 2012

Post Sat Feb 11, 2012 10:23 pm

hm ...I always thought everything counts .sure with those four wheels and barndoorlike wings a little hump will not alter drag very much but then where do you stop saying it does not matter?
marcush.
 
Joined: 9 Mar 2004

PreviousNext

Return to Aerodynamics, chassis and tyres

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CCBot [Bot], Exabot [Bot] and 9 guests