Tozza Mazza wrote:Interesting stuff.
I reckon you could get the concave diffuser up to the DF levels of the convex one, with much lower drag!
marekk wrote:@DRCosa: how do you calculate net downforce ?
hardingfv32 wrote:For F1, could this arrangement be an attempt to move the DF levels forward?
hardingfv32 wrote:To get some idea of the complexity of the subject you propose, review this article on a F1 intake diffuser.
Design Optimization of a Two-Dimensional Subsonic
Engine Air Intake
http://www.soton.ac.uk/~nwb/lectures/Ae ... 23-118.pdf
Tozza Mazza wrote:Very little info out there on the web, and pictures of Diffuser profiles are hard to come about.
Which shape is best for the aerodynamics of the diffuser, and why?
There was some info in the diffuser confusion thread, but it was so clogged up with babble and opinion I couldn't make sense of it.
CONVEX (TRADITIONAL) DIFFUSER
The air velocity was 50m/s (180kph)
First of all, we see that the drag with the concave diffuser is alost half!
Downforce is less but this could be improved with more development.
Looking at the static pressure images, i would say that for the traditional diffuser the pressure is more evenly distributed along the length of the diffuser, while on the concave one, the negative pressure is more "concentrated" on its front (horizontal) part.
scarbs wrote:The transistion between flat floor and diffuser is often more complex than a simple kink. Teams will often fit steps or rounded sections at the transistion. this detailing I imagine is to get the flow to attach to the steepest part of the diffuser, in a similar way to a gurney at the trailing edge of a flap.
Users browsing this forum: BlackSwan, Exabot [Bot], SectorOne and 7 guests