And I suspect this post shows what you know about aerodynamics.outer_bongolia wrote:I am trying to understand the logic behind the design of this car.
In the front end, it looks like they are trying to use the nose to generate downforce instead of the wings. The nose tip is like a four by four. It has the pelican-bottom that narrows like a water drop as it goes back. The triple vanes by the front wheels try to move some more air underneath it. Top of the nose section seems to be curved inward (compare this to mclaren, ferrari, merc) which also supports my initial point. But the tip of the nose seems like it will just squeeze air into the middle of the front wing and create a lot of drag for no gain.
The front wing is pretty ugly, too. Single piece top wing is pretty flat and looks more like a flow conditioner. The middle stage of the lower wing looks just ridiculously thick towards the inside. The inner portion of the bottom assembly (white, shiny section) seems to be designed to move the air inwards. I suspect it will stall regularly.
Overall I'm very worried about this car's performance.
That´s simply not true. The water droplet you speak of is a manmade creation, it do not exist in nature.trinidefender wrote:You said "narrows like a water drop as it goes back." Just a question but have you ever stopped and wondered why water drops are the shape that they are? They are that shape because as the water droplets fall, the airflow moving around them shapes them into the shape that causes the least possible drag.
Hm,trinidefender wrote:And I suspect this post shows what you know about aerodynamics.
Fair enough. For some reason I feel like I have seen some article or something similar to that in the past.SectorOne wrote:That´s simply not true. The water droplet you speak of is a manmade creation, it do not exist in nature.trinidefender wrote:You said "narrows like a water drop as it goes back." Just a question but have you ever stopped and wondered why water drops are the shape that they are? They are that shape because as the water droplets fall, the airflow moving around them shapes them into the shape that causes the least possible drag.
http://water.usgs.gov/edu/graphics/wcpr ... shapes.gif
edit: and another one,
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... es.svg.png
Hm,trinidefender wrote:And I suspect this post shows what you know about aerodynamics.
Based on?outer_bongolia wrote: The front wing is pretty ugly, too. Single piece top wing is pretty flat and looks more like a flow conditioner. The middle stage of the lower wing looks just ridiculously thick towards the inside. The inner portion of the bottom assembly (white, shiny section) seems to be designed to move the air inwards. I suspect it will stall regularly.
Some people think looking at flat images from distance is much more reliable than a team with the full CFD model and wind tunnelwesley123 wrote:Based on?outer_bongolia wrote: The front wing is pretty ugly, too. Single piece top wing is pretty flat and looks more like a flow conditioner. The middle stage of the lower wing looks just ridiculously thick towards the inside. The inner portion of the bottom assembly (white, shiny section) seems to be designed to move the air inwards. I suspect it will stall regularly.
Well said, this is F1T bullshit bingo season.Manoah2u wrote:
This is not the final product, this is a reveal vehicle. The front wing will be hugely adapted before the Melbourne Qually.
They'll test and test, adapt, and evolve the design.
There's a reason behind this design philosophy and it's been layed down by greater minds then armchair specialists here that have no clue of aerodynamics nor see the bigger whole in the entire concept.
Don't offend Scarbs ...Shakeman wrote: ...
There's not a human on this planet who can determine relative performance from images.