Is Aerodynamic Design influenced by the Animal Kingdom?

[godlameroso]

Apart from those flickups are there to take advantage of the massive flow of air pushed out of the way by the sidepods and bargeboards...

As has already been said, you can't just assume something that looks similar is performing anything like the same function.
Jaffa Cakes look a bit like wheels but I ain't gonna bolt them on my car.

They're there to lower the pressure of the leading edge of the floor, much like the sting ray uses them to accelerate water under their bodies. They both work in ground effect. The pressure differential in that part of the floor vs the sidepod undercuts, and bargeboards create a strong low pressure at the leading edge of the floor which in turn, on top of generating downforce feeds the rear diffuser as well.

Also no one is suggesting to use flappy skin on aero surfaces, as much as the aerodynamicist want to flexible aero is highly regulated.

[godlameroso]

....
I will agree with you that birds aren't the only inspiration for shapes on F1 cars, but disagree with the claim that they're not at all.
....

I think the majority of people here wouldn't argue that (is anybody?) Nature gives inspiration to many engineering fields, that's well documented.

You don't seem to be arguing that nature can influence aerodynamic development though. You seem to be arguing that birds etc. are better at aerodynamics than the people who develop F1 cars (the "bird brained" designers as you called them). This is laughably obviously not the case, as has been pointed out to you numerous times.

The only proof you have ever posted are images of parts of various creatures that look similar to aerodynamic appendages on certain F1 cars. You don't explain or justify these comparisons and refuse to prove what you claim with flippancy. Remember, you're the one making the claim, it is your job to prove said claim.

An aerodynamicist would not be insulted at being called bird brained, it just means they understand airflow, but they don't fly, they will never have the same intimate understanding of airflow as a bird.

The pictures I posted should highlight their function in a macro sense. Again a certain amount of imagination is required.

[PhillipM]

Why would the stingray be wanting to create that much pressure differential to need flickups that are massive in proportion to the 'floor' area and actual water displaced by the body?
Or is it trying to drive itself 12ft under the seabed?

Answer, it doesn't, and it's just lifted them to push them back down for propulsion.

[Just_a_fan]

they will never have the same intimate understanding of airflow as a bird.

You see, it's this sort of thing that I find annoying. BIrds, almost certainly, don't understand airflow in any meaningful way. They are intuitive fliers and don't need to understand about pressure and vortices, lift and drag. They just fly. They feel the air moving and adjust their wings and tail to get to where they want to go accordingly. No conscious thought required.

Birds haven't been designed except by evolution - which is why there are so many different types of bird with different flight characteristics. Birds don't sit there and think "I know, I'll grow a vortex generator here because that will give me a 2% improvement in L/D". A Peregrine would be rubbish flying thousands of miles over open ocean and an Albatross can't stoop at 125mph, a hummingbird can hover but can't lift a rabbit, an eagle can lift a rabbit but can't hover.

If teams should be looking at nature, for clues, perhaps F1 teams that struggle with overheating should look at humans for clues. Why? We're really effective at temperature control. Indeed, we're some of the most effective hot weather mammals there are. Humans can run - that's run - for hours at a time in 40deg C. Sure, we need to take on water to do it, but there's nothing else out there that is as effective. No horse or dog could do it, for example, and neither can just about anything that is born and lives in such temperatures. We evolved to do this because we're basically slow and weak with small teeth and no claws. But we can run in high heat. So we can run a prey animal until it literally collapses with heat exhaustion - antelope are still hunted this way by traditional tribes in Africa. (I say "we" in the species-sense. Not me - I'd have a heart attack before the antelope had even broken out of a trot! )

Wow, F1 teams are so sweat-brained that they haven't looked at human persperation for inspiration!

[godlameroso]

they will never have the same intimate understanding of airflow as a bird.

You see, it's this sort of thing that I find annoying. BIrds, almost certainly, don't understand airflow in any meaningful way. They are intuitive fliers and don't need to understand about pressure and vortices, lift and drag. They just fly. They feel the air moving and adjust their wings and tail to get to where they want to go accordingly. No conscious thought required.

Birds haven't been designed except by evolution - which is why there are so many different types of bird with different flight characteristics. Birds don't sit there and think "I know, I'll grow a vortex generator here because that will give me a 2% improvement in L/D". A Peregrine would be rubbish flying thousands of miles over open ocean and an Albatross can't stoop at 125mph, a hummingbird can hover but can't lift a rabbit, an eagle can lift a rabbit but can't hover.

If teams should be looking at nature, for clues, perhaps F1 teams that struggle with overheating should look at humans for clues. Why? We're really effective at temperature control. Indeed, we're some of the most effective hot weather mammals there are. Humans can run - that's run - for hours at a time in 40deg C. Sure, we need to take on water to do it, but there's nothing else out there that is as effective. No horse or dog could do it, for example, and neither can just about anything that is born and lives in such temperatures. We evolved to do this because we're basically slow and weak with small teeth and no claws. But we can run in high heat. So we can run a prey animal until it literally collapses with heat exhaustion - antelope are still hunted this way by traditional tribes in Africa. (I say "we" in the species-sense. Not me - I'd have a heart attack before the antelope had even broken out of a trot! )

Wow, F1 teams are so sweat-brained that they haven't looked at human persperation for inspiration!

B.S. birds aren't born knowing how to fly, it takes practice like riding a bike or walking. It takes months before they're comfortable flying in ground effect.

[Just_a_fan]

The little flick ups on the floor behind the sidepod endplates remind me of a sting-ray.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... y_city.jpg

The ray only has the flicks up along its edges because it is propelling itself through the water. The edges are undulated to force water rearwards and thus the ray forwards. They can rotate on their vertical axis and reverse too. But they aren't doing anything that an F1 car does.

[godlameroso]

Why would the stingray be wanting to create that much pressure differential to need flickups that are massive in proportion to the 'floor' area and actual water displaced by the body?
Or is it trying to drive itself 12ft under the seabed?

Answer, it doesn't, and it's just lifted them to push them back down for propulsion.

Stingrays don't have sidepods, their pressure differential is only enough to move their bodies. Don't focus on the finger point at the moon, focus on the moon the finger points at.

[Just_a_fan]

B.S. birds aren't born knowing how to fly, it takes practice like riding a bike or walking. It takes months before they're comfortable flying in ground effect.

But they still don't understand flying or aerodynamics.

Oh, and just about all birds can fly once the feathers have formed. They're not necessarily very accomplished but they can do it. That's how they fledge. They don't go to ground school and learn how the wing works first, do they? They just fly.

[godlameroso]

The little flick ups on the floor behind the sidepod endplates remind me of a sting-ray.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... y_city.jpg

The ray only has the flicks up along its edges because it is propelling itself through the water. The edges are undulated to force water rearwards and thus the ray forwards. They can rotate on their vertical axis and reverse too. But they aren't doing anything that an F1 car does.

They are, they're pulling water towards the flick up in ground effect. The same function the flickups on the F1 car do but with air. The sting ray ripples it's flick ups, on an F1 car they're stationary but fulfill the same function, to extract fluid, and lower the pressure at the leading edge of the floor.

[Just_a_fan]

They are, they're pulling water towards the flick up in ground effect. The same function the flickups on the F1 car do but with air. The sting ray ripples it's flick ups, on an F1 car they're stationary but fulfill the same function, to extract fluid, and lower the pressure at the leading edge of the floor.

No they're not. They're implementing a linear version of an Archimedes screw.

[godlameroso]

B.S. birds aren't born knowing how to fly, it takes practice like riding a bike or walking. It takes months before they're comfortable flying in ground effect.

But they still don't understand flying or aerodynamics.

Oh, and just about all birds can fly once the feathers have formed. They're not necessarily very accomplished but they can do it. That's how they fledge. They don't go to ground school and learn how the wing works first, do they? They just fly.

Did you go to walking school, and learn how bones and tendons and ligaments and kinetic linking work? Or did you learn through doing? And sure you can't easily describe walking motion but you understand it you live it. Just because the bird can't easily communicate what it knows with you doesn't mean it doesn't know or understand it. It's obvious it does.

[godlameroso]

They are, they're pulling water towards the flick up in ground effect. The same function the flickups on the F1 car do but with air. The sting ray ripples it's flick ups, on an F1 car they're stationary but fulfill the same function, to extract fluid, and lower the pressure at the leading edge of the floor.

No they're not. They're implementing a linear version of an Archimedes screw.

You say tomato I'll say tomato.

[godlameroso]

If I were to do an experiment, I would put the bird in the wind tunnel and then use the bird to work out what's the best way to solve a particular flow instability problem. Give it some yaw and force the bird to fly in yaw, so not just head on flow, but also tangential flow, above below and other directions. See which wing shapes dominate, and invert them, and that would be a good starting point for development.

If I had the wind tunnel and spare eagles I'd give it a shot, just for the sake of science. We can laser scan, and CFD it, do it with modern tech instead of stuff they had when I was a little kid. The legality boxes means the Re# are similar. But anyway, this was supposed to be a fun thread.

[PhillipM]

They are, they're pulling water towards the flick up in ground effect. The same function the flickups on the F1 car do but with air. The sting ray ripples it's flick ups, on an F1 car they're stationary but fulfill the same function, to extract fluid, and lower the pressure at the leading edge of the floor.

Flickups on an F1 car are driven by the sidepod displacing fluid. Where's the sidepod on a stingray?

[Just_a_fan]

And sure you can't easily describe walking motion but you understand it you live it. Just because the bird can't easily communicate what it knows with you doesn't mean it doesn't know or understand it. It's obvious it does.

I can walk but that doesn't mean I understand it (I do have a basic understanding, actually, but only because I've looked in to it). You ask the man on the street how he walks and he'll say something like "I put one foot in front of the other" but he doesn't understand it, he doesn't have knowledge about the mechanics of it. Humans were using levers to move things long before anyone sat down and worked out what levers are and how they work. Understanding and knowledge are not required to use the lever.

My dog has an excellent sense of smell - many times better than any human's. He can find stuff from a great distance. He was born able to do this. He has absolutely no knowledge or understanding about what smell is or how it's transmitted, how his nose picks it up, how the olfactory bulb in his brain sorts it all. And he doesn't understand why I can't do the same. That's the point. A bird can fly but it doesn't need to know how it flies in order to do so.

That's the really obvious thing. Knowledge and understanding are not fundamental in doing.