Red Bull RB17

Breaking news, useful data or technical highlights or vehicles that are not meant to race. You can post commercial vehicle news or developments here.
Please post topics on racing variants in "other racing categories".
User avatar
chrisc90
41
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2022 8:22 pm

Re: Red Bull RB17

Post

napoleon1981 wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2023 5:50 pm
TBH the Valkyrie and the RB19 look nothing alike. Had they designed the car with dimensions similar to current regulations, it would have been a different story.
I agree. Whilst the steps in the rear of the diffuser look similar, the overall design and concept of the floor is worlds apart.

LM10
LM10
121
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2018 11:07 pm

Re: Red Bull RB17

Post

chrisc90 wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2023 6:10 pm
napoleon1981 wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2023 5:50 pm
TBH the Valkyrie and the RB19 look nothing alike. Had they designed the car with dimensions similar to current regulations, it would have been a different story.
I agree. Whilst the steps in the rear of the diffuser look similar, the overall design and concept of the floor is worlds apart.
Yea, keep saying that to yourself. The Valkyrie does not need to have RB like sidepods and wings to function as a study object. After all teams learn from each other on weekly basis despite following entirely different concept philosophies.

Probably you’re also convinced of it being a complete coincidence that this part of the floor indeed looks very similar and has got nothing to do with knowledge gained from Valkyrie and applied to the RedBull. By far the most important part of the car in this ground effect era - the floor - has such similarities AND was designed by the same person, but it’s just a bizarre coincidence… :)

napoleon1981
napoleon1981
3
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 4:19 pm

Re: Red Bull RB17

Post

LM10 wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2023 6:37 pm
chrisc90 wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2023 6:10 pm
napoleon1981 wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2023 5:50 pm
TBH the Valkyrie and the RB19 look nothing alike. Had they designed the car with dimensions similar to current regulations, it would have been a different story.
I agree. Whilst the steps in the rear of the diffuser look similar, the overall design and concept of the floor is worlds apart.
Yea, keep saying that to yourself. The Valkyrie does not need to have RB like sidepods and wings to function as a study object. After all teams learn from each other on weekly basis despite following entirely different concept philosophies.

Probably you’re also convinced of it being a complete coincidence that this part of the floor indeed looks very similar and has got nothing to do with knowledge gained from Valkyrie and applied to the RedBull. By far the most important part of the car in this ground effect era - the floor - has such similarities AND was designed by the same person, but it’s just a bizarre coincidence… :)
The floor is totally different. It doesnt even use the plank concept. The design also started way back 2016-2017. Has Newey learned lessons using this, im sure he did. Newey started doing his homework in time, just like Merc did with the hybrid engine. Also, the whole cost cap discussion and agreement between teams didnt happen until 2020. So the argument that the Valkyrie was to circumvent the cost cap is crazy.
Last edited by napoleon1981 on Sun Aug 06, 2023 6:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
chrisc90
41
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2022 8:22 pm

Re: Red Bull RB17

Post

LM10 wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2023 6:37 pm
chrisc90 wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2023 6:10 pm
napoleon1981 wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2023 5:50 pm
TBH the Valkyrie and the RB19 look nothing alike. Had they designed the car with dimensions similar to current regulations, it would have been a different story.
I agree. Whilst the steps in the rear of the diffuser look similar, the overall design and concept of the floor is worlds apart.
Yea, keep saying that to yourself. The Valkyrie does not need to have RB like sidepods and wings to function as a study object. After all teams learn from each other on weekly basis despite following entirely different concept philosophies.

Probably you’re also convinced of it being a complete coincidence that this part of the floor indeed looks very similar and has got nothing to do with knowledge gained from Valkyrie and applied to the RedBull. By far the most important part of the car in this ground effect era - the floor - has such similarities AND was designed by the same person, but it’s just a bizarre coincidence… :)

It works as a whole though. Are you saying that because the rear is the same the airflow is going to be the same between a wider floor, much lower tunnels, leading strakes, fancy pieces on the edge of the floor to direct airflow out.

This is a era where everything needs to work as a whole. There is air feeding a beam wing, rear spoilers etc all affecting airflow out the rear of the car.

Yes it looks similar, but how much they benefitted from it is another question. I dare bet the height of the central area is nowhere near that of a F1 car. Is the Valkyrie expected to scrape along the floor with a central plank?

Do you think when F1 teams design a floor, they only run the floor through simulations and wind tunnel designs?

101FlyingDutchman
101FlyingDutchman
16
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2019 11:01 am

Re: Red Bull RB17

Post

As a lay person you can convince yourself quite easily of where there is smoke…there is fire. If you want to see it then you can but it’s beyond ridiculous. I guess it’s hard to accept one team has stolen a March. But as McLaren has shown, steps can be made when you do your homework. And arguably they’re the fastest in the high speed now. I’m sure the FIA has way smarter people working for them than the armchair finger pointing that’s going on here. It’s laughable

User avatar
TFSA
2
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2023 5:06 am

Re: Red Bull RB17

Post


Just_a_fan wrote:Exactly. And we were repeatedly told by certain quarters that there is no way that a road car project could be of any relevance to the F1 car.

What about a track-only "advanced ground effect" special?
You're allowed to transfer IP outside of F1, but not inside. The problem with your argument is that you automatically junp to the conclusion that the F1 project is copying stuff from this car, when in fact it's 99% likely to be the other way around.

Also, even small changes make a difference in F1 in regards to aero, and the whole package have to be considered. This floor is about as relevant to the RB F1 car as the Williams F1 floor is. Probably even less. It's a completely different car, and any data gathered in it would be pretty much useless in F1. As the 2022 mid-season Aston Martin proved, it's not enough to make two cars look alike and expect them to perform similarly.

Cs98
Cs98
33
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2022 10:37 am

Re: Red Bull RB17

Post

TFSA wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2023 8:16 pm
Just_a_fan wrote:Exactly. And we were repeatedly told by certain quarters that there is no way that a road car project could be of any relevance to the F1 car.

What about a track-only "advanced ground effect" special?
You're allowed to transfer IP outside of F1, but not inside. The problem with your argument is that you automatically junp to the conclusion that the F1 project is copying stuff from this car, when in fact it's 99% likely to be the other way around.

Also, even small changes make a difference in F1 in regards to aero, and the whole package have to be considered. This floor is about as relevant to the RB F1 car as the Williams F1 floor is. Probably even less. It's a completely different car, and any data gathered in it would be pretty much useless in F1. As the 2022 mid-season Aston Martin proved, it's not enough to make two cars look alike and expect them to perform similarly.
Speaking of the AMR22, why didn't that car have "steps" in the diffuser? Surely they had access to the designs and CFD of their own car? If this was such a groundbreaking thing then surely the AMR would have shown up with this on the car. They clearly would have known about it at the very least.

Seems to me these "steps" are just another aerodynamic tool that is only as good as the person wielding it. In this case Newey.

wesley123
wesley123
204
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 4:55 pm

Re: Red Bull RB17

Post

napoleon1981 wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2023 6:45 pm
Also, the whole cost cap discussion and agreement between teams didnt happen until 2020. So the argument that the Valkyrie was to circumvent the cost cap is crazy.
I'll raise you a different one; It circumvents limits on windtunnel/CFD time as well as a variety of other limits set on aerodynamic testing.

There are a variety of issues with defending the Valkyrie(or the RB17 for that matter). A first that people like to jump to is that the cars are vastly different, and therefore won't share any relevance. This is only partially true; physics do not change. However, what does change are aerodynamic requirements. So for example the kicks that is shared with the RB18/19 and the Valkyrie will have a very similar effect.
And since I mentioned requirements; There is literally no reason at all for a road car to have a step plane, yet, the Valkyrie -which has absolutely no relation to the Red Bull F1 car and will serve in no way as a way to gather knowledge- has one, just like the F1 car has from the same designer.

Another thing here is that Red Bull was an absolute landslide ahead of the rest of the field, featuring a floor that is significantly more detailed than even the second car on the grid, while having the second least wind tunnel time of the grid. You might defend this by arguing it sacrificed detailing on the upper side of the car; not the case either. However, what they did have and the rest of the field did not have was a car on which they could apply literally every single detail of their floor to test.
"Bite my shiny metal ass" - Bender

Just_a_fan
Just_a_fan
593
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:37 pm

Re: Red Bull RB17

Post

TFSA wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2023 8:16 pm
Just_a_fan wrote:Exactly. And we were repeatedly told by certain quarters that there is no way that a road car project could be of any relevance to the F1 car.

What about a track-only "advanced ground effect" special?
You're allowed to transfer IP outside of F1, but not inside. The problem with your argument is that you automatically junp to the conclusion that the F1 project is copying stuff from this car, when in fact it's 99% likely to be the other way around.

Also, even small changes make a difference in F1 in regards to aero, and the whole package have to be considered. This floor is about as relevant to the RB F1 car as the Williams F1 floor is. Probably even less. It's a completely different car, and any data gathered in it would be pretty much useless in F1. As the 2022 mid-season Aston Martin proved, it's not enough to make two cars look alike and expect them to perform similarly.
Why would a flat bottomed race car be used to help a tunnel car in development? Surely, a project with absolutely unlimited resources designing a tunnel car would benefit a limited resource tunnel race car. Simple diffusion - from geater concentration to lesser.

What's very interesting is that the Valkyrie's floor details were carefully protected from view right up until it was seen in the wild.
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.

User avatar
TFSA
2
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2023 5:06 am

Re: Red Bull RB17

Post


Just_a_fan wrote: Why would a flat bottomed race car be used to help a tunnel car in development? Surely, a project with absolutely unlimited resources designing a tunnel car would benefit a limited resource tunnel race car. Simple diffusion - from geater concentration to lesser.

What's very interesting is that the Valkyrie's floor details were carefully protected from view right up until it was seen in the wild.
Why is that interesting? It's still IP, and if it had some features that was shared with or came or related to their F1 division, then it's only reasonable that they wanted to protect that for as long as possible. Remember that back then, 3D scanning etc. wasn't banned before the Racing Point case.

If you're arguing that teams were preparing for the cost cap ahead of time, we don't disagree on that. It's no secret that many of the teams that had the resources, made massive investments before the cost of cap came into effect. Hardly surprising, but still within the rules last i checked.


Sendt fra min SM-N986B med Tapatalk


User avatar
bluechris
8
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 7:28 pm
Location: Athens

Re: Red Bull RB17

Post

To me it doesn't matter how it looks between the 2 designs, what matters is that the people involved in both designs are the same and in this case we have Newey as head developer in both so it's pretty obvious that he gained knowledge with this. Count also his experience with the old underground formula and porpoising that all the other teams had and this to me translates to the success we see now in RB.

User avatar
chrisc90
41
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2022 8:22 pm

Re: Red Bull RB17

Post

Newey's experience with ground effect dates back to his university studies. He was brought up around ground effect. There is probably very very few others that have done theory and papers as part of studies on ground effect.

Just_a_fan
Just_a_fan
593
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:37 pm

Re: Red Bull RB17

Post

TFSA wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2023 9:32 pm

If you're arguing that teams were preparing for the cost cap ahead of time, we don't disagree on that. It's no secret that many of the teams that had the resources, made massive investments before the cost of cap came into effect. Hardly surprising, but still within the rules last i checked.


Sendt fra min SM-N986B med Tapatalk
The Valkyrie is used as an example that we can see.

The thread is about the RB17 which is currently in design and could very conceivably be used to leverage resources outside of the cost cap for the benefit of the F1 car.

And the fact that TD45 exists tells us that the FIA are concerned about this very issue.
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.

Just_a_fan
Just_a_fan
593
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:37 pm

Re: Red Bull RB17

Post

chrisc90 wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2023 10:20 pm
Newey's experience with ground effect dates back to his university studies. He was brought up around ground effect. There is probably very very few others that have done theory and papers as part of studies on ground effect.
Every designer has experience with ground effects - F1 has been a ground effect series since the 1970s.

It's tunnel floors that are "new", and exactly the design issue that Valkyrie and now RB17 major on.
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.

User avatar
Wouter
110
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: Red Bull RB17

Post

chrisc90 wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2023 10:20 pm
Newey's experience with ground effect dates back to his university studies. He was brought up around ground effect. There is probably very very few others that have done theory and papers as part of studies on ground effect.
.
Thats correct. Newey wrote a dissertation on "Ground Effect" at the University and graduated cum laude.
The Power of Dreams!