If you want an idea to improve the floor fences, check out the paper titled "Effect of blade tip winglet on the performance of a highly loaded transonic compressor rotor". The regulations allow you to put a fillet radius on the floor fences of up to 50mm once the floor fence is covered by the floor body. In other words you can put a 50mm winglet on the bottom of the floor fences. This paper shows that a winglet on pressure side of a rotor cascade extends the stall limit, with an almost negligible increase in drag. In other words it extends the aero envelope of the floor fences.
Quoting said paper "In the case with pressure-side winglet, the tip leakage vortex trajectory is more inclined in the streamwise direction. In addition, the distance from the first tip leakage vortex appearance at the suction surface to the intersection with the shock is longer than the corresponding distance in baseline tip case. With the longer distance, the low momentum core fluid is reenergized as tip leakage vortex mixing with main flow, as discussed by Kablitz et al." So I would say you sir, are definitely on to something.
You know what would really improve these videos? A few more details on boundary conditions, used models and mesh. I dont know if airshaper even gives these informations but simply looking at a mesh to judge its quality, mesh convergence studies or anything would really help to strengthen the discussion of your results.
was going to sneak a adaptive mesh reference in with an image but forgot for this video. For the 50 people that get something out of those references, its just another thing. Spending a minute talking about a graph is a bit to much for some.... It depends on the video content and my poor script writing skills how much I can get in. Turns out I cannot script jokes about cfd... Trying to be honest while not being super boring is more difficult than I thought.
Tbh looking at total pressure slices would be more effective if you look to reduce drag , and side static pressure slices for the downforce , LiC slices are okey but when you only look at one variable you might miss some features
Agreed total pressure would be much better at assessing drag reducing but I was searching for flow structure. Say if you wanted to understand the impact of the front wing on the performance of the floor tp would be the primary variable. Then because I find tp terrible at looking for structures then vorticity and velocity etc..... can be used then. I try to explain why I am using the variable I am but my script still need a large amount of work. Videos on top of analysis places constraints that aren't normal...... but then I get feedback that I would otherwise get as well.
When talking about the mirror's supporting structure-housing connection area at 5:14 why wouldn't you just refine the mesh in that area as opposed to modifying the geometry to make the gap larger? I've never meshed with openfoam but I'd imagine its meshing utilities are powerful enough to do this.
The problem with openfoam is the work flow. You can refine the mesh locally but the thing you want to refine needs to be extracted or manually labeled.. For example if you want to add another part in the simulation, and you have automated the work flow yourself, each text file needs altering. Airshaper, not having used it myself, has a automate system but it mustn't have local refinements built in. Also the model wasn't prepared for this purpose in mind. Openfoam has all the required functionality, but not a gui for ease of use, though some of the windows adaptions, i don't use, seem to have a ui.
Nelson try doing an Aero Analysis on FW16, FW16B and the Benetton B194. I've got PDF it has bit of detail from a Japan Toy Model 20 / 1 car. It has Brazil and Imola setup. It's not highly detailed, but might help in creating a model.
Thanks. I've got a bunch of useful images of those cars. The b194 is particularly interesting because of the changes brought into effect that season. Getting a useful insight into these cars is difficult because the teams are really pushing performance and the computer I am using isn't able to convey that intention. Really should finish the 1990 cars first.... 😞
I have my Bachelor's degree is ME and am just getting interested in aerodynamics. Would you recommend pursuing further studies to learn more? I want to understand these concepts better but do not know where to start. Thanks for the video
There are few short courses that charge a range of fees. Otherwise you can do it old school and buy a bunch of book, some like joseph katz race car aerodynamics is classic and available online. JKF with Kyle Forster is an option, just checked hes got a 30% off deal atm. SAE organisations across the world have seminars. schoolofraceengineering . co . uk/ tend to have module every year.. maybe. There are plenty of options.
All this analysis is very interesting, but it is meaningless if the rotation of the wheels at the real speed of the vehicle simulation is not taken into account... it gives that feeling when you see the current lines shown in this video...
