Hey guys, hope you enjoy the video! A side note that my aero course is currently on sale for Black Friday if you want to get in on that action: courses.jkfaero.com/courses/race-car-aerodynamics-the-definitive-course Worth noting too that that inboard bulge on the diffuser top surface on the 3D model is larger than I would've expected just to cover a gutter - perhaps they were running a stay or a pressure tap here too?
Hi Kyle. Great channel. I've been subscribed for about 2 years. I noticed you only analyse the f1 cars after the launches. Could you do other videos throughout the season and give your take on the upgrades?
I beleive they had some kind of interactive app for the launch of the car, and the 3D model used in the app, was litereally pulled right from their CAD files, with hardly any reduction in quality. As you can see from Kyles 3D model, even all of the hub and brake internals are modeled inside the wheel. It was an obnoxiously detailed 3D model for what its intended purpose was for.
Loved this video! I love small quirky rule interpretations like these. Could you make a video about the 2026 aero regs? they might not be enough info about the actual design of the cars but the inwashing winglets and concept seems interesting, kinda goes against what you want and it does make me question what teams will do if they inwash the front tire wake, id love to hear your thoughts about it!
In a design I did for SCCA D Sports Racer here in America, I used variable front wingless to control the volume of air feeding the tunnels. The idea worked on being able to vary the winglets during practice manually operated to determine the best fixed adjustment (as per the rules) for the actual race at any given track or condition. Kind of like how a throttle cable actuates a slide in a carburetor in relation to the carbs venturi. Simple and effective. I was doing that back in 2005. It works.
I would love to see a video on your idea of an ideal formula car. Keep the same wheelbase or thereabouts, but have aero freedom. Would it be a more simple shape like the 1980s, or would it have the various flips and flops and flizzles. If it wasn’t for the limitations, would they have a much smoother shape?
Yeah you realize how hard thatd be? It takes 100s of Kyles to engineer a car from scratch, even just aero. Its not as ez as saying "best f1 car". You need constraints rules to push engineers to find innovation. If u gave kyle blank sheet of ppr w/o regs where does he start? Also just so complex and cfd running needed u just cant afford it
@@captaintoyota3171 but would it be so hard? The main issue is finding ways to circumnavigate the rules that are put in place to slow down the cars. I’m not saying he would create the perfect car. But I’m sure he could have a ballpark idea that’s 80% there.
If the limitations were purely dimensional, we would see jet engines for propulsion and downforce suction. There would be more than 4 for wheels, perhaps even a tracked vehicle. Furthermore, a lot of sporting regulations would have to be in place, otherwise we would see "cars" with chemical thrusters for higher deceleration and cornering speeds which, in the end, no human being would be able to tolerate.
@@captaintoyota3171it wouldn't be so bad if you were to make it sort of like a 919 evo type of challenge where you take whatever set of regulations he thinks is best and throws the constraints out the window to take them to their ceiling
I'm a layman, but have followed F1 since the mid 90's. You're showing me stuff I'm deeply interested in, but in a way that I can easily understand, at least conceptually. I really, really appreciate that. Fantastic video.
Actually this idea was first used by Rory Byrne on the Ferrari F2002, where he did put a step in the transition between the diffuser and the flat floor. Another of Rory Byrnes many ideas and concepts copied by others untill today, just applied best to that set of regulations. But the idea of pushing that even further was very clever!
I have a theory on McLaren, I think they pulled a bit of a Tracing Point; I postulate they copied RB’s floor from last season and are just now learning how it works. I know it’s not really relevant to the video but watching this video, it crossed my mind.
Afaik there are rules against that-you can recreate stuff from photos and so on, but you must have documentation on the whole development process, since copying using electronic aids (like e.g. photogrammetry) is not allowed. So they’d only have been able to get inspired by it, and then base their own designs on said inspiration, but you _can’t_ straight up copy something, every design element must have reasoning behind it.
The gutter on the Ferrari example appears to be vented out to the sides somehow. I wonder if that yields a secondary benefit of allowing the boundary layer to reform at the edge of the gutter that helps tolerate a steeper gradient for the diffuser.
I appreciate the explanation here but while this interesting subject in a very nuanced way I can’t help but think this is ultimately a bad look for the sport if the performance differentiators between the guys at the top and bottom are things like a 10mm step in the floor. I really wish the future regulations would allow more technical freedom since we now have cost cap controls and basically what will amount to a spec engine format in 2026. It seems like the tighter and tighter they write the rules the more you need a phd in aerodynamics to understand why the Redbull is winning every race.
I've wondered this for years now. Is attempting to use a forward kick line and some F1 specific rules the reason F1 will usually use a forward expansion diffuser? Or are there other benefits beyond just moving the kick line forwards? Ones you can actually speak of, of course. Would it translate to other non-F1 aero packages well?
I’m surprised that a coordinate system of of water lines, butt lines, and stations, referenced from a datum, similar to employed in aircraft design, isn’t utilized, to define the dimensions of the aero systems, in a standardized manner. Very enlightening presentation. Thanks for sharing.
Is there anything in the rules that say you can’t have multiple radii in the “floor edge” box? So you could turn the floor up and the turn it back towards horizontal to make a long, shallow diffuser prior to the “diffuser” box.
There’s no way there aren’t way more ‘worst kept aero secrets’ in 2022-23 F1 cars right? Would love to see more videos about overlooked features & details
I think it would have been good if you explained it a little more in the beginning. I wasn't sure if this was a feature on pre 2022 cars or post 2022 cars. Seems like it's used on both pre and post, but just saying when it was introduced roughly and that it's still in use etc would have helped me out a little. There was a bit of the assumption the audience is as familiar with it as you are.
Do you think you could have a place where people could ask questions about the aero stuff you do? because I have so many questions and I would love some answers!
A great example of the old adage that there’s nothing new in F1. Williams (and no doubt others) had a similar feature in the early 2000’s as a work around for a very similar rule.
RB is supposed to be scrapping RB19 and going a whole new direction next year. Most of the teams think they are playing catch-up with RB. But if RB is moving the goal posts then how could anyone really stand a chance, obviously RB discovered something, if you remember Christian Horners comments after the RB19’s floor was seen, he said something along the lines of “by the time they figure out what we’re doing we’ll be into something else”, that’s not a direct quote. Two questions for you..Why wouldn’t they try to improve on what they are doing to save costs? Second, what is really going to change, it almost has to be a side pod change doesn’t it?
I would speculate that this is, perhaps, one of the cases where CAD rises above traditional methods of design (pencils and drawing boards). At least, from your great demonstration, it's easy to see that, just by playing with a single variable (in this case the max radius) one could arrive at a geometry like the "gutter". I am no saying that traditional design methods do not allow for such realizations, but it appears to me, at least, that drawing something in CAD does allow for a better visualization of the limitations imposed by the regulations, especially in regards to highly complex areas where multiple reg articles coincide.
Excellent video, this reminds me that you were contemplating doing a video about the Fan of the Gordon Murray T.50. Seems to tie in with this video a little bit. Are you still planning to do this?
Thank you! You have a way of explaining what is effectively high tier motorsports aerodynamics in a way in which anyone who is even just slightly interested in aero can clearly understand and visualize. Thanks for keeping the channel going strong all these years.
Hey Kyle, can you make a video where you explain how you design Wings, winglets and the transitions surrounding them? Also an other question: Why do you use the splines with pullingdirection points and not the ones, where the spline runs through your point?
I’ve seen top fuel drag cars use that gutter aerodynamic factor in inlet ports. They could make running streams, run down the port and over the ports valve seat and into the combustion chamber.
It would be great to hear why all the teams changed the upper section of the tail end of the 2023 cars all started having a very narrow tail resulting in the very straight line heading to the rear wing versus 2022 where they sculpted a smooth transition. I havent seen any explanation for this change and all teams seemed to have made the similar change.
Interesting video, thanks for sharing. Can you share insights as to why Mercedes seem to have struggled so much these past two sessions. The no-pod experiment caused so much porpoising and seem to have much higher drag than their primary competition.
Love your videos, but PLEASE stop constantly moving your mouse around. It makes it impossible to keep attention on the part of the drawing your are referring to.
Another GREAT detailed explanation of the theory of fluid mechanic/dynamics applied to the real world scenario of a Modern F1 car. But as a mechanical engineer, I do have one question that has been plaguing me the entire season. And I am asking you because you have actually worked for a modern F1 team in that department. With the underfloor shots of the Red Bull on full display for the past two years (courtesy of Checo) coupled with the wide open ended shots of its suspension layout, why is is so difficult for teams to copy and paste and even improve upon their concept of using the kinematics of a suspension for capturing and managing airflow underneath the car? Especially when you have to consider the VAST amount of brain power and computational power they have at their disposal. Once you did your floor analysis to show show Red Bull's approach for generating downforce was more exponential with a curved roof as opposed to everyone going for a linear maximum downforce model I just knew all the teams would realize that's the only way to really manage it with the limitations of the new suspension regulations. I am curious as to your thoughts about why my favorite team, your former employer 😊can't get it together, at leas conceptually?
Look at what happened when Racing Point (Aston Martin) copied Mercedes. At first they did well but they suddenly weren't able to develop or understand their car. You don't understand the concept of the car so even if you manage to copy it you won't know how to extract the most out of it.
Well copy & paste is an over simplification. What I am talking about is more or less the realization of the limitation of the flat floor/peak downforce model which was so clearly articulated by Kyle. If he can see that in the early days around 1/2 way through year one when we had Checo's car suspended in the air for everyone to see, why continue to run with it? Without some sort of hydraulic trick suspension it was never going to work compared to Red Bull's approach. @@wouterg
