[gripfx]

As someone in the industry, please take these numbers with the biggest grain of salt you can find. The writer has both added their own components and not divulged the CFD settings used. Which is fair enough but the numbers shown could be within 10% or 1000% percent of a "ballpark".

[bernulli]

Can’t upvote this enough. I actually include an hour of rant in my Fluids class where we dissect CFD results from blogs or LinkedIn - hypersonic reindeer for Christmas are fun and obviously a joke, but everything presented sincerely, like all the Cybertruck analyses when it was revealed, are mostly irrelevant. Don’t trust CFD results if you don’t know every aspect of them.

It’s “dangerous” now in the sense that people just have to click a button and are led to believe that meaningful results are being produced without a thorough study.

[timpattinson]

Very cool, but yeah anyone with the competency and computing power to do actually decent F1 CFD wouldn't be posting it on the internet.

The teams themselves have a hard enough time getting a model to match their actual car.

[johnbrodie]

Not entirely correct, here's an interesting YouTube channel by an ex-F1 aero engineer: https://www.youtube.com/user/Kyleengineers

You're correct insomuch as he's not sharing CFD settings, and is bound by what I assume is a pretty strict NDA, but he still has a ton of useful content. Of course, if you want his true opinion/skills on something specific, he'll do so for a price.

[helmholtz]

It's "Colourful Fluid Dynamics" for a reason.

[JorgeGT]

"Colors For Directors", especially without the grid and turbulence modelling (RANS? DES? LES?) data.