- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
Right, I'm sure it's more of a / duct than an S duct.Der_Meister45 wrote:I don't think their "S-duct" is actually and S. It seems like a lot of piping to make it into an "S" shape. I would assume its more of a straight shot to the vanity panel from the ducts on the bottom side of the nose.
Trying to pull the high pressure air that moves around the nose to the top side of the car allowing for more low pressure air to fill the void as it moves further rearward on the nose/car. Just a guess but I'd think it would help with the Y250 vortex propagation through the front end of the car, so that the maximum can be obtained once it hits the W floor and the barge boards at the front of the side pod.Moose wrote:Right, I'm sure it's more of a / duct than an S duct.Der_Meister45 wrote:I don't think their "S-duct" is actually and S. It seems like a lot of piping to make it into an "S" shape. I would assume its more of a straight shot to the vanity panel from the ducts on the bottom side of the nose.
I'm pretty sure I didn't show a vortex anywhere.Moose wrote:I have no idea why you would want to create a vortex where you show one...bhall II wrote:A thickened boundary layer is synonymous with stagnation.Just_a_fan wrote:Perhaps it just cleans up the boundary layer behind the pylons.
Two other points: the new design seems to be straighter in profile, and the radius of the curvature that marks its transition to the chassis appears to be smaller. However, it could just be optical trickeration.
If true, that's the innovative part: the articles suggests that the conventional s-duct opening under the nose is rightly placed in the 150mm in front of the wheel center line (allowed); the shark opening is there to canalize the airflow in the allowed opening, but doing so Merc has more control on the flow (working it earlier in a more confortable zone).tony77g wrote:Focus on -Duct Mercedes
http://www.f1sport.it/2016/02/f1-s-duct ... -regolare/
Yes, that's my understanding, too. One reason why it will be extremely hard to pass crash testing.turbof1 wrote:My interpretation is that the underside is not part of the nose, but is counted as an aerodynamic device just like the turning vanes are. We all know it isn't, but everything which can be counted as a hole, happens at the intersection between the chassis and crash structure, which is not clearly regulated.
Moose wrote:Right, I'm sure it's more of a / duct than an S duct.Der_Meister45 wrote:I don't think their "S-duct" is actually and S. It seems like a lot of piping to make it into an "S" shape. I would assume its more of a straight shot to the vanity panel from the ducts on the bottom side of the nose.
Their nose has already passed crash testing. It's the deflection test that's missing, but the same goes for all other cars.dren wrote:Yes, that's my understanding, too. One reason why it will be extremely hard to pass crash testing.turbof1 wrote:My interpretation is that the underside is not part of the nose, but is counted as an aerodynamic device just like the turning vanes are. We all know it isn't, but everything which can be counted as a hole, happens at the intersection between the chassis and crash structure, which is not clearly regulated.
