McLaren MCL36

[SmallSoldier]

That may end up being correct, but this is F1 where even now its less prescriptive and the teams may be pushing ideas to their fragile limits. You're likely more technically proficient than I, but I don't think you can rule out floor damage and downforce loss mid corner given damage we know kerbs can do all over the car.

If last year 50% of the DF came from the floor then this year it is 70 perhaps? That's a lot of DF to come from just one place and I'll be surprised if we don't see accidents as a result. Let's see what happens I guess.

Also consider that a large goal of the new front and rear wings, the wheel covers, along with the "wake conditioners" atop the front wheel, is to make the overall dirty air wake far less and to lower the loss of front end grip when following closely. Ground effects are less affected by dirty air than a pure wing. Thus getting the bottom plane of the front wing low will limit the DF loss when racing close together. Your 70% number [from the floor] is also DF that is almost totally unaffected by following closely in dirty air. That and having less dirty air should tighten up the racing and promote more overtaking. So goes the theory anyway.

I'm not talking about following, just situations in which the venturi effect can be drastically reduced during g cornering situations.

But anyway I'm open to any scenario I'm just nor ring out potential risks associated with the more extreme situations.

I've nothing more to add though so I'll see what happens on the track now.

If we consider that back in 2017 cars Hamilton pulled 6.5G’s in Turn 11 at the Australian GP… I can’t imagine what a sudden loss of downforce could do when at the limits… Considering these cars are driven at the edge of grip, sudden loss could very well imply loss of car control… With Previous (XX - 2021) cars, the loss of grip is a bit more progressive since downforce is generated by several other structures in addition to the floor, if the majority of the downforce will come from the tunnels, it could be harder for the drivers to “catch it” if they get lose.

[mwillems]

Also consider that a large goal of the new front and rear wings, the wheel covers, along with the "wake conditioners" atop the front wheel, is to make the overall dirty air wake far less and to lower the loss of front end grip when following closely. Ground effects are less affected by dirty air than a pure wing. Thus getting the bottom plane of the front wing low will limit the DF loss when racing close together. Your 70% number [from the floor] is also DF that is almost totally unaffected by following closely in dirty air. That and having less dirty air should tighten up the racing and promote more overtaking. So goes the theory anyway.

I'm not talking about following, just situations in which the venturi effect can be drastically reduced during g cornering situations.

But anyway I'm open to any scenario I'm just nor ring out potential risks associated with the more extreme situations.

I've nothing more to add though so I'll see what happens on the track now.

If we consider that back in 2017 cars Hamilton pulled 6.5G’s in Turn 11 at the Australian GP… I can’t imagine what a sudden loss of downforce could do when at the limits… Considering these cars are driven at the edge of grip, sudden loss could very well imply loss of car control… With current cars, the loss of grip is a bit more progressive since downforce is generated by several other structures in addition to the floor, if the majority of the downforce will come from the tunnels, it could be harder for the drivers to “catch it” if they get lose.

Yeah, sudden loss and total loss are different concepts. I'm not referring to the latter, just loss of downforce and then control during steering.

And your right, it's hard to know. You can't see under the car like a front wing coming off. Such damage could see you enter a corner not knowing the damage or the car just snap round

If indeed such damage could occur to the floor.
I cant wait .to see the cars in action.

[gcdugas]

If we consider that back in 2017 cars Hamilton pulled 6.5G’s in Turn 11 at the Australian GP… I can’t imagine what a sudden loss of downforce could do when at the limits… Considering these cars are driven at the edge of grip, sudden loss could very well imply loss of car control… With current cars, the loss of grip is a bit more progressive since downforce is generated by several other structures in addition to the floor, if the majority of the downforce will come from the tunnels, it could be harder for the drivers to “catch it” if they get lose.

6.5G... Wow! We could see another Kubica Canada 2007 caliber crash.

[SmallSoldier]

If we consider that back in 2017 cars Hamilton pulled 6.5G’s in Turn 11 at the Australian GP… I can’t imagine what a sudden loss of downforce could do when at the limits… Considering these cars are driven at the edge of grip, sudden loss could very well imply loss of car control… With current cars, the loss of grip is a bit more progressive since downforce is generated by several other structures in addition to the floor, if the majority of the downforce will come from the tunnels, it could be harder for the drivers to “catch it” if they get lose.

6.5G... Wow! We could see another Kubica Canada 2007 caliber crash.

That’s the latest piece of actual data I could find… I’m sure that in 2020 they were probably getting even a bit more.

No idea if you are been sarcastic with the “Wow”, but 6.5G’s during cornering is a lot… Kubica accident was due to touching wheels with another car, wasn’t it?

In any case, I’m sure that most of this has been taken into consideration when drafting the new regulations… I guess we will wait and see… I personally hope that it’s not the case and we won’t experience any unnecessary accidents.

[PlatinumZealot]

Giorgio Piola:

In the rear, however, there was an inversion of the schemes with the introduction of the push rod: in Woking they wanted to prevent the tie rod in the gearbox attachment from interfering with the Venturi channels and they moved the shock absorbers and springs up, freeing the area below to zoom in on the eye-catching Coca Cola area.

In the rear suspension, however, there is another interesting aspect: there is no upper triangle, replaced by two multilink arms, with the front one pivoting under the rear one. McLaren at the Mercedes “supermarket” would not have bought the rear-end kinematics, nor the gearbox, but the gearbox gear. Staggered arms allow air passages useful for aerodynamics and the generation of vortexes.

https://cdn-9.motorsport.com/images/mgl ... link-1.jpg

There is zero evidence of McLaren having multi-link until all the shrouds are removed and we see the mounting points.

Keep in mind you can still have a wish-bone design with the arms non-horizontal. So I am not sure how Piola concluded multi-link just because of that.

What makes a multi-link is if the arms do not share a common outer ball joint and move out of plane relative to each other.

[Emag]

https://cdn-4.motorsport.com/images/mgl ... tin--1.jpg

Now that we have looked on a bunch of cars, I would honestly be surprised if AM's concept works out great for them, not on the long run at least. Maybe it might be good for a couple of races until everyone dials in, but I can't imagine these regulations to be "cracked" by such a simple and straightforward interpretation of the rules.

That concept is seemingly the most intuitive idea you can have, and for that reason I believe every team must have at least considered it as an option. It seems like it's just a matter of lifting everything up to make a clear path for clean air towards the diffuser. You basically simplify your job, because you don't have to come up with clever ideas elsewhere to make the airflow follow a specific pattern.

So yeah, in that regard, it's great. But the question is how do you develop it? Because there is very little amount of free volume you can get out of your bodywork this way. Meanwhile for the rest of the teams, there is almost always some new idea you can come up with to improve the airflow around the sidepods. There is almost always that extra bit more clean air you can get to the rear. It's just a matter of finding those ideas (which is obviously easier said than done).

That's why I believe that if the new McLaren is mechanically sound, and these "experimentations" with the suspension work out for them, I believe they will be on a good position for these new regs. Even if they don't start out very strongly on the aero side, the concept they have chosen seems like has a lot of development potential.

[Blackout]

For whatever reasons, the tunnel entry seem to be smaller/lower than other cars on this MCL (red), if the render is true. So it makes sense for Mcl to try to assist it with other features.
What do you think about that?

To me, the first half of this car seem to focus a lot on downwash, and making sure that the FW air hits the tunnels with the most favorable angle of attack.
 
- that's why the center of the FW is pulled forward and as low as possible while the nose tip is pulled back. It's to make the center of the FW generate most of the FW downforce, so the team can drop the middle and outer sections of the FW, in order to reduce its upwash. The opposite of AM
 
- then the lower suspension elements, the steering rod, the front and rear wishbone arms are cascaded in a downwashy way, + the pull rod according to Key, to angle that air towards floor mouth,
 
- and then the chunky sidepods come into play. Their boxy down side acts like rudimentary bargeboards. They do some outwash, pushing some of the upcoming wheel wake outwards, but also a lot of downwash by forming a high pressure zone across their length, like that Kyle engineer said, so the upcoming FW air will want to avoid that zone and flow towards a low pressure zone instead. And what's the lowest pressure zone in that area? the tunnel mouth.
Thus to enhance the suction that already occur there and afterwards.
 

[Blackout]

2/2
The AM and Haas also have that virtual bargeboard (green), but it's placed higher, next to their air intake, so they are forming that high pressure zone higher, and their focus seem to be on their big undercut too.
 
*If the render is true.
 

[Stu]

https://cdn-4.motorsport.com/images/mgl ... tin--1.jpg

This is the one bit of info Scarbs and Somers are spreading I disagree with. The cockpit location no longer has any bearing over the position of the floor leading edge - it used to be that this was set relative to the C-C plane (rear face of the cockpit entry) but it is now set relative to the front axle. Likewise the front wing always has been. They're conflating some parallax to a difference in distance.

The big stand-out from that image for me is, why on earth AM are not using the full rear overhang!!?

[marvin78]

https://cdn-4.motorsport.com/images/mgl ... tin--1.jpg

This is the one bit of info Scarbs and Somers are spreading I disagree with. The cockpit location no longer has any bearing over the position of the floor leading edge - it used to be that this was set relative to the C-C plane (rear face of the cockpit entry) but it is now set relative to the front axle. Likewise the front wing always has been. They're conflating some parallax to a difference in distance.

The big stand-out from that image for me is, why on earth AM are not using the full rear overhang!!?

I think it is just another angle. These comparison fotos are (for me) pointless. The angles are nearly always different.

[MrGapes]

For whatever reasons, the tunnel entry seem to be smaller/lower than other cars on this MCL (red), if the render is true. So it makes sense for Mcl to try to assist it with other features.
What do you think about that?

To me, the first half of this car seem to focus a lot on downwash, and making sure that the FW air hits the tunnels with the most favorable angle of attack.
 
- that's why the center of the FW is pulled forward and as low as possible while the nose tip is pulled back. It's to make the center of the FW generate most of the FW downforce, so the team can drop the middle and outer sections of the FW, in order to reduce its upwash. The opposite of AM
 
- then the lower suspension elements, the steering rod, the front and rear wishbone arms are cascaded in a downwashy way, + the pull rod according to Key, to angle that air towards floor mouth,
 
- and then the chunky sidepods come into play. Their boxy down side acts like rudimentary bargeboards. They do some outwash, pushing some of the upcoming wheel wake outwards, but also a lot of downwash by forming a high pressure zone across their length, like that Kyle engineer said, so the upcoming FW air will want to avoid that zone and flow towards a low pressure zone instead. And what's the lowest pressure zone in that area? the tunnel mouth.
Thus to enhance the suction that already occur there and afterwards.
 

If your seeking a reason as to why the floor entry seems smaller on the Mclaren, check out this video by Somerfield

[Emag]

This car will have a lot of little details to look for when it hits the track next week. Hopefully we get some nice quality pictures from the journalists. I would be particularly interested in some flow-vis shots. Want to see how the air is being manipulated around those sidepods.

[OO7]

As far as riding curbs go, perhaps.
But…..
As soon as a driver puts his wheel over the edge of a sausage curb, then it’s goodnight Vienna. All the FWD floor fences will be wiped out as they run just above plank legality. That’s a whole lot of downforce lost. The tunnels will be fine, the fences not!

I disagree. GP2 cars (the early variants) had tunnels and used kerbs in a similar fashion to any other single seated of the time.

Any fences or strakes in those GP2 cars?
I can guarantee that all 2022 F1 cars this season will be running fences or strakes in those tunnels for optimum downforce. It's the major gain for Aero this year. Yes, they will still be able to run but at a huge loss.

Flat bottom cars can be made to be extremely peaky and pitch sensitive. It's part of both the aerodynamic and mechanical engineering teams mandate to find solutions to mitigate these effects and provide compromises where necessary. The same will be the case with these 2022 cars. Again I very much doubt they'll suddenly lose significant amounts of D/F in the situations you described, at least nothing wildly different to the previous generation of F1 cars.

[mwillems]

For whatever reasons, the tunnel entry seem to be smaller/lower than other cars on this MCL (red), if the render is true. So it makes sense for Mcl to try to assist it with other features.
What do you think about that?

To me, the first half of this car seem to focus a lot on downwash, and making sure that the FW air hits the tunnels with the most favorable angle of attack.
 
- that's why the center of the FW is pulled forward and as low as possible while the nose tip is pulled back. It's to make the center of the FW generate most of the FW downforce, so the team can drop the middle and outer sections of the FW, in order to reduce its upwash. The opposite of AM
 
- then the lower suspension elements, the steering rod, the front and rear wishbone arms are cascaded in a downwashy way, + the pull rod according to Key, to angle that air towards floor mouth,
 
- and then the chunky sidepods come into play. Their boxy down side acts like rudimentary bargeboards. They do some outwash, pushing some of the upcoming wheel wake outwards, but also a lot of downwash by forming a high pressure zone across their length, like that Kyle engineer said, so the upcoming FW air will want to avoid that zone and flow towards a low pressure zone instead. And what's the lowest pressure zone in that area? the tunnel mouth.
Thus to enhance the suction that already occur there and afterwards.
 

I guess another key decision between how much air to go under the floor and how much around the car to get that balance for optimal downforce. That balance and the ride seem and the methods of conditioning air into the tunnels and around the car are the most important factors and from an aero POV the suspension is a potentially decent but not major improvement to airflow.

Here's a question, is the distance to track that they envisage the car running going to impact the philosophy by which the teams attempt to condition the air from the front wing and into the tunnels? Are we seeing concepts of cars that are set to run in the different suspension configurations and ride heights and might that explain why our wheels are closer to the front wing and the position of other components such of the entrance to the tunnels? Has the track become a more important component in conditioning now given that rake has gone?

[f1rules]

maybe williams show us here why mclarens tunnel look lower,? and why no fences where attached

For whatever reasons, the tunnel entry seem to be smaller/lower than other cars on this MCL (red), if the render is true. So it makes sense for Mcl to try to assist it with other features.
What do you think about that?

To me, the first half of this car seem to focus a lot on downwash, and making sure that the FW air hits the tunnels with the most favorable angle of attack.
 
- that's why the center of the FW is pulled forward and as low as possible while the nose tip is pulled back. It's to make the center of the FW generate most of the FW downforce, so the team can drop the middle and outer sections of the FW, in order to reduce its upwash. The opposite of AM
 
- then the lower suspension elements, the steering rod, the front and rear wishbone arms are cascaded in a downwashy way, + the pull rod according to Key, to angle that air towards floor mouth,
 
- and then the chunky sidepods come into play. Their boxy down side acts like rudimentary bargeboards. They do some outwash, pushing some of the upcoming wheel wake outwards, but also a lot of downwash by forming a high pressure zone across their length, like that Kyle engineer said, so the upcoming FW air will want to avoid that zone and flow towards a low pressure zone instead. And what's the lowest pressure zone in that area? the tunnel mouth.
Thus to enhance the suction that already occur there and afterwards.

 
https://i.imgur.com/R36pU1v.jpg