The intensity of the suction zone and the distribution of pressure depends on the profile geometry and ride height. On the other hand, the visual distribution depends on how the colour bar scale is set. If the bottom limit in that example is set at Cp -1, there'd be a whole lot more blue. If it was set at say -4, it would literally be a line.Farnborough wrote: โ27 Mar 2023, 15:27A question about graphic, the part marked as "peak downforce" and illustrated by the blue zone, is thst not peak vacuum in venturi position with downforce being enacted by the roof of the tunnel upstream of that location ?
Doesn't the vacuum need surface area to impose load (negative) on the structure rather than that narrow band ?
Thank you.
Trailing edge drops 20mm, easy. Could be 25mm even. Bigger wing would have bigger movement.
Is there video of this? Trying to find on Youtube and coming up blank.Cs98 wrote: โ27 Mar 2023, 15:22The new Merc rear wing flexes quite noticeably. Definitely part of their lower drag philosophy.Vanja #66 wrote: โ27 Mar 2023, 14:02So, rear wings don't flex any more?
https://i.ibb.co/hfrjXQ7/jeddah-2023-williams-flex.jpg
Just as a reminder, camera is fixed on the chassis, so the suspension movement under braking is observed with rear tyre movement (also marked)
There was a big storm about this in 2021 which shows that the teams do police one another if there is a significant benefit. So I'm not convinced this is as big of a deal as before.Vanja #66 wrote: โ27 Mar 2023, 18:54The intensity of the suction zone and the distribution of pressure depends on the profile geometry and ride height. On the other hand, the visual distribution depends on how the colour bar scale is set. If the bottom limit in that example is set at Cp -1, there'd be a whole lot more blue. If it was set at say -4, it would literally be a line.Farnborough wrote: โ27 Mar 2023, 15:27A question about graphic, the part marked as "peak downforce" and illustrated by the blue zone, is thst not peak vacuum in venturi position with downforce being enacted by the roof of the tunnel upstream of that location ?
Doesn't the vacuum need surface area to impose load (negative) on the structure rather than that narrow band ?
Thank you.
Trailing edge drops 20mm, easy. Could be 25mm even. Bigger wing would have bigger movement.
Great pics! That clearly shows increased complexity in the floor profile. Interesting that it shows (proves?) that the extent to which they could change everything around the limiting factor of radiator location (the crease line is visible in both); it also shows how they โbacked offโ on the diffuser throat/entry, reducing the effectiveness/sensitivity of the floor.Goblin42 wrote: โ28 Mar 2023, 05:37I mean yeah they copied the RB floor center bumps for the W13, are they carried over to the W14 we don't know unless someone flips a car this weekend
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FhussQSXwAE ... me=900x900
W13 floor at the Japanese GP
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FhusqIrX0AA ... =4096x4096
In terms of transmission, there are very important differences between the Red Bull and Mercedes specifications.
The Mercedes specification is bulkier in the area closest to the floor, which limits airflow through the AMR23โs diffuser. This area is designed for a car with ultra-compact bodywork like the W14, as seen with the Mercedes โzeropods.โ
Having a less efficient diffuser means the AMR23 needs more rear wing to compensate, which generates more drag.
This compact size is also made possible by the teamโs use of the rear push-rod layout.
As such, the internal part of the suspension has been moved much higher โ compared to the classic pull rod used instead by Mercedes, and therefore Aston Martin, which has them in the lower part.
The transmission casing and suspension mounting points are modular right? If so, is it possible for Mercedes to change rear suspension or is the suspension itself homologated for the season?mkay wrote: โ28 Mar 2023, 10:53Interesting article from Formu1a.uno, claiming that AMF1 is hampered by Mercedes' rear end components, namely the pull-rod suspension and the gearbox, both of which have cost AMF1 diffuser performance and forcing AMF1 to slap on a bigger rear wing to compensate. Because Merc's rear elements are bulkier, they require more space around the floor area and therefore reduce airflow reaching the diffuser.
Wonder whether we'll see Merc change gearbox/suspension philosophy next season if this is true.
https://www.formu1a.uno/en/how-the-merc ... on-martin/
In terms of transmission, there are very important differences between the Red Bull and Mercedes specifications.
The Mercedes specification is bulkier in the area closest to the floor, which limits airflow through the AMR23โs diffuser. This area is designed for a car with ultra-compact bodywork like the W14, as seen with the Mercedes โzeropods.โ
Having a less efficient diffuser means the AMR23 needs more rear wing to compensate, which generates more drag.This compact size is also made possible by the teamโs use of the rear push-rod layout.
As such, the internal part of the suspension has been moved much higher โ compared to the classic pull rod used instead by Mercedes, and therefore Aston Martin, which has them in the lower part.
Do you think that RB18`s floor was targeting not for inconstant, unpredictable peak downforce as W13 had but rather for a lower one which was more constant and predictable?ringo wrote: โ25 Mar 2023, 20:16I noticed something about the floors of the RB18 and the W13 last year.
The venturi under the RB18 floor has it's narrow area further downstream. I do not know if this was addressed with W14.
Also redbull have more generous volume under the floor because the venturi is gentler.
As the venturi ends, the diffuser starts. So very aggressive expansion at the rear diffuser relative to the front of the floor.
On the other hand Mercedes with their first floor iteration of the ground effect rules, have a more symetrical floor front to rear, but this may be where it loses out. Lower, more restrictive underfloor volume and the centre of pressure is more forward. There is more of a delay downstream of the lowest point of the venturi before the rear diffuser.
Additionally, the expansion between front center vane and centre floor wall under the RB18 also have more volume, and has a less tight expansion rate compared to W13. Note the blue line and arrows. W13 vanes are closer together and expansion rate is "tighter" as you downstream.
RBR could also be create a little nozzle jet stream with the two converging outer vanes to influence the flow at the edge of the floor downstream.
https://i.ibb.co/N9SWkrn/W13-VSRB18.png
But yes, the main and fundamental difference is the tunnel volume and the venacontracta of the floor. Redbull delays the venacontracta further downstream, then rapidly expands again into the rear diffuser.
W14 is more balance, but this results in a less volume under the car upstream the venacontra point, and can explain why it is more sensitive to ride. The RB has a better buffer due to its distribution of underfloor volume. It prioritizes the intake volume expansion over the rear, which is the outlet volumetric expansion. As to why this is done, I do not know. I am just pointing out my observations.
There are also mini diffusers between two planes of the floor "T", ie plank plane and tunnel roof. Indicating that the reference plane is playing some role in the ground effect as well for RBR.
In conclusion mercedes could investigate this if they haven't already. It makes more sense to me why RBR has the floor cut out where it is. The upper outwash and the rear biased venacontracta are linked.
https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/u ... _w13_5.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FT3w6SFWYAA ... ame=medium