Mclaren Mercedes MP4-25

[ESPImperium]

Yeah, I've a feeling that it's a little more complex than this and I'm not sure how you can have decided that's what's happening.

I have that same feeling as well. I was trying to put a graphic to my theory, but ultimatly it failed.

[Richard]

I've suddenly had the thought that the mechanism is probably to stabilise the sensor rather than change its orientation.

Have a look at the pictures. Sometimes the arm is up, sometimes down. you can see it more clearly if you also look at the angle of the supporting arms.

[horse]

Have a look at the pictures. Sometimes the arm is up, sometimes down. you can see it more clearly if you also look at the angle of the supporting arms.

Oh yeah! Sorry, you're totally right. I didn't see this picture:



It's clever that the sensor stays horizontal. There must be some fancy gear doing that. I wonder if it can maintain the distance from the cockpit at all heights? I still think it must be stabilised.

[gibells]

I half expected those tubes to squirt out flourescent green paint! But seriously, I have a feeling that what we are seeing here is McLaren revolutionising the testing game. They started it last year on Fridays, and it seem to be an excellent way of verifying Data from the computers/wind tunnels. I think the other teams could learn from their approach, especially the CFD only boys like Virgin.

I expect this is only the beginning of the wonderful world of moving aero testing.

[horse]

They started it last year on Fridays, and it seem to be an excellent way of verifying Data from the computers/wind tunnels. I think the other teams could learn from their approach, especially the CFD only boys like Virgin.

I expect this is only the beginning of the wonderful world of moving aero testing.

This is another interesting point. Would you give a wind tunnel up for this sort of data? I don't think so. I'm not sure its value comes so much for validating CFD results, more in giving good inputs to such numerical experiments. A wind tunnel is a much better controlled environment for doing validation, but won't inform you of all the dynamic boundary conditions on the track, i.e. in the real world. McLaren could certainly put this data to that use (providing real world BCs to CFD), but I'd still want a wind tunnel to confirm that my simulations were producing the right results (for more controlled inputs).

[myurr]

They started it last year on Fridays, and it seem to be an excellent way of verifying Data from the computers/wind tunnels. I think the other teams could learn from their approach, especially the CFD only boys like Virgin.

I expect this is only the beginning of the wonderful world of moving aero testing.

This is another interesting point. Would you give a wind tunnel up for this sort of data? I don't think so. I'm not sure its value comes so much for validating CFD results, more in giving good inputs to such numerical experiments. A wind tunnel is a much better controlled environment for doing validation, but won't inform you of all the dynamic boundary conditions on the track, i.e. in the real world. McLaren could certainly put this data to that use (providing real world BCs to CFD), but I'd still want a wind tunnel to confirm that my simulations were producing the right results (for more controlled inputs).

This is just another tool in their chest, another arrow in their quiver if you will. McLaren made huge strides in development last year and in doing so invested a lot into on track testing technology and solutions. It served them well when they were behind, so why stop using it even if they are back at (or near) the front.

I wouldn't be surprised to see them running this kind of gear throughout the year during Friday testing regardless of whether the car leads the pack or is a dog at the back of the grid. It appears to have become part of their standard testing routine, and I would expect the other teams to follow suit in due course.

[Richard]

It's clever that the sensor stays horizontal. There must be some fancy gear doing that. I wonder if it can maintain the distance from the cockpit at all heights? I still think it must be stabilised.

Its a parallelogram, so as the arm goes up and down, the end vertical part stays vertical. The horiz sensor arm is mounted on the bit that stays vertical. Have a look at an anglepoise lamp.

[imightbewrong]

Is it just me or does that sharkfin tube look even fatter now?

[thestig84]

Is it just me or does that sharkfin tube look even fatter now?

Hard to say. I did hear and posted a while ago on this thread it was to change at some point before Bahrain though. Becoming more cylindrical, at least that was spotted at MTC, maybe they wont use it.

[horse]

ts a parallelogram, so as the arm goes up and down, the end vertical part stays vertical. The horiz sensor arm is mounted on the bit that stays vertical. Have a look at an anglepoise lamp.

Right, gotcha. That's not so useful for building a grid, however, as the reference horizontal distance for the sensors is changing as they go up. I've never been a big fan of using transects to build information anyway, too much can change between runs.

[Spencifer_Murphy]

I also doubt that there is too much to worry about seeing these contraptions on the car. It does make sence. Last year Mclaren had some serious problems with the car and came to the tests with much more rudimentary devices like this. After all that effort they must have realised that they now have experience in this specific field of testing and might as well continue to do the same in future.

Think about it. We often hear of teams, when the car is a dog, complaining that "The windtunnel figures didn't correlate on track" or something allong those lines. This way they are essentially running similar tests as they would in the wind tunnel using this array of pitot tubes, except on track. If anything its ingenius, and will probably catch on as F1 starts to tighten it's belt.

Besides, while its still very early in testing, Mclaren haven't shown any of the "alarm-bell ringing" signs they did last year (slow on long runs, slow on short runs, Lewis binning the car off track). Its too early to say if it's great or not. But it certainly looks to be better than the MP4-24 started out.

[segedunum]

Hmmmmm. Looking at the new Red Bull and then looking over pictures of the new McLaren again the difference in packaging is night and day.

With the lack of testing and wind tunnel time I would expect more teams to use test contraptions to gather data. It seems quite a sensible thing to do to me. However, I would only use it as a verification tool to verify that the philosophy behind which the car is designed and built is sound and work out what's happening if there are any differences. It can also be used as a calibration tool for CFD data. However, if they're going to use these devices to shoot in the dark, as some teams seem to do with CFD at times, then I can only see them treading water.

[Afterburner]

are you assuming that the driver does not adapt their style to suit the car they are given...?
unless I'm mistaken, I think you're very much mistaken.


example: Schumacher hops from Mercedes sports car c91 to Jordan Ford EJF1-91
Completely different handling cars, differnet weight and requiring different styles of set up and operation on track...

alonso and renault found they could get the best out of the Michelin tyre by going for a very understeery type set up, he following ear the car was more neutral as michelin changed the tyre characteristic.

A good driver can adapt, a mediocre one can't

I think i'm not mistaken, one think is how a car needs to be driven and the other is how a driver can handle it, MS always said he preferred a rear loose to a rear front, it's his preferred style but his skill allow him to drive any car and get the most out of it like top drivers (Alonso, Hamilton, Vettel...). Bourdais was limited by his skills, he just couldn't cope with super tight front VS super loose rear, it's like asking to Button to do the same lap time with an agressive setup style. If driving style wasn't important there would be just one optimum setup for the same car and we know that's not true...

[meves]

The sensor strip has pitot tubes facing forwards, which I'm good with but facing backwards the also have ridges/lumps on the mounting, you can see if better in the picture below. Are they sensors say for air temp or just in the manufacturing for some reason?

[i70q7m7ghw]

We saw stuff like this last year, they've got big problems. There's no point saying otherwise, it's what everyone did last year until the final test where they finally came out and said they were well off the pace.

Please you cant come out with post like that with nothing to back it up.

Im sorry people guess/make up the problems as much as you like, this is just collecting data for CFD. After the 1st test I heard from my person at the MTC that they were very relived that the numbers were as expected and cautiously think there are no issues like last year.

People said the same things last year, as did McLaren with the comments regarding "this is normal". I'm sorry but this is a serious case of Deja Vu! I would love to be proved wrong.