McLaren MP4-26 Mercedes

[murtoidf1]

Well, whether they have a problem or not, they certainly seem calm about it; whereas in '09 they seemed to be in a general state of panic, running illegal wings, glueing random bits of carbon to the body, and slathering everything but the pit crew in flovis.

My take - if we don't see them run a private test between now and two weeks, then we can be fairly certain that they feel they've got a handle on it.

True, but they were calm in in 09 really. said all the illegality stuff was for comparison purposes ya kno.

[McG]

Hi this pic is going back to Jerez day 4. I've been following the thread and also read scarbs blog, but thre is no mention of what this device is. Does anyone know? Looks like a bit of cloth shoved in a hole!

[Onch]

I am afraid that's just a reflection on the surface of the floor...

[murtoidf1]

well its a reflection on the bulge in the floor. where the exhaust bends backwards again to go into the slit

[Richard]

That's a port that they use to feed the pipes from the pitot tubes into the car.

Something like this from way back on page 57. Either that or they've stuffed a rag in a leaky radiator... it worked for my dad's Morris Traveler!:

[PNSD]

That picture has reminded me...

With the rakes, Mclaren have been running constant velocity runs. I persume in a straight-line and at quite a low speed.

Just how useful is this info? An F1 car is hardly ever in a straight line, so why would validating data via rakes in a straight-line, slow speed test be important? OR is for just general validation?

I cant imagine the rakes are gathering useful info in yaw. Likewise the ones above seem to feature well within the wheels wake but pitots generally hate any non-uniform flow.

So are they primarily there for steady-state slow speed data validation? And if so, what use is that when an F1 is never really in a steady-state, is constantly in yaw and pitch and often at high speed?

Am I missing something really simple here?

[Richard]

Maybe they are measuring on bends as well as straights?

[kalinka]

The position of the nose, splitter, and tray directs the air in those directions. McL with low sidepods can allow more air over the top, hence a lower nose. RB favour air around the side passed the undercut sidepods, so that's why they've championed the very high nose in the last few years.

Thanks for explanation. It's more logical that mine was. The point is, this lower nose design is probably better for them anyway.
Considering the quite wide and a little low nosecone, do you think that this can add up something to front downforce, or this effect is negligible? Or..they maybe want some more air to get to that cooling inlets on roll hoop ? What I'm trying to figure out, what is the main effect of this lower nose : more DF, less drag, better cooling, or something else ?

[raymondu999]

The only ones I can think of so far are lower CofG and less air that can go under the nose

[Just_a_fan]

so why would validating data via rakes in a straight-line, slow speed test be important? OR is for just general validation?

I think it's just general validation. The more accuate the computer models are the more they can use the simulator to evaluate new parts etc.

[Raptor22]

The position of the nose, splitter, and tray directs the air in those directions. McL with low sidepods can allow more air over the top, hence a lower nose. RB favour air around the side passed the undercut sidepods, so that's why they've championed the very high nose in the last few years.

Thanks for explanation. It's more logical that mine was. The point is, this lower nose design is probably better for them anyway.
Considering the quite wide and a little low nosecone, do you think that this can add up something to front downforce, or this effect is negligible? Or..they maybe want some more air to get to that cooling inlets on roll hoop ? What I'm trying to figure out, what is the main effect of this lower nose : more DF, less drag, better cooling, or something else ?

With the sow plough under nose splitter I don't think there is any real aerodynamic benefit to the nose position. It may just be at the slightly lower height so it does not get in the way of the driver being able to sight the apex of teh corner. Much can be said for a clear view of the road.

[Just_a_fan]

I think the nose shape and the snow plough below are designed to generate a vortex that run along the tub and through the sidepod void. Last year that vortex would have aided cooling - indeed ISTR seeing a flo-vis shot of the airflow following this path towards the sidepod.

The snow plough will also help to make the centre of the wing create some downforce too although I think that is a secondary consideration.

[horse]

Clearly you don't want air under because you want low pressure under the floor.

Sure you do. More air = higher velocity = lower pressure.

[bogi]

Clearly you don't want air under because you want low pressure under the floor.

Sure you do. More air = higher velocity = lower pressure.

More air that can escape, or you will end like hovercraft

[horse]

More air that can escape, or you will end like hovercraft

Hey man, it would cut down on rolling resistance...