Mercedes GP W02

[The FOZ]

for the actuation:why not put the actuator into the main wing and have a rotating
throughshaft ending in both endplates turning a lever? this would not require a lot of endplate thickness it may even be a bit lighter than having two actuators.and you get rid of all the synch action.

The upper element would need to be beefier to carry the additional mass of the actuator, as would the mounts and bearings.

A single actuator located in one endplate could be the way to go, provided the upper element is torsionally stiff enough - although that might still be a lighter structure than one housing the actuator at the midpoint.

There IS an access panel located at the very bottom of the RW endplates, likely only for access to the beam wing fasteners, but then again, putting the mass of the actuators lower on the car will lower the center of mass...how heavy would zylon cables be, anyhow?

[xpensive]

Q: Does anyone know for sure how Mercedes current ARW works?

[marcush.]

my idea was for the MAIN wing ,not for the flap.

we have no indication of how itis actuated.
With most teams using electromechanical devices for the front wing ,i´m surprised that teams went for a electrohydraulic solution for the rear now...maybe the thinking is we got these systems in the rearend anyways ....the electromechanical solution carries the advantage that a hydraulic leak is not a possible fault.

as for a set of cables in a shrinktube..not a factor compared to the autosport connector and the actuator itself .I´d estimate around 200g for the actuator and
200g for the wiring including connectors +100+g for the actuation .
The electric solution with 2 actuators would allow for two smaller actuators but how much can you save on those..and you need double wiring and save not much on actuation so it will be more like 800+g instead of 500g for the single actuator....
the alternative:
http://www.moog.com/literature/ICD/Race ... utions.pdf
http://www.moog.com/literature/ICD/E024 ... EUROPE.pdf
will this be any lighter? you still need the electric connections (but only signal wiring)but a rub of hydraulic lines and fittings the sertvovalve(94g) plus actuator (s)and all too soon you are back to the 500g I estimated for the electromechanicaal solution...
You need to consider the extremely harsh conditions in the rear wing with vibrations but not temp -which are your main enemy.

[xpensive]

Therer are certasin "flat" electrical motors on the market, could those have been built in the end-plates of Mercedes' rear wing to actuate the flap?

[ringo]

I think the merc solution is hydraulic. Initially i thought electric, but the actuator could be at the beam wing height in the end plates with rods going up through the end plate to the flap.

[Formula None]

xpensive, it sounds like you were proposing an STR-type solution (rotating transverse rod inside main wing profile):

[marcush.]

I have no trouble to have the proposed main wing through axle assigned to expensive..

these drives are readily available and funny enough I know a soon to be available road car from the stuttgart area using exactly such a setup for their rearwing.
I would never confirm the drive was derived from a device the driver usually is sitting on.

[xpensive]

That STR arrangement is really cute, not xactly how imagined things but helluva nicer solution than the schnabels.

I had fantasized of two flat electrical motors in each sideplate, operating the flap directly, but I admit marcush' and STR had a neater solution.

[marcush.]

with the through shaft motor you can have the levers in the endplate -no levers visible...I think the Mercedes solution is the neatest looking one andf can be done with this concept.
You need just two small access plates -or ,if done cleverly just a hole in the endplate to slot in the shaft and a slot for the lever articulation of the flap.
This could actually be a very neat solution-you have to allow for a proper bearing for the lever inside the Endplates and make sure one of the two levers has a bit of gap in his connection to the flap (to avoid bind)but that´s about it.
and to get rid of the failure potential of the motor itself -rotation actuator using magnets?-
http://contact-evolution.com/pdf/doc/LE ... oids_B.pdf

[raymondu999]

slightly OT, but are there regs governing the pivot placement of DRS? I mean, couldn't a team put their pivot point like maybe just 100mm from the leading edge, and have the thing almost flat when DRS is engaged?

[xpensive]

with the through shaft motor you can have the levers in the endplate -no levers visible...I think the Mercedes solution is the neatest looking one andf can be done with this concept.
You need just two small access plates -or ,if done cleverly just a hole in the endplate to slot in the shaft and a slot for the lever articulation of the flap.
This could actually be a very neat solution-you have to allow for a proper bearing for the lever inside the Endplates and make sure one of the two levers has a bit of gap in his connection to the flap (to avoid bind)but that´s about it.
and to get rid of the failure potential of the motor itself -rotation actuator using magnets?-
http://contact-evolution.com/pdf/doc/LE ... oids_B.pdf

Not really satisfying marcush, I want to see it!

[adrianjordan]

slightly OT, but are there regs governing the pivot placement of DRS? I mean, couldn't a team put their pivot point like maybe just 100mm from the leading edge, and have the thing almost flat when DRS is engaged?

Yes, though I can't remember exactly what they are and since they've been quoted several times in the various DRS threads I'm not inclined to look them up again.

[beelsebob]

slightly OT, but are there regs governing the pivot placement of DRS? I mean, couldn't a team put their pivot point like maybe just 100mm from the leading edge, and have the thing almost flat when DRS is engaged?

It's got to pivot around the trailing edge.

[f1gang]

Bild newspaper reports that Nico Rosberg tried the MGP-W02 car’s Istanbul upgrade in the Brackley simulator last week. “In the simulator I was fast,” the German confirmed.

the question is there are differences about the simulator and between real tracks?? can anybody answer that

[marcush.]

simulator technology is far away from predicting reality.The Mercedes simulator is outdated as well and new tools will come into service only later this year..
You cannot simulate sustained high g-forces in the simulator -how would you do a seven second duration sweeper with susttained 3+gs in a simulator ? the sled would have to accelerate at 3 gs for 7seconds to do that ..what a challenge and what a building to house that sled in....