McLaren MP4-28 (pre-launch speculation)

[raymondu999]

Thats exactly what i thought it was, the Red Bull DRD or what ever its called, im not talking about the Mercedes pipes everywhere version, but the RB one where air goes down the hole in the rear wing and then goes into the central section of the beam wing to reduce drag there.

What Red Bull had is banned. The device the Lotus has (the passive DRS) isn't.

Any secondary functions of DRS are banned.

[turbof1]

Thats exactly what i thought it was, the Red Bull DRD or what ever its called, im not talking about the Mercedes pipes everywhere version, but the RB one where air goes down the hole in the rear wing and then goes into the central section of the beam wing to reduce drag there.

No I think you are mixing it all up :p.
At Singapore, Red Bull introduced their version of the Double DRS. That one indeed is activated by using DRS. It is actually activated the same way by Mercedes: the flap at the rear wing goes up, reveals 2 holes in the endplate and air can pass through their. The difference is what part is being stalled, but both are DDRS because they are activated by using DRS.

At the Young Drivers Test in Ab Dhabi, Red Bull tested out a Drag Reduction Device similar to the one Lotus tested throughout the year. This is COMPLETELY passive. It works by a fluid switch: when air pressure is high/low enough, the airflow changes and at high speed, it sends air to the underside of the main plane of the rear wing, stalling it. This has NOTHING to do with DRS, as it happens without any input of it.

Now, next year on, DDRS is banned. DRS has only function: open the rear wing and nothing more. As DRD isn't operated by it, DRD is still allowed.

[myurr]

It was Garry Andersons Guess on the BBC website, im just asuming heights.

Gary has been obsessed with McLaren's low nose since before this season. He declared it the wrong solution before the season started, and I think he's been proven wrong over the course of the season where McLaren have had the fastest car (on balance).

I wouldn't rule out a raising of the chassis, but I don't think it's a done deal by any stretch of the imagination.

Also for clarity:

• DRS usage is restricted to two zones on most tracks, one zone on the other tracks. This applies to both qualifying and the race.
• The DRS mechanism is no longer allowed to have secondary functions, as per the current Mercedes and Red Bull DDRS solutions.
• The front wing, as with the rear wing, is no longer allowed to have any slots - blown or otherwise.
• So the only drag reduction system anticipated by the rule makers, other than the primary DRS system itself, would be a passively activated version of Red Bull and Lotus's holes in the central rear wing support. These holes work by stalling the central part of the rear wing.

I don't think it's clear cut that those devices will be desirable next year. Being passive means that they will be very hard to correctly tune for each circuit, and also means that the device won't automatically deactivate when the brakes are pressed. This is going to cause a complex interaction that may cause the car to be unstable during heavy braking at the end of a main straight: both the DRS and passive systems will be active; as the brakes are pressed the DRS will rapidly disengage causing the upper flap to start producing downforce however the central section of main plane will still be blown and the airflow may be detached; only once the speed reduces and the passive system disengages and the flow reattaches itself will the rear wing produce the full level of downforce. If all that can reliably happen within a tenth of a second or two then maybe it will give an advantage. Any longer than that and it could cause the rear of the car to be unstable only for the balance to shift again. Couple that shift with KERS harvesting and it could make the car a bit of a pig to drive.

This system that Lotus has struggled to get to work with only two aerodynamic states (both DRS and blown wing either active or inactive) now has four states: DRS disabled, passive disabled; DRS enabled, passive disabled; DRS enabled, passive enabled, DRS disabled, passive enabled. That is a much more complex system to model, tune, and get the most out of when you can only use it twice per lap, maybe more with just the passive system depending on the circuit configuration and the speed through the fastest corner.

Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong or have missed something!

P.S. Have we ever seen a car with a passive aerodynamic fluidic switch win a race or even look like it had an advantage? I'm only aware of Mercedes running one during the F-Duct year. All the others have had some kind of human controlled activation as far as I can remember.

[turbof1]

I generally agree, but:

This system that Lotus has struggled to get to work with only two aerodynamic states (both DRS and blown wing either active or inactive) now has four states: DRS disabled, passive disabled; DRS enabled, passive disabled; DRS enabled, passive enabled, DRS disabled, passive enabled. That is a much more complex system to model, tune, and get the most out of when you can only use it twice per lap, maybe more with just the passive system depending on the circuit configuration and the speed through the fastest corner.

This would have been the case anyhow ,even without the new DRS rules, during the race.

Maybe it is possible to make it work with 2 fluid swtiches: one that activates the DRD above some certain speed and one that deactivates it when you are near the topspeed. As you are at the limiter anyhow at that point, it doesn't matter if the drag is reduced or not. That way you can atleast make it more predictable when you are using DRS. Still leaves the problem of airflow reattachment and the timing it stops blowing the main plane. Maybe that is solvable with complex use of multiple fluid switches.

[Vegetabill]

Could the switching be activated by sensing a change in g-force direction. Any change in g-force forwards (braking) or sideways (turning) disabling the device?

[myurr]

Could the switching be activated by sensing a change in g-force direction. Any change in g-force forwards (braking) or sideways (turning) disabling the device?

That would require moving parts, so would not be allowed.

@turbof1 - there are only 4 states where the activation of the passively blown device is decoupled from the DRS system. So the systems in use this year do not have the same problems. They are manually activated rather than passively activated.

[turbof1]

Could the switching be activated by sensing a change in g-force direction. Any change in g-force forwards (braking) or sideways (turning) disabling the device?

That would require moving parts, so would not be allowed.

@turbof1 - there are only 4 states where the activation of the passively blown device is decoupled from the DRS system. So the systems in use this year do not have the same problems. They are manually activated rather than passively activated.

DRD wasn't as long as I recall. Hence why it isn't just another DDRS: this device uses fluid switches. It worked completely independent from DRS. The 2 states you are counting would indeed be true for qualifying this year, but in the race you would have the 4 states (well 4 states... I think DRS enabled, DRD disabled will be very, very rare).

[myurr]

DRD wasn't as long as I recall. Hence why it isn't just another DDRS: this device uses fluid switches. It worked completely independent from DRS. The 2 states you are counting would indeed be true for qualifying this year, but in the race you would have the 4 states (well 4 states... I think DRS enabled, DRD disabled will be very, very rare).

Red Bull's system was activated by ducts in the rear wing that were uncovered by the DRS mechanism. So it was an active system. Lotus's system was, I believe, passive but wasn't raced.

[raymondu999]

There was this idea a while back:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dpl4lClXt_4[/youtube]

But I'm not sure that it would be legal in today's regs

[turbof1]

DRD wasn't as long as I recall. Hence why it isn't just another DDRS: this device uses fluid switches. It worked completely independent from DRS. The 2 states you are counting would indeed be true for qualifying this year, but in the race you would have the 4 states (well 4 states... I think DRS enabled, DRD disabled will be very, very rare).

Red Bull's system was activated by ducts in the rear wing that were uncovered by the DRS mechanism. So it was an active system. Lotus's system was, I believe, passive but wasn't raced.

Ah but that was their DDRS; Red Bull also tested a Lotus-like DRD at the Young Drivers Test.
For the record: none of the DRD were raced; it is highly probable we will never see it at a race.

[myurr]

But I'm not sure that it would be legal in today's regs

I believe that would be outlawed under the active aero rules.

[Holm86]

One should not forget the car converged throughout the year toward the mainstream philosophy. Compare the car at the start of the testing days to the race in Brazil. It's only expected that they will continue to do this and so a higher chassis is more likely then you might think.

The chassis stayed the same. So the know balance of the car didnt change. Updates just added to the performance.

Holm, they raised the nose halfway through this year as turbof1 was alluding to.

http://www.f1technical.net/development/359

I know they raised the nose. Thats not the same as raising the chassis. They have a low chassis with the highest possible nose. I believe they will keep this next season.

[turbof1]

One should not forget the car converged throughout the year toward the mainstream philosophy. Compare the car at the start of the testing days to the race in Brazil. It's only expected that they will continue to do this and so a higher chassis is more likely then you might think.

The chassis stayed the same. So the know balance of the car didnt change. Updates just added to the performance.

Holm, they raised the nose halfway through this year as turbof1 was alluding to.

http://www.f1technical.net/development/359

In the defence for him, they only raised the nose itself, not the chassis. Though like stated in the article, it is not the optimal aerodyamic solution. They could have, but that would have ended up with a complete balance change in the middle of the season.
However, I don't see why they aren't going to rise the chassis for the new car. It would only be a logical continuation of the path they went into and with pirelli delivering tyres substantially different from the 2012 ones, balance will change anyhow.

[KingHamilton01]

To many times McLaren have missed out on making fundamental changes before a season start`s, this pre-season they have the raise the overall height of the chasis and have a higher nose to improve the airflow underneath the car, that should buy them at least a couple tenth`s. With recent season`s gone by ive also seen a lot mentioned about McLaren running such a stiff set-up and that they are planning on running a more tyre conserving suspension set-up for the 2013 season.

Maybe now Hamilton has left, Button and Perez have a similar driving style? maybe this is a good thing and they will be able to progress the new car around 2 driver`s instead of one, well see.

[McMrocks]

McLaren was in the last years always the team with a low nose. Maybe it is their way to build cars, but I would prefer to giving up this philosophy instead giving away some tenth. But the guys at Woking have a wind tunnel and they will find the best way (before this season I thought the same).

What interests me more is if they will use the ramp and tunnel design for the exhaust or if they are lucky with the way they made it this year. I guess the ramp version is maybe more accurate. We'll see. I can hardly wait.