Mercedes AMG F1 W05

[Emerson.F]

Good find @Ricerdude, werent those streaks and appendages banned last year?

Great insight on the aero and airflow @Zioture.

[aral]

We have been discussing this through and through in the past few years.

Yes, flexing is illegal, the rules say that parts cannot flex(which is impossible) but it also has limits on the amount of flex in contradiction. They obviously passed those flex tests, so arguably, they are legal.

I am not talking about the actual flexing, but the alteration of the aero due to the closing of the apertures. other wings do flex, but the apertures stay pretty well the same. the mercs practically close completely.

[muhammad-13]

What became of the chimneys we saw near the rear tyres during barcelona test?

[otbsti]

What became of the chimneys we saw near the rear tyres during barcelona test?

Supposedly they were using those because they wanted to see if the air from the brakes was affecting flow around the diffuser. They used the chimneys to move the air away to see if the flow was behaving the same...

[stefan_]

Monaco 2014 - Friday (23.05.2014)

[Agerasia]

That is no way consistent in how you would expect an F1 front wing to flex, it's obviously deliberately designed that way.
The question is, why?
I myself believe it has a mass damping effect.

I dissagree but I'm listening. Explain.

Look at the main plane, then the gurneys. One bends while the other does not. They are supposed to be fixed which would make them all bend together aka Red Bull type flexing. They also very conveniently line up perfectly when compressed don't you think? Also when compared to other cars in this shot it over flexes, as if weight is in the back part of the end plates. This would make the most sense as it would provide a pivot point to the pillar.
Even if not a true mass damper which it's obviously not, it would still be beneficial as some sort of damper. After all the same principle of opposite inertia applies.

P.S. Just to be clear, I'm not comparing it to Red Bull's flexing. That was done for an entirely different reason.

[Coefficient]

I made a small gif of the video:

http://i.imgur.com/zGqj2m3.gif

Mass Damper

Rubbish. It lacks the mass (Weight) for it to be functional as as damper.

Rubbish, it's the energy from the flexing that achieves the effect, not only the "weight".

[Pilatus]

They've ommited "Pitot fin" in qualifications, there is a duct instead:

[wesley123]

I only see a duct added, nothing removed.

[George-Jung]

Yeah they removed it, I also noticed it during quali..

[wesley123]

I'm unsure what you guys are talking about, but the fin on the number is right there.

[Crucial_Xtreme]

Merc upper front wishbone


via OmniCorse.it

[Pilatus]

http://www.formula1.com/wi/gi/enlarge/1 ... 24my91.jpg
I'm unsure what you guys are talking about, but the fin on the number is right there.

Try to find it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDldIaFRXRw

[wesley123]

Ah you're right, thanks. F1.com incorrectly badged the image as "qualifying"

[Akodo]

Mass Damper

Rubbish. It lacks the mass (Weight) for it to be functional as as damper.

Rubbish, it's the energy from the flexing that achieves the effect, not only the "weight".

Errr... Care to take a stab at the physics to explain how it'd work in the manner you've described? It doesn't have enough mass, and the torque is applied in the wrong place in two ways: 1) It's too far forward to be of any use, and 2) it's too low to be of any use. To top that all off, a mass damper doesn't oscillate that fast. It's supposed to oscillate at the same period of the sway which this clearly does not.