Mercedes AMG F1 W08 EQ Power +

[wesley123]

Interesting to me who knows nothing about F1 car alignment tendencies, that how much visible toe-in there is on the front wheels on this top view from their team celebration:

https://i.imgur.com/FCcLiiv.jpg

Similarly it looks like a small amount of toe-out on the rear! I never would have imagined that, would have went the opposite myself (out at the front, in for the rear).

I hope I get my toe-in/out right here

Afaik this setup here is fairly agressive, and has two points;
1. Creating a more twitchy car to overcome the longer wheelbase.
2. Generating more friction(and thus heat) in the tires in an attempt to make them work, something that has plagued Mercedes over the course of the year.

[garyjpaterson]

Interesting to me who knows nothing about F1 car alignment tendencies, that how much visible toe-in there is on the front wheels on this top view from their team celebration:

https://i.imgur.com/FCcLiiv.jpg

Similarly it looks like a small amount of toe-out on the rear! I never would have imagined that, would have went the opposite myself (out at the front, in for the rear).

I hope I get my toe-in/out right here

Afaik this setup here is fairly agressive, and has two points;
1. Creating a more twitchy car to overcome the longer wheelbase.
2. Generating more friction(and thus heat) in the tires in an attempt to make them work, something that has plagued Mercedes over the course of the year.

Rear toe-out in my limited experience in sims is extremely aggressive, certainly not comfortable on a race distance for me. Though the photo isn't really clear enough to make that assumption.

The front toe-in looks fairly clear though, and you see both in and out on the front axle, just the sheer amount took me by surprise.

[turbof1]

I can't help but think of this isn't actually primarily an aerodynamic solution, trying to bring the tyre wall in line with the outwash section of the front wing.

[mmred]

I can't help but think of this isn't actually primarily an aerodynamic solution, trying to bring the tyre wall in line with the outwash section of the front wing.

with the result of shiftin the tyre wake closer to the siddepos, that would be suicidal for 2 reasons first on the bottom part the front wing section is already unable to properly deflect all the flow at the side of the tyre to reduce the wake, so movin the bottom part of the tyre outward makes it only more complicated

the upper part of the tyre as said creates a wake that interacts with the sidepod brinin it closer it is sucidal

in the end from aerodinamic performance you want to do the opposite

[mmred]

I can't help but think of this isn't actually primarily an aerodynamic solution, trying to bring the tyre wall in line with the outwash section of the front wing.

that would be suicidal for 2 reasons
first, on the bottom part of the front wing, the flap section is already unable to properly deflect all the flow toward the (out)side of the tyre to reduce the wake, so moving the bottom part of the tyre outward makes it only more complicated and you reduce performance and efficiency to deflect the flow far from the tyre with even more front wing winglets...

second, the upper part of the tyre instead creates a wake that interacts with the sidepod, therefore bringing it closer to the car is suicidal ( there are deflector panels like the ferrari and redbull copycat one that serve exactly the purpous to separate the wake from the sidepod and keep it far...)

in the end from aerodinamic performance ( especially drag reduction on front wing front tyre and turbulence reduction on sidepods and therefore on upper part of the diffuser to fuel the bottom diffuser) you want to do the opposite

[turbof1]

that would be suicidal for 2 reasons
first on the bottom part the front wing the section is already unable to properly deflect all the flow at the (out)side of the tyre to reduce the wake, so movin' the bottom part of the tyre outward makes it only more complicated and you reduce performance and efficiency to deflect the flow far from the tyre....

second, the upper part of the tyre instead creates a wake that interacts with the sidepod, therefore bringing it closer to the car is sucidal ( there are deflector panels like the ferrari and redbull copycat one that serve exactly that purpous to separate the wake from the sidepod and keep it far..)

in the end from aerodinamic performance ( especially drag reduction on front wing front tyre and turbulence reduction on sidepods and therefore on upper part of the diffuser to fuel the bottom diffuser) you want to do the opposite

Maybe it's exactly the bargeboards that allowed this kind of setup. As you mentioned, the upper part of the tyre creates a wake interacting with the sidepod, but we have large fins on the chassis acting as flow conditioners towards the sidepods.

The bottom part of the front wing is indeed quite unable to deflect flow. However, the front of the tyre is clearly moving inwards (it is toe-in after all), not outwards. This reduces the blockade from the front part of the tyre and so does make things easier for the wing to deflect the flow away from the tyre.

... Reading through your post in proper, you did actually notice it is toe in right? front of the tyre inwards, back of the tyre outwards?

[mmred]

that would be suicidal for 2 reasons
first on the bottom part the front wing the section is already unable to properly deflect all the flow at the (out)side of the tyre to reduce the wake, so movin' the bottom part of the tyre outward makes it only more complicated and you reduce performance and efficiency to deflect the flow far from the tyre....

second, the upper part of the tyre instead creates a wake that interacts with the sidepod, therefore bringing it closer to the car is sucidal ( there are deflector panels like the ferrari and redbull copycat one that serve exactly that purpous to separate the wake from the sidepod and keep it far..)

in the end from aerodinamic performance ( especially drag reduction on front wing front tyre and turbulence reduction on sidepods and therefore on upper part of the diffuser to fuel the bottom diffuser) you want to do the opposite

Maybe it's exactly the bargeboards that allowed this kind of setup. As you mentioned, the upper part of the tyre creates a wake interacting with the sidepod, but we have large fins on the chassis acting as flow conditioners towards the sidepods.

The bottom part of the front wing is indeed quite unable to deflect flow. However, the front of the tyre is clearly moving inwards (it is toe-in after all), not outwards. This reduces the blockade from the front part of the tyre and so does make things easier for the wing to deflect the flow away from the tyre.

... Reading through your post in proper, you did actually notice it is toe in right? front of the tyre inwards, back of the tyre outwards?

you know i was tinkin about the exxagerated camber!!!
my bad
well the problem with toe in is (almost )simple
from aero perspective the bad is that any angle of attack compared to the wind direction creates a lift and increases the drag
so best efficiency is still with zero toe in, also u dont want really any side-lift on wheels ( there s zero purpose for that )
sure, there is chance that you have some positive effect allievating the bad, probably the intuition u had, in the creation of a movement that directs the flux outwards, but you still have to increase even more the deflection of the front wing to reduce the local angle of attack and move the stagnation point accordingly to make it behave like it works at zero angle ( but sooner or later the wind of the side keeps up with the defection and the work you do costs you drag and wake )

probably it s even worse ( cause camber has zero angle of attack just creates a different geometry but toe in affects the tyre cfd heavily )

[sprint car76]

When or where was that photo taken? I have trouble believing that this represents how the car is actually set up.

[bosyber]

When or where was that photo taken? I have trouble believing that this represents how the car is actually set up.

I think yesterday, during a visit by/tribute to Hamilton at Brackley to celebrate his fourth championship with the engine people. So it might well be that's not at all close to the actual set up.

[roon]

https://imgr2.auto-motor-und-sport.de/M ... 129961.jpg
Via AMuS

Can anybody explain the use of these things? Sensors, microphone?

They are two hex sockets as mentioned above. The are to tighten the two floor stays that support the diffuser. The team adjust them on the FIA flat floor to meet the flatness and deflection tests. They go into a wheel box that adjusts the length of the floor stays. I havent seen another team do it this way

Thanks. The stays look to be at about a 45* angle. Adjusting their length or tension will both alter diffuser height, left-right orientation, and/or warp?

[designf1]

[media]https://twitter.com/ImanHansra/status/9 ... 6516715520[/media]
[media]https://twitter.com/ImanHansra/status/9 ... 1842376704[/media]
[media]https://twitter.com/ImanHansra/status/9 ... 8033525760[/media]

[designf1]

[media]https://twitter.com/ImanHansra/status/9 ... 5120891904[/media]

[ScrewCaptain27]

Via AMuS

[pimpwerx]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201711 ... b2ca58.jpg
Via AMuS

I feel really stupid for only noticing this now, but when did Merc go with the large aero cowl on the steering arm? I initially did a double-take, because I thought someone had photoshopped in a triple wishbone. Then I noticed that one was obviously the pushrod, and the other was the steering arm. Wasn't this integrated into the lower A-arm in a prevous iteration?

Again, sorry for the dumb question, but this stood out to me. I don't remember seeing this in previous pics.

[De Jokke]

Who else feels surprised? Did Merc make up time on high DF circuits? Was expecting Ferrari on pole before the weekend, considering the twisty third sector.