McLaren MCL33

[godlameroso]

Looks like an earlier iteration of the tea-tray extension.

https://i.imgur.com/AYrJ0q0.jpg

It does but it seems to not extend as far outboard as the one shown. I still think the plate and chicken wing are badly done, the device behind the bargeboard guides the vortex traveling under the floor and the mid wing energizes that vortex. McLaren's solution creates flow stagnation in that area because the lateral and longitudinal flows disturb each other rather than compliment. The flow-vis paints it clear as day. Without the device they get more airflow under the floor which results in a net gain, it all stems from the bad solution they used in the mid wing. And seeing how the floor is constructed, they'd have to manufacture a whole new floor which is why updating this takes so long. My guess, next year's car will be a lot more modular in this area so they'll be able to experiment with the design in season, and cut down on lead times.

The reason their mid-wing is distinct is because they use it to guide air under the floor instead of guiding the outwash like others.

The others are guiding air under the floor just fine, the suction peak caused by the wing elements are more than enough to energize any airflow you manage to send under the bargeboards. After that, the device behind the bargeboard takes over. What McLaren is doing isn't unique just ineffective compared to the others. They've tweaked everything, this is the only part they haven't modified at all, all season long, at some point you have to say maybe we should look into this because nothing else is working.

[M840TR]

It does but it seems to not extend as far outboard as the one shown. I still think the plate and chicken wing are badly done, the device behind the bargeboard guides the vortex traveling under the floor and the mid wing energizes that vortex. McLaren's solution creates flow stagnation in that area because the lateral and longitudinal flows disturb each other rather than compliment. The flow-vis paints it clear as day. Without the device they get more airflow under the floor which results in a net gain, it all stems from the bad solution they used in the mid wing. And seeing how the floor is constructed, they'd have to manufacture a whole new floor which is why updating this takes so long. My guess, next year's car will be a lot more modular in this area so they'll be able to experiment with the design in season, and cut down on lead times.

The reason their mid-wing is distinct is because they use it to guide air under the floor instead of guiding the outwash like others.

The others are guiding air under the floor just fine, the suction peak caused by the wing elements are more than enough to energize any airflow you manage to send under the bargeboards. After that, the device behind the bargeboard takes over. What McLaren is doing isn't unique just ineffective compared to the others. They've tweaked everything, this is the only part they haven't modified at all, all season long, at some point you have to say maybe we should look into this because nothing else is working.

Say they do go the Redbull/Ferrari way. How much lap-time does that give them? 0.1 sec? 0.2 at most? Thing is, if there were that easy an answer to their problems they would've done it already. It's something fundamental in the design that will takes several months to correct. Something like that is only visible in the wind tunnel which we don't have so it's pointless speculating.

[godlameroso]

Red Bull gained .5 copying Ferrari, I don't know how good the designers are at McLaren, but .3 is not out of the realm of possibility.

[M840TR]

Red Bull gained .5 copying Ferrari, I don't know how good the designers are at McLaren, but .3 is not out of the realm of possibility.

That was from the entire bargeboards not just midwing. Again, we can't put a finger on one place and label it the crux of every problem. The car as a whole doesn't work. It's fundamentally flawed.

[Zynerji]

Red Bull gained .5 copying Ferrari, I don't know how good the designers are at McLaren, but .3 is not out of the realm of possibility.

That was from the entire bargeboards not just midwing. Again, we can't put a finger on one place and label it the crux of every problem. The car as a whole doesn't work. It's fundamentally flawed.

Flawed how? Instability or just draggy?

Alonso says the car feels great. It's just slow. Im wondering if the problems would still be as bad if it had a Merc or Ferrari engine. Realistically, it's only 2.5s slower over 4.3 miles of corners.

That's not utterly terrible, but comparatively slow by F1 terms.

[godlameroso]

It lacks downforce, that's it, plain and simple.

[techman]

Flawed how? Instability or just draggy?.

its been draggy for so many years. last year they were pilling on downforce and boasting how good the car was in corners. now they cant because they have direct competitors with renault and redbull. its a highly inefficient chassis just like i predicted

[ivanlesk]

Flawed how? Instability or just draggy?.

its been draggy for so many years. last year they were pilling on downforce and boasting how good the car was in corners. now they cant because they have direct competitors with renault and redbull. its a highly inefficient chassis just like i predicted

You should get a medal...

[diffuser]

Wind tunnel correlations issues seem highly correlated with teams having a bad year.

Probably related to light at the end of the tunnel.

Or in this case , "lack of".

[Big Tea]

Wind tunnel correlations issues seem highly correlated with teams having a bad year.

Probably related to light at the end of the tunnel.

Or in this case , "lack of".

Its a train headlight, coming this way

[M840TR]

Photos from the crash.

[M840TR]

Red Bull gained .5 copying Ferrari, I don't know how good the designers are at McLaren, but .3 is not out of the realm of possibility.

You know, I kept thinking about the whole mid-wing configuration and I asked myself, where does the vortex from the nose go? Turns out, we were wrong to assume it went to the undercut. It actually goes under the floor through the vacancy in the mid-wing. Whereas others use this area to power the outwash, Mclaren use it to guide air under the floor, like I said previously. This compromises the outwash and risks diffuser stall. This method of powering the floor is incredibly inefficient as well, given the high turning angle would result in obvious drag.



Mercedes use the same cape concept, but they use it to power the outwash. Note mid-wing.



What's a proven method of using the floor to good effect is the tea-tray extension. It catches air up top and directs it downwards underneath the floor. The vortex generators help energize the air that goes to the diffuser and you have a double whammy. Ferrari supposedly gain 3 tenths just from tweaking this area further around Silverstone.







How does this explain the drag issue? The lack of an S-duct means frontal air that would've flown through the car straight away now has now a great turning angle which makes its path difficult. All this isn't helped by the very short bargeboard length. The weak diffuser due to aforementioned reasons also effects corners exit speed which just exacerbates the problem.

Mclaren in the end abandoned a proven solution for a gamble.

[M840TR]

I realize I'm backtracking on my previous point of view but without a reasonable technical explanation, I bought their fundamentally flawed design excuse. Correlation issues was probably PR lingo for 'we screwed up'.

[turbof1]

Any clear pictures of the ripped open nose? The crash might have exposed some of the internal ducting.

[M840TR]

Any clear pictures of the ripped open nose? The crash might have exposed some of the internal ducting.

Best I could find. Ducts remained surprisingly intact for the most part; except for the ones on the sides which we know open underneath the cape to power the vortex.