Mercedes W11

[Morteza]

[zibby43]

And here we go . . .

[Sevach]

[dans79]

https://twitter.com/tgruener/status/123 ... 00736?s=20

They are pretty confident that they are either legal, or that they can overhaul and points they loose from being excluded.

[Maplesoup]

https://twitter.com/tgruener/status/123 ... 00736?s=20

They are pretty confident that they are either legal, or that they can overhaul and points they loose from being excluded.

It's both illegal and legal, it will be based on how convincing the teams arguements are.

Red bull will probably say that it breaks the moveable aero rules, mercedes will say that any chances to the aero is negligible and the main pursue of DAS is to reduce tire wear maybe.

[dans79]

Red bull will probably say that it breaks the moveable aero rules

They are going to need a better argument than that, as the driver turning his head, or the wheels has an aerodynamic effect.

[RZS10]

AMuS had an article with 4 possible arguments against DAS (and Merc's viewpoint on why they're wrong) late February (haven't seen any links to it) ... i guess they've been argued to death in this thread already

1. It's moveable aero - Merc argues that it's a steering system, so it's the same as any other steering motion.
2. Breaking parc-fermé, specifically changing the setup of the car whilst driving during quali - Merc argues that it's no different than changing the brake balance, diffs or any other setting on the steering wheel, all 'setup changes' done via steering wheel are legal
3. It's changing the suspension config. - same as with 'normal' steering, it will always change toe, camber and as a result the ride height
4. Steering is for steering, turning the wheel is supposed to change the car's direction (supposedly RBRs fav. argument) - Merc had extensive conversations about that particular detail with the FIA, arguing that any steering system would have a dead zone/play, therefore turning the wheel would not always result in change of direction.

edit: well f*** me i thought i was posting this in the appropriate 'legality' thread

[Just_a_fan]

Engineers expect the protest to be lodged either after quali or race for max damage.

I think that all technical protests should be lodged at the start of the event so that the teams have a chance to make changes if found to be in breach. Doing it afterwards is cowardly, it seems to me. As he says above "for max damage", rather than "to ensure legality".

But them's the rules so they'll do it that way no doubt.

I would think Mercedes will successfully defeat the aero argument. I bet they already have a CFD plot with DAS in both positions to show that the effect is nothing more than extremely minor. Heck, if activating DAS makes the aero to the rear of the car worse, they could argue that it's definitely not being done for aero benefits.

[mmred]

AMuS had an article with 4 possible arguments against DAS (and Merc's viewpoint on why they're wrong) late February (haven't seen any links to it) ... i guess they've been argued to death in this thread already

1. It's moveable aero - Merc argues that it's a steering system, so it's the same as any other steering motion.
2. Breaking parc-fermé, specifically changing the setup of the car whilst driving during quali - Merc argues that it's no different than changing the brake balance, diffs or any other setting on the steering wheel, all 'setup changes' done via steering wheel are legal
3. It's changing the suspension config. - same as with 'normal' steering, it will always change toe, camber and as a result the ride height
4. Steering is for steering, turning the wheel is supposed to change the car's direction (supposedly RBRs fav. argument) - Merc had extensive conversations about that particular detail with the FIA, arguing that any steering system would have a dead zone/play, therefore turning the wheel would not always result in change of direction.

The counterarguments of amus are really idiotic

2 a changeable wheel geometry Is not in any way comparabile to a breaking system setting

[dans79]

The counterarguments of amus are really idiotic

2 a changeable suspension geometry Is not in any way comparabile to a breaking system

Changing the toe angle is not a change in the suspension geometry. Toe has no effect on how the suspension works.

[Big Tea]

When the tyre manufacturer requests a change in operating pressure, would this not have an effect on tyre profile and wall flexibility which would have a similar effect to those mentioned?
If it has been accepted, can they change it now?

[mmred]

The counterarguments of amus are really idiotic

2 a changeable suspension geometry Is not in any way comparabile to a breaking system

Changing the toe angle is not a change in the suspension geometry. Toe has no effect on how the suspension works.

My bad i meant the wheel geometry setup like camber

[Maplesoup]

Red bull will probably say that it breaks the moveable aero rules

They are going to need a better argument than that, as the driver turning his head, or the wheels has an aerodynamic effect.

It's actually a very good arguement, changing the toe angle will change the ride height of the car moving all the aero parts on the car almost like active suspension. This could be used to reduce drag and downforce on the straights then increase it for the corners like DRS.

The drivers head and the wheels aren't aero devices thus don't matter if they are moving.

Also worth noting that Merc argue the steering wheel is being used to adjust the wheels, when it actual fact it's the steering column that looks to be moving and be the key player in the system.

[dans79]

When the tyre manufacturer requests a change in operating pressure, would this not have an effect on tyre profile and wall flexibility which would have a similar effect to those mentioned?
If it has been accepted, can they change it now?

I believe you are thinking of camber, not toe!

[mmred]

Red bull will probably say that it breaks the moveable aero rules

They are going to need a better argument than that, as the driver turning his head, or the wheels has an aerodynamic effect.

It's actually a very good arguement, changing the toe angle will change the ride height of the car moving all the aero parts on the car almost like active suspension. This could be used to reduce drag and downforce on the straights then increase it for the corners like DRS.

The drivers head and the wheels aren't aero devices thus don't matter if they are moving.

Also worth noting that Merc argue the steering wheel is being used to adjust the wheels, when it actual fact it's the steering column that looks to be moving and be the key player in the system.

I suspect it s the camber Angle that affects the height... The Toe effect on height Is negligible...