Mercedes AMG F1 W06

[timbo]

Nose, after suspension, drops for a lot and is almost tinny compared to other teams. I've not idea how the managed to package that.

Package what? It's not like there are many mechanical components in the nosecone
Passing crashtest could have been tricky but it doesn't look like the structure is on the limit.

[Mattchu]

Not sure if it`s been brought up yet (and i know this is massively subject to change) but it looks like the`re doing some subtle refing work in the front wing endplates. I`m Not sure if the lower outer edge curves of the end plates is slightly longer more rounded, it may just be the pictures!
I`m amazed (btw, thanks and credit to the original creator of the split image) at how much narrower the new nose is when seen directly compared to the old one, i actually think they both look great



p.s Feel free to correct me on the circled bits as i think they did appear like that on the W05, allthough maybe not with the joiners inline...

[Thunder]

The Picture from the W05 is the Launch Frontwing. The newer one introduced during the Season is very similar to the W06.

[Morteza]

[ME4ME]

woah, from that angle, it looks mighty quick!

[turbof1]

Could the shorter nose also have anything to do with crosswinds?
So with a shorter nose it will not affect the front wings as much?

Probably a bad image as it seems the air is going the opposite direction of what i had in mind.

http://i.imgur.com/CM1eAqp.png

Ah interesting you mention this.

Last year Force India had a car that was aerodynamically unstable on a windy day. It messed up their aero structures. I don't know what exactly was the problem, I highly doubt it was the nose alone and probably was the car on its whole being much too sensitive. However, you are having the correct question in mind: what type of nose could aerodynamically be more stable?

I wrote an article about how yaw changes the real air volume fitting through the front wing nose and pylons: http://www.f1technical.net/features/19883. a nosetip sitting just right in front or even partially inbetween the pylons will block more airflow getting throug there then a nose hanging more forward, even though from a frontal view the opposite would be true.

Mercedes has a rather smell letterbox, meaning it's peak air volume being able to pass that passage is less then what Williams has, BUT due it has no nose stumb hanging over, that same air volume diminishes much less during yaw and crosswinds.

That's not everything to the story though. I didn't want to make the article too complicated to understand, but I think I can further elaborate here: the front wing pylons themselves are very important. They act as turning vanes and flow straighteners. When airflow enters the hotzone right underneath the nose tip, it'll get very turbulent, more so if you have nose stump like Williams and less see when it's more straight forward like Mercedes. However, as you noticed Mercedes has only very tiny pylons while Williams has much larger ones, which allows much more air to be straightened out and be less turbulent. It's trade off between making better quality airflow les better vs. making less quality airflow more better.

BUT there's even more to the story! Last year we saw Williams setting the trend with sculpted pylons that invites airflow from outside the wing pylons to go underneath the nose. Teams always tried this, but with more and more stringent rules blocking airflow going underneath the nose at the front of that nose, this route becomes more and more important. This year we have mclaren turning the pylons both inside, and having a scoop shape in it (something pointed out by trinidefender):
http://cubeupload.com/im/turbof1/Nose.jpg
(As you can probably see, mclaren didn't have any mercy at all with this poor drawer!)

Mercedes does not have that benefit again. I'm guessing here, but I believe they try something very similar through shedding a very controlled vortex coming off their mini pylons.

There are more factors, but it would expand this too much. You are still having your question unanswered and the truth is, is that it'll stay unanswered. It's much too complex and boils down to what philosophy is applied to the car.

[NoDivergence]

While I agree with much of what you are saying, it is also important to note the amount of volume from the wing flaps to the nose. The narrower nose allows a lot of flow to go under the nose when the car is in yaw.

[turbof1]

While I agree with much of what you are saying, it is also important to note the amount of volume from the wing flaps to the nose. The narrower nose allows a lot of flow to go under the nose when the car is in yaw.

Of course. There are so many factors here involved. The position of the neutral section compared to nosetip and wing pylons too is important, for instance.

[NoDivergence]

Car looks gorgeous

[Morteza]

[Ferraripilot]

Stunning car. I am seeing more clearly at the front corners of the floor next to the sidepod uprights what appears to be exaggerated flick ups directing air under the car.

[GPR-A duplicate2]

Not sure if someone already pointed this out.

The BREAK DUCTS are missing on W06 !!! The break ducts existed on W05, all through from launch till end of season.

[Manoah2u]

weren't there other cars without brake ducts this year? Mclaren?

Did i recall correctly the brake-by-wire system with the regererative energy systems hold that the brakes
could be smaller last year 2014? Does that imply the possibility that 'enlargening' the brakes a bit could make them
need the brake ducts less?

[Manoah2u]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8sHl5eCYAAkW3y.jpg:large

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8sJAAKCAAAfoKf.jpg:large

dat sidepod 'scoop' looks great!

[SectorOne]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8rz2nGIYAAvPNu.jpg:large

I just praised the Mclaren cokebottle but i´ll be damn, this actually looks tighter.
A very nice angle, thank you!


@TurboF1, nice write-up! yup i guess you are right,