2023 Mercedes-AMG | Petronas F1 Team

[organic]

There's no blending in an undercut "after" the sidepod wing. there is no "after"... Unless you can explicitly state what you mean by after and how that would bypass the 3 sections rule

The rule prevents you from having 3 sections in the y plane as already stated. In order to achieve an undercut you would therefore need to make the mid-wing narrower which is not possible due to the width of the SIS dictating the mid-wing width; it is fundamentally a SIS shroud

It's not a matter of blending surfaces cleverly like many of the tricks in this regulation set have appeared.. it's a simple part of the rules in terms of no. of sections. Merc would almost certainly already have 3+ sections in y plane if they could.

There is a simple reason they accept the compromise of running their intakes to the floor and not running any undercut of the sidepod which are negative aspects of the zeropod (mid-wing) concept.. these drawbacks would've been ditched long long ago if such simple workarounds as "blend it in" and start the undercut "after the mid-wing" were the solutions to merc's problems

It is groundhog day with this conversation

[PlatinumZealot]

Not everyone is strong at spacial manipulation or 3D modelling. It is an ability that a few (of us)out of thousands possess.

You guys are struggling to see how an undercut would work with a zero pod within the rules no less, but I have the image in my mind already. Just a bit of creatifty is required to get the outwash effect near the floor that is needed. The side pod wing has nothing to do with getting this shape. The shape can be blended AFTER the side pod wing. And it will be there with the side pod wings in Imola.

We've had this discussion with you already a month ago. You were told then that it's not possible. It's been explained above again that it's not possible.

viewtopic.php?p=1127882#p1127882

I was told?!

You still have not demonstrated anything to say it's not possible. You posted a red herring.

[AR3-GP]

Not everyone is strong at spacial manipulation or 3D modelling. It is an ability that a few (of us)out of thousands possess.

You guys are struggling to see how an undercut would work with a zero pod within the rules no less, but I have the image in my mind already. Just a bit of creatifty is required to get the outwash effect near the floor that is needed. The side pod wing has nothing to do with getting this shape. The shape can be blended AFTER the side pod wing. And it will be there with the side pod wings in Imola.

We've had this discussion with you already a month ago. You were told then that it's not possible. It's been explained above again that it's not possible.

viewtopic.php?p=1127882#p1127882

I was told?!

You still have not demonstrated anything to say it's not possible. You posted a red herring.

The link is in the post you quoted and a video tutorial has been provided. There is no undercut to be had in the side pod.

[organic]

You can see clearly there why other teams without a mid-wing can incorporate undercut. All other teams do not have to worry about the mid-wing so they have an extra section that Merc cannot use.

Here's a 2d front-on view of what Kyle has shown to break it down very basically if this at all helps....

W13



W14



A theoretical sidepod incorporating undercut (anywhere along the sidepod) with a mid-wing.



Take away the mid-wing and youre back to 2 sections in y and plain sailing with the 3rd design, so that's why I'm predicting them to ditch the whole mid-wing idea.

This 3 sections in y rule is why Merc's sidepod ramps into their floor edge & towards their floor edge wing flap and this is how they have to achieve outwash whilst all of the other teams do it with undercut

[PlatinumZealot]

There's no blending in an undercut "after" the sidepod wing. there is no "after"... Unless you can explicitly state what you mean by after and how that would bypass the 3 sections rule

The rule prevents you from having 3 sections in the y plane as already stated. In order to achieve an undercut you would therefore need to make the mid-wing narrower which is not possible due to the width of the SIS dictating the mid-wing width; it is fundamentally a SIS shroud

It's not a matter of 3d modelling or blending surfaces cleverly like many of the tricks in this regulation set have appeared.. it's a simple part of the rules in terms of no. of sections. Merc would almost certainly already have 3+ sections in y plane if they could.

There is a simple reason they accept the compromise of running their intakes to the floor and not running any undercut of the sidepod which are negative aspects of the zeropod (mid-wing) concept.. the answer is that it is not avoidable. these obvious drawbacks would've been ditched long long ago if such simple workarounds as "blend it in" and start the undercut "after the mid-wing" were the solutions to merc's problems

It is groundhog day with this conversation

Can you forget about the side pod wing? Go Past that red herring. Now put your conventional side pod with undercut but only in "zero-pod" size and blend it in after the side pod wing...

I guess you guys are more left brained? I can't explain any better than that other than breaking out Solidworks and modelling it myself.

think of the W14 parts that sweep out wider... AFTER the side pod wing and blend those with an undercut..

[PlatinumZealot]

You can see clearly there why other teams without a mid-wing can incorporate undercut. All other teams do not have to worry about the mid-wing so they have an extra section that Merc cannot use.

Here's a 2d front-on view of what Kyle has shown to break it down very basically if this at all helps....

W13

https://i.imgur.com/g9L6ke9.jpeg

W14

https://i.imgur.com/zyjLpfA.jpeg

A theoretical sidepod incorporating undercut (anywhere along the sidepod) with a mid-wing.

https://i.imgur.com/oKjGFhk.jpeg

Take away the mid-wing and youre back to 2 sections in y and plain sailing with the 3rd design, so that's why I'm predicting them to ditch the whole mid-wing idea.

This 3 sections in y rule is why Merc's sidepod ramps into their floor edge & towards their floor edge wing flap and this is how they have to achieve outwash whilst all of the other teams do it with undercut

See above post. look past the mid wing and visualise making an undercut past that.

[AR3-GP]

There's no blending in an undercut "after" the sidepod wing. there is no "after"... Unless you can explicitly state what you mean by after and how that would bypass the 3 sections rule

The rule prevents you from having 3 sections in the y plane as already stated. In order to achieve an undercut you would therefore need to make the mid-wing narrower which is not possible due to the width of the SIS dictating the mid-wing width; it is fundamentally a SIS shroud

It's not a matter of 3d modelling or blending surfaces cleverly like many of the tricks in this regulation set have appeared.. it's a simple part of the rules in terms of no. of sections. Merc would almost certainly already have 3+ sections in y plane if they could.

There is a simple reason they accept the compromise of running their intakes to the floor and not running any undercut of the sidepod which are negative aspects of the zeropod (mid-wing) concept.. the answer is that it is not avoidable. these obvious drawbacks would've been ditched long long ago if such simple workarounds as "blend it in" and start the undercut "after the mid-wing" were the solutions to merc's problems

It is groundhog day with this conversation

Can you forget about the side pod wing? Go Past that red herring. Now put your conventional side pod with undercut but only in "zero-pod" size and blend it in after the side pod wing...

I guess you guys are more left brained? I can't explain any better than that other than breaking out Solidworks and modelling it myself.

think of the W14 parts that sweep out wider... AFTER the side pod wing and blend those with an undercut..

You're proposing a sidepod that's wider than the mid wing. This is marginal and most likely illegal due to regulatory sidepod volume box.

All of the purposeful "undercut" action on every other car is happening inside the mid-wing lateral extent. Undercut running right up against the side of the chassis. They are barred from it unless they engulf the midwing with a sidepod inlet...but then you don't have a midwing anymore.

We all started by assuming you were talking about a functional undercut with appreciable volume, as every other team. No one was counting on you coming up with a token abstraction of an undercut, just to tick a box on a technicality. The issue is fairly clear in the 3rd photo why it's not going to happen. You think Merc is going to go from narrowest sidepod, to the the absolute widest sidepod on the grid, just to have a tiny notch in the lower corner outside the mid-wing? I doubt it. Time will tell. If that were to happen, as unlikely as it seems, then you'd at least have to give up on calling it a "zero pod".

[Farnborough]

As already very well presented in illustrations above (completely clear to me from those, thankyou ) they are effectively cornered by their jump through the "loophole" they use to have that configuration.

Any significant difference in iteration would be by stepping backwards through the loophole toward convention, which is what TW has indicated.

Pure guess from me, but like many interested to find out where they go with this, top surface of midwing to essentially remain but with complete sidepod built from that with air entrance in same place as everyone else's, then into their own interpretation of down ramp/detail as they've effectively got completely clear space (with no real hardware internal installation taking that space currently) just to place aero only sidepod there.
New floor (already stated) to meet that sidepod form, even if underside doesn't essentially change.

Front suspension, increased anti dive, arms moved forward at outer to push tub backwards (conditional on meeting wheelbase maximum) maybe with revised rear geometry to facilitate. Moving drivers backwards to assess configuration prior to 24 chassis design phase. All from existing tub pickups currently, can then be moved in 24 build.

Wondering whether they met their targets on classis torsional performance with their X tub design, and if that matches their competitors, must be under review if this B spec performs, then cooling can move location to more conventional in 24 too.

Just a guess

[chrisc90]

Thats only way I can see it working, is if the sidepod inlet is right at the back of the 'Sidepod Legality box' (pictured 2 posts above) and they can use the free area of the sidepod volume in order to try and create a undercut. That way you keep your 2x Y axis planes and stretch the new sidepod out in the area behind the sidepod legality box. Of course doing that means you lose your true undercutting sidepod. The only other way is if the sidepod that normally doesnt touch the floor stops at the height of the start of your undercut. Which opens up the area forwards of the sidepod intake for the undercut, but then you could need a divider outside of the reference box in order to direct air internally for cooling and the rest for the undercut airflow.

It would be interesting to plot exactly where the W14 bodywork starts in reference to the legality boxes and we would get a better/more accurate idea where the end of the regulatory box is thats hindering the design. We can see that the sidepod intake section (thats bolted to the rest of the car) starts at the end of the beam wing and finished inline with the upwards section of the Halo.

The only thing thats confusing me at present is the drawing for the legality box with the mirror mount, which starts about half way inside the sidepod box. If the W14 mirror is at the front of that box, then it would seem that the sidepod intake is actually outside of that sidepod legality box pictured. (im not sure if theres a box missing from that diagram, which I presume there will be)

Please please please excuse my laptop trackpad drawings in paint but this is where I think things are sitting on the W14.



Ive plotted roughly where the boxes pictured above are believed to be. The sidepod legality box starting in line with the halo front. The mirror box which you can use for a reference for the start of the cockpit opening and where Merc have their sidepod intakes. I extended the box back as something must be in that plane furtherwards backwards in order to meet the 2x Y plane rules.

What is interesting though is that flow conditioner directly underneath the mirror mounts. Something which falls inside the sidepod legality box and your 2x Y planes. Surely adding a flow conditioner would add a extra plane to the box making it 3 planes when viewed from the front?

[PlatinumZealot]

There's no blending in an undercut "after" the sidepod wing. there is no "after"... Unless you can explicitly state what you mean by after and how that would bypass the 3 sections rule

The rule prevents you from having 3 sections in the y plane as already stated. In order to achieve an undercut you would therefore need to make the mid-wing narrower which is not possible due to the width of the SIS dictating the mid-wing width; it is fundamentally a SIS shroud

It's not a matter of 3d modelling or blending surfaces cleverly like many of the tricks in this regulation set have appeared.. it's a simple part of the rules in terms of no. of sections. Merc would almost certainly already have 3+ sections in y plane if they could.

There is a simple reason they accept the compromise of running their intakes to the floor and not running any undercut of the sidepod which are negative aspects of the zeropod (mid-wing) concept.. the answer is that it is not avoidable. these obvious drawbacks would've been ditched long long ago if such simple workarounds as "blend it in" and start the undercut "after the mid-wing" were the solutions to merc's problems

It is groundhog day with this conversation

Can you forget about the side pod wing? Go Past that red herring. Now put your conventional side pod with undercut but only in "zero-pod" size and blend it in after the side pod wing...

I guess you guys are more left brained? I can't explain any better than that other than breaking out Solidworks and modelling it myself.

think of the W14 parts that sweep out wider... AFTER the side pod wing and blend those with an undercut..

You're proposing a sidepod that's wider than the mid wing. This is marginal and most likely illegal due to regulatory sidepod volume box.

All of the purposeful "undercut" action on every other car is happening inside the mid-wing lateral extent. Undercut running right up against the side of the chassis. They are barred from it unless they engulf the midwing with a sidepod inlet...but then you don't have a midwing anymore.

We all started by assuming you were talking about a functional undercut with appreciable volume, as every other team. No one was counting on you coming up with a token abstraction of an undercut, just to tick a box on a technicality. The issue is fairly clear in the 3rd photo why it's not going to happen. You think Merc is going to go from narrowest sidepod, to the the absolute widest sidepod on the grid, just to have a tiny notch in the lower corner outside the mid-wing? I doubt it. Time will tell. If that were to happen, as unlikely as it seems, then you'd at least have to give up on calling it a "zero pod".


https://i.postimg.cc/yNPv46g5/image.png

https://i.postimg.cc/8PYC4LZX/image.png

https://i.postimg.cc/c4WqSCr1/image.png

Back pedalling?

Token abstraction of an undercut? When you look at the RedBull and Ferrari undercut at the sides there is a specific function happening there near the floor. This is all that Mercedes would need to achieve there but it needs a certain shape that is very possible even with the zero-pod.

I hinted many times that this cannot be a conventional undercut in order to keep the mid-wing. You and Organic got so caught up in works of others that you didn't try to see how it could work.

For me, legality is not even a question. It's only now if Mercedes deploys it or something close to it in the coming races. If they don't well, that's just because they have found something else to generate a stronger outwash.

[PlatinumZealot]

https://i.ibb.co/74GCVf6/w14.jpg

Thats only way I can see it working, is if the sidepod inlet is right at the back of the 'Sidepod Legality box' (pictured 2 posts above) and they can use the free area of the sidepod volume in order to try and create a undercut. That way you keep your 2x Y axis planes and stretch the new sidepod out in the area behind the sidepod legality box. Of course doing that means you lose your true undercutting sidepod. The only other way is if the sidepod that normally doesnt touch the floor stops at the height of the start of your undercut. Which opens up the area forwards of the sidepod intake for the undercut, but then you could need a divider outside of the reference box in order to direct air internally for cooling and the rest for the undercut airflow.

It would be interesting to plot exactly where the W14 bodywork starts in reference to the legality boxes and we would get a better/more accurate idea where the end of the regulatory box is thats hindering the design. We can see that the sidepod intake section (thats bolted to the rest of the car) starts at the end of the beam wing and finished inline with the upwards section of the Halo.

The only thing thats confusing me at present is the drawing for the legality box with the mirror mount, which starts about half way inside the sidepod box. If the W14 mirror is at the front of that box, then it would seem that the sidepod intake is actually outside of that sidepod legality box pictured. (im not sure if theres a box missing from that diagram, which I presume there will be)

Please please please excuse my laptop trackpad drawings in paint but this is where I think things are sitting on the W14.

https://i.ibb.co/9yprfRD/w14regbox.jpg

Ive plotted roughly where the boxes pictured above are believed to be. The sidepod legality box starting in line with the halo front. The mirror box which you can use for a reference for the start of the cockpit opening and where Merc have their sidepod intakes. I extended the box back as something must be in that plane furtherwards backwards in order to meet the 2x Y plane rules.

What is interesting though is that flow conditioner directly underneath the mirror mounts. Something which falls inside the sidepod legality box and your 2x Y planes. Surely adding a flow conditioner would add a extra plane to the box making it 3 planes when viewed from the front?

Ah!! Very good! RedBull man.. When can I send you your official Mercedes team member card?

Yeah it would be something like this but more aggressive near the floor.

[chrisc90]

Ah!! Very good! RedBull man.. When can I send you your official Mercedes team member card?

Yeah it would be something like this but more aggressive near the floor.

I hope that kind of explained what you were trying to say.


The choice of bringing the undercut forwards can’t really be done, but as you say it could go as pictured/described (I think).

Whilst it is a scenario that will allow a undercutting pod - to some extent, whether it is aerodynamically effective is another topic. Also depends if you need to retain the sidepod dropping right to the floor or you stop it 1/2 - 2/3 way from the top, begin the undercut there, then add in the squared off section behind the legality box for the sidepod and your 2 planes in the Y axis.

[organic]

Good contributions I still don't see how the above would be legal but I suppose we'll never know if Merc don't go down the above route. Most likely this will all end up as fruitless speculation

[chrisc90]

Good contributions I still don't see how the above would be legal but I suppose we'll never know if Merc don't go down the above route. Most likely this will all end up as fruitless speculation

I think the key point to work out here is how far back the 2 planes extends to. I haven’t got my laptop to hand to look at the tech regs to see where it’s enforced, but at some point in the cars bodywork, you are allowed more than 2 planes in the Y axis.

[chrisc90]

If anyone is wise enough to work all that out.

If the RV-RBW-SPOD includes the intake and the engine cover then their options might be limited. I think the magical line is the Xf=1300 to what you can do forwards of that (which can only have 2 planes) (rearwards of Xf=1300 is RBW-COKE which doesn’t have the 2 planes per axis ruling)