Mercedes W15

[Venturiation]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GJDUwKRXgAE ... name=large

This sounds a bit made up, I don't think any sane team would bring a major floor update to the first race. I also don't remember any mention of a floor update in the first race or in Saudi.

It's coming from motorsport


https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/data ... /10588670/

[maygun]

It's coming from motorsport


https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/data ... /10588670/

Interesting, I don't recall anything about this floor update from the team.

For me, it does not make any sense still.

You have 3 days of testing just one week before the race and you don't bring a major change like floor to test, and get confused after the upgrade and want to find if the update made things worse.

If the story is true the situation in Merc sounds way more catastrophic than I thought.

[Jdn1327]

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/data ... /10588670/

Interesting article on where the deficit actually was in Jeddah. They were overall faster than last year but thr w14 was flat out through high-speed and the w15 had big lifts in the same section.

[Sieper]

They were super fast on the straights. Piastri in one lap started in the gearbox of Hamilton with a better exit of the last turn and still couldn’t keep up even with drs. Isn’t it just down to rearwing choice?

[SiLo]

They were super fast on the straights. Piastri in one lap started in the gearbox of Hamilton with a better exit of the last turn and still couldn’t keep up even with drs. Isn’t it just down to rearwing choice?

I thought Mercedes were clearly running the lowest amount of downforce out of all the teams on the grid. They had so little wing and were monsters on the straights.

[j_ste]

They were super fast on the straights. Piastri in one lap started in the gearbox of Hamilton with a better exit of the last turn and still couldn’t keep up even with drs. Isn’t it just down to rearwing choice?

Pretty much. Lewis tried a little more wing in FP3 but the gain in sector one wasnt enough to counter the loses in straight line speed.

As sad as it sounds. They probably set the car up as well as they could considering what they currently have to work with.

[Farnborough]

They were super fast on the straights. Piastri in one lap started in the gearbox of Hamilton with a better exit of the last turn and still couldn’t keep up even with drs. Isn’t it just down to rearwing choice?

I thought Mercedes were clearly running the lowest amount of downforce out of all the teams on the grid. They had so little wing and were monsters on the straights.

Looks like they have to in keeping it away from it's porpoise "threshold" even here they seemed to induce it at their noted 250kmh point, on a smooth track as well.

[Farnborough]

They were super fast on the straights. Piastri in one lap started in the gearbox of Hamilton with a better exit of the last turn and still couldn’t keep up even with drs. Isn’t it just down to rearwing choice?

Pretty much. Lewis tried a little more wing in FP3 but the gain in sector one wasnt enough to counter the loses in straight line speed.

As sad as it sounds. They probably set the car up as well as they could considering what they currently have to work with.

It looks this way to me too. They appear to be manoeuvring between hard points of undesirable behaviour in trying to pull the chassis toward giving them as much as they can extract, but with obvious consequences if they dare to step outside a very very narrow band of operation.

[Venturiation]

It's coming from motorsport


https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/data ... /10588670/

Interesting, I don't recall anything about this floor update from the team.

For me, it does not make any sense still.

You have 3 days of testing just one week before the race and you don't bring a major change like floor to test, and get confused after the upgrade and want to find if the update made things worse.

If the story is true the situation in Merc sounds way more catastrophic than I thought.

they said after testing that correlation was perfect, every change in the simulator worked exactly the same on track
It has to be the new floor introduced for the race that changed that

[Sevach]

This RW seems different from last years(and Bahrain) medium.

[organic]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GJJ_oWHbQAA ... ame=medium

This RW seems different from last years(and Bahrain) medium.

Isn't it same as Bahrain without a gurney flap?

[Luscion]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GJJ_oWHbQAA ... ame=medium

This RW seems different from last years(and Bahrain) medium.

Isn't it same as Bahrain without a gurney flap?

Yea looks like the Bahrain spec wing to me as well

[ltitus8900]

Merc running Bahrain spec makes sense. I believe it was the same spec as the test. They would want to keep the setup as similar to testing as possible if they want to confirm if the issue was the new floor upgrade or not.

[ing.]

The focus on the floor stays at the rear would seem to highlight the dependence of DF and bouncing on rear ride height and, critically, the floor sealing from proximity to the ground (including flexing) of the floor edge.

I expect that for the purpose of formulating a dynamic model, the teams use WD testing to determine aerodynamic derivatives to spike out the dependence of certain dynamic characteristics of the car on its aerodynamic behaviour. And I would think that they test the various deformed (flexed) floor edges to do this.

Is this what they reverted to on the floor, just the stays?

https://x.com/gamer13_joao/status/17707 ... 5rN71eTA2g

[ing.]

…

Underfloor aero and floor sealing edges will be huge contributors to its behaviour as contrary to airplane design where the lifting wings are designed to avoid twisting and creating more lift as they deflect, in F1 as the floor and edge translate down and deflect (the floor edge) the DF increases—this is an unstable situation prone to aeroelastic anomalies if the damping is inadequate. I believe some teams have a better handle on this modeling and the result is better control of the porpoising through appropriate floor design (and understanding of its performance mapping) and suspension behaviour and modeling.

The focus on the floor stays at the rear would seem to highlight the dependence of DF and bouncing on rear ride height and, critically, the floor sealing from proximity to the ground (including flexing) of the floor edge.

I expect that for the purpose of formulating a dynamic model, the teams use WD testing to determine aerodynamic derivatives to spike out the dependence of certain dynamic characteristics of the car on its aerodynamic behaviour. And I would think that they test the various deformed (flexed) floor edges to do this.

Is this what they reverted to on the floor, just the stays?

Out-of-phase floor edge deflection could be what they are missing in their models.

https://x.com/gamer13_joao/status/17707 ... 5rN71eTA2g

EDIT: Apologies for duplicate post.