2016 Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 Team - Mercedes

[dans79]

It's debatable which track has an overall net positive result with overtaking. I personally believe that Spa gives easier overtaking, but the drawback is that you have less laps to do it.

I think spa is the better choice, as getting past a Williams or FI in Monza would be harder.

[Cold Fussion]

As for the graph.....It shows as Drag increases, there is a point that is reached whereby there will be a drop off in drag due to the boundary layer build up.

This is an extremely strange interpretation of the graph. The graph shows that increasing the wing angle of attack increases the drag coefficient until it reaches the stall point of the wing, at which point the drag coefficient decreases. If you had another graph displayed along side it of cl vs AoA, then you would see an even sharper drop off.

The graph cannot be read as follows; as drag increases, there is a point where the wing AoA decreases, which is how you appear to be reading the graph (as this is the only explanation that appears to be consistent with the statements you keep making). This is important because the graph you provided explains exactly what everyone has been telling you for the last 5 pages, if you decrease the wings AoA, you move it further from it's stall point.

[diego.liv]

Now it's spa?
http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/ ... m-mercedes

Please not both gp's...

ps: if Hamilton poles, will he lose his pole position due to the penalties or can he keep pole statistically but starting backwards?

You won't see it as a pole in the statistics, the guy promoted to first will get the statistic

[aral]

The rub comes from being able to find a speed threshold whereby you’re effectively switching off the rear wing. This happens when the car's rake is reduced: as the load builds with speed, the car is forced toward the ground, which in-turn rotates the wing and overloads it, stalling flow, both reducing downforce and drag.

http://i.imgur.com/2ya6ZUY.jpg
"...rake is reduced..."

http://i.imgur.com/iqASbUX.gif
"...which in-turn rotates the wing and overloads it, stalling flow, both reducing downforce and drag."

second photo is totally irrelevant as it has been photoshopped ! look at rear wheel !

[F1NAC]

penalty definitely here

"As far as l am aware we will be taking a penalty this weekend," Hamilton told reporters at Spa.

[FoxHound]

The flow reacts to the edge of the boundary layer just as it would to the physical surface of the object.

That's not true. The flow still moves through the boundary layer, it just does so with a certain velocity profile (in the case of a turbulent boundary layer a time averaged profile can be used). Its the displacement thickness that is a measure of how much the flow deflects due to the presence of the boundary layer. Both boundary layer thickness and displacement/momentum thickness are a function of Reynolds number.

The no slip condition is only valid right on the surface of the object the flow is moving over.

Right fair enough, I'm ill equipped to disagree here.

So what are the implications of this on a raked car vs non raked car.

As I have still yet to see anything that intimates drag loss on raked cars at speed that can otherwise not be attained by lower raked cars.

[bhall II]

The rub comes from being able to find a speed threshold whereby you’re effectively switching off the rear wing. This happens when the car's rake is reduced: as the load builds with speed, the car is forced toward the ground, which in-turn rotates the wing and overloads it, stalling flow, both reducing downforce and drag.

http://i.imgur.com/2ya6ZUY.jpg
"...rake is reduced..."

http://i.imgur.com/iqASbUX.gif
"...which in-turn rotates the wing and overloads it, stalling flow, both reducing downforce and drag."

second photo is totally irrelevant as it has been photoshopped ! look at rear wheel !

Yeah, and I'm the one who did it. It's a simple illustration of how reduced rake equals reduced AoA.

[bhall II]

And to Ben,

Would you say this effect is more pronounced with raked cars?

The concept is irrelevant.

An adverse pressure gradient is a region where static pressure increases in the direction of travel. This is problematic, because air would much rather flow from areas of high pressure to areas of low pressure, as areas of varying pressure will always seek to equalize.

Ultimately, that means air flow along an adverse pressure gradient steadily loses dynamic pressure - the kinetic energy of the air flow itself - as it overcomes the effects of the adverse pressure gradient. If boundary layer flow along an adverse pressure gradient loses too much dynamic pressure, it will separate. By separate, I mean it will reverse itself, as areas of varying pressure will always seek to equalize...


Exaggerated for effect

If that were to happen on a Formula One car as described in the Motorsport article, the size of the car's wake would be increased significantly, which would increase drag significantly, because it would create the mother of all bottlenecks. It's a senseless outcome.

And this is supposed to happen to RB12 as a drag-reduction strategy? After the severity of the rear wing's adverse pressure gradient has been minimized due to reduced rake from aero loading? In other words, the senseless outcome is supposed to occur magically?


Less rake = lower AoA

As my friends in New Jersey would say, "Get the --- outta here!" (The idea presented actually comes closer to explaining how rear wings create downforce.)

If you have a pet, ask for its thoughts on the subject. The answer you receive will make exactly as much sense as what was written in that article.

EDITS: clarity

[Just_a_fan]

penalty definitely here

"As far as l am aware we will be taking a penalty this weekend," Hamilton told reporters at Spa.

If you know you're starting from the back of the grid (or even the pit lane), wouldn't it be sensible to just do Q1 and then save tyres for the race and engine life in general?

No point risking a possible error resulting in damage going for a pole you won't benefit from.

[sosic2121]

It's debatable which track has an overall net positive result with overtaking. I personally believe that Spa gives easier overtaking, but the drawback is that you have less laps to do it.

I think spa is the better choice, as getting past a Williams or FI in Monza would be harder.

I thought in monza hamilton could finish 2nd. There are 4 long straights and, imo he would be P6 very soon. Mercedes could sacrifice little bit of lap time, for more top speed.
But here, could he finish better then 5th or 6th? I don't think so.
Also, there is more chance for things to go wrong. It will be very interesting

[dans79]

I thought in monza hamilton could finish 2nd. There are 4 long straights and, imo he would be P6 very soon. Mercedes could sacrifice little bit of lap time, for more top speed.
But here, could he finish better then 5th or 6th? I don't think so.
Also, there is more chance for things to go wrong. It will be very interesting

I Don't think Monza is that easy to pass at. Think back to 2014 Lewis went from 1 to 4th at the start and wasn't able to get back up to 2nd till lap 10. He didn't pass Nico till lap 29, and that was greatly aided by Nico missing the chicane twice.

[adrianjordan]

I wonder whether Lewis' people are almost banking on the Red Bulls challenging for the win at Spa which could potentially limit the damage Nico could do to Lewis' points lead...

[Bomber_Pilot]

Completely anticipated, that Ham will start from the back here and not Monza.
Reason1:Spa has 2 nice overtaking places, and it is way easier to get by FI and Williams here, than it would be at Monza. Fi and Williams are fast in a straight line. One would think, that Monza is one of the easiest palces to overtake, especially into the first corner, because of the long straight and the tight chicane at the end of it. But we could see, that it's not that easy, even with DRS. If the car infront of you has a nice exit out of the parabolica, and has a good straight line speed, you won't get by, unless the driver in front of you makes a mistake, or you are on way fresher tires.
In Spa, to get by the car infront, you need a good exit out of the Eau rouge, or the ability to get quite close to the car infront of you down to the bus station, which shouldn't be a probem for Mercedes/Hamilton. (to get by FI and Williams).
Reason2: So far weather forecast shows that Mercedes lucked out on tire choice (not so much compared to Red Bull, but deffinetly Ferrari)
Reason3: They have so much mojo left in their power unit, that as long as the circuit allowes them, they drive circles around everyone else.
Anything less than Ham being in the top five is just Merc PR bull**** as usual, as they tend to overdramatize their strugles (especially in the last few laps of every second race).

[bigpat]

The wings create more wake/turbulence than the underbody, as they deflect the air in order to create their downforce, and are dependent upon freestream airflow to do so. The underbodies are less sensitive to this, as they work in close proximity to the ground. History has shown that with powerful under bodies that the cars can follow closely with LESS degredation in grip, which helps with making overtaking a possibility. Look at the ground effects era, up to the early 90's.

Perfect example of how wings affect the flow of following cars was when Champ Cars introduced the "Handford Device" to the rear wings for use on Superspeedways in 1998. Check it out here:
http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7833

[Juzh]

But then again, double diffusers in 2010 absolutely wrecked following distances in close proximity despite tires being solid as a rock.