Mercedes GP - Inauguration and 1st season

[marcush.]

everyone says adding (cranking up)downforce is slowing you in terms of trap speed...
The wonder is that RBR has a weak engine ,best downforce and still decent trapspeeds..
so even if they had the same power it is still a significant advantage in drag for the downforce they produce.
But maybe the total DF figure is not that much more compared to others ..maybe it is their ability to provide a smooth downforce generation/progression over a big range of rideheights that is helping the drivers extract 100% of what is there.
With big fluctuations and small windows of optimum operation it is incredibly more difficult to extract all that is in there and maybe thats what RBR does better with their layout? I feel cleaner shapers will not show as much change over rideheights or bdy roll dive and squat...

btw ..when Webber´s car stranded in FP in Monza..it was also evident they did not carry much in terms of Anti Ackerman with their inner wheel doing consdiderable
turn action...hm..

[Raptor22]

MEP, the Mercedes F-Duct is indeed routed through the bodywork. the plumbing takes air from the converted driver cooling duct on the side of the chassis and pressurises a chamber under the engine cover.
Under the drivers foot is another pipe tht is compressed when the system is activated. that action shuts off flow to a part of the chamber that results in a switching of exit air inside the chamber to pressurise the rear wing blowing pneumatic circuit. Pressure is pressure, it does not need flow to be efficient, it just needs energy to maintain the pressure. That energy comes from the dynamic pressure head created by the car moving forward. F0Ducts don't work while the car is reversing.

[segedunum]

They didn't have identical straight line speeds and I'm afraid looking at speed trap stats tells you little. You want to know how fast a car with a certain engine accelerated to a given speed and how long the car and engine was able to maintain that speed. There's also the issue of wing and downforce levels to consider.

The speed trap figures can only tell you so much, and often it's pretty misleading in trying to guess how well a car and engine is doing in a straight line and how it's contributing to the lap time overall.

The only conclusion you can drawn from that race was that although the Renault and Red Bull cars have performed pretty well over many races, have good downforce and have had decent speed trap figures in the past they were both lacking at Monza.

And not even Scarbs can see the difference between engines without benching them.

This is pure straw clutching and is the tac you usually resort to when you've been cornered - claim that no one really knows. You should probably stop otherwise this will go nowhere.

I'll have to dig out the article but Scarbs described accurately how Ferrari had gained around 15 horsepower through reliability improvements, which makes a whole mockery of equalisation.

[aral]

30 hp difference is pure fantasy.


And Schumachers presence more than justifies his 7m salary through sponsorship.

Frankly, I would prefer to believe the engineers in Ferrari and Renault. On what do you base your assertion that the difference is "pure fantasy". Do you have any bench figures to prove this?

I can't believe that there are any sponsors lining up to contribute to Schumis pension fund, at the moment, and you may find that some will drop out for next year, disappointed at the lack of return. Maybe next year, he could get sponsorship from Philosan ( fortifies the over fortys)

[aral]

Some have been continually asserting that the Merc f-duct is passive, despite constant proof that it is in fact active. But I would not be sure that it is foot operated. If you remember, there were shots at Spa , of Schumi using his hand. Further, there was a clear shot of Schumi getting out of his car at Monza, and on the left hand side, there was clearly a hole in the cockpit side, close to where his hand would be. This was ringed with some white material, possibly to create a good seal. But I would agree that the route is so tortuous, that it would be very difficult to provide instant activation. Perhaps if they used a nozzle pointing back to the wing, and exiting from out of the airbox, this increased airpressure could cause the wing to stall

[mep]

@ raptor
So first of all do you have any source to back this up?
Second why are you talking about pressure here?
You want to tell me they have a pressure tank in the car to blow the wing?
Yea pressure doesn’t need airflow as long as it’s in a closed vessel but as soon as there is a little hole air will stream out and pressure will drop if you don’t keep it up with a compressor. Just to make it clear the F-duct is not a compressor.
What the rear wing needs to stall is not pressure it is air flow and quite a lot of it.
Look at the TorroRosso duct.
Lets say the duct has a circular diameter of 5cm. That gives you a cross-section of 19,6cm². So lets say the car is moving with 300km/h or 83,3m/s this gives us a volumetric flow of 0,16m³/s or 9,8m³/min.

It should be easy to see that you can’t store such an amount of air in the car under 1 bar pressure. So what’s the max stagnation pressure we have at this speed?

Pstag = ½ p * v² = 4232,7 N/m² = 0,04 bar

Not much!
So how you want to pressurise a chamber with this?
Its ok to get some flow but not pressure.

[RacingManiac]

Regardless how the air gets there, is their wing actually blown? I don't remember seeing anything obvious....but thats just me...

[747heavy]

I don´t know how MGP F-duct works - period
But we need to seperate two things IMHO

The main feed for the F-duct, which "blows" the rear wing, and the control feed, which is activating the "pressure switch" to turn it on or off.

Let´s take the McL example. The main feed for the F-duct, is in the top 1/4 of the airbox intake in the air from there goes via the shark fin to the rear wing.
The control input is via the small snorkel scoop on top of the tube (this has been removed from L.H.´s car in Monza)

I think aptor has a valid point in saying, that the airintake behind the RHS suspension is the control intake.
I don´t know where there main intake is, in earlier versions/photos, I´m sure it was in the 150 mm "free zone" at the main profile of the wing.
I agree with mep, that you cant route the main feed fom the font of the car, though the whole car via the endplates into the rear wing and still expect to have enough flow velocity left to blow the wing.
But it could well be the control circuit, where you just need a small pressure difference to activate/deactivate a fluid switch.

Both of you can be right in this matter I supose.
I think the STR feed solution for an F-duct would work well with the MGP roll-hoop., will be interesting to see, if MGP is going to copy this.
The routing/operation of the control circuit, should not be that much of an problem.
In earlier photos, from tests, of an active F-duct, we have seenm the small tube taped to the rear wing endplate of the MGP car, this is no probably integrated into the endplate.
I think raptors explaination is creditable, but I don´t know for sure.
Just my 2 cent.

[siskue2005]

I will post this again for those who still have doubt

its actually there , and was reported in formula1.com site
here is the link

I am sure the FIA has the perfect source for what is happening with Merc's F-duct
and this
http://www.formula1.com/news/technical/ ... 0/758.html


Mercedes GP's F-Duct system, which was introduced in China, has received an upgrade in Turkey. It can now be activated by the driver's foot thanks to a bigger duct on the side of the chassis (blue arrow). This was previously much smaller and used to cool the drivers. The system of pipes used to direct the air to the rear wing is very complicated and they are all concealed by the engine cover, eventually reaching the wing's main profile through the side endplates.

[RacingManiac]

Even if the FIA knows, that does not mean Formula1.com's site is basing their stuff on FIA's knowledge. I am sure there are NDAs in place so whats secretive and unique to each car don't get passed around...

[mep]

Notice that even they only assume that the air goes trough the side plates.
Or am I reading this wrong?

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Mercedes had a near flat plane wing and achieved the same top speed as renault who had a touch more wing according to Brundle.

So how will 30 hp translate on the track? Put it this way, Webber would have been mince meat on the straight with Schumacher, this was not the case. Red Bull even managed more wing. Their aero effieciency is obviously good, but their engine is also nowhere near as down on power as you lot suggest.

So I put it to you gilgen and segedunum, your arguments dont stack up because you dont have the stats to back it up.
Ferrari have not once complained about supposed Mercedes "superiority". And Renault have done so 90% of the time through Horner, who lets face it couldnt engineer his way out a paper bag.

If it was unfair, why did they sign up to the engine freeze?
Seems Red Bull can have a years frozen advantage with Chassis(homologation) yet Mercedes with it engines cannot, even though the rules dictate it?

Thats fair eh?

So the crux of your arguments, you are basing on speculation, I would say that is most evident. Therefore I can just as easy speculate that Renaults fuel advantage nullifies the Mercedes power advantage, and you know what? You couldnt argue otherwise because you dont have the stats to back it up.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

As for Schumachers salary and their sponsorship returns, why does it bother anyone of us?
The deals were put in place and anyone with a modicum of foresight can actually see that most of Mercedes contracts are for 3 years(Schumachers contract duration).
Petronas is for 2012 renewal as is MIG and autonomy.
Deutsche post will be renewed at the end of the current season but if not, Mercedes will not be short of sponsors.

[aral]

Mercedes had a near flat plane wing and achieved the same top speed as renault who had a touch more wing according to Brundle.

So how will 30 hp translate on the track? Put it this way, Webber would have been mince meat on the straight with Schumacher, this was not the case. Red Bull even managed more wing. Their aero effieciency is obviously good, but their engine is also nowhere near as down on power as you lot suggest.

So I put it to you gilgen and segedunum, your arguments dont stack up because you dont have the stats to back it up.
Ferrari have not once complained about supposed Mercedes "superiority". And Renault have done so 90% of the time through Horner, who lets face it couldnt engineer his way out a paper bag.

If it was unfair, why did they sign up to the engine freeze?
Seems Red Bull can have a years frozen advantage with Chassis(homologation) yet Mercedes with it engines cannot, even though the rules dictate it?

Thats fair eh?

So the crux of your arguments, you are basing on speculation, I would say that is most evident. Therefore I can just as easy speculate that Renaults fuel advantage nullifies the Mercedes power advantage, and you know what? You couldnt argue otherwise because you dont have the stats to back it up.

You say my arguments are speculation, but are your theories not speculation? You cannot judge horsepower by comparing speeds on straights. There are numerous factors, of which you are well aware. Aero drag, gearing, frictional drag, etc. The Cosworth is known to be considerably down on power, yet it was ahead of the Renault and Mercedes engines.
And as for sponsorship, I would imagine that a number of these have performance clauses in them, and so lack of points or exposure, could technically be a breach, and thus the sponsors could walk away. Petronas contract was not reliant on Schumi, so yes, they will probably stay.
You ask me to back my "speculation" with stats, yet you cannot back up your own speculation with stats. So why be so critical of those with opinions different to yours.
And by the way, Ferrari have also called for engine equalisation.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

[...]
I didnt use a speculation to make a point. Segedunum used the "30hp" myth to suggest that the W01 is so bad it cannot utilise this even in the face of such a huge advantage. This is plain wrong as its unsubstantiated.
Furthermore you only to see that the Renault V8 has advantages of its own like frugality and reliabilty. My point is equally valid, but my post was meant to demonstrate how easy it is to pluck somthing out the air and post because "ferrari and Renault engineers say so"
[...]
They asked for engine mods earlier this year, and recieved it. But this was on the grounds of unreliability. Renault have had 2 such mods, but still they ask for engine equalisation. So far as I'm aware there is a difference.