McLaren MP4-26 Mercedes

[vall]

I don't think it is particularly low drag. They have the raised parts of the sidepod almost in line with the rear tyres and the shallow part of the sidepod should give some fairly unrestricted airflow, but whenever you create leading edges and shape changes on your car you're always going to get some drag and conflicting airflow.

this was more or less my comment few pages back! The 26 surfaces are too complicated and I fail to see how this is optimal. I expect smooth surfaces to work better, but you never know - it is a complex science

[csponton]

Mclaren MP4 - 26
http://spontoncristiano.wordpress.com

Finally, even the much-anticipated McLaren MP4-26. was presented this morning in Berlin. The Mclaren is the first car that stands out from all others because it has followed its own concepts and has taken just starting an incomparable Red Bull RB6.

AERODYNAMICS

The McLaren has followed the concept now used by everyone to raise as much as possible the muzzle. Unlike others, however, the snout is very flat and lacks the characteristic shape of a "V". The front wing is a triple, full of chutes, the area allowed by regulation, to try to ensure a high downforce and to meet the increased flow of air in the lower areas of the car so as to work in the best possible way diffusore.In particularly curious about the presence of an additional profile and mounding very complex, the result of painstaking microaerodinamica.
Under the nose there is a divergence of up to drivers front wing useful to divide the flow: those that blow over this profile is intended for the air vents radiators, while those that pass below are directed to the rear.
Under the nose there is a divergence of up to drivers front wing useful to divide the flow: those that blow over this profile is intended for the air vents radiators, while those that pass below are directed to the rear.

The shape of the bonnet is domed and has an additional air intake with a half moon shape and placed over the area back from the roll bar that would serve mainly to cool the KERS. The engine hood has an opening in the rear area to "breathe" and in the best way to cool the Mercedes engine and electric motor used for KERS.

The air intakes are practically new, very small with an L-shaped aerodynamic channel characterized by a potential that can bring additional air into the back flows and improving the operation of the rear axle. The benches in the back are very low and tend to practically zero in the back called coca-cola.

This concept of sides and vents is not new in Formula 1 because the sides reminiscent of the Ferrari F310 (first Ferrari headed by M. Schumacher) drawn by Barnard back in 1997 and those of Benetton B195 designed by Rory Byrne and Ross Brawn.

The rear wing is in 2011 that the wing configuration that can move. The speaker used is pretty standard and certainly will undergo an evolution since the next test in Jerez.

For now, as opposed to the rumors suggested (exhaust style Lotus-Renault R31), McLaren presents low discharges that surely will go to areas where you can create openings in the diffuser (see Red Bull and Ferrari). Also of interest the lower edge of the wing becomes aerodynamically integrated with the rear suspension arms to prove that the change, just like on Williams, has been miniaturized.


MECHANICS

Even at the McLaren mechanic has evolved considerably. Practically new push for the suspension - front rod designed specifically to make the best possible way the Pirelli tires, new are the cooling vents both front and rear brakes. The only idea that McLaren engineers have "copied" by rivals Milton Keynes and the rear suspension that has become pull-rod. This road has been chosen by all the teams seen so far except for Ferrari and Sauber (rear mount / rear suspension of Ferrari). Of which was already known for some time as the suspension offers considerable gains in aerodynamic design because it allows a very low and tapered rear end, but also offers significant advantages in terms of gravity as it tends to lower it. Low center of gravity means very balanced car and then low tire degradation.

KERS

McLaren has worked very hard in the best way to introduce KERS in car trying to use the experience gained with such an approach in 2009. The whole system has been miniaturized and now the KERS is much smaller and lighter than the one used on the MP4-24. In KERS system has been improved and changed the system of connection between the electric motor (MGU Motor Generator Unit) and internal combustion engine. The battery storage energy recovered during braking or deceleration of the car, are located at the bottom of the fuel tank in an area distinct. This location was chosen both to satisfy the car's weight balance is imposed by regulation for an optimal balance of the car.

[Richard]

Here's some evidence that the side pods are not higher than the previous car.

As you can see below, McL have punched a hole in the sidepod when viewed
from the front as shown by the yellow boxes. Other cars have a bank of
raditors in this area.

I've not done a comparison of width. Primarily because it is late, but also
all teams use the max floor width allowed by the rules when viewed from above.

Finally, seeing that 2010 pic with the high exahust reminded just how much things have changed since last year.

This post seems to be wider then the screen even though the images are small, how
odd. I've put in some manual line breaks so text doesn't spill off screen.

[Richard]

The McLaren has followed the concept now used by everyone to raise as much as possible the muzzle.

err ...no!

The nose is lower then most other cars that have an almost straight to edge, see the image above. Looking at the image in the post above, you can see it is identical to last year.

[ringo]

The nose looks the same as last year to me as well. It's already a high nose design, so i guess they were satisfied with it and the relationship to the new side pods.

The radiators actually have a lower mass centroid.

Neither are they wider geometrically, though the mass is further away from the centre line.


l is the same distance, both coolers at the same exact shape, just one rotated twice. A little chunk is taken off and placed on the inside (light blue)to keep the undercut.

Basically flipping horizontally and vertically will do the trick. Pretty simple put very outside of the box.

[godlameroso]

I don't think it is particularly low drag. They have the raised parts of the sidepod almost in line with the rear tyres and the shallow part of the sidepod should give some fairly unrestricted airflow, but whenever you create leading edges and shape changes on your car you're always going to get some drag and conflicting airflow.

this was more or less my comment few pages back! The 26 surfaces are too complicated and I fail to see how this is optimal. I expect smooth surfaces to work better, but you never know - it is a complex science

Well I know for a fact that golf balls travel more efficiently due to their bumps and complexities than if they were just smooth and round

[kalinka]

Good point. Also you can ask : optimal for what ? Better flow? lower drag? higher DF ? Lower CoG ? It's a multi-variable thing. Maybe you loose somwhere with complex surfaces, but maybe the gain is much bigger at some other parameters. Too complex to judge without real data.

EDIT : another example for this : modern fighter-jets have such a complex aerodynamic that pilots can't fly them without computer assisted fly-by-wire systems. The real time control of all parameters would be too complex for human. Simply they would fall down without constant real-time computer control. I know...I know.. in F1 you can't control these surfaces. It's just another not so perfect example as above with the golf ball

[tarzoon]

l is the same distance, both coolers at the same exact shape, just one rotated twice. A little chunk is taken off and placed on the inside (light blue)to keep the undercut.

Basically flipping horizontally and vertically will do the trick. Pretty simple put very outside of the box.

Ringo, it seems like the McLaren has a smaller undercut, so the blue corner probably remains where it was.

Anyway, how much does a radiator filled with water weight? If that weight moves a few inches further down -- and further out as well -- is it that significant to pursue a different approach, balancing the pros and cons?

[myurr]

The Red Bull doesn't have any undercut either, so the McLaren isn't unique in that regard.

[timbo]

Neither are they wider geometrically, though the mass is further away from the centre line.

That what I was telling.
They also seem to have higher fuel tank IMO, which may balance out lower CofG of radiators and a longer chassis.
Anyway, IMO they sacrificed packaging for aero.
It would be interesting to see if it works for them.

[Tamburello]

Next test, we'll get a lot more to disseminate I am sure.

I reckon they'll be sandbagging until Bahrain meself. Can't see them showing their cards during the tests.

But nobody does show their in the tests.

[Tamburello]

What if the sidepods are just here to mess with the other teams heads and have them run around in the wrong direction and divert resources from where they should be. Kind of like the F-Duct... only that kind of worked.

Other teams are not stupid...

[Tamburello]

What if the sidepods are just here to mess with the other teams heads and have them run around in the wrong direction and divert resources from where they should be. Kind of like the F-Duct... only that kind of worked.

Other teams are not stupid...

[bar555]

Mc Laren MP4/26A – Special shaped sidepods
http://formula1techandart.wordpress.com ... -sidepods/

[jgh]

I am wondering if the mirrors will also now help with directing the airflow.

I think it was early 2010 where several teams had mirrors positioned further out to help with the airflow coming off the front tyres. This was banned on safety grounds (I think).