Mercedes W13

[SparkyAMG]

I think both examples weren't really due to drag at all but due to traction. On both instances where this happened, it was early after a restart when the tires were cold. It appears the W13 in Silverstone at least had issues with tire warm-up. On the up-side, it looked to be very kind on its tires (allowing Lewis to stay out that long on the first stint).

I believe this is OT to the car thread though. Sorry if this is the case.

This looked to be the W13's main weakness yesterday, perhaps combined with a continued dislike for the slower speed stuff. At all the starts (even the first one) and the pit stop, the car looked very sluggish through Farm and Chapel and left Hamilton exposed on the Wellington straight, but was better after a few laps.

His medium stint was incredible.

[AA_2019]

When Max damaged the underfloor today with debris, we saw how much slower he was, however his car still had no bouncing which suggests their lack of bouncing is not due to clever aero but rather other things such as a flexi floor. Your description if true would indicate the RB's floor helps in this area.

The car didnt bounce because its ride height was very high after the floor damage. That's how much load they lost at the rear.
I could see right through underneath.

Have you got a pic or timestamp showing this?

Just watched some replays and Max's car is still scrapping the floors after the damage.

The reasons for the excessive bouncing of the w13 perhaps does not lie in the aero concept.

[f1jcw]

I am alway amused when a car puts in a much faster lap and gets the fastet lap point.

I know it must be difficult to race at 100% all the time and also fuel consideration, but team members must think if he can do that, how come he not do that more laps.

[kalinka]

I am alway amused when a car puts in a much faster lap and gets the fastet lap point.

I know it must be difficult to race at 100% all the time and also fuel consideration, but team members must think if he can do that, how come he not do that more laps.

It's because of ERS charge state. You can prepare a charging lap to run a much faster lap next time around, but you can't do it every lap - and both your previous and next laps will be compromised.

[f1jcw]

I am alway amused when a car puts in a much faster lap and gets the fastet lap point.

I know it must be difficult to race at 100% all the time and also fuel consideration, but team members must think if he can do that, how come he not do that more laps.

It's because of ERS charge state. You can prepare a charging lap to run a much faster lap next time around, but you can't do it every lap - and both your previous and next laps will be compromised.

ah, thanks, didn't think of that

[SuperCNJ]

The reasons for the excessive bouncing of the w13 perhaps does not lie in the aero concept.

That is also what I am thinking, or it may not be wholly to blame. We saw some bouncing in Canada on the straight, but what was strange to me was that, unlikely porpoising the bouncing was intermittent. There was a momentary pause between the bouncing on the straight, whereas porpoising would be pretty much continuous with no breaks. So I am not convinced it is entirely aero related and contrary to what many people suggest, I want Merc to stick with the zero-pod concept.

I have been a fan of the zero-pod concept since it was first introduced and despite the performance issues it has suffered and the challenges with stiffening the floor I still have a sense it is the right concept. I don't have proof but I do believe once Merc sorts out the niggling problems, the performance ceiling will be quite high and may even exceed those of other concepts. I do hope Merc will stick with this as I think the car looks incredible. Such an innovative and brave solution.

[SuperCNJ]

I am alway amused when a car puts in a much faster lap and gets the fastet lap point.

I know it must be difficult to race at 100% all the time and also fuel consideration, but team members must think if he can do that, how come he not do that more laps.

It's because of ERS charge state. You can prepare a charging lap to run a much faster lap next time around, but you can't do it every lap - and both your previous and next laps will be compromised.

That and also because he would have probably turned the engine up for that single lap, taken more out of the tyres, taken more risk with kerbs, used more fuel etc - all of which is not really sustainable for a race distance.

[Sieper]

I am alway amused when a car puts in a much faster lap and gets the fastet lap point.

I know it must be difficult to race at 100% all the time and also fuel consideration, but team members must think if he can do that, how come he not do that more laps.

It's because of ERS charge state. You can prepare a charging lap to run a much faster lap next time around, but you can't do it every lap - and both your previous and next laps will be compromised.

That and also because he would have probably turned the engine up for that single lap, taken more out of the tyres, taken more risk with kerbs, used more fuel etc - all of which is not really sustainable for a race distance.

You can’t turn the engine up. What you can do, as described is not use your ERS deployment for say 2 laps, so that the battery is fully charged and then deploy it to zero in one lap, perhaps even limit recovery in that lap. Then you would need another lap or two to recover. So if you are not being chased you can go for it.

[AA_2019]

The reasons for the excessive bouncing of the w13 perhaps does not lie in the aero concept.

That is also what I am thinking, or it may not be wholly to blame. We saw some bouncing in Canada on the straight, but what was strange to me was that, unlikely porpoising the bouncing was intermittent. There was a momentary pause between the bouncing on the straight, whereas porpoising would be pretty much continuous with no breaks. So I am not convinced it is entirely aero related and contrary to what many people suggest, I want Merc to stick with the zero-pod concept.

I have been a fan of the zero-pod concept since it was first introduced and despite the performance issues it has suffered and the challenges with stiffening the floor I still have a sense it is the right concept. I don't have proof but I do believe once Merc sorts out the niggling problems, the performance ceiling will be quite high and may even exceed those of other concepts. I do hope Merc will stick with this as I think the car looks incredible. Such an innovative and brave solution.

Zero-pod with so much exposed floor caused more fluttering, but they have largely solved that with the update at Barcelona. The problem now is bouncing as distinct from flutter induced purpoising.

Zero-pod concept is not a dead duck, but the underbody concept probably needs changing.

RB have sacrificed the volume of their venturis to what they could have had under the regs and also have no kick points. A very different concept to Merc.

Here is hoping:
https://www.planetf1.com/news/mercedes- ... to-change/

[pimpwerx]

Zero-pod with so much exposed floor caused more fluttering, but they have largely solved that with the update at Barcelona. The problem now is bouncing as distinct from flutter induced purpoising.

Zero-pod concept is not a dead duck, but the underbody concept probably needs changing.

RB have sacrificed the volume of their venturis to what they could have had under the regs and also have no kick points. A very different concept to Merc.

Here is hoping:
https://www.planetf1.com/news/mercedes- ... to-change/

Doesn't RB have kick points on the centerline? It looks like the diffuser volume increases in steps horizontally instead of vertically. Isn't the concept similar?

[Sofa King]

It got the fastest lap, was on pace to overtake the leaders before the SC and lost mainly due to poor tire warmup. Since this is a development thread, there seems to be good evidence that the W13 has the potential to be the fastest car under even broader conditions and tracks

The W13 is now the fastest car

On tracks with smooth surface and not many undulations, maybe. But I bet Verstappen would have been fastest in the race if his car didn’t suffer a damaged floor.

No just no...

[CMSMJ1]

Now then Forum friends - can we get back to the W13 please?

I'll go drop a fair few of these recent posts into a more appropriate thread

[ringo]

So it has been clarified that Mercedes did not know about the flexifloors, this seems that the FIA were behind that investigation. Again Mercedes failed to see that trick with this car. What would be good is if the FIA stamps out the flexing floors then the car will be better relative to the competition.

I was looking on the other cars and noticed that in their upgrade packages the openings of the radiator ducts have been moved forward. This is a different concept to the cars in the recent past where the inlets were moved backward into the crash structures to reduce the skin drag on the sidepods.
Now with the indented sidepods, or coanda pods, we are seeing the inlets brought forward for a less aggressive expansion over the sidepods.
Mercedes car is different, but they can also investigate extended openings for the radiators.

[hecti]

So it has been clarified that Mercedes did not know about the flexifloors, this seems that the FIA were behind that investigation. Again Mercedes failed to see that trick with this car. What would be good is if the FIA stamps out the flexing floors then the car will be better relative to the competition.

I was looking on the other cars and noticed that in their upgrade packages the openings of the radiator ducts have been moved forward. This is a different concept to the cars in the recent past where the inlets were moved backward into the crash structures to reduce the skin drag on the sidepods.
Now with the indented sidepods, or coanda pods, we are seeing the inlets brought forward for a less aggressive expansion over the sidepods.
Mercedes car is different, but they can also investigate extended openings for the radiators.

Because of the sidepod body work rules and the very limited range of placement for the upper side impact structure, Mercedes can't really move their side pod entry more forward, it is stuck where it is unless they change their sidepod concept.

I also see a lot of people throwing out the "Coanda" effect again, but it is not really what is going on here in this set of regulations, teams are trying to get clean and volumous flow to the beam wing while trying to outwash the air that passes under the radiator intakes. The curvatures of the supposed "coanda pods" isn't nearly as extreme as what we saw with the exhaust flow coanda effect ramps we had in 2012-2013

[De Jokke]

So small floor upgrades for the next three races: https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/114539/m ... ngary.html