Mclaren MCL40

[Emag]

Did McLaren conclude that speed of deployment and closure was more important than size of the opening?

Size of opening doesn’t matter at all. It’s visual trickery for your brain. All DRS does is reduce the drag of the actuated flap as much as it can. You can do this by flattening it, or as it’s now possible, by flipping it upside down.

Drag reduction eventually is dictated by the final resting position of the actuated flap and the gap it makes with the rest of the rear wing makes no difference at all.

The maximum amount of drag you can reduce via DRS is equal to the drag of the actuated flap and it depends on that flap’s surface area.

[SilviuAgo]

[f1rules]

Its all good. Thanks for sharing all the nice info
I just thought i remembered seing the picture before and i can see its from page 40 in this thread.

No cooling vents on top of the sidepod… is F1rules right?

Indeed. I updated the post accordingly. Sorry for the info, and I';ve sent the feedback also to the x user.

Mclaren brings 4 performance upgrades:

- Rear wing
- Floor body
- Front corner
- Rear corner

Circuit specific:
- Front corner

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HN_TUZ8WsAE ... name=large

Detail of the "Mclarena"actuator:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HN_N-NAWUAA ... name=large
@AlbertFabrega

[f1rules]

doesnt look to be the floor edge theyve updated

[f1rules]

im not judging how it works, only joking how it looks, is this the temu version

[SilviuAgo]

im not judging how it works, only joking how it looks, is this the temu version

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HN_N-NAWUAA ... name=large

Maybe for the FP1 test is enough for them. Is possible McLaren considered that you do not have to came with a sophisticate solution and final version of the actuator to test if the wing is working as expected or to validate the data from the simulation.
Or at least this I hope they are doing

[Macklaren]

im not judging how it works, only joking how it looks, is this the temu version

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HN_N-NAWUAA ... name=large

Maybe for the FP1 test is enough for them. Is possible McLaren considered that you do not have to came with a sophisticate solution and final version of the actuator to test if the wing is working as expected or to validate the data from the simulation.
Or at least this I hope they are doing

Until you have a piece of errant gravel knock out the hydraulics like it hit the kill switch on hulk's car

[AR3-GP]

im not judging how it works, only joking how it looks, is this the temu version

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HN_N-NAWUAA ... name=large

Maybe for the FP1 test is enough for them. Is possible McLaren considered that you do not have to came with a sophisticate solution and final version of the actuator to test if the wing is working as expected or to validate the data from the simulation.
Or at least this I hope they are doing

Until you have a piece of errant gravel knock out the hydraulics like it hit the kill switch on hulk's car

That line is not hydraulic. It is electrical or pressure tube. I don't think it's a pressure tube since the zip ties would strangle it so it's probable a line for a position sensor.

[SilviuAgo]

MCL40 RW vs Ferrari and RedBull:

[AR3-GP]

Mclaren closes the fastest, to my eye.

[FittingMechanics]

Mclaren closes the fastest, to my eye.

Fastest by far to my eye. Not sure it matters but it'll allow them to close it a bit later.

Oh and now it is clear McLaren macarena opens up like Red Bull one.

[Brahmal]

Dang it thought I had it figured out, oh well. A lot of the pictures alleged to be the McLarena wing were in fact not, as these details have not been pictured before to my knowledge. I've marked the shutline on the swan-neck stay in pink, the displaced hinge with axis of rotation in green, and highlighted the flap shutline in blue.



Most confusing for me was how McLaren was achieving this geometry without the RBR-style displaced hinge, but they just have a less extreme version that isn't as visually apparent. Curious to see what adjustments they make for the final version, as this looks like it would be susceptible to the same kind of failure that spun Max out.

[AR3-GP]

Curious to see what adjustments they make for the final version, as this looks like it would be susceptible to the same kind of failure that spun Max out.

You could say a lot of things are susceptible to failure if they are designed poorly. Brakes, steering, etc. Red Bull's issues are a red herring for this design. The front wings operate on the same principle where they have to counteract the aero load when they close. If the design is good, it's bulletproof. If it's not, then you get what Red Bull had in Austria/Silverstone. Mercedes had an issue closing their front wings in the first 2 weekends. It happens but it's 99% of the time down to bad design, not an inherently unsolvable problem.

[AR3-GP]

[Brahmal]

You could say a lot of things are susceptible to failure if they are designed poorly. Brakes, steering, etc. Red Bull's issues are a red herring for this design. The front wings operate on the same principle where they have to counteract the aero load when they close. If the design is good, it's bulletproof.

The big difference between the FW and RW flap-opening geometries is the FW flap is hinged across its front edge, while the RW flap is hinged at two points rearward. That first slot-gap is critical for wing performance, and even a tiny discrepancy can result in the separation and stalling which pitched Max around twice. The FW flaps have inherently more support and stiffness along that front-edge slot-gap than the RBR or McLarena RW design does, so I think that will always be a fundamental flaw of this design that will require mitigation of some kind. OTOH the Ferrari wing physically comes to rest on the mainplane stub-stays so no worries there.

I will say that I'm a little disappointed in McLaren's effort here, as I was hoping they would come with another unique interpretation of this basic idea. Instead, like f1rules joked, this just appears to be a temu version of the RBR wing.