Mercedes-AMG F1 W10 EQ Power+

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter does not belong here.
dans79
dans79
248
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 6:33 pm
Location: USA

Re: Mercedes-AMG F1 W10 EQ Power+

Post

Yes, it's my assumption as well that it would have to be related to the suspension system.
160 96 91 6

LM10
LM10
106
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2018 11:07 pm

Re: Mercedes-AMG F1 W10 EQ Power+

Post

I found an article from October 2018 suggesting that Mercedes already came up with this in Singapore or Russia last year.

https://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/sorpr ... 53/?nrt=54

zibby43
zibby43
424
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2017 11:16 am

Re: Mercedes-AMG F1 W10 EQ Power+

Post

AMuS with a very doom and gloom outlook on Mercedes

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... ste-woche/

Seems like there is quite a bit focus on the front wing design, in particular

" . . . it came out that Ferrari is currently two tenths ahead of Red Bull Honda and five to eight tenths ahead of Mercedes in all projections."

"Mercedes has already pushed Ferrari into the role of favourite. "Ferrari is the clear favourite at the moment. We have to catch up," stated team boss Toto Wolff. The technicians are arguing about how much. "At least half a second, maybe even more." Up to 0.8 seconds were heard from the pessimists. Valtteri Bottas reported from the cockpit: "At the low temperatures we had trouble bringing the tyres into her window. The balance is on a knife's edge. We're behind, but it doesn't feel like something fundamental is wrong either."

"Mercedes uses a front wing concept that is contrary to that of Ferrari. The flaps are flatter on the inside than on the outside. In addition, the end plates point inwards, which is not to be seen in any other car. Ferrari does it the other way round. Flaps higher inside than outside, end plates bent outwards. All bad air should pass the outside of the car as before. With the Mercedes solution, you have to live with swirling air inside the wheels and catch it again further back with a complex construction of baffles. The fact that Red Bull drives a similar type of wing is not a sedative pill. The rest of the RB15 is completely different from the Mercedes. Strongly set with a nostril that relieves the middle part of the front wing."

"Red Bull technical director Adrian Newey gives a little insight into the aerodynamics: "You have to decide between the two wing concepts. There is no interim solution. We could switch to the Ferrari wing without any major modifications, if necessary. Mercedes would have more problems there. You would have to change basic things on the car." The Mercedes engineers admit that the Ferrari concept is already being tested in the simulations. "It would be negligent if we didn't. Nevertheless, we must not panic now and must sound out whether we can make progress on our way." The major aero upgrade for the second week of testing of course still sticks to the old values."




User avatar
RZS10
153
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 12:23 am

Re: Mercedes-AMG F1 W10 EQ Power+

Post

How can AMuS even call this an analysis when they're not even crunching numbers? They rely entirely on hearsay and have not done any calculations themselves and to top it off they put the "quote" that Merc is "half a second" down (which they previously said was a rumour in the paddock) next to a quote by Toto Wolff to make it appear as if he himself had said that :?

Are they slowly but surely turning into a clickbait-y tabloit tier rag, or?

Don't get me wrong, what is claimed there might end up being true but that article is far from an "analysis" by any definition of the word ....
Last edited by RZS10 on Mon Feb 25, 2019 1:01 am, edited 1 time in total.

zibby43
zibby43
424
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2017 11:16 am

Re: Mercedes-AMG F1 W10 EQ Power+

Post

RZS10 wrote:
Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:58 pm
How can AMuS even call this an analysis when they're not even crunching numbers? They rely entirely on hearsay and have not done any calculations themselves and to top it off they put the "quote" that Merc is "half a second" down (which they previously said was a rumour in the paddock) next to a quote by Toto Wolff to make it appear as if he himself had said that :?

Are they slowly but surely turning into clickbait-y tabloit tier rag, or?

Don't get me wrong, what is claimed there might end up being true but that article is far from an "analysis" by any definition of the word ....
I'm with you. Took the words right out of my mouth, in fact.

Their articles lately have come across as tabloid journalism. The only reason I included it was there were some interesting comments from the various team personnel about the front wing designs.

There were also articles stating that Merc was running a dedicated test mule of a car (sacrificing fit, finish, and drivability in exchange for modularity and the ability to easily test/swap parts) this past week to trial concepts for the year-long development race. If this is accurate, that would no doubt not only impact the car's overall pace, but it's balance as well.

Just a flurry of conflicting information out there right now with respect to Mercedes.

f1jcw
f1jcw
11
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2019 8:15 pm

Re: Mercedes-AMG F1 W10 EQ Power+

Post

Not sure hearsay is allowed, but another forum has it the issue was with the new nose causing too much downforce and upsetting the balance, they knew this from the silverstone test and they already have a fix ready to go next week.

Seems have conflicting rumours going from.

Issue, but will be sorted
No issue, it was just testing news mechanicals
Quite a big issue and not sure when sorted

Which will be the right one....

zibby43
zibby43
424
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2017 11:16 am

Re: Mercedes-AMG F1 W10 EQ Power+

Post

f1jcw wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 12:58 am
Not sure hearsay is allowed, but another forum has it the issue was with the new nose causing too much downforce and upsetting the balance, they knew this from the silverstone test and they already have a fix ready to go next week.

Seems have conflicting rumours going from.

Issue, but will be sorted
No issue, it was just testing news mechanicals
Quite a big issue and not sure when sorted

Which will be the right one....
First I had heard of the new nose providing too much downforce. That’s very interesting, and fixable. Also explains the balance issues.

User avatar
jh199
19
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2016 2:00 am

Re: Mercedes-AMG F1 W10 EQ Power+

Post

f1jcw wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 12:58 am
...the new nose causing too much downforce and upsetting the balance...
Makes sense to me. The new regs allow for larger front wings, thus, more possible front end downforce generation. As Mercedes has basically made the front wing as large as allowed they are most likely producing more front wing downforce than anyone else. Plus, if what everyone is saying is true and their tire wake control method is inferior to that of other cars (i.e. the Ferrari and Sauber concept), the rear end will produce less downforce due to the ingress of front tire wake into the sensitive flow areas. In combination, this will lead to too much grip at the front and not enough grip at the rear.

It will be interesting to see how they cope with it in testing tomorrow

f1jcw
f1jcw
11
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2019 8:15 pm

Re: Mercedes-AMG F1 W10 EQ Power+

Post

jh199 wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 2:49 am
Plus, if what everyone is saying is true and their tire wake control method is inferior to that of other cars (i.e. the Ferrari and Sauber concept)
How do they improve the tire wake control?

User avatar
SparkyAMG
6
Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 12:30 pm

Re: Mercedes-AMG F1 W10 EQ Power+

Post

f1jcw wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:36 am
How do they improve the tire wake control?
By modifying the front wing and bargeboard concepts, though these are also tied to their front suspension concept so it's a lot easier said than done.

djones
djones
22
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 2:01 pm

Re: Mercedes-AMG F1 W10 EQ Power+

Post

All track side reports I saw of the car reported understeer.

So I suspect the idea of too much front downforce is completely false. Indeed if anything it would be too little front wing downforce.

garygph
garygph
7
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 1:25 pm

Re: Mercedes-AMG F1 W10 EQ Power+

Post

djones wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 10:27 am
All track side reports I saw of the car reported understeer.

So I suspect the idea of too much front downforce is completely false. Indeed if anything it would be too little front wing downforce.
I am not convinced about any specific reason for the observed understeer and talked about handling issues. There are just too many issues that could be contributing. Possibly the very cold track is causing a problem which they will not have come the warmer track temperatures during the season. Maybe the car has understeer in fast corners due to too little front downforce compared to rear. Maybe it is a slow corner issue that has little to do with a downforce problem but more to do with suspension. Etc Etc Etc.. there are just too many variables I think to tell with the little we know.

My favourite personal thought is track temperature related problems that you do not want to waste a lot of time correcting as that is not what you will be dealing with later in the year. Of course if the front and rears are heating/cooling in VERY different rates then of course that is a different matter but within reason I am sure they will be focusing on other things. Like checking correlation and so on.

kalinka
kalinka
9
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 11:01 pm
Location: Hungary

Re: Mercedes-AMG F1 W10 EQ Power+

Post

garygph wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 11:34 am
djones wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 10:27 am
All track side reports I saw of the car reported understeer.

So I suspect the idea of too much front downforce is completely false. Indeed if anything it would be too little front wing downforce.
Maybe the car has understeer in fast corners due to too little front downforce compared to rear.
:wtf:
Wouldn't this cause oversteer also? Why would the car understeer in fast corners due to lack of front DF?
If the overall DF is low, but balanced, it should again transfer into oversteer in the middle of the fast corner where power is applied..? Just curious.

ripleysend
ripleysend
0
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2018 6:34 am

Re: Mercedes-AMG F1 W10 EQ Power+

Post

garygph wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 11:34 am
My favourite personal thought is track temperature related problems that you do not want to waste a lot of time correcting as that is not what you will be dealing with later in the year.
This, 100%. Been on my mind too. One of the problems with Barcelona as the pre-season test is that track temperatures are rarely representative of likely future conditions. There must be many tremendously tempting bear traps awaiting performance engineers and designers, where one could be fooled into making changes to the car which may work now in Barcelona, but which are dead ends at warmer future circuits.

I've always assumed it is one of the mystic skills of performance engineers to be able to set a car up across FP1 / FP2 for likely future conditions in quali and race when the track temperature may be different (Weather, time of day) and the track surface different (rubbering in etc.).

garygph
garygph
7
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 1:25 pm

Re: Mercedes-AMG F1 W10 EQ Power+

Post

kalinka wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 12:21 pm
garygph wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 11:34 am
djones wrote:
Mon Feb 25, 2019 10:27 am
All track side reports I saw of the car reported understeer.

So I suspect the idea of too much front downforce is completely false. Indeed if anything it would be too little front wing downforce.
Maybe the car has understeer in fast corners due to too little front downforce compared to rear.
:wtf:
Wouldn't this cause oversteer also? Why would the car understeer in fast corners due to lack of front DF?
If the overall DF is low, but balanced, it should again transfer into oversteer in the middle of the fast corner where power is applied..? Just curious.
Hi Kalinka
Not sure that you read what I said properly as I said " too little front downforce compared to rear" which means it is not balanced?