Mercedes AMG F1 W03

[Gridlock]

Another shot of proposed duct system. Not sure how much the pic shows though.



link--> http://www.pratperch.com/2012/03/merc-w03-rear-wing/

I'd say it shows the cover for the duct very well, you can clearly see a part of the actuated section is flush to the end plates here, and would reveal pretty much what we see in the other picture directly above my post

[lillschumi]

I think scarbs got it wrong this time.Like someone prior said the flow goes the other way. Air is released over the wing stalling it when DRS flap opens. Air is probably coming from airbox and routed as described but flows the other way.

This about a duct to the front wing is completly nonsense. At most they have a passive stalling not interlinked with DRS but i think no. They might have tried it 2011. The famous hole in nosecone has been present a long time and i think it is for hydraulic cooling.

I have made my prediction and that is it´s a dog of a car. hope i´m wrong.

[hardingfv32]

Delete

[hardingfv32]

Still no one seems to have clue what giant hole in the nose is for ? :wtf:

Driver cooling as specified in the rules.

Brian

[Tozza Mazza]

Still no one seems to have clue what giant hole in the nose is for ?

Driver cooling as specified in the rules.

Brian

Brian, why do the drivers require 'cooling'.

Surely it decreases the maximum performance of the car, so why have it.


I don't believe a Front Wing F-Duct exists. Way too complex, and what are the benefits?

[beelsebob]

Still no one seems to have clue what giant hole in the nose is for ?

Driver cooling as specified in the rules.

Brian

Brian, why do the drivers require 'cooling'.

Surely it decreases the maximum performance of the car, so why have it.


I don't believe a Front Wing F-Duct exists. Way too complex, and what are the benefits?

Because a fast car with a passed out driver isn't very fast after all.

[hardingfv32]

Brian, why do the drivers require 'cooling'.
Surely it decreases the maximum performance of the car, so why have it.

Off coarse not all cars have such openings. And I would agree with you the drivers don't need cooling other than their fat heads. This is one of the more black and white rules. Said opening is for driver cooling, well at least 51% of the flow, to satisfy the main purpose argument.

Brian

[hardingfv32]

I just reviewed 3.10, Bodywork behind the rear wheel centre line, and do not see why the main element can not have a stalling slot. Now that is not to say I was reading it correctly. Can anyone point to some wording that might precludes a slot?

Brian

[Just_a_fan]

The nose tip hole does two things:

1. Cools the driver a little. Why? because he's immobile in a carbon tank and is subjected to punishing physical workouts lasting up to 2 hours in temperatures up to 40degC whilst wearing several layers of clothing!! Keke Rosbergs once won a race wearing a cooling skull cap under his helmet. His performance was attributed in no small way to him being able to think clearer in very high temperatures on the race when everyone else was hitting the walls (Dallas in summer I think?)

2. Removes a possible stagnation point at the front of the car

[Raptor22]

Let me understand this:
The armchair aero guys are saying its more beneficial to stall a DRS activated wing, thereby shedding more downforce and creating a bigger front rear aero imbalance....?

fricking incredible logic

[Tatsu333]

OK - having seen the shot of the front of the chassis (where the nose connects), I would agree there is no ducting from the RW to the nose, so the DRS-activated blown front-wing is almost certainly a myth. (Not saying that a separate, passive blown front wing is out of the question, though...)

With that in mind, I would also agree with the far more logical suggestion that the ducts exposed when the DRS is active must be exits, not intakes, and the air is blowing across the rear wing main plane to stall it and reduce drag even further than the DRS alone. My only thought is that the air would be hard-pressed to affect the centre of the main plane, because the oncoming (external) air would deflect the ducted flow pretty strongly. How effective that would be, I have no idea, but I guess every little bit helps!

As suggested by Raptor22, this would only create a bigger front/rear imbalance, making the DRS less useful on corner exit during qualifying, for example, but perhaps they've found the trade-off in top speed on the straights to be worth that compromise. It would allow them to run a more aggressive main plane on the rear wing, which would help in the slow to mid-speed corners, where you wouldn't be using DRS anyway, and might help with rear tire wear in the race.

The intakes could be anywhere allowed by the rules, really, but it seems clear from previous images that there is a duct inside the rear crash structure that the wing mounts to that must channel the air into the beam wing and up the endplates (the reverse of the diagram from Scarbs). This suggests a fairly obvious intake location ahead of that - either up around the roll hoop, or integrated into the sidepod intakes. For that matter, Red Bull's ducts in the lower sidepod sides (the much-vaunted "tunnels") would probably work too - they are apparently "well advanced" in developing their own version after all.

[Pup]

I just reviewed 3.10, Bodywork behind the rear wheel centre line, and do not see why the main element can not have a stalling slot. Now that is not to say I was reading it correctly. Can anyone point to some wording that might precludes a slot?

Brian

Minimum inside radius. The wing would be unpractically thick if the closed section folded in on itself to create a slot/cavity.

[Pup]

Because a fast car with a passed out driver isn't very fast after all.

It is until it hits a wall. Ask Massa.

[thearmofbarlow]

Because a fast car with a passed out driver isn't very fast after all.

It is until it hits a wall. Ask Massa.

Shouldn't have, but I lol'd.

[hardingfv32]

Let me understand this:The armchair aero guys are saying its more beneficial to stall a DRS activated wing, thereby shedding more downforce and creating a bigger front rear aero imbalance....?

If it is creating an imbalance during Qual then just close the DRS flap. How may corners benefit from a low drag setup? During the races it is not an issue and stalling the main wing would be a benefit.

Scrabs proposal is now off the table.

Brian