McLaren MCL60

[organic]

https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/M ... 979181.jpg

AMuS

So that wing is there to improve aero efficiency of that section. Less lossy flow

Don't think we can say that without CFD

[101FlyingDutchman]

https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/M ... 979181.jpg

AMuS

So that wing is there to improve aero efficiency of that section. Less lossy flow

Don't think we can say that without CFD

Was explained by Kyle Engineer that a wing is better to use (RB18 had it) as it’s so much more efficient than cuts/angles

[gcdugas]

They should try making the beam wing almost flat like an open DRS. It will speed the air out of the diffuser and not feed air to the low pressure zone under the rear wing.

[PhillipM]

They should try making the beam wing almost flat like an open DRS. It will speed the air out of the diffuser and not feed air to the low pressure zone under the rear wing.

[101FlyingDutchman]

They should try making the beam wing almost flat like an open DRS. It will speed the air out of the diffuser and not feed air to the low pressure zone under the rear wing.

Yes, you can ask WTF? to my idea. The "orthodox" view says I'm crazy and it makes sense but who would have thought that by flooding the diffuser with exhaust, and thus technically "defeating" the low pressure zone, that you would increase downforce? It turns out that by making the flow faster under the diffuser, it increased the suction. I'm arguing the same thing. By having the air flow faster horizontally over the diffuser that it will actually "pull" air out of the diffuser and increasing its effectiveness and suction. Plus you will not be feeding air into the negative pressure zone beneath the rear wing and increasing its effectiveness... all the while decreasing drag on the straights. I am asserting that it is counter-intuitive just as the blown diffuser was.

Would it be possible not to duplicate your posts in this and the team thread?

[djos]

They should try making the beam wing almost flat like an open DRS. It will speed the air out of the diffuser and not feed air to the low pressure zone under the rear wing.

Yes, you can ask WTF? to my idea. The "orthodox" view says I'm crazy and it makes sense but who would have thought that by flooding the diffuser with exhaust, and thus technically "defeating" the low pressure zone, that you would increase downforce? It turns out that by making the flow faster under the diffuser, it increased the suction. I'm arguing the same thing. By having the air flow faster horizontally over the diffuser that it will actually "pull" air out of the diffuser and increasing its effectiveness and suction. Plus you will not be feeding air into the negative pressure zone beneath the rear wing and increasing its effectiveness... all the while decreasing drag on the straights. I am asserting that it is counter-intuitive just as the blown diffuser was.

Sorry mate, but you are making stuff up with no technical basis for your “concept“ - if that worked, the teams would all be doing it.

The fact is, the high AoA on the beam wings accelerates extraction from the diffuser and this is why the teams do this. RedBull being the best example!

[hugobos]

Noticed that the RB has rounded corners at the diffusor exhaust, while the MCL ones are square. Also the top wishbone is above the upper wing element on the RB while the MCL ones are before the upper element. I am no aero guy, can somebody say something about these things?

[Emag]

Judging the car handling from this onboard, it really doesn't look that bad balance-wise. Maybe a bit clumsy on slower stuff, but overall it seems like they have much more front bite and turn-in compared to this time last year :

Onboards can often be deceiving though, because if the car is well balanced (as in this case), it's tough to see where time is lost compared to faster cars. So if they are closer to the back of the grid rather than the front, it will be because of a general lack of downforce. Because in terms of car behavior, I can't see big issues.

[organic]

Think Lando said it is on a knife-edge like last year in interviews/conference with media

With the rear df cut from regs, weight loss and the new pirellis, it would be truly embarrassing if the car had more ujdesteer than last year, so it's a very low bar to clear

[BigBeansBoy]

Hello all, I don't know if this thread is the perfect place for this analysis so please let me know if it should be moved.

I was heavily inspired by @F1DataAnalysis on twitter to try to dig into the numbers to get a better look at how Mclaren is looking. This is admittedly my first attempt at analyzing F1 telemetry data, so if I've made any mistakes feel free to correct, I can also provide any information regarding how values are calculated.

For all analyses here I'm looking at Norris, Perez, and Hamilton. If anyone wants to see any particular comparison please request!

Firstly, we're going to look at the speed, longitudinal acceleration (positive means foot on the gas, negative means slamming on the brakes), and lateral acceleration (related to mechanical grip with the assumption that the drivers are on the edge). All of these are in relation to distance along the track.

Starting with the main straight, top speed for Norris is 317kph compared to Perez's 319kph and Hamilton's 315kph.

We can see in the speed plot that the 3rd major braking point loses Norris a lot of time. I'm not including the figure here, but Piastri is very similar. (Though I should note he actually holds on to it a little better and where Norris' speed drops he's able to keep it steady. Both are still very off Hamilton/Perez.)

Additionally, at the 6th and 8th braking points the minimum speed going through the corner is notably lower.

Before diving into the longitudinal and lateral acceleration I think it's useful to look at them plotted with respect to each other:

Here the data points create a shape narrower than the other drivers. Peak lateral acceleration occurs in high speed corners so that's likely where the Mclaren is lacking the most.

The max braking performance looks surprisingly good. So surprisingly I'm curious if it's an issue from the telemetry data. I did a fair amount of smoothing to remove weird artifacts, but it might not have been perfect. I think it's important to remember this caveat when looking at all of these figures.

Lastly, I want to include this figure showing the velocity and lateral acceleration plotted against each other. I'm not entirely sure what conclusions can be drawn from this, but I think it's interesting to look at:


If anyone has any requests for other data/drivers to look at let me know!

[AR3-GP]

Can you explain how each dot on your acceleration scatter plots is acquired? Is this the acceleration measured at a certain sampling rate? Over 1 lap? Over many laps? I don't understand.

[BigBeansBoy]

Can you explain how each dot on your acceleration scatter plots is acquired? Is this the acceleration measured at a certain sampling rate? Over 1 lap? Over many laps? I don't understand.

I should've specified more how this data was generated. This data is the fastest lap of each driver from the third day of testing.

Longitudinal acceleration was fairly simple to calculated. The telemetry data available from the fastf1 python package contains a speed in kph (top plot in figure 1). From this we can take a derivative with respect to time using the real time associated with the telemetry data (so we don't have to worry about irregular sampling rates). This data is then smooth with a linear convolution.

Lateral acceleration is a little more complicated and requires a few assumptions. I took this to be 798kg for all three drivers, this likely incorrect, but hopefully consistently incorrect.
The lateral acceleration can be calculated as:

Code: Select all

a = v^2/R

where v is the instantaneous velocity and R is the instantaneous turning radius. I'm not modeling horizontal slip velocity but I don't think that will impact the trends seen in the data, just the absolute numbers.
I mentioned above the velocity can be acquired directly from the telemetry data. The radius is not so simple. Instead we need to plot the position of the car and calculate the first and second derivatives of each cardinal direction. A more detailed write-up regarding curvature can be read here: https://mathworld.wolfram.com/Curvature.html. Then the radius is simply

Code: Select all

1/k

.
This can then be calculated at each point along the lap and similarly smoothed as the longitudinal acceleration.

The absolute values of the these figures should be taken with huge pinch of salt, but the comparisons should be largely valid to make, assuming similar weights.

[michl420]

In the last picture it looks that in high speed corners mclaren and mercedes are even and Red Bull is faster. In slow speed corners mercedes and red bull are even and faster than mclaren.

[SmallSoldier]

Hello all, I don't know if this thread is the perfect place for this analysis so please let me know if it should be moved.

I was heavily inspired by @F1DataAnalysis on twitter to try to dig into the numbers to get a better look at how Mclaren is looking. This is admittedly my first attempt at analyzing F1 telemetry data, so if I've made any mistakes feel free to correct, I can also provide any information regarding how values are calculated.

For all analyses here I'm looking at Norris, Perez, and Hamilton. If anyone wants to see any particular comparison please request!

Firstly, we're going to look at the speed, longitudinal acceleration (positive means foot on the gas, negative means slamming on the brakes), and lateral acceleration (related to mechanical grip with the assumption that the drivers are on the edge). All of these are in relation to distance along the track.
https://i.imgur.com/r4n0PYS.png
Starting with the main straight, top speed for Norris is 317kph compared to Perez's 319kph and Hamilton's 315kph.

We can see in the speed plot that the 3rd major braking point loses Norris a lot of time. I'm not including the figure here, but Piastri is very similar. (Though I should note he actually holds on to it a little better and where Norris' speed drops he's able to keep it steady. Both are still very off Hamilton/Perez.)

Additionally, at the 6th and 8th braking points the minimum speed going through the corner is notably lower.

Before diving into the longitudinal and lateral acceleration I think it's useful to look at them plotted with respect to each other:
https://i.imgur.com/STNO83Q.png
Here the data points create a shape narrower than the other drivers. Peak lateral acceleration occurs in high speed corners so that's likely where the Mclaren is lacking the most.

The max braking performance looks surprisingly good. So surprisingly I'm curious if it's an issue from the telemetry data. I did a fair amount of smoothing to remove weird artifacts, but it might not have been perfect. I think it's important to remember this caveat when looking at all of these figures.

Lastly, I want to include this figure showing the velocity and lateral acceleration plotted against each other. I'm not entirely sure what conclusions can be drawn from this, but I think it's interesting to look at:
https://i.imgur.com/uovqDv9.png

If anyone has any requests for other data/drivers to look at let me know!

Interesting analysis, thanks for sharing

Performing this type of analysis after Qualifying this weekend will be more valuable, since if using “fastest” laps of testing, we are not considering that Hamilton for example was on C4 tires during his fastest lap (therefore it would be expected for him to be faster, especially in slow corners), while Norris did his fast run on C3’s.

It would also be more beneficial at this point and based on the expectation that McLaren will be battle in the midfield, to do the analysis against the likes of Alonso, Ocon / Gasly and maybe Bottas since those are the teams we expect them to be fighting against.

[hollus]

As awesome as the data is, can I please request that it continues in the telemetry data thread?
viewtopic.php?p=1116397#p1116397

Within a few posts we are already discussing Red Bull vs Mercedes and drifting to even more cars and drivers…
The team thread could also be an excellent place for this, freely discuss faster-than and slower-than in the team threads.

A reminder to everyone but specially to the new people (welcome!).
The car threads are specially strictly moderated in this forum. Stick to this car and to hardware in the car threads.
Team politics and other team things, please in the team threads.
Lap times, happy faces, sensations and will they be faster/slower than XYZ, either in the team threads or in the race threads.

If your post is in this thread and is not centering on this car, the physical car, it might have been or might be deleted or moved.
Let's keep the awesome car threads on this forum
a) focused on the hardware and
b) awesome.

Thanks.

But please, more of it, it is awesome. And feel free to drop a link in the car threads. Only the link to whichever other thread, though. Let’s not have those discussions in the car threads.

@BBB, please feel free to repost elsewhere, and let’s continue there.