Mercedes W13

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter do not belong here.
User avatar
214270
18
Joined: 27 Apr 2019, 18:49

Re: Mercedes W13

Post

Powy wrote:
10 Mar 2022, 19:36
5 minute analysis by "B Sport" on youtube. He thinks that Mercedes will open up the black patch that will work with an outwashing vortex.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRKjKH2Ymq0
Never seen a vid from this guy before, but that was sweet 👍🏼
Team ANTI-HYPE. Prove it, then I’ll anoint you.

Fast
Fast
1
Joined: 23 Feb 2022, 21:49

Re: Mercedes W13

Post

Powy wrote:
10 Mar 2022, 19:36
5 minute analysis by "B Sport" on youtube. He thinks that Mercedes will open up the black patch that will work with an outwashing vortex.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRKjKH2Ymq0
Apparently not allowed

User avatar
NathanOlder
48
Joined: 02 Mar 2012, 10:05
Location: Kent

Re: Mercedes W13

Post

silver wrote:
10 Mar 2022, 19:20
Porpoising early in the day. Quite violent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmlbg_3AzSw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BEBIkt1hwQ
Didn't look as bad as the Alpha Tauri porpoising at the end of the day.
GoLandoGo
Lewis v2.0
King George has arrived.

New found love for GT racing with Assetto Corsa Competizione on PS5 & PC

User avatar
dans79
267
Joined: 03 Mar 2013, 19:33
Location: USA

Re: Mercedes W13

Post

silver wrote:
10 Mar 2022, 19:13
Mercedes lap with telemetry.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VE4U90IqE8g
Either its the mic location, or they are running in a low power mode. The throttle response sounds very sluggish.
201 105 104 9 9 7

zibby43
zibby43
613
Joined: 04 Mar 2017, 12:16

Re: Mercedes W13

Post


SmallSoldier
SmallSoldier
479
Joined: 10 Mar 2019, 03:54

Re: Mercedes W13

Post

From above… The fact that they have already tried 3 different versions of their front wing by this point of the “season” is impressive:

Image

Hoffman900
Hoffman900
211
Joined: 13 Oct 2019, 03:02

Re: Mercedes W13

Post

My only take away so far is that Mercedes is doing a ton of data collection. A 23 race calendar does open up the ability to start out a bit behind and play catch up in terms of refining a package.

User avatar
AeroDynamic
349
Joined: 28 Sep 2021, 12:25
Location: La règle du jeu

Re: Mercedes W13

Post

silver wrote:
10 Mar 2022, 19:20
Porpoising early in the day. Quite violent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmlbg_3AzSw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BEBIkt1hwQ
It was porpoising fully because Mercedes were experimenting with skid-boards on the outer edges of the floor. Thats probably what Russell's earlier comment was confirming. The ideal would be to keep the car close to the ground for maximum downforce, allow the porpoising, but mitigate any hard bouncing / damage to the car and make it comfortable for the driver I guess

User avatar
JordanMugen
85
Joined: 17 Oct 2018, 13:36

Re: Mercedes W13

Post

mwillems wrote:
10 Mar 2022, 12:46
Is there a too much? Have Mercedes already asked the FIA about where the line might be drawn? Do the FIA even care?

I think they will see the racing first and decide later if clarification is required!
There seems to be a lot of competition politics creeping into this car thread!

NB: I don't know what I am talking about, this is really one for AeroGandalf and Vanja #66.

I guess the crux of the matter is:
1) The minimum radius rule for the sidepod bodywork does not apply to the crash structure, notwithstanding it is in the forward bodywork area which allows 25mm convex radius rather than the sidepod area? (Is that correct?) And/or the FIA do not require the crash structure to enclosed by the 'main' bodywork of the car?
2) Should the minimum radius rule apply to the crash structure, or rather did the FIA intend for it to apply?

If (2) is negative then not only is it legal, but also the FIA won't act to change the wording for 2023 and I suspect everyone will consider such a design for 2023 if this design is effective? :)

Regulation 13.5 about the Side Impact Structure doesn't mention much about bodywork as far as I can tell, while the bodywork section doesn't mention anything about side impact structures... So the FIA intend for the teams to have free reign on how the SIPS are clad with bodywork? I.e., there is no rule that SIPS must be fully enclosed in what you might call the "main" bodywork however that would be defined, so Mercedes are well within their rights to clad the SIPS in bodywork of not less than 25mm convex radius which resembles a winglet? :)
13.5.1 (b) The two side impact structures must be fully enclosed by bodywork, and hence no
part of them should be exposed to the external air stream.
The mirror mount volume regulation is similarly vague and seems to allow as many vanes to be put into that volume as the teams may wish, however dubiously such vanes may function as a "mount" for the mirror.

Forming the SIPS cladding and mirror mounts into a combination of winglet and turning vanes is therefore a logical outcome of the regulations. One wonders how other teams either missed it or why they decided against it!

https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files ... -02-19.pdf
Last edited by JordanMugen on 10 Mar 2022, 21:44, edited 5 times in total.

User avatar
Thunder
Moderator
Joined: 06 Feb 2013, 09:50
Location: Germany

Re: Mercedes W13

Post

Please discuss basic testing and Laptime shenanigans in the Testing or Team threads.
turbof1 wrote: YOU SHALL NOT......STALLLLL!!!
#aerogollum

User avatar
AeroDynamic
349
Joined: 28 Sep 2021, 12:25
Location: La règle du jeu

Re: Mercedes W13

Post

Andrew Shovlin

Compared to Barcelona it's been harder to get the car well-balanced around the lap here. We do seem to have made a bit of progress through the day but it's always difficult to judge accurately here as the falling temperature tends to flatter everything you do later in the day. We've got quite a lot of work still to do regarding validation of the update kit and will continue the data collection programme over the next few days so it's a bit early to say whether everything is working as expected. There is certainly more to find in getting the balance right between slow and high-speed corners, and there's also a bit too much tyre overheating. So, plenty to keep us busy for the next two days but we are on a steep learning curve with the new car and tyres - we'll analyse what we have from today and hopefully make a step forward for tomorrow.


Source

User avatar
dans79
267
Joined: 03 Mar 2013, 19:33
Location: USA

Re: Mercedes W13

Post

a tech overview of the car seen today.

201 105 104 9 9 7

smilodon
smilodon
0
Joined: 10 Mar 2022, 21:24

Re: Mercedes W13

Post

Hi guys. First time here...

I was thinking about this new W13.... In a situation that they have to follow other car for a long time.... How this tiny pods will work? In a place like Mexico?

In pre season they can't simulate this with one car....

Marty_Y
Marty_Y
28
Joined: 31 Mar 2021, 23:37

Re: Mercedes W13

Post


User avatar
mwillems
44
Joined: 04 Sep 2016, 22:11

Re: Mercedes W13

Post

JordanMugen wrote:
10 Mar 2022, 20:37
mwillems wrote:
10 Mar 2022, 12:46
Is there a too much? Have Mercedes already asked the FIA about where the line might be drawn? Do the FIA even care?

I think they will see the racing first and decide later if clarification is required!
There seems to be a lot of competition politics creeping into this car thread!

NB: I don't know what I am talking about, this is really one for AeroGandalf and Vanja #66.

I guess the crux of the matter is:
1) The minimum radius rule for the sidepod bodywork does not apply to the crash structure, notwithstanding it is in the forward bodywork area which allows 25mm convex radius rather than the sidepod area? (Is that correct?) And/or the FIA do not require the crash structure to enclosed by the 'main' bodywork of the car?
2) Should the minimum radius rule apply to the crash structure, or rather did the FIA intend for it to apply?

If (2) is negative then not only is it legal, but also the FIA won't act to change the wording for 2023 and I suspect everyone will consider such a design for 2023 if this design is effective? :)

Regulation 13.5 about the Side Impact Structure doesn't mention anything about bodywork as far as I can tell, while the bodywork section doesn't mention anything about side impact structures... So the FIA intend for the teams to have free reign on how the SIPS are clad with bodywork? I.e., there is no rule that SIPS must be fully enclosed in what you might call the "main" bodywork however that would be defined, so Mercedes are well within their rights to clad the SIPS in bodywork of not less than 25mm convex radius which resembles a winglet? :)

The mirror mount volume regulation is similarly vague and seems to allow as many vanes to be put into that volume as the teams may wish, however dubiously such vanes may function as a "mount" for the mirror.

Forming the SIPS cladding and mirror mounts into a combination of winglet and turning vanes is therefore a logical outcome of the regulations. One wonders how other teams either missed it or why they decided against it!

https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files ... -02-19.pdf
I'm talking about the bargeboards and always have been :)
I'm not taking advice from a cartoon dog

-Bandit