Mercedes W13

[dans79]

[F1Krof]

"However, changes to the specification of the floor seen in Bahrain have been approved, hoping to be able to assemble it effectively next Friday to be able to compare it in free practice.

In this way, possibly, the W13 will have another floor."

[RZS10]

Comparing launch spec W13 to current version...
appears that a many components have been moved higher.
Launch spec quite slim
https://cdn-1.motorsport.com/images/mgl ... -w13-1.jpg

current spec: area under air intake occupies a lot more volume.
https://d3cm515ijfiu6w.cloudfront.net/w ... anetf1.jpg
https://static.motor.es/fotos-noticias/ ... 7556_2.jpg

Curiously not many images available for direct comparison.

If you are genuinely interested:
this post has a few comparisons which show what you pointed out, i believe there's more than enough images in this thread if one is willing to have a look
viewtopic.php?p=1040514#p1040514
this post shows what is under the cover and there doesn't seem to be any difference which matches what the team has said about the internals being the same under a different bodywork
viewtopic.php?p=1040779#p1040779

The assumption that components have been moved up is probably false and it's rather a change to the internal airflow or it was beneficial for the external airflow - given that they experimented with various panels with and without gills (where the teamviewer logo is) and taping up those on the sidepod it might not even be too far fetched to assume that they might slim it down in that area at some point depending on the cooling requirements.

Here's a massive image gallery for Bahrain https://xpbimages.com/f1/event/f1-2022-tst02 and Barcelona https://xpbimages.com/f1/event/f1-2022-tst01 watermarks aside there might be some comparable images of both versions there.

[Big Tea]

I read an article where they said that Merc are really sandbagging: "The Silver Arrows have sat mid-leaderboard throughout testing, onboard footage of the W13 does show however both drivers avoiding eighth gear at times, resulting in a significantly lower top speed compared to their rivals. The W13 will be fully unleashed next weekend at the first Grand Prix of the season, only then will the paddock understand where Mercedes are in comparison to the other teams. Mercedes have gathered plenty of data across the three day test, the W13 is proving to be impeccably reliable."

The key here would be if they were hitting maximum RPM in 7th?

if they were not topping out in 7, they would go no faster in 8th

[Just_a_fan]

https://twitter.com/MercedesAMGF1BR/sta ... rBp2Tqyhjg


"However, changes to the specification of the floor seen in Bahrain have been approved, hoping to be able to assemble it effectively next Friday to be able to compare it in free practice.

In this way, possibly, the W13 will have another floor."

The W13's floor is very basic compared to most / all others. The likes of Ferrari and McLaren have some quite involved details where the Mercedes is just a straight edge of carbon. It's almost like they're still working to last year's floor edge rules.

[SuperCNJ]

Just curious to understand whether having the side pod opening much wider at the bottom than the top has any effect on the temperature of the air entering the car? I appreciate the distance is not much but will scooping up air close to the ground bring any benefits as opposed to having the duct higher up like the RB or Ferrari?

[Just_a_fan]

Just curious to understand whether having the side pod opening much wider at the bottom than the top has any effect on the temperature of the air entering the car? I appreciate the distance is not much but will scooping up air close to the ground bring any benefits as opposed to having the duct higher up like the RB or Ferrari?

The car's design involves bringing "clean" air down from above - downwash. This will bring cooler air down too. The double vanes on the side of the tub ahead of the sidepod inlets will help this effect by setting up a vortex that pulls air downwards along the flanks of the tub.

[Big Tea]

Just curious to understand whether having the side pod opening much wider at the bottom than the top has any effect on the temperature of the air entering the car? I appreciate the distance is not much but will scooping up air close to the ground bring any benefits as opposed to having the duct higher up like the RB or Ferrari?

The car's design involves bringing "clean" air down from above - downwash. This will bring cooler air down too. The double vanes on the side of the tub ahead of the sidepod inlets will help this effect by setting up a vortex that pulls air downwards along the flanks of the tub.

AS the opening is shaped from narrow at the top to wide at the floor, what would be the effect of this within the cavity?
I assume there would be equal pressure all along as there is no forced air,(is there low pressure "pulling it in?")

Don't know how to phrase the question, as I am a bear of little brain, but would this accelerate the air entering at the top end of the intake, as it would have a longer path? and would that be an advantage or disadvantage

[AR3-GP]

Just curious to understand whether having the side pod opening much wider at the bottom than the top has any effect on the temperature of the air entering the car? I appreciate the distance is not much but will scooping up air close to the ground bring any benefits as opposed to having the duct higher up like the RB or Ferrari?

Considering that the track temperature is usually hotter than the air temperature, then the air near the ground would be warmer than air further above. I think there is little different in inlet air temperature amongst the different designs unless one team is accidentally feeding the inlets with the brake duct exhaust.

[ringo]

I'm not sure if its just good downforce. It might be weight as well. Does anyone have an order of cars by wheel base length? I've been curious to learn where the cars are different in that aspect.

The Mercedes has lived up to its recent trend of concept: efficiency and low drag over downforce. The concept is extreme and the downforce performance hinges on that floor maybe even more than the other cars with the bulk-sidepods. So, the fact that their unresolved porpoising is in their way from really activating the peak potential of that car concept is not surprising. The more the raise the ride height, perhaps the greater the ratio of downforce loss there is on their car because its even more sensitive and dependent on this than the others?

If they sort out the porpoising (and I have no doubt they will) I won't be surprised if that car supersedes the rest with margin.

https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/G ... 880386.jpg

I agree. The other cars may have a larger % of their downforce coming from wings and beam wing. W13 may have gambled all their chips on the floor.

Sorry but... do you have some pointers for this conclusion?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FNf2fllVcA0 ... name=large

From this picture F1-75 has both less front wing and less rear wing than the W13.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FNjOIN3UYAQ ... name=large

RB-18 has perhaps somewhat slightly more rear wing, although primarily behind the centerline cooling which is less used, and less front wing.

But as a comment overall I'm not sure what benefit would be being more floor or more wing, it's a balance, on slow corners the floor will not help much, while the wings will get in the way on a straight. Any way to allocate the downforce is going to come down to a compromise with how they have other areas in the car setup like suspensions.

Simple example to illustrate:

If W13 produces 150 points from the floor. And has a 50 points in front wing. 50 in rear. total 250 points.. 60% from the floor.

F75 for example could produce 80 points floor and 30 front wing and 50 rear wing. Total 160 points. ... 50% from the floor.

But.. W15 front wing still bigger despite being less of the total downforce it produces.

[AR3-GP]

I'm not sure if its just good downforce. It might be weight as well. Does anyone have an order of cars by wheel base length? I've been curious to learn where the cars are different in that aspect.

The Mercedes has lived up to its recent trend of concept: efficiency and low drag over downforce. The concept is extreme and the downforce performance hinges on that floor maybe even more than the other cars with the bulk-sidepods. So, the fact that their unresolved porpoising is in their way from really activating the peak potential of that car concept is not surprising. The more the raise the ride height, perhaps the greater the ratio of downforce loss there is on their car because its even more sensitive and dependent on this than the others?

If they sort out the porpoising (and I have no doubt they will) I won't be surprised if that car supersedes the rest with margin.

https://imgr1.auto-motor-und-sport.de/G ... 880386.jpg

I agree. The other cars may have a larger % of their downforce coming from wings and beam wing. W13 may have gambled all their chips on the floor.

Sorry but... do you have some pointers for this conclusion?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FNf2fllVcA0 ... name=large

From this picture F1-75 has both less front wing and less rear wing than the W13.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FNjOIN3UYAQ ... name=large

RB-18 has perhaps somewhat slightly more rear wing, although primarily behind the centerline cooling which is less used, and less front wing.

But as a comment overall I'm not sure what benefit would be being more floor or more wing, it's a balance, on slow corners the floor will not help much, while the wings will get in the way on a straight. Any way to allocate the downforce is going to come down to a compromise with how they have other areas in the car setup like suspensions.

In theory, you can manipulate the interaction between the front wing and the tire. Imagine using the front tire to stall the outboard sections of the front wing when the wheels points straight ahead, but to activate the outboard sections of the wing when the wheels are turned. You could gain a lot of front downforce in the corners without the drag penalty in the straights.

Who knows, maybe this is why Merc have a massive front wing.

[ringo]

I think the fatter back of the car is more related to the track climate than their new sidepods.
Looking at Mclaren with normal sidepods, it also has the back fat.

[ringo]

Scarbs spoke of 3D printed radiators. But someone posted the regs on heat exchangers, and did it not say that additive manufacturing is not permitted for heat exchangers?

[Henri]

If the bouncing doesn't stop they need to copy redbull's side pod design because their car is so stable smooth ride

[JPower]

If the bouncing doesn't stop they need to copy redbull's side pod design because their car is so stable smooth ride

What do side pods have to do with porpoising? How exactly would Red Bull's sidepods works with Mercedes' aero concept?

I'm interested to hear this one.