Mercedes W13

[PlatinumZealot]

I think it's quite complicated to think that just a certain aspect of somebody's floor is linked to the porpoising. In other words, I don't think you can pick and choose certain parts.

It was reported that his car with the test parts had worse porpoising.

How can you isolate the issue to the strakes? As opposed to the suspension?

Reported that the car is on bumpstops at high speeds. Suspension wouldn't factor at that point. The tyres squish would be what's left.

[cplchanb]

It was reported that his car with the test parts had worse porpoising.

How can you isolate the issue to the strakes? As opposed to the suspension?

Reported that the car is on bumpstops at high speeds. Suspension wouldn't factor at that point. The tyres squish would be what's left.

source?

[PlatinumZealot]

Quoted by Toto Wolff. Auto Motor und sport.

[AR3-GP]

Why would they run the car on the bumpstops?

Is that the solution they trialed in Barcelona?

[AR3-GP]

Aston Martin are using the W13 rear suspension with the RB bodykit ( ) and they did not appear to suffer from porpoising in Baku.

So is it the suspension or the aero?

[zibby43]

Aston Martin are using the W13 rear suspension with the RB bodykit ( ) and they did not appear to suffer from porpoising in Baku.

So is it the suspension or the aero?

Impossible to tell if the cars are being run differently. The Merc is now slammed to the ground. Where's the AM ride height?

[saviour stivala]

For Mercedes to solve their problems they need to produce/introduce their W14 as fast as they can.

[ing.]

One word Tombazis..

Wow what a great argument

Right, because “Tombazis” is genius, yes?

[tok-tokkie]

This Kyle video about the RB underfloor.

I have a suspicion that the rounded roof of the RB tunnel as discussed at 10:22 compared to the Merc max sectional area rectangular profile as discussed at 11:16 (Merc name not used) is the origin of the difference in porpoising between the 2 cars. RB generate a lot of vortices which combine & are constrained to form a nice combined single vortex by the tunnel. As the tunnel is drawn down by downforce the vortex is constrained within a smaller sectional area so the linear speed increases. But the shape of the tunnel remains similar so the vortex persists.

Merc have gone for max cross sectional area in the pursuit of maximum volumetric flow. That is good for linear flow but it is awful for toroidal flow. The vortex gets pushed into the top corners as the floor is drawn down & the vortex gets badly distorted by being forced into the corners and breaks up causing a flow disturbance so the flow reduces. The venturi effect diminishes so the car rises allowing the vortices once more to flow through the tunnel & porpoising ensues.

It is just my suspicion. I don't know what effect a vortex has inside a venturi. Bernoulli equation uses the linear velocity of the airstream, not the velocity along the corkscrew path. As the airspeed increases along the corkscrew path the air pressure at the core of the vortex decreases but that is not what causes the downforce in the venturi. I would be interested in hearing what the informed have to say about the shape of the tunnel & what happens as it is drawn closer to the ground.

Now that the details of the RB floor have been revealed I expect the features to be adopted by most of the other teams in varying amounts.

[AR3-GP]

Aston Martin are using the W13 rear suspension with the RB bodykit ( ) and they did not appear to suffer from porpoising in Baku.

So is it the suspension or the aero?

Impossible to tell if the cars are being run differently. The Merc is now slammed to the ground. Where's the AM ride height?

Merc said they are bouncing at all rideheights. So that will include anything that Aston Martin are running.

[PlatinumZealot]

This Kyle video about the RB underfloor.

I have a suspicion that the rounded roof of the RB tunnel as discussed at 10:22 compared to the Merc max sectional area rectangular profile as discussed at 11:16 (Merc name not used) is the origin of the difference in porpoising between the 2 cars. RB generate a lot of vortices which combine & are constrained to form a nice combined single vortex by the tunnel. As the tunnel is drawn down by downforce the vortex is constrained within a smaller sectional area so the linear speed increases. But the shape of the tunnel remains similar so the vortex persists.

Merc have gone for max cross sectional area in the pursuit of maximum volumetric flow. That is good for linear flow but it is awful for toroidal flow. The vortex gets pushed into the top corners as the floor is drawn down & the vortex gets badly distorted by being forced into the corners and breaks up causing a flow disturbance so the flow reduces. The venturi effect diminishes so the car rises allowing the vortices once more to flow through the tunnel & porpoising ensues.

It is just my suspicion. I don't know what effect a vortex has inside a venturi. Bernoulli equation uses the linear velocity of the airstream, not the velocity along the corkscrew path. As the airspeed increases along the corkscrew path the air pressure at the core of the vortex decreases but that is not what causes the downforce in the venturi. I would be interested in hearing what the informed have to say about the shape of the tunnel & what happens as it is drawn closer to the ground.

Now that the details of the RB floor have been revealed I expect the features to be adopted by most of the other teams in varying amounts.

Agreed. Multitude of vortices in the right locations can give you a lower pressure for the same ride height, they are more stable and a stream with less of them, and they allow some fine tuning of the centre of pressure.

To me it's clear that the RedBull aero team pays attention more to the finer details. It is a wonder how mercedes did not try to poach any big name aero guys from RedBull. In fact they made other smaller teams beat them to it.

[F1doc]

Aston Martin are using the W13 rear suspension with the RB bodykit ( ) and they did not appear to suffer from porpoising in Baku.

So is it the suspension or the aero?

Impossible to tell if the cars are being run differently. The Merc is now slammed to the ground. Where's the AM ride height?

You can see the ride height in many of the photos here:

https://www.astonmartinf1.com/en-GB/new ... gp-weekend

I suspect the bouncing is more to do with the aero concept as AM had significant porpoising before the Barcelona changes. I don't think their suspension has changed.

[AR3-GP]

Aston Martin are using the W13 rear suspension with the RB bodykit ( ) and they did not appear to suffer from porpoising in Baku.

So is it the suspension or the aero?

Impossible to tell if the cars are being run differently. The Merc is now slammed to the ground. Where's the AM ride height?

You can see the ride height in many of the photos here:

https://www.astonmartinf1.com/en-GB/new ... gp-weekend

I suspect the bouncing is more to do with the aero concept as AM had significant porpoising before the Barcelona changes. I don't think their suspension has changed.

Aston Martin have flatout said that the change of aero concept stopped their porpoising and now they can driver lower. What it shows is that the Merc suspension cannot suppress the aerodynamically driven issues of the Merc aero platform whereas when given a RB bodykit ( ), the suspension no longer has anything to suppress.

So in a sense, the suspension is incompatible but one can argue that the demands that the Merc aero package place on the suspension are too much.

It's clear that Mercedes don't want to abandon their aero concept. The car visually has changed very little from Bahrain test. Meanwhile, Aston Martin brought half a car and radically altered the cars behaviour.

Lets see Mercedes bring half a car before we decide they cannot do anything.

The fact that both AM and RBR no longer bounce shows that both the Mercedes/RB suspension is not neccesarily the silver bullet. One can address the issue with suspension, but one may find it better off to simply address it through aerodynamic means.

[PhillipM]

Why would they run the car on the bumpstops?

Is that the solution they trialed in Barcelona?

A lot of cars run on the packers at peak df, it's been part of the tuning setup for decades.

[siskue2005]

Wow what a great argument

Right, because “Tombazis” is genius, yes?

Where did I use the word "genius"???

However, a person who did PhD from Cambridge University and then worked for 2 decades as a senior aerodynamists for pretty much the top teams in f1 and has multiple championship to his credit... I guess he is a genius compared to the average Internet arm chair expert who don't have any verifiable qualification and post here thinking they know everything.
.
.
.

Aston Martin are using the W13 rear suspension with the RB bodykit ( ) and they did not appear to suffer from porpoising in Baku.

So is it the suspension or the aero?

Impossible to tell if the cars are being run differently. The Merc is now slammed to the ground. Where's the AM ride height?

You can see the ride height in many of the photos here:

https://www.astonmartinf1.com/en-GB/new ... gp-weekend

I suspect the bouncing is more to do with the aero concept as AM had significant porpoising before the Barcelona changes. I don't think their suspension has changed.

I agree...the floor support from the side pods are the way to go in this era.

AM have gone from struggling to get out of Q1 to almost the same pace as the Mercs now