Mercedes W14

[Venturiation]

Its probably not really any of the upper body work that is behind the performance delta. I think that its a difference in front end, the suspensions here are probably the key differentiator, that and the floor interaction with the front wing/wheel wake.

It's a combination of things. The underfloor isn't as efficient and the small pod / midwing don't help the airflow over the body and around the tyres. Lewis said with the smaller rear wing that he had no grip which just goes to show how ineffective the Mercedes underfloor is and so just replacing the small pods won't by themselves sort out all there issues.

Ironically I think the initial W13 Barcelona test sidepods would probably work a hell of a lot better if they don't want to go full Red Bull / Ferrari. The front suspension I think is fine. It is the rear where the W14 lacks the most.

we know it's not the rear when you see that a customer team doesn't have these problems with the same components as W14
it has to be the front suspension and the front wing and floor interaction

sidepods might have some effects but maybe not so crucial, or the engineers were wrong and the sidepods have a big play in the interaction of the front and the floor and the rear

it could be also they still have simulator and CFD inaccuracy wich could explain that they tested the redbull concept and their and found the zeropds being superior
but shovlin said they made upgraded all their tools to account for porpoising and have better correlation and we see that because the car doesn't bounce anymore

did they understimate the improvement of other teams? but they said after testing that the team knew the gap would be even bigger than what it was today

it's a W13 with no bouncing but small lap time improvment, nowhere near the 1,5 gain they were expecting last year with the zeropds

edit: not sure if it's true but it seems the other concept has been in the wind tunnel more than 2 weeks ago

[PatrickOshea]

Just out of curiosity, would sidepod design have any help towards rear traction? The designs of the RB and Ferrari sidepods go much further back and are bulkier.. that weight further back surely helps with rear wheel traction? Looking at it, the W14 seems to struggle putting power down at times. And just a small thought I had. Great thread as always /!

[e30ernest]

Just out of curiosity, would sidepod design have any help towards rear traction? The designs of the RB and Ferrari sidepods go much further back and are bulkier.. that weight further back surely helps with rear wheel traction? Looking at it, the W14 seems to struggle putting power down at times. And just a small thought I had. Great thread as always /!

I don't think that will matter for traction because the weight distribution is regulated.

[atanatizante]

It's not totally the wheel wake. Wheel wake maybe more to do with drag reduction and some impact on the floor efficiency but not tottally.
If it were just the wheel wake it would be an easy fix. You would only have to worry about the sidepods.
Reason i say this is the other teams like willaims and mclaren and alpine arent doing so great.

I am starting to wonder if mercedes underestimated how much progress the other teams could make over 2022. Because if you have targets and you feel those were acheived over the winter.. why would it be a shock that the car is at best front of midfeild?
Did they fail to meet targets with w14 or was W14 simply set at a lower target?
The top speed is not an issue it seems, but it comes at a cost with grip at the rear. Downforce lacking at the rear, or balance.

I second that regarding the front tyre wake!
On another forum, someone is quoting an undisclosed team engineer saying they also solved this issue coz the rear tyres are less affected and thus the car is not more draggy anymore. And the proof is in the speed traps even with the old barn door rear wing...

Unfortunately, now their problem is that due to the 2023 regs with the raised floor, they are losing some downforce but overall they are faster than last year, according to the tests and both FPs. What caught them up was that RB and AMR have been able to run their cars lower than they and the regs are allowing them to do that and that's why Toto was moaning about it...

We have to face it that last year AMR22 wasn't doing much better even if they were copping RB18`s aero so the dominating factors should be the floor and the suspension, particularly the rear one. This year it has the same rear suspension as W14 has but it seems that they could change some of it with their own damping system and also have other geometry setup compared to the works team. These things and the know-how are common factors with RB19 regarding their ability to run lower the car ...

So HAM duly admitted in the post-race interview that the car practically lacks downforce thus confirming what that engineer said above ... but what was the most important is that he didn`t say the floor is the most responsible thing for not having enough downforce. It is those two teams' ability to run the car lower to generate enough floor downforce, thus the entire suspension system ...

[atanatizante]

Agreed Andi76 hence why I used the word "lead". There are other talented people doing the work, but maybe his direction or critique is crtical in getting the best from the team.
Looking on the W14

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FqSoDtWXwAI ... ame=medium
https://cdn-1.motorsport.com/images/amp ... tail-1.jpg

I am starting to see why the Zero-pod is so different. Look on the floor treatment between the two cars.
W14 has a very steep drop off to the edge of the floor at the base of the sidepod.
RB19 relatively flat going outwards from the undercut to the edge of the floor.

W14 is heavily dependent on the mid wing, compared to RB19 that uses that whole funnel underneath the sidepod to push higher volumes of air outward. Some it jets and squirt between the undercut. And above the sidepod, at the lump behind the opening, more air is pushed outward at mid height of the car.
The squirt between the narrow point of the undercut goes to the diffuser mouse hole and also sheilds the floor and provide out wash, and the rest of the flow at mid-rift is dealing with tyre wake. Then you have above the sidepod that is doing pressure recovery.
The Zero-pod just has less surfaces to play around with. It has a low drag advantage, but it seems to not be able to enhance the floor and diffuser performance as much as the other cars. The mid-wing is left to do all of that.
Zero-pod is heavily dependent on a super effective floor and diffuser to take advantage of it's facilitation of high energy flow past the side of the car.

Another thing, why does the floor seem so thick with W14 and not the other cars? It's almost seems to be deeper and skirted.

What benefits and downsides have to having a bigger mid-wing that joins with the sidepode?

Could it create a significant area kind of aeroplane wing that could both create two things in my opinion:
- a bigger low-pressure volume thus accelerates the front wake flow and
- increasing this low-pressure volume it`ll generate more car downforce coz on the way down the front tunnel ramps is now more pressure.

Maybe I`m wrong coz I don`t have aero expertise but from my side, this is what RB19 is doing with both this big undercut and that big downward ramp. I think that this downforce is a bigger benefit than the front tyre outwash has. Mainly coz the downforce is generated near the car`s CoG or maybe CoP ...

Surrely Vanja #66 could certify it had that`s a stupid thing to do or not ...

[Henk_v]

What I think the big "undercut trick" is that MB are missing;

Downforce is in effect the pressure difference between the top and the bottom of the car + the amount of air the car throws up (action=reaction).

Just focussing on the pressure difference; If a car has 2 bodies above each other, the pressure (assumed evenly distributed) between those bodies is IRRELEVANT for the net-downforce;

Let's assume pressure below floor (fictional numbers) = -3 and pressure upper side is +3, on any car that would result in a 6 downforce. Now take 2 stacked bodies:

Pressure upper side car
=====sidepod=====
Pressure between
=====floor=======
Pressure below

If the pressure in between is 0, the sidepod sees a 3 downforce (+3-0) and the floor also 3 (0--3). Floor+sidepod = 6 (3+3)

Then take the pressure in between sped up (lower), -1
The sidepod sees 4 downforce (+3--1) and the floor 2 (-1--3). 4+2=6


So aero guys want to speed up air to do fun stuff. Blow away some tire wake, energise floor edges, etc. BUT speeding up air is lowering it's pressure hence if you do this above the floor, you'll end up with a loss of net downforce.

What the undercut is doing, is speeding up the air between two bodies. If one dumps the high stagnation pressure over the top of the sidepod, THAT creates the net downforce. The act that there is actually sped up air between the sidepod and the floor is not relevant.
The sidepod undercut thus provides a means to accelerate outwash "for free".

What the W14 tries to achieve is to not accelerate air too much above the car, just give it a straight path. Any aero trickery will deminish this strategy.

[AR3-GP]

Its probably not really any of the upper body work that is behind the performance delta. I think that its a difference in front end, the suspensions here are probably the key differentiator, that and the floor interaction with the front wing/wheel wake.

front suspension is 100% a red herring. Brackley has decades of experience designing suspension systems.

[shady]

Its probably not really any of the upper body work that is behind the performance delta. I think that its a difference in front end, the suspensions here are probably the key differentiator, that and the floor interaction with the front wing/wheel wake.

front suspension is 100% a red herring. Brackley has decades of experience designing suspension systems.

I know, with a particular affinity to hydraulic systems - Just looks like they missed a trick, and the AMR is the proof. Yes one track so far, but the difference between the front ends was obvious in the race.

[AR3-GP]

Its probably not really any of the upper body work that is behind the performance delta. I think that its a difference in front end, the suspensions here are probably the key differentiator, that and the floor interaction with the front wing/wheel wake.

front suspension is 100% a red herring. Brackley has decades of experience designing suspension systems.

I know, with a particular affinity to hydraulic systems - Just looks like they missed a trick, and the AMR is the proof. Yes one track so far, but the difference between the front ends was obvious in the race.

That's because the W14 lacks downforce.

[shady]

front suspension is 100% a red herring. Brackley has decades of experience designing suspension systems.

I know, with a particular affinity to hydraulic systems - Just looks like they missed a trick, and the AMR is the proof. Yes one track so far, but the difference between the front ends was obvious in the race.

That's because the W14 lacks downforce.

Yeah, DF was why ALO passed HAM in T10

[AA_2019]

Its probably not really any of the upper body work that is behind the performance delta. I think that its a difference in front end, the suspensions here are probably the key differentiator, that and the floor interaction with the front wing/wheel wake.

front suspension is 100% a red herring. Brackley has decades of experience designing suspension systems.

I know, with a particular affinity to hydraulic systems - Just looks like they missed a trick, and the AMR is the proof. Yes one track so far, but the difference between the front ends was obvious in the race.

The old Merc suspension system was banned from the 2022 reg changes.

Their front suspension had long featured the unique ‘interconnected double-almond’ anti-roll bar arrangement. This was banned for 2022.

The simplification of the suspension systems under the regulations for 2022 could be where Merc have missed a trick compared to RB and now AM.

The RB suspension is visibly softer than all others (except for AM now), yet they run the lowest giving them superior DF.

Interestingly the AM has more anti-dive on it this year.

[f1jcw]

Is there any particular reason that these suspensions in particular were banned?

[organic]

Is there any particular reason that these suspensions in particular were banned?

Pat Symonds explained in one of his various interviews in 2021 that it was done to help the smaller teams close up to the big ones as the complex suspension systems were too expensive to develop, especially within a cost cap.

[avantman]

The RB suspension is visibly softer than all others (except for AM now), yet they run the lowest giving them superior DF.

Interestingly the AM has more anti-dive on it this year.

Quite clearly AM looks a lot stiffer than Mercedes on the onboards.
Look at the helmets.

[Sevach]

Is there any particular reason that these suspensions in particular were banned?

Expensive to develop was the reasoning.
Same reason why full active was banned back in the day.