Mercedes W15

[djones]

I’m really wondering if the plank of this car manages to do 58 laps on Saturday…

My thoughts exactly.

I’m fully expecting them to raise the car in FP3 and all of a sudden be half a second a lap slower.

[Venturiation]

Why is the plank not scratching like the test?
Onboard fastest lap

[Holm86]

Why is the plank not scratching like the test?
Onboard fastest lap

Different setup, they're probably running more ride height, that's what testing is for, finding the limits

[AA_2019]

Watching Lewis's fastest lap today, wow, it looks nicely planted. No bouncing in the first 2/3rds of the lap. They can now run low to the ground. Have they found the RB trick of being able to run low with minimal wear on the plank ?

I can't help but notice the smile on James Alison's face when talking about the W15. Could the W15 compete for the title this year?

[HungarianRacer]

[Timestamped] Great look at the fourth flap of the front wing.... The outer part is actually DETACHED from the vestigle inner section under where the adjustment bracket shadows the meeting point of the two(?)

EDIT: embedded video doesn't work, look around the 3:15 mark.

[ivansskoro]

Correct me if I'm wrong, having the adjustable arm of upper front wishbone on the downwards position, instead of upwards now, means there is more anti-dive effect?

Meaning to say;
- Set downwards => More Anti-dive Effect,
- Set upwards => Less Anti-dive Effect?

AFAIK no, from what I’ve read online about suspension design — moving the rear mounting point upwards increases the anti-dive.

[Shrieker]

[Timestamped] Great look at the fourth flap of the front wing.... The outer part is actually DETACHED from the vestigle inner section under where the adjustment bracket shadows the meeting point of the two(?)

EDIT: embedded video doesn't work, look around the 3:15 mark.

This must be from testing.

[AR3-GP]

[Timestamped] Great look at the fourth flap of the front wing.... The outer part is actually DETACHED from the vestigle inner section under where the adjustment bracket shadows the meeting point of the two(?)

EDIT: embedded video doesn't work, look around the 3:15 mark.

This must be from testing.

It was the same way on Russell's hot laps today around 29 minutes remaining in session when front wing cam was shown.

[PlatinumZealot]

Why is the plank not scratching like the test?
Onboard fastest lap

I gotta say though, the car balance lools good in that video. Much pointier than last year and it responds well to the steering inputs. Looking good for the race if they can do that and keep good tyre deg.

[ing.]

Correct me if I'm wrong, having the adjustable arm of upper front wishbone on the downwards position, instead of upwards now, means there is more anti-dive effect?

Meaning to say;
- Set downwards => More Anti-dive Effect,
- Set upwards => Less Anti-dive Effect?

AFAIK no, from what I’ve read online about suspension design — moving the rear mounting point upwards increases the anti-dive.

In the case of the current trend of wishbone axes (upper and lower--not just either one in isolation) inclined with rear leg below the forward leg, the W15 configuration with the rear leg of the upper WB set at its lower position will tend to increase the anti-dive effect. This is because the upper wishbone pivot axis will intersect the lower wishbone pivot axis higher up on its downward trajectory.

This imagine (mark-up of a Piola sketch of SF-24 chassis mods vs. '23) shows the effect of raising the forward pick-up of the upper WB (red dashed line) with everything else being the same. It shows that the lateral Instant Center would be higher and so greater ant-dive effect. The same is the case with W15 lowering the rear leg of upper WB. On SF-24, this was not the case as they also raised the fwd pick-up of the lower wishbone--see SF-24 thread:



What the above image shows, though, is that with RB-style inclined WBs, the anti-dive effect is ironically--ironic because of the over-hyped use of anti-dive to describe these--very much reduced, resulting in an IC close to ground level. If it was anti-dive that the teams were looking for they'd angle the WBs in the opposite direction and get a bunch more anti-dive effect:

[ing.]

One could question why they didn't do the same trick at the rear suspension as they did at the front one ... or just anti-squat effect is not so important on the F1 car as it is on the slower single-seater formulas? then how about the rear tyre management due to the anti-squat setup, could you please enlighten us with some info ...

The fact they didn't design in adjustability at the rear for anti-squat (reaction to thrust load at axle height) or anti-rise (reaction to braking loads at the contact patch) doesn't mean they have not considered these or designed in their effects--they just didn't design in adjustability, either because they understand what the have, or have no room for multiple pick-ups with the existing suspension configuration.

Why they designed-in adjustability at the front is a bit of a mystery as no one else has. Maybe they don't have a good understanding of the dynamics and need to test it on track. It is well known that anti-dive reduces compliance to bumps as well as driver steering feel under braking.

[mendis]

That plank is on fire! Or is that some kind of sensor?

[SparkyAMG]

It looks like a sensor. The same thing was visible at the Australian GP in 2022.

[Farnborough]

One could question why they didn't do the same trick at the rear suspension as they did at the front one ... or just anti-squat effect is not so important on the F1 car as it is on the slower single-seater formulas? then how about the rear tyre management due to the anti-squat setup, could you please enlighten us with some info ...

The fact they didn't design in adjustability at the rear for anti-squat (reaction to thrust load at axle height) or anti-rise (reaction to braking loads at the contact patch) doesn't mean they have not considered these or designed in their effects--they just didn't design in adjustability, either because they understand what the have, or have no room for multiple pick-ups with the existing suspension configuration.

Why they designed-in adjustability at the front is a bit of a mystery as no one else has. Maybe they don't have a good understanding of the dynamics and need to test it on track. It is well known that anti-dive reduces compliance to bumps as well as driver steering feel under braking.

They do seem uncertain of outcome dont they, hence the potential to change built in.

Remember they put a steering rack that was "new" design on GR car for an FP session at one race (Miami 23 ? ) who then determined it wasn't usable/sensible ? A bunch of development spend, obviously with the full expectation that would bring improvement, only to find something in that component along with driver interaction became undesirable.

The mystery cover up at post season testing AD curcuit in which GR stacked it was left undefined, in public comment at least.

Add to correlation issues and question marks over the last two seasons, looks like keeping at least some options a little fluid could be advantageous at this point of development. These type of adjustment ultimately deleted down the line as proven performance is honed.

Certainly it doesn't look to have anything like the compromised sphere of performance and setup question marks that 22~23 chassis brought to the table.

[Owen.C93]

That plank is on fire! Or is that some kind of sensor?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GHg5B3wXsAA ... name=large

It's quite common to get a bit of burning at the leading edge, especially when the titanium glows.