2024 Mercedes-AMG | Petronas F1 Team

[Shrieker]

It's fixable. McLaren started last season at the back and ended it being the fastest car in high speed corners. As long as you have a platform that can be developed (which Merc now has) you can improve. A new floor can change a lot.

They had a dud front wing coming in tho, which meant fixing it would be a huge step. And then with the upgrades that were brought later on, made the car a front runner. But more than half of it was probably just solving the fwing issue.

Does merc even have such a problem that once fixed, can bring them time. Doubtful, and Toto seems to admit so.

[mkay]

It's fixable. McLaren started last season at the back and ended it being the fastest car in high speed corners. As long as you have a platform that can be developed (which Merc now has) you can improve. A new floor can change a lot.

They started the season at the back as their big upgrade package just wasn't ready for the start of the season.

Also, they benefitted from substantially more wind tunnel and CFD time than the front runners. Same thing happened with Aston between 2022 and 2023 basically.

Mercedes doesn't seem capable to build a floor to suit whatever concept they go for. I don't think their issue resides in the suspension given what Aston has achieved with Merc's suspension.

[Cs98]

It's fixable. McLaren started last season at the back and ended it being the fastest car in high speed corners. As long as you have a platform that can be developed (which Merc now has) you can improve. A new floor can change a lot.

They started the season at the back as their big upgrade package just wasn't ready for the start of the season.

Also, they benefitted from substantially more wind tunnel and CFD time than the front runners. Same thing happened with Aston between 2022 and 2023 basically.

Mercedes doesn't seem capable to build a floor to suit whatever concept they go for. I don't think their issue resides in the suspension given what Aston has achieved with Merc's suspension.

From what I've heard Merc have a big upgrade package coming for Imola. And because they had so many structural changes to fix the car platform they didn't have enough resources to also bring a refined aerodynamic package to the start of the season. I would wait to judge W15 until their upgrade package hits.

[KimiRai]

Gary Anderson's theory for why Mercedes is bouncing badly again

Reading what Lewis Hamilton has said in Mark Hughes's analysis of Mercedes' woes at the Saudi Arabian GP, points me in the direction of where Hamilton's bouncing problem is coming from.

And the conclusions we can draw from this tells us how much work Mercedes still needs to do if it's to get anywhere near the front consistently.

“We have pretty bad bouncing which we’ve not been able to fix,” said Hamilton. “We made changes overnight and the car felt so much better in FP3 earlier today.”

“It felt difficult again in qualifying. We tried every set-up change but we just can’t get rid of the bouncing.”

While that sounds straightforward enough, these are very revealing comments.

In hotter climates, a car that is borderline on hitting airflow separation troubles will suffer from more problems. On top of that, because of the heat, you will actually generate less downforce.

Before these ground effect cars came into play, the problem was mainly with the front wing as it was running reasonably close to the ground. Sometimes the rear wing would also suffer but that was mainly when the DRS closed. Now with ground effect cars, it’s a completely different beast.

These cars now generate roughly 75% of their downforce from the underfloor. This is critical to airflow separation problems, so it requires a lot of airflow separation management in the initial floor design.

Based on what Hamilton said, in FP3 with a higher rear wing level the car was better.

It had very little to do with the wing as it now produces a small percentage of the rear downforce, it’s more to do with the fact it was in the heat of the day.

That means the car would produce less downforce and because of that the ride height overall would be that little bit higher.

The airflow separation would also be increased as thanks to the thinner air it would start earlier and end later. Again, that means less downforce when the car was close to the ground.

Compared to FP3, in qualifying the air temperature was two degrees cooler and the track temperature was 12 degrees cooler. Both of these would mean the car overall produces more downforce, which would mean that the car would be running at a lower ride height.

With the more dense air, any separation problems in the underfloor would hold on for longer and be more aggressive when they inevitably happened. This means that the car would suffer more porpoising, which would lead to what he calls more bouncing in qualifying.

As I said earlier these cars ‘require a lot of airflow separation management in the initial floor design’. We don’t see the underfloor too often, but I would imagine that if we compared the Red Bull to the Mercedes underfloors from underneath we would see two very different philosophies.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/gary ... dly-again/

[Sevach]

It's fixable. McLaren started last season at the back and ended it being the fastest car in high speed corners. As long as you have a platform that can be developed (which Merc now has) you can improve. A new floor can change a lot.

They had a dud front wing coming in tho, which meant fixing it would be a huge step. And then with the upgrades that were brought later on, made the car a front runner. But more than half of it was probably just solving the fwing issue.

Does merc even have such a problem that once fixed, can bring them time. Doubtful, and Toto seems to admit so.

I also think the runner up spot was there for the taking last season, Mercedes, Aston Martin and Ferrari were all struggling with something and kinda compromised.

Now Ferrari seems to have a good car, still learning how to better use it and poised to evolve.
Mclaren is also there abouts.

[KimiRai]

[zibby43]

Gary Anderson's theory for why Mercedes is bouncing badly again

Reading what Lewis Hamilton has said in Mark Hughes's analysis of Mercedes' woes at the Saudi Arabian GP, points me in the direction of where Hamilton's bouncing problem is coming from.

And the conclusions we can draw from this tells us how much work Mercedes still needs to do if it's to get anywhere near the front consistently.

“We have pretty bad bouncing which we’ve not been able to fix,” said Hamilton. “We made changes overnight and the car felt so much better in FP3 earlier today.”

“It felt difficult again in qualifying. We tried every set-up change but we just can’t get rid of the bouncing.”

While that sounds straightforward enough, these are very revealing comments.

In hotter climates, a car that is borderline on hitting airflow separation troubles will suffer from more problems. On top of that, because of the heat, you will actually generate less downforce.

Before these ground effect cars came into play, the problem was mainly with the front wing as it was running reasonably close to the ground. Sometimes the rear wing would also suffer but that was mainly when the DRS closed. Now with ground effect cars, it’s a completely different beast.

These cars now generate roughly 75% of their downforce from the underfloor. This is critical to airflow separation problems, so it requires a lot of airflow separation management in the initial floor design.

Based on what Hamilton said, in FP3 with a higher rear wing level the car was better.

It had very little to do with the wing as it now produces a small percentage of the rear downforce, it’s more to do with the fact it was in the heat of the day.

That means the car would produce less downforce and because of that the ride height overall would be that little bit higher.

The airflow separation would also be increased as thanks to the thinner air it would start earlier and end later. Again, that means less downforce when the car was close to the ground.

Compared to FP3, in qualifying the air temperature was two degrees cooler and the track temperature was 12 degrees cooler. Both of these would mean the car overall produces more downforce, which would mean that the car would be running at a lower ride height.

With the more dense air, any separation problems in the underfloor would hold on for longer and be more aggressive when they inevitably happened. This means that the car would suffer more porpoising, which would lead to what he calls more bouncing in qualifying.

As I said earlier these cars ‘require a lot of airflow separation management in the initial floor design’. We don’t see the underfloor too often, but I would imagine that if we compared the Red Bull to the Mercedes underfloors from underneath we would see two very different philosophies.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/gary ... dly-again/

Thanks for sharing.

[izzy]

So, as far as I understand it, separation is when the airflow detaches from the surface it's supposed to be following, and this is a stall. But bouncing is when the gap to the ground gets so small the two boundary layers meet and as they're slow the pressure suddenly rises and the car rises on its springs. Is Gary saying these two are the same thing?

[chrisc90]

I think there’s more to it than just the floor. Everyone seen RB’s floor in Monaco last year thanks to Perez, so surely other teams will have a good idea of what’s going on under there by now.

I think the one of the major things that has an affect on these cars…. Goes wayyy back to 2022 testing, When Red Bull rocked up to date 2 of the test and the porpoising had stopped. Whatever they changed overnight, certainly is one of the key players in how these cars work

[f1jcw]

With Gary’s statement I was waiting for the catch line of exactly what the issue was but it never arrived.
I’m surprised the team never asked any old time 60/70 year old ground effect engineers to consult!

[mendis]

With Gary’s statement I was waiting for the catch line of exactly what the issue was but it never arrived.
I’m surprised the team never asked any old time 60/70 year old ground effect engineers to consult!

Given their difficulties and inability to sort one problem for 3 years, it seems it would be wise to talk to these 60/70 year old ground effect engineers. May be that can help.

[DGP123]

The state of Mercedes. Is this really what it’s come to? The brain drain is such, that they’re so clueless and out of ideas, they might have to resort to calling up some OAP’s with some ground effect experience, to help bail them out

Feel for GR. Time doesn’t stand still for anybody. Yes, Lewis is older, but alarm bells must ring when he decides to jump ship. Real possibility that George is now in danger of his career amounting to absolutely nothing at Mercedes. Only one win in his career, and this regulation is pretty much written off. You can’t even have any confidence in this team being a front runner in 26’, given their continued inability to solve their ongoing issues over the last three seasons.

I’d be surprised if George’s agent is not looking at options for 26’.

[214270]

A class below in the hi-speed.

[f1jcw]

A class below in the hi-speed.

But not as fast on the straight and had to defend with some really awful weaving

[Vanja #66]

So, as far as I understand it, separation is when the airflow detaches from the surface it's supposed to be following, and this is a stall. But bouncing is when the gap to the ground gets so small the two boundary layers meet and as they're slow the pressure suddenly rises and the car rises on its springs. Is Gary saying these two are the same thing?

I'm gonna go into a bit more detail, so feel free to skip when you find what interests you.

Flow separation is detachment from surface, yes. Full description would be straining of boundary layer flow and local flow reversal leading to local detachment. Depending on the flow conditions, this detachment can either immediately spread or remain locally contained. It's usually contained to a certain area and is called a separation bubble, unless there are also other external disturbances (dirt on the surface, damaged surface, strong side wind, etc)

Also depending on flow and geometry of the surface, separation can happen and aerodynamic forces can keep growing a bit more. For wings, trailing edge separation allows for a bit more angle to be added before lift starts dropping. For floor and diffuser, doesn't matter if it's a Venturi or a flat floor, typically the ride height is the crucial parameter. At a certain low ride height, flat floor diffuser exhibits initial separation. In controlled conditions, you can then still lower the floor a bit more and keep gaining downforce before the separation bubble grows too big, bursts and separation suddenly spreads out rapidly.

Venturi floor can experience the same phenomena in low ride height, but there are some key differences. Typical choke of the floor is the most extreme case, when the expansion after the throat is too big and the flow can't stay attached to the Venturi tunnel roof. It is reported by some insiders that no team in 2022 had this happen alone and cause porpoising, it was typically multiple factors that caused this to occur.

Due to the movement of the car and floor, bumps and kerbs on track and overall flow condition changes at different parts of the track, what happend most often was having an initial external influence cause the initial separation somewhere behind the floor throat. Since these Venturi tunnels are so big and generate 100s of kg of load, this separation could cause enough of a trouble to make the car lose enough load to start bouncing while the car would still accelerate on straights or high-speed corners. More speed later on means more load squared and thus the amplitude of bouncing would only go up. Once this process starts, there is a hysteresis and so it would be impossible to keep accelerating or even keep the same velocity and expect the bouncing to stop. Vertical movement caused by porpoising also typically meant additional vertical velocity component, which would also mess with the flow and add more disturbances.

There are two simple solutions to fight bouncing - higher ride height and stiffer suspension. Higher ride height affects downforce generation and tyre performance, while stiffer suspension usually affects low-speed cornering and tyre performance. So it's best when you can avoid bouncing with floor design that allows the floor to work more robustly and in various adverse conditions.

Not sure what Gary A wrote, but there are no two boundary layers, there's no boundary layer on the ground since the ground (and air) are typically static and the car moves.