Mercedes GP MGP W01

[Morteza]

The word flawed chassi is what is itching me....what might be that flaw causing this sort of trouble? It is a carbon tube basically as everyone else has.
Macs have a very long one ,Renault have a very short one...
RBR,Ferrari,Sauber,Williams,Mercedes tororosso , Virgin and HRT have adopted a v shaped tub crossection with elevated steering ,Mclaren and Renault have the steering low ,Lotus the single car with a steerringmount as high as the upper wishbones...
I simply fail to understand just why this car should not have any strength ..renault has strong tracks and so does MACS ,but the benz seems to struggle no matter what you have on offer:barcelona,Hockenheim montecarlo,Canada ,Australia... were did they shine? it is too easy to say ...the thing is crap ,get over it and start afresh.
Last years Mac ,that was a crap car ...it had everything you would not want,wrong weight distribution ,,crap aero,overweight ,you name it.And they won races ,well Hamilton won races...

It seems they can't get the car to work properly. We say how Rosberg and Schumacher would perform in a RB6 but what would happen if McLaren or Red Bull were given MGP W01? Could they get it to work? Last year MP4-24 was a crap but they won races. It's so odd that the car has no strength at every track
I agree with you Marcush.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Marcush

Here are some links you can make yuor own mind up.

http://www.inracingnews.com/formula-one ... wheelbase/

http://www.motorsport.co.uk/formula-1/b ... 6952.shtml

http://www.carracingblogging.com/?p=26

And many many other sites that conclude Brawn got their sums wrong with regard to the Tyre. Its all very well someone like gilgen to say they "didnt understand" or that it was "the same for everyone".
Getting the weight distribution wrong is fatal, you saw Brawns face when he found out. He knew 2009 was effectively over, there is no real solution other than start again.
They got it wrong, in a worse way than Mclaren did in 2009 because the car is designed to use a tyre that doesnt exist. So any improvements will be very hard to read, as the tyre performance fluctuates making readings impossible.

A tool as delicate as an F1 car needs precise calcualtions. they admit they got it wrong, lets accept that and see what they can do next year.

[marcush.]

JET,if it was that simple as a weight distribution problem...They have done what was possible....
but that did not change their speed.

We have discussed at length what you need to change weight distribution dramatically:

ballast weight and a car thats underweight.

with the major masses of driver,fuelload,engine and gearbox a given I see no real chance to move weight distribution more than the odd 1 or maybe two percent without
going to extremes in building underweight and ballast placement were you would want it.
RBR has a quite short car ,Mcl is a long one so I´don´t think there is much to be discussed about Wheelbase.
someone raised the possible issue of fuelcell placement and longitudinal shift of coG with reducing fuel levels ...something to consider ,thats true.

So in effect i don´t think we have heard a reasonable explanation for their underperforming yet.

One thing is striking: they are still slow on straights. why is their car so draggy? copuldit be the driver is sitting more upright in the tub ? giving them a lot more crossection without better CW -thus a more drag in consequence?

Rosberg and Schumacher are no really big men ,compared to for example Button or Webber..

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Marcush, 308kmh is 3kmh down on Red Bull last race, hardly slow.
That is neqrly 10kmh down on Mclaren, but then they are the only ones doing that speed that are competitive. Force india were terrible yet matched that top speed.

When does an inherrent weight distribution issue become solved Marcush?
Not simply by changing wheelbase, although this could help.

The concept Brawn had for the car was killed with the problems of too much weight over the front end. You can even tell with the naked how eye "bulky" the car looks ahead of the side pods.


Problems like this will take more than a season to solve when their is a testing ban.

[marcush.]

Marcush, 308kmh is 3kmh down on Red Bull last race, hardly slow.
That is neqrly 10kmh down on Mclaren, but then they are the only ones doing that speed that are competitive. Force india were terrible yet matched that top speed.

When does an inherrent weight distribution issue become solved Marcush?
Not simply by changing wheelbase, although this could help.

The concept Brawn had for the car was killed with the problems of too much weight over the front end. You can even tell with the naked how eye "bulky" the car looks ahead of the side pods.


Problems like this will take more than a season to solve when their is a testing ban.

the bulky looks is AERO ,and I admit to this as one thing i take into consideration.
but weightdistribution? what is there to make a difference .
You got the nosecone ,wing,wingflap actuation ,Front wheelassemblies,with brakes and hubs etc,Steering rack ,wishbiónes ,teethers,brakemastercylinders/pedalbox ,
Torsionbars/rockers,ARB,Springloadpickuppoints,Steeringcolumn and steering and
2 drivers legs + a fire extinguisher + a few cables for brakeand suspensionsensors + wingactuation ,and some minor features apart from a steeringwheel....aerial for the pit...I can´t see where someone could find anything meaningful to change weightdistribution of the car..that end of the car is light already as there is not much in it that could account for a dramtic forward shift of weight they don´t need.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Marcush

Do you agree with me this is more of a Brawn BGP002 than a Mercedes W01?

Now if you can imagine a team who are winning, with no money, and an advanced prototype in the works like it was in 2009.
The understood the reason of the BGP001 having inherent issues with its tyres. It couldnt generate enough heat into the front tyres which in turn affected the rear grip.

They had specs from bridgestone for the 2010 tyre and overcompensted in 2 ways to engineer their way through the tyre issue.
First they added more weight to the front relative to the rear. You v#can see the Mercedes has a tiny arse, but a huge nose relative to the proportions of the car.
forward biased weight distrubtion right there.
The benefit is that if you have the correct tyre, the front is worked as hard as the rear on full to half tanks or 55-60% race conditions.

Secondly the aero nose was designed to do somthing specific with the air. This is not happening. By having the larger nose for the weight issue, Brawn gambled on a theory that they could use the bulky nature of the nose to their advantage.
You can read more on this at the beginning of this very thread.

So, to conclude, it is my view that these issues cannot simply be overcome by the adding of little bits and pieces.
A new car is needed, and it will be more competitive next year, that you can be sure of.
Brawn hasnt made the same mistake twice, and with the resource restriction here next year, the only way is up.

[NewtonMeter]

JET,if it was that simple as a weight distribution problem...They have done what was possible....
but that did not change their speed.

We have discussed at length what you need to change weight distribution dramatically:

ballast weight and a car thats underweight.

with the major masses of driver,fuelload,engine and gearbox a given I see no real chance to move weight distribution more than the odd 1 or maybe two percent without
going to extremes in building underweight and ballast placement were you would want it.
RBR has a quite short car ,Mcl is a long one so I´don´t think there is much to be discussed about Wheelbase.
someone raised the possible issue of fuelcell placement and longitudinal shift of coG with reducing fuel levels ...something to consider ,thats true.

So in effect i don´t think we have heard a reasonable explanation for their underperforming yet.

One thing is striking: they are still slow on straights. why is their car so draggy? copuldit be the driver is sitting more upright in the tub ? giving them a lot more crossection without better CW -thus a more drag in consequence?

Rosberg and Schumacher are no really big men ,compared to for example Button or Webber..

Well, I think it's a rather a case of their giving a reasonable explanation, but our not understanding it.

I'm in an engineering discipline myself and I fully appreciate how changing one thing can influence 10 others. For example, changing the weight distribution will change the CoG (obviously, because that's the point). One problem that can arrise is then that the CoG will not shift as it was designed to as the tank empties (if it was designed to move at all, at that). That may or may not explain their polarising performance on high and low fuels, just as an aside.

Secondly, the CoG and CoP are designed to work together to get the "dynamic weight distribution" (my own term as I can't remember what the proper term is). When they moved the front wing and suspension forward, that balance may well have suffered as well.

Those are just 2 --- from the top of my head. One would need an automotive engineer (which I am not) to explain all the intricacies. The butterfly effect is a suitable description when dealing with this situation.

Just my 2c.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Exactly right Nm

If you get the numbers wrong, as Brawn has been big enough to admit, you will always be playing a game of cat and mouse with a problem that can rear its head at anytime.

In a very basic way a very good friend of mine tried to shift some weight around in his S2000. Its a car with a very tail happy nature he managed to get more weight over the rear axle which bizzarely solved his oversteer woes at Thruxton race track.
He moved the battery and a couple of auxillaries to the rear, nothing major but the overall change of 40kg from front to back gave the car properties he liked.

The moment he took it to the Nurburgring every time he went over a crest the cars front would lighten the steering would "deaden" (his words) and the car would try go into tank slapper mode.
Suffice to say he reverted back to the standard configuration when he got back home.
This is all in a mass produced car that weighs all of 1300kgs.

The intricacies you rightly say that affect F1 cars is a different league away from this. And to get it wrong in the design stage is somthing that is nigh on impossible to "fix".

[marcush.]

unfortunatelly you are not willing to follow up the line of argumentation here.
I honestly believe there is not much ,apart from ballast that may be able to shift
weight distribution of the cars we currently see in the paddock.

the Cars with a full carbonfibre gearbox have some scope to shift weight forward in the car maybe 3-5kilos and maybe you can shift coolers and ancilliaries the odd 100 to 300 mm back or forth .
there is a rule of just how wide your fueltank maybe and how far it may reach under the back of the driver.So even there you will not really find a lot to shift weight forward or backwards.Could the unballasted car have more than 3-5% of degree of freedom with the weight split ,I´d be very surprised.
So coming from that assumption and the info we got from Mercedes very own MrBrawn something like 1 percent of the weightsplit has been shifted,bringing the car closer to the desired split.unfortunatelly that did not show in a change of form .

As for the CoG not matching the Cop I cannot and will not accept this ,as this is a function of the wings (not changed) and the underfloor ,wich they had to adapt to the new wheelbase anyways so with this development they could easily accomodate the requirements.

I´m not convinced ...not convinced.

How did Ferrari close the gap? the car does not look that impressive it is apparently slimmer in the front ...but will this be reason enough?

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

Marcush

The Ferrari was 0.450 seconds off in Bahrain.

Since then they have added the Exhaust blown diffuser AND an F-duct to a design that incorporates both of these very easily.
They also had an engine modification done 3 months ago.

Mercedes design is totally different to anything out there. More so than other I would say. It doesnt have a shark fin, its proportions are unique.

I cannot say what they can change to get it to work. But If Brawn say weight distribution, Im going to believe him.
Its very evident in highspeed direction changes that the W01 is nowhere near as planted as the top 3 or even Renault!
What are 2 things you need for them to become better in this area? Better aero and weight distribution.

Mercedes aero isnt the greatest but its ok, However their weight distribution will always affect them, and is a big reason why they cannot get high top speeds too.
If you cant get your foot down early enough then you gonna lose time on the straight.

the problem could be that 10kgs(could be more, could be less) is being placed somewhere it shouldnt be, the amount of time it takes to accelerate brake and turn this mass costs you dearly.

[marcush.]

lets conclude ,we will not see a Mercedes fighting for wins this year in Formula 1 .
And I really hope to learn someday what the true issue was that held them back .

For sure their 2011 contender will not look like a Brawn BGP001 nor like the MGP Wo1.
will they retain the blade type rolloverstructure?

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

With the demise of the F-duct and development of the passive F-duct,
Mercedes will retain exactly the same set up IMO.

Passive F-duct is legal I believe. And it doesnt require a shark fin ether.

[ringo]

Marcush, 308kmh is 3kmh down on Red Bull last race, hardly slow.
That is neqrly 10kmh down on Mclaren, but then they are the only ones doing that speed that are competitive. Force india were terrible yet matched that top speed.

When does an inherrent weight distribution issue become solved Marcush?
Not simply by changing wheelbase, although this could help.

The concept Brawn had for the car was killed with the problems of too much weight over the front end. You can even tell with the naked how eye "bulky" the car looks ahead of the side pods.


Problems like this will take more than a season to solve when their is a testing ban.

the bulky looks is AERO ,and I admit to this as one thing i take into consideration.
but weightdistribution? what is there to make a difference .
You got the nosecone ,wing,wingflap actuation ,Front wheelassemblies,with brakes and hubs etc,Steering rack ,wishbiónes ,teethers,brakemastercylinders/pedalbox ,
Torsionbars/rockers,ARB,Springloadpickuppoints,Steeringcolumn and steering and
2 drivers legs + a fire extinguisher + a few cables for brakeand suspensionsensors + wingactuation ,and some minor features apart from a steeringwheel....aerial for the pit...I can´t see where someone could find anything meaningful to change weightdistribution of the car..that end of the car is light already as there is not much in it that could account for a dramtic forward shift of weight they don´t need.

The front doesn't have much heavy stuff up there. but if you look at where the driver is, i would suspect he is too far ahead. This was probably done to move the fuel tank, engine up to shorten the wheel base.
If you notice they tried to remedy this with their wheelbase upgrade, moving the front axles further away from the driver.

[Italiano]

Something less technical: Everyone wanted to see a BGP002...well, this is it. Shows how much behind was the rest of the pack last year. Wonder what would happen if Button hadn't changed teams. He is well aware that his title was 90% car's work. Mercedes has to start fresh for 2011. Otherwise this operation is going down.

[aral]

With the demise of the F-duct and development of the passive F-duct,
Mercedes will retain exactly the same set up IMO.

Passive F-duct is legal I believe. And it doesnt require a shark fin ether.

Merc may be running an active F-duct at present. Check the stewards technical report. Merc changed a rubber seal for the F-duct, on the FOOTREST of the car!