Mercedes AMG F1 W03 (pre-launch speculation)

[MercAMGF1Fans]

Since this thread is about pre-launch speculations I`ll sum up some rumors on other forums regarding novelties on W03:
1. Sidepods will be curved and also have a very slope angle (side viewing):
a) to maintain a clean path of the airflow to the beam wing;
b) to create DF as near as possible to the CoG;
c) this arrangement is design bearing in mind the crash structure requirements.
2. Air intakes will be very low, very small in width but also very wide and practically has the same width like the floor does. This low position benefits from the clean air which is channeled via the fins under the FW and also from the barge boards under the nose.
3. The lower side of the air intake has a curved shape, in order to channel and accelerate the airflow like STR did last year with their double floor.
4. There are no air box intake over the driver`s head because they will reinstate their blade roll hoop. The air box intake will be splitted in two channels which goes on each side of the driver`s cell of survival. They are starting from the sidepods air intake level and go around the back of the driver towards the engine.
5. They will blow the fins placed on the rear break ducts.
6. The exhausts covers and the rear wing will have a linear connection. These exhaust covers are angled like RB6 nose fins, in order to divert the airflow towards both ends of the rear wing.
7. Last but not least, they will have a legal RRH system

Cool, interesting stuff. Do you have the sources, so we can read more?

Yes! But there is a small problem: you should know Russian language

Link please

[FrukostScones]

Link please

[PlatinumZealot]

What I have done for you both is ISOLATE a scenario where the system can work without any changing input from the wheel loading. This is important if you analyse a vibrating system..with transfer function and all that stuff that I don't remember now.

You will never understand your own scenario. You don`t understand Newton`s laws, you don`t understand causal connection between all the elements we are talking about. This is what i can summarize after nearly 20 pages of discussing with you.

Nice way to escape the discussion. Fire some shots in the air and run off the battle field.

Your rhetoric was not concrete enough to eliminate any other theories or FACTS. Even now I am still waiting for that engineering explanation that will let me change my mind and it does not take much for me to do that. I have only heard pieces of here or there information that is pretty much common knowledge or just twisted science. (witchcraft? ) haha

[Tyler]

I was just thinking of Mercedes' DRS system they used last year.
They had the mechanisms mounted in the endplates.
Most of the other teams incl Force India and Mclaren copied Red Bulls system by the end of the season with that big L shaped structure in the middle of the wing plane
(sorry for my lack of correct terms - I'm not very good at the technical stuff )
What are the benefits and disadvantages of the various systems and are Mercedes likely to use the same system again?

I was also wondering why Mercedes didn't use those vanes at the bottom of the rear wing end-plates as seen on the RB7 and MP4-26 and now on the MP4-27.
At one point in the season they did have them on the car bit they were taken off and not used for the remainder of the season.
A lot of teams adopted them as the season progressed, obviously seeing some sort of benefit, I wonder why they weren't used by Merc and if they are likely to use them on the W03?

[pocketmoon]

I was just thinking of Mercedes' DRS system they used last year.
They had the mechanisms mounted in the endplates.
Most of the other teams incl Force India and Mclaren copied Red Bulls system by the end of the season with that big L shaped structure in the middle of the wing plane.

Mercedes went a different way to the other top teams with a much shorter car. Ross admitted that they didn't see the benefits of blown diffusers so didn't design the MGPW02 around it. That changes a lot at the back end of the car.

Interestingly Mercedes has problem with the DRS but only with Schumi - for some reason they DRS wouldn't reliably 'switch off'. Ross believes this may have been due to differences between Nico & Schumi helmets!

[gato azul]

because weight is acceleration due to gravity x mass. FACT

same very interesting physics going on here - impressive:

So what is your definition of "acceleration" ?

a=dv/dt ?

if so, then how does this makes any sense

You need to refresh your mind on what weight means. Terminal velocity only give a feeling of weightlessness but you are still in a gravitational field so you still have weight.

Does "terminal" velocity not mean "constant" aka not changing velocity?
If so, how do you can still have acceleration? - if velocity does not increase?

BTW:
I think, what you experience in the moment of impact is more the effect of energy:
Et =1/2mv^2
then it is the effect of weight.

[Raptor22]

I would advise you in the interests of proper reational discusion to not respond to the trolls who jump in on discussions and ask circular questions.
their intent is not for discussion but for arguement.When corner they wilput words in your mouth and use psuedo science to explaintheir POV. Its a trap to get attention.

[Ferraripilot]

Since this thread is about pre-launch speculations I`ll sum up some rumors on other forums regarding novelties on W03:
1. Sidepods will be curved and also have a very slope angle (side viewing):
a) to maintain a clean path of the airflow to the beam wing;
b) to create DF as near as possible to the CoG;
c) this arrangement is design bearing in mind the crash structure requirements.
2. Air intakes will be very low, very small in width but also very wide and practically has the same width like the floor does. This low position benefits from the clean air which is channeled via the fins under the FW and also from the barge boards under the nose.
3. The lower side of the air intake has a curved shape, in order to channel and accelerate the airflow like STR did last year with their double floor.
4. There are no air box intake over the driver`s head because they will reinstate their blade roll hoop. The air box intake will be splitted in two channels which goes on each side of the driver`s cell of survival. They are starting from the sidepods air intake level and go around the back of the driver towards the engine.
5. They will blow the fins placed on the rear break ducts.
6. The exhausts covers and the rear wing will have a linear connection. These exhaust covers are angled like RB6 nose fins, in order to divert the airflow towards both ends of the rear wing.
7. Last but not least, they will have a legal RRH system

That's an awful lot of speculation indeed. I can't imagine half of this information being leaked.

[Ferraripilot]

Its a trap

Where's admiral Ackbar? Sorry, couldn't resist. Too right though Raptor. Don't feed the troll

[Raptor22]

[raymondu999]

I Its a trap to get attention.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4F4qzPbcFiA[/youtube]

[gato azul]

I would advise you in the interests of proper reational discusion to not respond to the trolls who jump in on discussions and ask circular questions.
their intent is not for discussion but for arguement.When corner they wilput words in your mouth and use psuedo science to explaintheir POV. Its a trap to get attention.

Thanks for the good advice - it´s appreciated
Nevertheless, I was hoping, that on a technical forum, and that is what the name suggests, some rules and laws (preferable physical and natural ones, such as Newtons) still apply. - No?
And that they are used correctly.

[Raptor22]

Gato,

I feel your passion for the laws of physics, However stupidy is threatening tobecomes a much more powerful and influential force. Logic cannot win against it because stupidity is not governed by any laws..
Eventually science and logic will be driven to the underground as BS artists, marketers and lawyers kill what remains of it.

If an individual cannot grasp the difference between weight and mass, is there any basis upon which to continue a discussion?
When the basis for an arguement is simply to disagree then there is no point.

I would be interested to hear your views on inertia valve or fluid inerter suspension systems

[gato azul]

If an individual cannot grasp the difference between weight and mass, is there any basis upon which to continue a discussion?

I would be interested to hear your views on inertia valve or fluid inerter suspension systems

Unfortunately, I fear that a very clear understanding of some physical principles are needed to understand the proposed system/concept.
Without, any attempt of constructive discussion will be in vain.

Furthermore, I think that during this discussion, some things have become a bit "muddied" and some concepts are chucked into one bowl, which don´t necessary belong into the same bowl.

As far as I can tell, we have:

a.) the concept proposed on the other blog, which I have assumed is discussed here.

b.) the fluid inerter - patented by Lotus-Renault, and used in place of an "mechanical inerter" based on the concept put forward by Prof. Malcolm Smith's

c.) so called "inertia valves" as used in some dampers, or interconnected suspension systems, which regulate the oil flow in said systems in response to acceleration (either vertical,longitudinal,lateral or any combination thereof)

These are three totally different applications, and apart from sharing some of the same physical principles, have nothing to do with each other, and are used for different purposes.

It would help, if someone could clearly state which of the three systems in question, you would like to discuss here.

[xpensive]

One way of avoiding the aggravation could perhaps be to use an SI-related terminology, like Mass (kg) and Force (N),
where of course Force is Mass times Accelleration, positive or negative, why I never use the xpression "Weight"?