McLaren MCL33

A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter do not belong here.
User avatar
godlameroso
309
Joined: 16 Jan 2010, 21:27
Location: Miami FL

Re: McLaren MCL33

Post

M840TR wrote:
25 Aug 2018, 21:42
godlameroso wrote:
25 Aug 2018, 15:07
M840TR wrote:
25 Aug 2018, 15:02


Looks like an earlier iteration of the tea-tray extension.

https://i.imgur.com/AYrJ0q0.jpg
It does but it seems to not extend as far outboard as the one shown. I still think the plate and chicken wing are badly done, the device behind the bargeboard guides the vortex traveling under the floor and the mid wing energizes that vortex. McLaren's solution creates flow stagnation in that area because the lateral and longitudinal flows disturb each other rather than compliment. The flow-vis paints it clear as day. Without the device they get more airflow under the floor which results in a net gain, it all stems from the bad solution they used in the mid wing. And seeing how the floor is constructed, they'd have to manufacture a whole new floor which is why updating this takes so long. My guess, next year's car will be a lot more modular in this area so they'll be able to experiment with the design in season, and cut down on lead times.
The reason their mid-wing is distinct is because they use it to guide air under the floor instead of guiding the outwash like others.
The others are guiding air under the floor just fine, the suction peak caused by the wing elements are more than enough to energize any airflow you manage to send under the bargeboards. After that, the device behind the bargeboard takes over. What McLaren is doing isn't unique just ineffective compared to the others. They've tweaked everything, this is the only part they haven't modified at all, all season long, at some point you have to say maybe we should look into this because nothing else is working.
Saishū kōnā

M840TR
M840TR
315
Joined: 13 Apr 2018, 21:04

Re: McLaren MCL33

Post

godlameroso wrote:
26 Aug 2018, 02:48
M840TR wrote:
25 Aug 2018, 21:42
godlameroso wrote:
25 Aug 2018, 15:07


It does but it seems to not extend as far outboard as the one shown. I still think the plate and chicken wing are badly done, the device behind the bargeboard guides the vortex traveling under the floor and the mid wing energizes that vortex. McLaren's solution creates flow stagnation in that area because the lateral and longitudinal flows disturb each other rather than compliment. The flow-vis paints it clear as day. Without the device they get more airflow under the floor which results in a net gain, it all stems from the bad solution they used in the mid wing. And seeing how the floor is constructed, they'd have to manufacture a whole new floor which is why updating this takes so long. My guess, next year's car will be a lot more modular in this area so they'll be able to experiment with the design in season, and cut down on lead times.
The reason their mid-wing is distinct is because they use it to guide air under the floor instead of guiding the outwash like others.
The others are guiding air under the floor just fine, the suction peak caused by the wing elements are more than enough to energize any airflow you manage to send under the bargeboards. After that, the device behind the bargeboard takes over. What McLaren is doing isn't unique just ineffective compared to the others. They've tweaked everything, this is the only part they haven't modified at all, all season long, at some point you have to say maybe we should look into this because nothing else is working.
Say they do go the Redbull/Ferrari way. How much lap-time does that give them? 0.1 sec? 0.2 at most? Thing is, if there were that easy an answer to their problems they would've done it already. It's something fundamental in the design that will takes several months to correct. Something like that is only visible in the wind tunnel which we don't have so it's pointless speculating.

User avatar
godlameroso
309
Joined: 16 Jan 2010, 21:27
Location: Miami FL

Re: McLaren MCL33

Post

Red Bull gained .5 copying Ferrari, I don't know how good the designers are at McLaren, but .3 is not out of the realm of possibility.
Saishū kōnā

M840TR
M840TR
315
Joined: 13 Apr 2018, 21:04

Re: McLaren MCL33

Post

godlameroso wrote:
26 Aug 2018, 04:27
Red Bull gained .5 copying Ferrari, I don't know how good the designers are at McLaren, but .3 is not out of the realm of possibility.
That was from the entire bargeboards not just midwing. Again, we can't put a finger on one place and label it the crux of every problem. The car as a whole doesn't work. It's fundamentally flawed.

User avatar
Zynerji
110
Joined: 27 Jan 2016, 16:14

Re: McLaren MCL33

Post

M840TR wrote:
26 Aug 2018, 04:49
godlameroso wrote:
26 Aug 2018, 04:27
Red Bull gained .5 copying Ferrari, I don't know how good the designers are at McLaren, but .3 is not out of the realm of possibility.
That was from the entire bargeboards not just midwing. Again, we can't put a finger on one place and label it the crux of every problem. The car as a whole doesn't work. It's fundamentally flawed.
Flawed how? Instability or just draggy?

Alonso says the car feels great. It's just slow. Im wondering if the problems would still be as bad if it had a Merc or Ferrari engine. Realistically, it's only 2.5s slower over 4.3 miles of corners.

That's not utterly terrible, but comparatively slow by F1 terms.

User avatar
godlameroso
309
Joined: 16 Jan 2010, 21:27
Location: Miami FL

Re: McLaren MCL33

Post

It lacks downforce, that's it, plain and simple.
Saishū kōnā

techman
techman
-5
Joined: 09 Jun 2016, 10:25

Re: McLaren MCL33

Post

Flawed how? Instability or just draggy?.
its been draggy for so many years. last year they were pilling on downforce and boasting how good the car was in corners. now they cant because they have direct competitors with renault and redbull. its a highly inefficient chassis just like i predicted

ivanlesk
ivanlesk
2
Joined: 17 Nov 2017, 21:09

Re: McLaren MCL33

Post

techman wrote:
26 Aug 2018, 06:43
Flawed how? Instability or just draggy?.
its been draggy for so many years. last year they were pilling on downforce and boasting how good the car was in corners. now they cant because they have direct competitors with renault and redbull. its a highly inefficient chassis just like i predicted
You should get a medal...

User avatar
diffuser
236
Joined: 07 Sep 2012, 13:55
Location: Montreal

Re: McLaren MCL33

Post

Big Tea wrote:
25 Aug 2018, 19:43
zac510 wrote:
25 Aug 2018, 19:04
Wind tunnel correlations issues seem highly correlated with teams having a bad year.
Probably related to light at the end of the tunnel.

Or in this case , "lack of".

User avatar
Big Tea
99
Joined: 24 Dec 2017, 20:57

Re: McLaren MCL33

Post

diffuser wrote:
26 Aug 2018, 14:28
Big Tea wrote:
25 Aug 2018, 19:43
zac510 wrote:
25 Aug 2018, 19:04
Wind tunnel correlations issues seem highly correlated with teams having a bad year.
Probably related to light at the end of the tunnel.

Or in this case , "lack of".
Its a train headlight, coming this way :shock:
When arguing with a fool, be sure the other person is not doing the same thing.

M840TR
M840TR
315
Joined: 13 Apr 2018, 21:04

Re: McLaren MCL33

Post

Photos from the crash.

Image
Image
Image

M840TR
M840TR
315
Joined: 13 Apr 2018, 21:04

Re: McLaren MCL33

Post

godlameroso wrote:
26 Aug 2018, 04:27
Red Bull gained .5 copying Ferrari, I don't know how good the designers are at McLaren, but .3 is not out of the realm of possibility.
You know, I kept thinking about the whole mid-wing configuration and I asked myself, where does the vortex from the nose go? Turns out, we were wrong to assume it went to the undercut. It actually goes under the floor through the vacancy in the mid-wing. Whereas others use this area to power the outwash, Mclaren use it to guide air under the floor, like I said previously. This compromises the outwash and risks diffuser stall. This method of powering the floor is incredibly inefficient as well, given the high turning angle would result in obvious drag.

Image

Mercedes use the same cape concept, but they use it to power the outwash. Note mid-wing.

Image

What's a proven method of using the floor to good effect is the tea-tray extension. It catches air up top and directs it downwards underneath the floor. The vortex generators help energize the air that goes to the diffuser and you have a double whammy. Ferrari supposedly gain 3 tenths just from tweaking this area further around Silverstone.

Image

Image

Image

How does this explain the drag issue? The lack of an S-duct means frontal air that would've flown through the car straight away now has now a great turning angle which makes its path difficult. All this isn't helped by the very short bargeboard length. The weak diffuser due to aforementioned reasons also effects corners exit speed which just exacerbates the problem.

Mclaren in the end abandoned a proven solution for a gamble.
Last edited by M840TR on 27 Aug 2018, 22:16, edited 1 time in total.

M840TR
M840TR
315
Joined: 13 Apr 2018, 21:04

Re: McLaren MCL33

Post

I realize I'm backtracking on my previous point of view but without a reasonable technical explanation, I bought their fundamentally flawed design excuse. Correlation issues was probably PR lingo for 'we screwed up'.

User avatar
turbof1
Moderator
Joined: 19 Jul 2012, 21:36
Location: MountDoom CFD Matrix

Re: McLaren MCL33

Post

Any clear pictures of the ripped open nose? The crash might have exposed some of the internal ducting.
#AeroFrodo

M840TR
M840TR
315
Joined: 13 Apr 2018, 21:04

Re: McLaren MCL33

Post

turbof1 wrote:
27 Aug 2018, 08:33
Any clear pictures of the ripped open nose? The crash might have exposed some of the internal ducting.
Best I could find. Ducts remained surprisingly intact for the most part; except for the ones on the sides which we know open underneath the cape to power the vortex.

Image
Last edited by M840TR on 27 Aug 2018, 22:16, edited 1 time in total.