The centrepiece to those changes was made to its sidepods, and builds on the conceptual shift taken at the Monaco Grand Prix when it opted to abandon the ‘zeropod’ concept used since the start of the current ground effect era.
Mercedes has adopted a broader, downward-sloping ramp design that is reminiscent of its competitors. However, it seems that Mercedes is unable to pursue a more aggressive approach in shaping the bodywork, resulting in a makeshift solution.
The reason for this is that the team needs to understand and consider the perspective of its upper SIS (Side Impact Structure) and the protective covering surrounding it.
Mercedes cannot modify this specific part of the vehicle because it would necessitate homologating a new chassis, which is not feasible within the season’s budget restrictions.
While dramatic changes to the SIS fairing might be off the table, Mercedes has made changes to the aerodynamic furniture housed around it, with the mirror slat from above the housing removed in Spain (above, blue arrow, inset), while the row of vortex generators mounted on the upper corner of the fairing (above, red arrow, inset) were reduced from four to three in Canada and have been deleted entirely as part of this update.
Like Red Bull, which made changes to its sidepods in Hungary, Mercedes listed the taller sidepod inlet being used this weekend as a reliability update, rather than being purely aerodynamic. This suggests there’s work that has been undertaken to the internal ducting, as well as the external bodywork.
The design of the entrance has also been altered, with a preference for a cylindrical scoop instead of the boxy layout that was previously implemented after the update in Monaco.
This clearly has implications in regard to its cooling capacity and it also results in a revised undercut layout, in order to deliver a better flow regime downstream.
There’s changes at the rear of the sidepod bodywork to take advantage of this too, with much more concavity down the flank of the ramped section to help push flow laterally around the rear tyre.
The ramp section has become steeper compared to its previous design. The bodywork now descends to connect with the floor, effectively channeling the airflow over and through the elevated surface of the sidepod.
And, as a means to work in conjunction with the changes to the rear portion of the sidepod, the camber of the engine cover has also been modified.
Regarding the synchronization of updates, Mercedes has also made modifications to the floor of the W14. In their car presentation document, they mentioned adjusting the distribution of volume in the underfloor.
According to the team, this will aid in extracting a greater amount of local load from the forward floor vortex system, consequently enhancing flow to the diffuser.
Externally, there is a noticeable change in the strakes on the scroll section of the floor in the front corner. The number of strakes has been reduced from three (shown above and inset) to two.
Mercedes W14 rear wing comparison
Photo by: Uncredited
Mercedes only equipped Lewis Hamilton’s car with the new rear wing that had reduced downforce during the Belgian race.
However, based on the speed trap figures during both qualifying sessions, the sprint and the race, there wasn’t a great deal of difference between it and the higher downforce solution used by George Russell. This could be because the “barn door” solution used by Russell offered more balance and a better corner exit.
However, it is evident that the new wing occupies a smaller portion of the designated box area for the mainplane and upper flap. The mainplane now has a more gradual spoon-like shape, and the upper flap’s trailing edge has also been reduced.
The single mounting pillar and DRS pod are joined together, and they have a different composition. The newer rear wing endplate has a cutout at the rear quarter, while Russell’s car had an infill panel.
Other wing tweaks
Ferrari SF-23 rear wing detail, Belgian GP
Photo by: Giorgio Piola
Ferrari also had a new rear wing assembly for the Belgian Grand Prix, as it looked to improve its top speed without compromising its performance through the trickier second sector.
Like Mercedes, there’s a difference in the design of the DRS pod and how that connects with the single pillar.
Ferrari, like Red Bull, adopted a similar design approach used by teams in the past, incorporating a V-shaped groove on the trailing edge of the upper flap. However, Ferrari’s groove has a more gentle curve.
Ferrari also became the latest to implement an offset flap junction for the upper portion of the endplate, following in the footsteps of Alpine, Aston Martin, AlphaTauri and Mercedes, all of which have their own take on how to best use the feature.
Compared with its regular design (inset), you’ll note how this alters the shape of the tip section and has a significant bearing on the rear quarter cutout.
Ferrari made a significant decision in Belgium by choosing to use only one element for their beam wing. This was done with the intention of increasing their speed on straight sections two and three.
Alpine used a specific front wing design during the Belgian GP to achieve a balanced distribution of weight between the front and rear of their car. The upper flap of the wing was significantly reduced in size.
Not only did it feature the inboard notch that we’ve seen it employ already this season, but the rest of the flap had also been trimmed across its span too.
This follows the introduction of its high downforce variant at the Hungarian GP (right), which has a deeper chord length across its span but also features a wave-like trailing edge. This not only generates more load but also directs the airflow across and around the front tyre to help influence the wake.
Leave a Reply