advertisement


2014 Formula 1 Season Thread (part II)

Quite a good race I thought from a spectators point of view. Lots of close racing and over-taking up and down the field. I think Lewis did really well to get from 20th to 3rd but Rosberg didn't race off into the distance as I thought he might. Looks like double points for the last race of the season could really become a factor.
 
This is always monitored and he is made aware of when he missed his mark when practising and after the race event when a more detailed video analysis is conducted.



When a driver oversteps his mark slightly it is normally one corner that is delayed more than others. This is due to the handed nature of the problem, the slightly different difficulties of changing front and rear tyres and the individuals involved.

I watched Hamilton's stops closely in view of your comments here, and he did stop a foot or eighteen inches past the mark on the yellow line both times the overhead shot was used. In fairness he did stop in exactly the same place each time though....

Rosberg seemed to be more accurate from the TV perspective. But Hamilton was slower getting away on his stops yesterday too. System glitches?
 
I don't know about any system glitches, but even if he is consistently stopping in the same place, if it is the wrong place, there is a cost attached to it (stop time and possibly get away due to the crew not being so slick in terms of when to go).
 
Is it asking too much for Mercedes to provide equally reliable equipment to both of it's drivers this season?

Driving style does have an effect on the delivered reliability, for example in Lewis' case, he is harder on his brakes so he is likely to have problems out at the limit of reliability with the brake system.

For the avoidance of doubt (on the off chance that someone thinks some drivers are picked on with lesser quality parts or build process), the team builds the cars to be as reliable as possible. The pride that the mechanics + engineers have of doing the best job for both drivers guarantees that. Let alone the bonus paid to all employees is based on championship position.
 
Driving style does have an effect on the delivered reliability, for example in Lewis' case, he is harder on his brakes so he is likely to have problems out at the limit of reliability with the brake system.

I recommend you tell him not to drive so fast.
 
Or the team does what it is doing to develop the car t make it more robust in the areas that it is having reliability problems. Some of these updates can be done quickly and some take a lot longer to engineer.

The changes to the powerplant for 2014 and its impact on braking and cooling were always going to result in the least reliable championship for years, and so it has turned out.

Some drivers will be more affected than others, and so it has turned out.
 
Bloody Lewis, when is he going to learn? It's about preserving fuel, tyres and brakes. Soon it will be the one who finishes with the fewest bug splats who wins. Time he got with the program and stopped all this racing lark.
 
If it was Nico having problems, you'd praise Lewis for exercising caution and not pushing the hardware beyond the limits of endurance. Personally, I think Lewis relies a bit too much on others getting out of the way for him. I'm sure it'll cost him another race before the season is through.
 
If it was Nico having problems, you'd praise Lewis for exercising caution and not pushing the hardware beyond the limits of endurance.

Endurance? Wasn't it the first part of a qualifying session Markus?

His retirement in Australia? One lap?

People want to paint Hamilton as being hard on his car but the stats over the years do not back that up - all they do show is that he is routinely the quicker of the drivers.

It's most frustrating from an (English ;) ) enthusiast's POV to not be able to see the drivers compete on an equal footing and for them to race each other toe to toe for the championship. I have utter confidence in Hamilton to deliver the championship should he and we be given that opportunity.
 
Clearly if a one driver is quicker than the other then he is stressing the braking and suspension components more, and Hamilton is a bit quicker than Rosberg. One of Hamilton's big strengths is late braking, but he adapted to the lift and cruise fuel saving braking technique in the races very quickly, and he consistently uses less fuel than Rosberg. So he must be faster in corners and putting more stress on tyres and suspension components there.

Plus of course, starting at Monaco after Rosberg's 'bad luck' turned out to be so lucky for him and unlucky for Hamilton he's tended to be following in dirt air more in races after making pressure errors in qualifying. Or having yet more bad luck like Saturday. Following in dirty air was clearly the reason why his car suffered more and he couldn't keep going after both cars developed the same fault in Canada while Rosberg running at the front could.

Regarding ill informed myths about car breaking, I'm old enough to remember Stirling Moss's disastrous season when his Rob Walker entered Cooper broke at practically every race and he got a tabloid reputation as one. I even remember someone repeating it to me years later, and then saying he knew what he was talking about because he was a bus driver!

In fact the reason was because John Cooper was happy to sell them the car but wouldn't sell the gearbox to go with it. Back then there were few rear transaxle gearboxes that were suitable, and Cooper was using a specially developed ZF one. Moss had to use a beefed up Porsch unit which couldn't take the power.

But his reputation as car breaker has continued to this day.
 
Lewis still brakes later and harder!

And therefore gives the powerplant and braking system a slightly different duty cycle. These differences are enough in a race car operating at the limit, to result in different levels of reliability.
 
That is one way of looking at it!!

On a serious note (sorry but I have to be as this is the car that we spent years developing), none of the team wants to have a car that is not reliable for either driver due to some very small (at least to the outsider) differences in duty cycle. This will get resolved.
 
I hope so Ian.

The bit I'm not getting still is what this has to do with ""duty cycles" when the failures are to parts whose replacement is not dictated by the FIA and is happening seemingly early in runs/those parts' anticipated life spans.
 
Hi Mike,

The term duty cycle is commonly used w.r.t. reliability where parts fail after a broadly predictable usage and hence components can be lifed (this is I think how you are interpreting it, please correct me if I am wrong).

I am using the term in a slightly wider sense as what happens with more extreme loads etc is that you accelerate the failure modes dramatically. It is a highly non linear situation with combinations of loads likely to be causing these problems.

The cars are engineered to be as far below the FIA minimum weight limit as possible to ensure ballast can be put where it is needed for longitudinal weight distribution and as low as possible for the centre of gravity height. I mention this as it should clarify why weight reduction is very important and the consequence of that is that all components are engineered for specific duty cycles which have little room for deviance. So if a driver's style just pushes the system outside these limits it can and often does result in failures.

All of this is right down in the detail which often makes them very difficult to resolve.

I hope this makes it a bit clearer! Please ask if not and I will try to answer more clearly.
 
That is abundantly clear, but it begs the question ...

If the cars' components are pared in weight to allow 100% performance but you hire a driver known to ask 105% of certain components then why not engineer for that? That would obviously compromise the overall package in terms of the finer deployment of ballast.

But here's the thing: if that compromise suits the 105% driver and he can wring more speed out of the package but your 100% driver looses out, then who do you design around, assuming you don't want two different packages? The conspiracy/tin foil hat wearers would tell you that the status quo favours ze German! ;)
 
It would help if the conspiracy theorists would read what Ian says: Because of the new rules, teams lack experience where the 100 and where the 105% are. So they can't actually design their car for exactly what's needed while still keeping weight as low as possible. A degree of trial and error is obviously involved. The guy who works the car harder will find the limits more often. He can either accept that and enjoy the speed advantage he has over the other guy who works the car very slightly less hard; or he can choose to work the car very slightly less hard himself.

And I know that the English love a conspiracy theory, but really, please keep this in perspective: there are several hundred Englishmen working for Mercedes. Do you really think Mercedes would even consider running the risk of just one of them telling about the secret conspiracy, even 20 years down the road? It would ruin Mercedes' hard-won reputation in England for decades.

If Merc really had wanted a German to win, they wouldn't have had to hire Hamilton in the first place, they could have signed Hülkenberg.
 
It would help if the conspiracy theorists would read what Ian says: because if the new rules, teams lack experience where the 100 and where the 105% are. So they can't actually design their car for exactly what's needed while still keeping weight as lloow as possible. A degree of trial and error is obviously involved. The guy who works the car harder will be find the limits more often. He can either accept that and enjoy the speed advantage he has over the other guy who works the car very slightly less hard; or he can choose to work the car very slightly hard himself.

And I know that the English love a conspiracy theory, but really, please keep this in perspective: there are several hundred Englishmen working for Mercedes. Do you really think Mercedes would even consider running the risk of just one of them telling about the secret conspiracy, even 20 years down the road? It would ruin Mercedes' hard-won reputation in England for decades.

If Merc really had wanted a German to win, they wouldn't have had to hire Hamilton in the first place, they could have signed Hülkenberg.
Clearly you missed my smiley ... :)
 
Hi Mike,

The term duty cycle is commonly used w.r.t. reliability where parts fail after a broadly predictable usage and hence components can be lifed (this is I think how you are interpreting it, please correct me if I am wrong).

I am using the term in a slightly wider sense as what happens with more extreme loads etc is that you accelerate the failure modes dramatically. It is a highly non linear situation with combinations of loads likely to be causing these problems.

The cars are engineered to be as far below the FIA minimum weight limit as possible to ensure ballast can be put where it is needed for longitudinal weight distribution and as low as possible for the centre of gravity height. I mention this as it should clarify why weight reduction is very important and the consequence of that is that all components are engineered for specific duty cycles which have little room for deviance. So if a driver's style just pushes the system outside these limits it can and often does result in failures.

All of this is right down in the detail which often makes them very difficult to resolve.

I hope this makes it a bit clearer! Please ask if not and I will try to answer more clearly.

What you really seem to be saying there is that the car has been developed more with Rosberg's input, and to suit his style of driving and the loads he puts on the car than Hamilton's.

Something like it was alleged was done for Schumacher when Rosberg was beating the pants off him.
 
It would help if the conspiracy theorists would read what Ian says: Because of the new rules, teams lack experience where the 100 and where the 105% are. So they can't actually design their car for exactly what's needed while still keeping weight as low as possible. A degree of trial and error is obviously involved. The guy who works the car harder will find the limits more often. He can either accept that and enjoy the speed advantage he has over the other guy who works the car very slightly less hard; or he can choose to work the car very slightly less hard himself.

Spot on.

I think many people are forgetting that the powerplant change is by far the biggest change to an F1 car that has been made in the 24 years that I have worked in the sport. So out at the limits of performance there will be problems and they will affect some drivers more than others! So designing this years car to achieve close to 100% reliability whilst achieving the best car performance was and is extremely challenging.
 


advertisement


Back
Top