Open top menu
30 Jun 2013
Pirelli's Tyre issues in Silverstone

Pirelli have been the topic of huge conversation and debate this season, with the teams placing increasing scrutiny on the tyre manufacturer and leveling the blame on them for all manner of issues.  The failures seen today differ from the ones we have seen before, with the tyre exploding rather than delaminating.  The upshot of this is that Pirelli unable to make changes to the construction of the tyre without unanimous consensus from the teams, has instead changed the bonding process for the tread platform.


In previous races we have seen that when the tyres have got cut or damaged the tread platform strips off (often in spectacular fashion), but as the rear tyres have a steel band running through them it enables the driver to return to the pits with the carcase of the tyre intact.

With the tread platform now adhered to the carcass of the tyre in a more restricted capacity, should a cut or damage occur the tread won't simply lift off the carcass of the tyre but instead stay attached, heating the tyre as the plaform moves around.  The integrity of the tyre is compromised by the heat and as the platform refuses to strip away it takes the carcass of the tyre with it.  (Pirelli's change in bonding process is like sticking a plaster over a problem, the dominoes are just falling in a different direction)



What we have seen teams do in the past is run outside of the reccommended parameters set by Pirelli.  Camber and Tyre pressure is something the teams will always try to find advantages from and has caught out the likes of Red Bull in the past (Spa)

The quick fix for Pirelli will be to return to the bonding process used before Silverstone which allowed drivers sustaining cuts/damage to their tyres to return to the pits with their cars unscathed.  The long fix is something that was debated during #TyreGate and that's the problem of no in-season testing.  Changing the construction will lead to an advantage swinging in one teams favour, something I think we can ill afford at this stage in the Championship.
Read more
29 Jun 2013
no image


The following decisions were taken by the World Motor Sport Council (I have added my own notes after the relevant sections):

FIA FORMULA ONE WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP

The FIA President and the Commercial Rights Holder advised that negotiations regarding the Concorde Agreement were close to conclusion with the intention the contract between the FIA and FOM will be signed in the near future.

The following summarises the changes made to the 2014 Sporting Regulations:

Further to a request from Mercedes, it will be permitted to supply engines to a maximum of four Formula One teams in 2014. (Mercedes, McLaren, Force India and Williams)

A penalty point system for drivers will be introduced. If a driver accumulates more than 12 points he will be banned from the next race. Points will stay on the driver’s licence for 12 months. The amount of points a driver may be given for infringements will vary from one to three depending upon the severity of the offence.
The procedure for a driver to be given the chance to give back any advantage he may have gained by leaving the track has been adopted. (The system has been being mirrored in the background of the current system in order to assess how valid the points system is, it seems that the process has been validated and will be introduced next season)

A significant reduction in the amount of wind tunnel testing and CFD work has been imposed to help reduce costs and potentially allow two teams to share one wind tunnel. (An interesting development as save any undisclosed caveats in the Concorde Agreement the restriction on Wind Tunnel testing has only really been limited to model size and wind speed whereas CFD has never been expressly defined in the Sporting Regulations framework.  The use of CFD has clearly become a powerful tool and the only restriction I was aware of was the gentleman's handshake of no more than 80 Teraflops to be used in the FOTA agreement)

Four two-day track tests will be allowed in season in place of the current eight one-day promotional days and the three-day young driver test. These will take place at tracks in Europe on the Tuesday and Wednesday after a race in order to ensure minimal additional resources are necessary.
Track testing will now also be permitted in January 2014 in order to allow earlier testing of the new power units.  (For a long time now I have talked about the use of post race testing as a tool to increase F1's productivity whilst maintaining a lower cost ratio.  The problem most teams face is the correlation between the virtual world (CFD), scaled testing in the Wind Tunnel and then implementation at the track.  These test days after each GP will allow teams to adapt a different strategic development plan resulting in more successful adaption of upgraded components.  The only problem I forsee is waste, teams currently design and process thousands of components in CFD and the Wind Tunnel before reducing it to a handful of parts to be tested on the car.  This process will of course change and those designs that were marginal before may very well be processed for trial on the car)

For safety reasons all team personnel working on a car in a race pit stop will be required to wear head protection. (Speaks for itself)
 
Each driver will be provided with one extra set of tyres for use only during the first 30 minutes of the first practice session on Friday, to encourage teams to take to the track at that time without having to worry about using valuable tyre wear. (This will of course increase the costs for Pirelli but enables the teams more test/setup time and of course the fans some action on track)

A number of new regulations have been confirmed to govern the new, far more complex power units. It is agreed that only five power units may be used by each driver for the whole season. Any use of an additional complete power unit will result in that driver having to start the race from the pit lane. Any changes of individual elements above the permitted five, such as turbocharger, MGU or Energy Store, will result in a 10 grid place penalty.  (The complexities and number of components in the new power units was always likely to cause an issue with regards to penalties so it's good to see a ruling of this nature)

No manufacturer will be allowed to homologate more than one power unit during the homologation period from 2014-2020. Changes to the homologated unit will continue to be permitted for installation, reliability or cost saving reasons. (No real change from the V8 era)

Drivers must now use a gearbox for six consecutive events, an increase from the current five. (Not really a surprise as the FIA force the teams to increase the longevity of components to reduce costs, it's worth noting though that 2014's Gearbox is brand new, with 8 forward gears rather than the current 7)

No car may use more than 100kg of fuel for the race, from the time the lights go out at the start of the race to the chequered flag. This will be monitored by the use of an FIA approved fuel flow meter.  (There is no point having a drastically more efficient power unit if you can then use more fuel in order to raise power and/or alter strategy)
 
The pit lane speed limit, which is currently set at 60km/h for the free practice sessions and 100km/h for the qualifying practice and race (60km/h for the whole event in Melbourne, Monaco and Singapore), has been amended so it is set at 80km/h for the whole event (except the three races mentioned which would stay at 60km/h for the whole event). This is for safety reasons, as most accidents happen during the race when the speed limit is higher; drivers also have very little chance to practice stopping from 100km/h until the race.

The following summarises the changes made to the 2014 Technical Regulations:

Measures have been put in place to ensure that the cars do not incorporate a step in the chassis behind the nose. These changes will also ensure that a genuine low nose, introduced for safety reasons, is always used. (Following on from the 'Step Noses' of 2012 the FIA were not eager for a repeat and although aesthetics really have no place in a racing series they were seen to be a commercial problem.)

The minimum weight limit has been raised by 5kg, as the power unit is now likely to weigh more than originally expected. The weight distribution has also been changed accordingly.

Electronic control of the rear brake circuit is permitted in order to ensure consistent braking whilst energy is being recovered.

In order to ensure that side impact structures are more useful in an oblique impact and more consistent, they will become standard items made to a strictly laid out manufacturing process and fitted to the cars identically. The impact tests currently carried out will be replaced by static load push-off tests and squeeze tests. This will also help reduce costs as no team will need to develop their own structures.  (Another example of how the FIA is improving safety whilst reducing cost, certain areas of the car being "spec'd" is an inevitability in order to control these 2 elements)

In order to ensure that the cockpit rims either side of the driver’s head are stronger, the amount of deflection during the static load tests has been reduced from 20mm to 5mm.
Read more
28 Jun 2013
no image

As we all know Mark Webber's Formula One career will come to it's conclusion at the end of the season.  The tenacious Aussie has laid bare his plans to compete with Porsche in the LMP1 category next season marking the German manufacturer return to the top flight of WEC.   Webber's F1 career spanned 12 years with stints at Minardi, Jaguar Racing, Williams and then back to the old Jaguar fold as the team changed to Red Bull Racing.  With 9 race wins under his belt the 36 year old has decided it's time to move onto other things and who can blame him when the media have done nothing but elevate tensions between him and Sebastian.

From the outside looking in, the Red Bull team always seem to favour their younger protege but Mark's relationship with Christian Horner has always kept his anguish from spilling over.  Their connection through Arden Motorsport allowed the pair to remain grounded where others may have lost their head.

So with Mark Webber's future now clear, this leaves a gaping hole at Infiniti Red Bull Racing for 2014 and the candidates list doesn't make the decision any easier.
Read more
27 Jun 2013
25 Jun 2013
no image

The recent FIA International Tribunal has been the centre of many debates already but with the dust settling I thought I'd weigh in a little on the subject.

The test conducted by Pirelli and Mercedes was indeed illegal in accordance with the Formula One / FIA's Sporting Regulations with in-season testing outlawed.

The use of Mercedes W04 in conjunction with Pirelli constitutes in season testing but both parties argued they had authorization test with the FIA.

The FIA clarified its position, stating that certain criteria must be met in order for the test to occur. This criteria centered around the unanimous support of the teams in using a current car. The FIA were not satisfied this caveat was fulfilled by Pirelli and so the test was essentially ran without their consent.

The largest question is, how much did Mercedes learn from the test? However I think in order to answer this we must also consider some other factors...

The tyres used in Barcelona at the test in question were prototypes used to assess their initial thoughts for 2014. Pirelli had around 12 different tyres to test over a 1000km distance. Undoubtedly an array of constructions and compounds were reviewed giving Pirelli data to move forward with their designs for 2014.

Why did Pirelli feel the need to test with a representative car (2012/2013)? Well the problem for Pirelli is their current test car is a Renault R31 from 2010, the Italian tyre manufacturer claim that their car is now impractical for testing tyres as it doesn't represent the current level of downforce seen by the teams. Furthermore their driver lineup doesn't drive the cars on a consistent basis and will inevitably spend a proportion of their time in the car acclimatizing.

Pirelli have also completed a tyre test with Ferrari and Felipe Massa earlier this season utilizing their 2011 challenger the F150. As the F150 isn't seen as representative the test doesn't come under the scrutiny of the FIA / Sporting Regulations but it further enforces Pirelli's need to test their product. The test was rumored to have been conducted in order to assess a new tyre choice for 2013 with Pirelli unhappy with both the teams criticism of their product this season and concerns over the safety of the tyres with delaminations seen in the early races.  Following on from an exchange with Paul Hembrey of Pirelli though he tells me that although other things were tested their intent was to create a procedure for evaluating flat spotting on the 2014 tyres (under braking).

The changes afoot in 2014 are monumental with challenges being faced in terms of both engines and aerodynamics. I've looked at both these topics in more detail already:

Aero - http://somersf1.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/2014-bodywork-regulation-changes.html?m=1

Power Units -http://somersf1.blogspot.com/2013/01/2014s-power-units-16-v6-turbos-with-ers.html

In short aerodynamically the cars will be robbed of the Beam Wing at the rear of the car which aids in the overall airflow structure at the rear of the car, reducing the effectiveness of the Rear Wing and Diffuser.  The narrowing of the Front Wing raises new challenges for the designers in the way they structure the airflow around the front tyres and onwards along the rest of the car.

The new Power Units power curve will be substantially steeper with roughly the same power available but with a much smaller rev band (18,000rpm reduced to 15,000rpm but with the fuel flow restriction above 10,500rpm it's more likely we'll see the units only rev just beyond that)

This puts an even larger importance on the design characteristics of 2014's tyre, especially with pressure still on the tyre manufacturer to create a situation where teams stop around 3 times.

So Pirelli are damned if they do and damned if they don't but that's nothing new. As Paul Hembery has stated before Pirelli are more than happy to create 'Concrete Tyres' (tyres that can last a whole race) but that's not their brief from the FIA.

So what happened at the last rule change? Well let's look back to 2009...

Bridgestone had been supplying grooved tyres to F1 for a number years, with the FIA introducing new rules in order to encourage more overtaking they also asked Bridgestone to bring back Slick tyres. This would add an element of mechanical grip that was lost with the grooved tyres giving the driver more feel in the corners.

The idea worked to some extent but it needed tweaking. With Bridgestone questioning their involvement / relevance in F1 with slick tyres they departed the sport at the end of 2010.

Pirelli's entrance into the sport bought with it an air of transparency, in the Bridgstone era compound choices were shielded from public view and tyres simply denoted as Prime and Option (Hard and Soft).

This regime was a carry over from the pre 2009 grooved tyre rules and something Pirelli shook up when they entered in 2011. Offering up 4 slick tyre compounds for that season (Hard,Medium,Soft and Super Soft) the tyre manufacturer would select 2 of them for each race to feature as the Prime and Option tyres.

This approach although commendable in my opinion for its transparency has sometimes seen Pirelli come in for flack that Bridgestone perhaps shielded itself from by not showing its entire hand.

Tyres have been a matter of complaint throughout Pirellis tenure in F1 with teams taking umbridge to the designs used by the Italian manufacturer.

In 2012 we saw an incredible start to the season with 7 winners from 7 races as teams grappled to understand the way in which the tyres came upto and stayed in their operating window. Stiff sidewalls meant heating the tyres through conventional methods were restrictive, meanwhile the stiff sidewall lead to the shoulders wearing quicker than the rest of the tread platform with the central section often showing very little signs of wear when taken off the car.

For 2013 Pirelli looked to address this scenario bringing thermal degradation to the fore. However the  teams have this season struggled to adapt aerodynamically as the tyres more flexible Sidwall not only effect the mechanical grip but organically effect the aerodynamic platform as the car brakes, accelerates and corners. I've explained this in more detail here:

http://somersf1.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/pirelli-are-they-really-to-blame.html?m=1

The reason I raise the point once more though is that F1 teams forever look for the opportunity to discredit or take an advantage from their opponents. Earlier in the season some teams fired a shot across the bow of Lotus claiming that the use of their R31 by Pirelli had therefore inherently favoured the Enstone based team gifting them with a car that was much easier on its tyres.

All of this and some of the information to come out of the recent International Tribunal probably raises more questions than answers...

How can we expect a tyre manufacturer to influence the amount of pitstops in a race when they don't have access to a relevant car?

Should the FIA relax their brief on Pirelli for 2014? with the huge challenges already faced by the teams making the design more complex by virtue of tyre dynamics could be disastrous.

Do the FIA need to re-assess their approach to two stage tyre usage and/or the qualifying format?

Has Formula One got to a point where restricted in-season testing has become acceptable?

The resounding question however is how much did Mercedes learn from their time in Barcelona? I understand them using their race drivers as with only 1000km and a packed programme it's better that a driver comfortable in their surroundings is better equipped than a test driver like Sam Bird or Brendon Hartley who in this era of F1 spend time in the Simulator but very little in the car.

I'm certainly not convinced that the time spent in Barcelona by Mercedes has gone any way toward rectifying their tyre degradation issues. The team haven't done so in the 2 and a bit years since Pirelli have been in the sport and so one extra test won't be that secret elixir they've been missing.

Of course many looked at Monaco as a sign the team had turned a corner but If we look back to 2012 bar his grid penalty, Schumacher would have been on pole. Therefore  it should have been no shock that the 2 Mercedes drivers started from 1-2 on the grid in the Principality.

I won't go as far to say that Mercedes learnt nothing and undoubtedly time in the car for the race drivers aids in their approach. Solving their 2013 degradation issues when testing prototype tyres of unknown construction and compounds would be difficult but not entirely improbable too, so the jury is still out...

The team state their programme was controlled by Pirelli and no updates were tested ahead of Monaco which in reality without test equipment on the car (pitot tubes, flo-viz etc) it would be difficult to correlate any worthwhile data.

The biggest issue I have with the punishment levied on Mercedes at the International Tribunal though is disadvantage the other race drivers now face. Both Hamilton and Rosberg drove during those few days of testing in Barcelona giving them time in the car that the other race drivers simply cannot get this season.

By banning Mercedes from the Young Driver Test their race drivers have gained an advantage with the other teams only able to run their support drivers.
Of course if Mercedes didn't run upgrades to the W04 during the test then the teams running at the YDT are able to gain an aerodynamic advantage using their drivers to assess any future packages.

I mean no disrespect in this next comment but a race driver has a perspective that the support drivers cannot offer, they don't usually drive the car in a competitive manner and so are less accomplished to give opinions on upgrades. Of course the driver can be given the previous specification car as a reference to work from but it's never quite the same.

I'd argue that should any of the teams decide to take their race drivers to the Young Drivers Test it should be overlooked by the FIA for the sake of parity.

I think the lesson that should be taken away from the whole debacle is that the stranglehold on track testing needs to be reviewed. The cost reductions that were intended by the introduction of the in-season testing haven't really come to fruition. Formula One teams will always find other areas in which to spend cash and gain an advantage over their rivals. It can come from various avenues: CFD, Wind Tunnel, test equipment /rigs or even just streamlining their processes but one things for certain those that spend money will nearly always see a return for their investment.

The re-introduction of in-season testing in 2012 (Mugello) offered no real benefit to the likes of Red Bull & Lotus teams that have seemingly fully embraced the testing restricted regulations. Ferrari however are an advocate for a return to in-season testing and reveled in the opportunity to test at Mugello.

The largest problem with the Mugello test of 2012 was one of cost. Many teams saw it as an expense they didn't need as they for the last few years had found solace in the restrictions.

The FIA, teams and FOM need to strike a balance that reintroduces in-season testing without the costs spiraling beyond the control of some of the smaller teams. The likes of Caterham and Marussia may even make strides with a return to track testing as it aids in correlating the information seen in CFD, Wind Tunnel and test rigs...

As we stand on the precipice of another huge rule change, decisions made now could shape the sport for years to come, I only hope that the testing rules are adapted to better suit the economic and technological time frame we currently sit within.

The problem as always is that everyone is in it for theirselves and a resolution that fits the sport as a whole can never be found.

Egos aside with a Concorde Agreement still not in place the sport and it's rules could be rejuvenated if all sides can look at the bigger picture. Come on F1 wake up and make the Sport even better for the fans!
Read more
23 Jun 2013
Renault's 2014 Energy-F1 Power Unit is unveiled

Renault were the first of the Engine manufacturer's to blink, unveiling their new power unit for 2014 onwards at the Paris Air Show.


I have already covered the changes afoot for 2014 in terms of the power plants here: http://somersf1.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/2014s-power-units-16-v6-turbos-with-ers.html
but in summary the new power units are F1's full blown move into a green-centric racing series.  KERS allowed the teams to tip toe into the electrification of the sport but these new power units will see the stakes raised.  Whilst KERS was responsible for an 80bhp increase over 6.67 seconds we will see ERS raising the cars output by a maximum of 160bhp for 33.33 seconds.  This will put a new onus on the strategy of deploying the additional energy with the main engine responsible for around 600-650bhp.  Furthermore with the cars only being fueled with 100KG's of fuel in comparison to roughly 150KG's now another strategy war will be managed by the team as they manage fuel usage.

The Engine isn't a screamer like it's V8 counterpart with rev limits reduced from 18,000rpm to a maximum of 15,000rpm.  However with a fuel flow limit above 10,500rpm it's likely we will only see these engines rev out to around 12,000rpm shifting the powerband down the scale.

Thermal efficiency will be a key factor with the new engines with new challenges faced by the teams in cooling not only the Engine but Turbo and ERS.  Batteries are of course susceptible to heat soak and so with ERS having to carry much more load than their current counterparts cooling will need to be top of the designers thoughts.

The above image is the first real idea of what we can expect to see from the 2014 Powerplants with a mock up in the foreground of the Energy Store (Battery Pack).  Just like the KERS batteries currently used these will be placed under the driver.  For the first time we can also see that Renault have included a Intercooler within their release images signalling the need to cool the airflow by external methods.

As we can see in this picture (with the airbox and intercooler pipework etc removed) Renault are hinting at controlling exhaust temperatures by 'bagging' them.  In this case they have placed a Carbon Fibre shroud over the pipework.

I must however point out that although Renault have shown their powerplant complete in these images, ancillary items are still down the team to design and manufacturer should they so wish.  Performance can and will be extracted from the fabrication of airboxes, exhausts, intercoolers, hoses etc that the teams will design and either manufacturer in house or outsource to their respective specialists.

Ever since Renault released their first rough image of their 2014 power plant the French manufacturer have shown it with one exhaust outlet but be aware the rules do permit two and so some teams may find an advantage there.  (Exhaust outlets are restricted within the 2014 Technical Regulations to exit centrally out of the rear of the car to limit their ability to aid in any aerodynamic effects)

As a teaser the French manufacturer has also released a sound bite to give us an idea of the much anticipated audio level of these new engines which can be found here: http://www.renaultsport.com/Come-on-feel-the-noise,2630.html?lang=fr

Crank it upto 11 and you will be delighted by the audio which portrays a raspy note as the Turbo makes it's mark on the senses.  Please don't expect this to be the final sound though as each teams design will have an impact on the harmonics and Renault themselves won't be looking to give away too much to their rivals either.

You'll also note the speed at which the engine seemingly accelerates through the gears (of which there will be 8 forward gears in 2014) showing that power delivery will be a totally different ball game for 2014.

I leave you with a few more pictures courtesy of RenaultSportF1





Enhanced by Zemanta
Read more
22 Jun 2013
no image

Whilst at the Red Bull Racing #OPENHOUSE Mark Webber & Christian Horner were kind enough to sign a cap for me to give away as a prize for 1 lucky reader.  All you need to do to enter is Follow me on Twitter and Retweet the following: (Entries close when the lights go out at Silverstone)


Read more
19 Jun 2013
Unfounded / wild accusations of Red Bull using Traction Control in Montreal

Well it's kept twitter awash with the usual anti Red Bull sentiments over the last day or so with Autosprint running a story that Red Bull may be using a form of Traction Control, pointing the finger at their revived pace during the Montreal weekend.  It's a story that developed initially over on F1Technical's forum with a picture of Mark Webber's car laying rubber on the circuit after his collision with Van der Garde at the chicane.


The image shows breaks in the rubber lines as Webber's car takes off down the straight whereas we tend to find when these lines appear on the circuit elsewhere they don't have the breaks.

Some footage of the incident has of course arrived via YouTube and I'm sure will be taken down in due course but for the moment here it is below:


It's a none story for me but I felt compelled to write a few words about it whilst the buzz surrounded the matter as confusion arises throughout the fans.  Traction Control is, as we know banned in Formula One and any attempt to try and use it would be easy to see due to the use of the SECU.  As an explanation for the tread marks I think we have to consider the following:

  • Mark is not only looking to lap Giedo but also has Fernando in close proximity and so will be prepared for his advances should an error creep in
  • During the incident with Giedo, Mark has his right hand side of the car on the grass
  • The angle of approach means he had to slow considerably and exited along the straight completely off the standard racing line (Usually the drivers allow the car to drift out left to carry more exit speed)
  • The slow speed he exited and likely buried the throttle and KERS at the same time would be enough to cause some drivetrain oscillation.
  • On top of this people are forgetting the vertical sidewall deformation this years tyres have which combined with the above would likely cause some wheel hop and the stagnated rubber pattern.
I have looked through the available onboard footage from Montreal and the incident isn't included, so I cannot establish whether Mark made changes on the corners exit to his diff or whether it was simply a case of too much right foot and KERS.  The fact of the matter remains that calling this a use of Traction Control is a reach by people trying to understand where Red Bull's pace came from in Montreal.  The team did take a plethora of upgrades to the race which I looked at here: http://www.pitpass.com/49282-Canadian-Grand-Prix-Technical-Analysis

Read more
11 Jun 2013
9 Jun 2013
7 Jun 2013

Total Pageviews