Jump to content


Photo

Car development and the testing ban


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 mountford

mountford
  • Member

  • 430 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 12:50

Hello,

I've got a couple of questions for you all:


1. Just how important has driver feedback become no there’s a ban on testing?
2. Is driver feedback overrated, as such?

I only ask as we have Fernando Alonso, who has the best real life and internet reputation as a car developer still scrapping in the midfield with Renault who is a team that know how to win. On the other end of that scale we have McLaren Mercedes who have gone from -2.5 seconds to a race winning KERS car in the space of 10 races.


What do you peeps think? XXX

Edited: All the time I took to prepare this thread and I didn't even spell development correctly. FFS.

Edited by mountford, 20 August 2009 - 12:55.


Advertisement

#2 bigginge

bigginge
  • Member

  • 558 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 12:58

Overrated - the teams get all the data they need from the cornucopia of sensors littered around the car. They just need someone that can drive the car on the limit.

Edited by bigginge, 20 August 2009 - 13:00.


#3 Demo.

Demo.
  • Member

  • 1,205 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 13:11

Overrated - the teams get all the data they need from the cornucopia of sensors littered around the car. They just need someone that can drive the car on the limit.


:down: :down: :down:
your comment deserves no more than that

#4 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,211 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 20 August 2009 - 13:15

:down: :down: :down:
your comment deserves no more than that


I suppose that's a much easier response than actually showing why it's wrong.

#5 Jay

Jay
  • Member

  • 957 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 13:16

Overrated - the teams get all the data they need from the cornucopia of sensors littered around the car. They just need someone that can drive the car on the limit.


lmao..

If you think a sensor (s) can substitute for the delicate feel of a car twitching and moving around the track...you are sadly mistaken.

#6 bigginge

bigginge
  • Member

  • 558 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 13:19

lmao..

If you think a sensor (s) can substitute for the delicate feel of a car twitching and moving around the track...you are sadly mistaken.


If you think a driver can tell the team more about the cars performance than the data they spend hundreds of thousands of pounds a year acquiring then you are sadly mistaken.

#7 engel

engel
  • Member

  • 5,037 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 20 August 2009 - 13:23

Driver is important in figuring out how to string a series of not perfect situations into the fastest corner possible ... a sensor will tell you there's over/under steer on entry/mid/exit driver needs to figure out which he can and should live with and how to modify his entry/apex/exit to get through the corner in the shortest amount of time. The difference is that before, with testing, teams did thousands of runs effectively trying every possible setup they could think of before arriving at the optimum. What made a "good" development driver then was somebody that could replicate the exact same line using the exact same amount of throttle and brakes lap after lap so that the team could better compare setups. Today it's more creative because you don't have enough time to do that so input counts for more.

#8 mountford

mountford
  • Member

  • 430 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 13:25

Calm down peeps.

It you want to agrue, go to the Webber Vs Vettel scoreboard

#9 bigginge

bigginge
  • Member

  • 558 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 13:27

If you think a sensor (s) can substitute for the delicate feel of a car twitching and moving around the track...you are sadly mistaken.


I've just thought of a really obvious example that demonstrates why this is wrong - Traction Control -an electronic substitute for the 'delicate feel of a car twitching and moving around the track'. If the driver isn't adept enough to apply the driving force of the engine to the road in a straight line more efficiently than can be done by analysing sensor data, why do you propose (s)he would be better at applying the steering? And given the aforementioned, do you think the behaviour of the car would be better expressed for the purpose of development by the quantitive data, or the qualitative assessment of a driver? In reality there is obviously usefulness for the drivers’ feedback – the car and driver react as a single system – but this is not the basis for development, it’s the basis for setup.

Edited by bigginge, 20 August 2009 - 13:34.


#10 Henrytheeigth

Henrytheeigth
  • Member

  • 4,655 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 13:28

If you think a driver can tell the team more about the cars performance than the data they spend hundreds of thousands of pounds a year acquiring then you are sadly mistaken.


That's only spent so Rod can tell Felipe when to brake at Turkey lol

#11 bigginge

bigginge
  • Member

  • 558 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 13:29

Driver is important in figuring out how to string a series of not perfect situations into the fastest corner possible ... a sensor will tell you there's over/under steer on entry/mid/exit driver needs to figure out which he can and should live with and how to modify his entry/apex/exit to get through the corner in the shortest amount of time. The difference is that before, with testing, teams did thousands of runs effectively trying every possible setup they could think of before arriving at the optimum. What made a "good" development driver then was somebody that could replicate the exact same line using the exact same amount of throttle and brakes lap after lap so that the team could better compare setups. Today it's more creative because you don't have enough time to do that so input counts for more.


That would be the difference between 'developing' the car, and operating the car.

#12 bigginge

bigginge
  • Member

  • 558 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 13:30

That's only spent so Rod can tell Felipe when to brake at Turkey lol


:up: :lol:

#13 engel

engel
  • Member

  • 5,037 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 20 August 2009 - 13:31

That would be the difference between 'developing' the car, and operating the car.



clearly you 're new ... you do know that setups are done on a Friday now right? with limited running? Thanks for the tough know it all newbie attitude but since you can't back it up with actual understanding of what you 're talking about perhaps you should tone it down?

#14 PNSD

PNSD
  • Member

  • 3,276 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 20 August 2009 - 13:36

99% of setup is done at the factory. It's really only small changes on Friday and possibly Saturday.

The driver can try his or her best to explain what they are feeling within the car, but its using the data and engineers interpretation of that data and the drivers thoughts which help develop it at a track to find the optimum setup for that driver.

As for general car development the driver is a nobody. That's upto the performance engineers. Most of the time gained usually comes from trying various things back at the factory on the shaker-rig I believe. It does help to have a driver who can very accuratly give his thoughts on the cars handling at different parts of the circuit though.

#15 DaveW

DaveW
  • Member

  • 393 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 13:37

1. Just how important has driver feedback become no there’s a ban on testing?
2. Is driver feedback overrated, as such?


What experience I have suggests that a driver is very good at identifying that a problem exists, but not good at identifying the cause. Worse, without aids, a driver won't normally know whether a change has improved lap time, or otherwise. Various reasons, which include:

a) at the limit, a driver is primarily concerned with managing the vehicle around a circuit, so his mind is ahead of the vehicle, and

b) lap times are affected most by corner exit speeds, for which a driver has few cues.

Measurements provide objective information that often answer the what & where but only too rarely the why, because that often lies submerged in the plethora of compromises that determine the performance of a race vehicle (in the hands of a particular driver).

Hence driver feedback is extremely important, but should, together with his suggestions, probably be interpreted with some care. Further, it is often worthwhile reviewing changes made at a track in a less frantic atmosphere to avoid being pushed into a set-up "corner".


#16 engel

engel
  • Member

  • 5,037 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 20 August 2009 - 13:42

99% of setup is done at the factory. It's really only small changes on Friday and possibly Saturday.

The driver can try his or her best to explain what they are feeling within the car, but its using the data and engineers interpretation of that data and the drivers thoughts which help develop it at a track to find the optimum setup for that driver.

As for general car development the driver is a nobody. That's upto the performance engineers. Most of the time gained usually comes from trying various things back at the factory on the shaker-rig I believe. It does help to have a driver who can very accuratly give his thoughts on the cars handling at different parts of the circuit though.



shaker-ring gives little useable data outside of damper settings, what you 're missing is the big ol compromises needed by the 2 tyre rules, track conditions (for eg Valencia has a huge setup window because the track at least last year changed a great deal during the 3 days) etc.

#17 zoombie

zoombie
  • Member

  • 432 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 13:43

I agree with bigginge - driver feedback is important but I think its overrated. Every driver on the grid have the feel for the car, they tell the engineer that the car under/oversteer etc...the engineer then try to change the setup to have a more balance car. This is done on a circuit to circuit bases. The development work is being done by the large team of engineers back at the factory. Of course, the fans will tend to disagree with this. Prior to the ban on testing, teams have a separate test team with race drivers doing minimal testing compares to the testing drivers.
I believe there was a lot of talk of how Kimi & Lewis not being development drivers, look where Ferrari and Mclaren are at now.
Its the engineers people, look where Adrian Newey & Ross Brawn has taken their respective team to.

#18 bigginge

bigginge
  • Member

  • 558 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 13:45

clearly you 're new ... you do know that setups are done on a Friday now right? with limited running? Thanks for the tough know it all newbie attitude but since you can't back it up with actual understanding of what you 're talking about perhaps you should tone it down?


I'm quite familiar with how F1 operates thank you very much.

#19 TinyJim

TinyJim
  • Member

  • 184 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 13:51

In terms of development driver feedback is increasingly less important because of the aero development. It either works or it don't. Numerous drivers in the past who have been considered average at best have found themselves in stunningly quick cars. That through driver feedback or smart thinking in the factory.

All a driver can do is hit good fast and consistent laps like Alonso or Schumacher. That's how you get could data.

Edited by TinyJim, 20 August 2009 - 13:51.


Advertisement

#20 mountford

mountford
  • Member

  • 430 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 13:55

I believe there was a lot of talk of how Kimi & Lewis not being development drivers, look where Ferrari and Mclaren are at now.
Its the engineers people, look where Adrian Newey & Ross Brawn has taken their respective team to.


I was thinking this tbh

I'm sure I read that the upturn in Renault's performance in 2008 was a new front wing, not driver development as such. :well:


#21 bigginge

bigginge
  • Member

  • 558 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 13:57

shaker-ring gives little useable data outside of damper settings, what you 're missing is the big ol compromises needed by the 2 tyre rules, track conditions (for eg Valencia has a huge setup window because the track at least last year changed a great deal during the 3 days) etc.


You've clearly not used an F1 DK&C rig, as they are extensively used for analysing and optimising car performance and in conjunction with a comprehensive tyre model and aero map can provide fairly* accurate lap time simulations.

*subject to the garbage in=garbage out caveat

#22 zoombie

zoombie
  • Member

  • 432 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 14:01

I was thinking this tbh

I'm sure I read that the upturn in Renault's performance in 2008 was a new front wing, not driver development as such. :well:

Don't let anyone fools you with that talk, Alonso brought 6/10 to Mclaren 07, he brought it back to Renault in 08 and he will bring that to Ferrari whenever he joins them ;)

Edited by zoombie, 20 August 2009 - 14:06.


#23 bigginge

bigginge
  • Member

  • 558 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 14:07

Don't let anyone fools you with that talk, Alonso brought 6/10 to Mclaren 07, he brought it back to Renault in 08 and he will bring that to Ferrari whenever he joins them ;)


:clap:

#24 DaveW

DaveW
  • Member

  • 393 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 14:10

You've clearly not used an F1 DK&C rig, as they are extensively used for analysing and optimising car performance and in conjunction with a comprehensive tyre model and aero map can provide fairly* accurate lap time simulations.

*subject to the garbage in=garbage out caveat


Apologies, bigginge, I have to react to that post.

I think your caveat is rather important, bearing in mind that, by implication, your rig test has simulated the four largest unknowns: tyres, aero amp, road inputs & what a driver will do with it all.

Edited by DaveW, 20 August 2009 - 14:10.


#25 bigginge

bigginge
  • Member

  • 558 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 14:17

Apologies, bigginge, I have to react to that post.

I think your caveat is rather important, bearing in mind that, by implication, your rig test has simulated the four largest unknowns: tyres, aero amp, road inputs & what a driver will do with it all.


No apologies required, you have a valid point. I was just trying to demonstrate that there is more useful data to be had than 'damper settings' - and lap time simulation is one of the most relatable performance criteria to the general F1 enthusiast.

#26 DaveW

DaveW
  • Member

  • 393 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 14:24

No apologies required, you have a valid point. I was just trying to demonstrate that there is more useful data to be had than 'damper settings'...


Now that is certainly true.


#27 mountford

mountford
  • Member

  • 430 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 14:24

Don't let anyone fools you with that talk, Alonso brought 6/10 to Mclaren 07, he brought it back to Renault in 08 and he will bring that to Ferrari whenever he joins them ;)


:lol:


#28 blackonyx4

blackonyx4
  • Member

  • 1,284 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 20 August 2009 - 14:28

shaker-ring gives little useable data outside of damper settings, what you 're missing is the big ol compromises needed by the 2 tyre rules, track conditions (for eg Valencia has a huge setup window because the track at least last year changed a great deal during the 3 days) etc.



As for Valencia setup, wasnt that Massa last year who said that they got perfect setup done at the factory for that track. I am not sure, but I think they didnt change anything for the race...