Jump to content


Photo

Williams 2012 - FW34 Renault


  • Please log in to reply
3953 replies to this topic

#501 MaxisOne

MaxisOne
  • Member

  • 1,197 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 08 January 2012 - 23:00

Large sponsorship flattered the teams engineering skills. Williams proble was they persisted with poor design staff for too long. BMW tried to tell them that their chassis tech was not up to spec before they left.
Sam Michael was the prime culprit he had surreptiously climbed the gresy pole without any design ability. Last years car was conceptually flawed and if you can believe it OVERWEIGHT as Williams composite technology had fallen so far behind the top teams.
The reality is now Williams need two pay drivers bringing > $10 million each to stabilise the team. There's just no guarantee that any Qatar deal will come to fruition and they need a fall back position.


Can i get some sources to validate the overweight assertion please.

Just curious

Thanks in advance.

Advertisement

#502 Petroltorque

Petroltorque
  • Member

  • 1,627 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 09 January 2012 - 06:31

Can i get some sources to validate the overweight assertion please.

Just curious

Thanks in advance.

Scarbs F1 blog.

#503 Little Leaf

Little Leaf
  • Member

  • 1,072 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 09 January 2012 - 13:08

Well there isn't long left now untill the first test, little over a month isn't it?

As I see it there are now really just 3 candidates in with a chance of this seat, all (if rumoours are to be believed) bringing with them about USD5M in sponsorship.

Rubens
Sutil
Senna

I hope that deals can be tied up with QTel and QNB, but I will believe them when I see them. Having to depend on drivers for the sponsorship money is not a good position to be in.

#504 One

One
  • Member

  • 6,527 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 09 January 2012 - 13:33

Scarbs F1 blog.


Just how good is Scarbs? As good as Willis, Newey or Head? Or more like expert arm chair crit?

#505 dau

dau
  • Member

  • 4,569 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 09 January 2012 - 13:49

Scarbs F1 blog.

http://www.f1technic...=293498#p293498

#506 Disgrace

Disgrace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 9,677 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 09 January 2012 - 16:55

Just how good is Scarbs? As good as Willis, Newey or Head? Or more like expert arm chair crit?


Technical journalist if you like.

#507 MadYarpen

MadYarpen
  • Member

  • 3,875 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 09 January 2012 - 16:58

he has worked for some F1 team, hasn't he?

#508 hunnylander

hunnylander
  • Member

  • 4,448 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 09 January 2012 - 17:07

The monocoque is overweight (relatively to the competition) is not the same as the car is overweight. When you're citing something to someone be more precise not to distort the information, otherwise you'll cite fiction to someone and make him looks stupid, when it was you who were incorrect.

Edited by hunnylander, 09 January 2012 - 17:08.


#509 Little Leaf

Little Leaf
  • Member

  • 1,072 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 10 January 2012 - 06:49

The monocoque is overweight (relatively to the competition) is not the same as the car is overweight. When you're citing something to someone be more precise not to distort the information, otherwise you'll cite fiction to someone and make him looks stupid, when it was you who were incorrect.


Exactly, it's not the same thing.

Although any part that is heavier than optimum will leave less room for ballast and optimisation of CoG

#510 DanardiF1

DanardiF1
  • Member

  • 6,524 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 10 January 2012 - 06:51

Dear Williams,

I would like to see the team running two drivers at the Jerez test please. You do have a decent choice of drivers potentially available, but please just choose one already.

Yours Truly,

DanardiF1

Ps. go for Rubens, he's even brought some money along, and if that's not motivation to race and race hard I don't know what is.

#511 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,233 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 10 January 2012 - 17:30

The monocoque is overweight (relatively to the competition) is not the same as the car is overweight. When you're citing something to someone be more precise not to distort the information, otherwise you'll cite fiction to someone and make him looks stupid, when it was you who were incorrect.



Exactly, it's not the same thing.

Although any part that is heavier than optimum will leave less room for ballast and optimisation of CoG


Spot on. This was the same for Ferrari in 2009, but many are still stating the car was overweight and that KR had to carry the extra weight of the batteries.

Edited by Clatter, 10 January 2012 - 17:30.


#512 MaxisOne

MaxisOne
  • Member

  • 1,197 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 10 January 2012 - 17:45

Scarbs F1 blog.


Thank you kind sir :up:

#513 BRG

BRG
  • Member

  • 11,489 posts
  • Joined: September 99

Posted 10 January 2012 - 19:38

Dear Williams,

I would like to see the team running two drivers at the Jerez test please. You do have a decent choice of drivers potentially available, but please just choose one already.

Yours Truly,

DanardiF1

Ps. go for Rubens, he's even brought some money along, and if that's not motivation to race and race hard I don't know what is.

Dear DanardiF1,

We will be deciding on our driver line up in good time, as and when it suits us. We will then announce it when it suits us.

with best wishes

Sir Francis Williams

#514 GSF1

GSF1
  • Member

  • 98 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 11 January 2012 - 03:03

From the horses mouth, a review on the FW33 from Sam Michael.

The team took a bold direction with the FW33 but it didn't work out.

"As soon as double diffusers were banned," Michael explains, "we looked and said, right, the fastest single diffuser car in '09 was the Red Bull RB5 and Adrian Newey designed it with a very low gearbox and driveshafts. We went a whole step lower and embarked on it early because we had to do a lot to make the driveshafts survive.

"Making the gearbox small was quite straightforward. People said we'd lose all the stiffness but it was no less stiff than a normal 'box.

"By dropping the gearbox height the airflow to the rear lower wing is better. When we got rid of the double diffuser and looked at the rear lower wing for 2011, it had increased downforce three-fold. It became clear you had to make it work. The whole concept was about that."

The team used Toyota's electric dyno in Cologne, and after some early test failures, had no problems, the only issue being a failure when Barrichello got stones in a driveshaft boot in Australia and the joint dried out. And, despite the extreme solution, Michael estimates that power loss was less than 0.5 bhp.

Having moved heaven and earth to get better flow to the lower rear wing, something spoiled it which Williams could do nothing about.

"The engine restricted us taking full advantage," Michael explained. "It's homologated and you cannot change it. That's why the cover was shrink-wrapped around it. It looked pretty ugly but you can't change that - that's as small as we could make it. The Renault is different in that the back of its trumpet tray funnels very heavily. It wasn't like that on the Cosworth."

In light of that, Michael concedes that "We probably spent too much energy for the company's resources making the gearbox work. Going from a high pushrod gearbox to a pullrod consumed a lot of the design office. It created quite a bit of conflict.

"It took a lot of energy away from areas like the exhaust. We didn't do a top job on the blown exhausts even though our 2010 blown diffuser worked pretty well. We took our eye off the ball with that. In terms of running the exhausts down where Red Bull were, we didn't think of that, so we spent most of the year catching up on blown diffusers."

Williams first tried a Red Bull type-system at the Chinese GP but burning was problematic and it was not until almost halfway through the year that progress was made.

The team did not have hot-blowing either and it's perhaps not surprising that Williams looked its best at Silverstone, when Maldonado qualified seventh. That was the race where everyone else's hot blowing was restricted and Williams debuted a new blown diffuser.

Michael says that the team's KERS was also quite heavy, over 30kgs, and that the harvesting and brake balance needed to be better. It was done to a tight budget with Cosworth control systems.

Some very interesting points, but not too many positives apart from a small gearbox, which they probably wish they lengthened to increase the single diffuser. But sounds like troubles and issues with most things, thank fully Renault next year can resolve alot of these issues.

#515 DanardiF1

DanardiF1
  • Member

  • 6,524 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 11 January 2012 - 04:03

Dear DanardiF1,

We will be deciding on our driver line up in good time, as and when it suits us. We will then announce it when it suits us.

with best wishes

Sir Francis Williams


Cheers Frank :p

I'm not that bothered about them choosing a driver right away, but they do need one eventually...

#516 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 23,334 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 11 January 2012 - 04:42

Nice points in the Sam Michael article there.. I think the sheer awfulness of the Cosworth lump is underrated when assessing teams who used it.

#517 Petroltorque

Petroltorque
  • Member

  • 1,627 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 11 January 2012 - 06:06

Nice points in the Sam Michael article there.. I think the sheer awfulness of the Cosworth lump is underrated when assessing teams who used it.

Its too simple to simply blame Cosworth. The problem was that the whole design concept was wrong. Interesting that Michael's present job has no design role which is a good indication of his abilities.

#518 DanardiF1

DanardiF1
  • Member

  • 6,524 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 11 January 2012 - 06:15

Its too simple to simply blame Cosworth. The problem was that the whole design concept was wrong. Interesting that Michael's present job has no design role which is a good indication of his abilities.


I think Michael's skills were stretched too thin as Technical Director, but he has good standalone ideas like the gearbox and other little bits. If he was assigned to a certain department, much like Aldo Costa, Geoff Willis and Bob Bell have been at Mercedes, I think he would be a valuable design asset. McLaren though are very strange in their design recruitment (all I ever hear is of guys moving to other teams!?!) so they weren't looking at that side of him when they approaching Sam.

#519 Petroltorque

Petroltorque
  • Member

  • 1,627 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 11 January 2012 - 06:31

I think Michael's skills were stretched too thin as Technical Director, but he has good standalone ideas like the gearbox and other little bits. If he was assigned to a certain department, much like Aldo Costa, Geoff Willis and Bob Bell have been at Mercedes, I think he would be a valuable design asset. McLaren though are very strange in their design recruitment (all I ever hear is of guys moving to other teams!?!) so they weren't looking at that side of him when they approaching Sam.

Michael is a race engineer. Basically he finds a setup for any given design and there's a big difference between working hard and working clever. The individuals you have cited are all primarily designers who are unlikely to be lead down dead end concepts as Michael was.

Advertisement

#520 One

One
  • Member

  • 6,527 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 11 January 2012 - 06:33

Its too simple to simply blame Cosworth. The problem was that the whole design concept was wrong. Interesting that Michael's present job has no design role which is a good indication of his abilities.

Michael is being very reflective in saying that it created quite a conflict. I think he knew it but did it. It is a lost gamble that could not regret. Making stream lined body shell from engine backwards was done often enough so could imagine a bit how they felt the pressure of going forward from where the team was placed then. After all at some point team got to make the over all performance better which was clear also to Michael as he knew the team would get three folds more down force IF it had worked. It could have beaten RB that must have been the excitement and driving force. Sam left so he kinda reborn I hope at Mclaren. Integration is the greatest property of extreme race cars. I still like him. Hope he goes step forward and get matured.

Edited by One, 11 January 2012 - 06:36.


#521 Disgrace

Disgrace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 9,677 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 11 January 2012 - 06:46

If the Cosworth was so bad, and I'm sure it wasn't up to par with it's rivals, then it puts the 2010 Williams, the FW32, in a fairly favourable light.

#522 Little Leaf

Little Leaf
  • Member

  • 1,072 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 11 January 2012 - 06:51

If the Cosworth was so bad, and I'm sure it wasn't up to par with it's rivals, then it puts the 2010 Williams, the FW32, in a fairly favourable light.


Considering where Williams were last year compared to other teams I think it is safe to say the FW32 was a better car than the FW33.

But the main problem with the Cosworth was the lack of engine mapping to exploit the blown diffuser. In 2011 they were obviously more advanced than in 2010, so the problem would have been more noticeable last year.

Whatever, with the Renault engine this year any difference to Red Bull will be down to the chassis and drivers.

#523 One

One
  • Member

  • 6,527 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 11 January 2012 - 08:45

Cold Blowing was something even Ross got surprised about. Merc were doing hot blowing.

#524 MustangSally

MustangSally
  • Member

  • 372 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 11 January 2012 - 09:58

If the Cosworth was so bad, and I'm sure it wasn't up to par with it's rivals, then it puts the 2010 Williams, the FW32, in a fairly favourable light.


The Cosworth turned out to be false economy. The first part of 2010 was spent on installation and Cosworth related problems such as degradation. Fuel economy was also poor and Williams suffered in the early part of races.

Last year Cosworth admitted it was a long way behind in electronics and mapping - not included in the price.

Even the big teams all struggled in their first learning year of KERS, if you remember 2009.

Sometimes you wonder if Williams shouldn't give it up and buy an off-the-shelf drivetrain and KERS like its main rivals, STR, Sauber and Force India . . . and perhaps soon to be Caterham.


#525 Little Leaf

Little Leaf
  • Member

  • 1,072 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 11 January 2012 - 10:12

Sometimes you wonder if Williams shouldn't give it up and buy an off-the-shelf drivetrain and KERS like its main rivals, STR, Sauber and Force India . . . and perhaps soon to be Caterham.


I hope they never do that, part of the charm of Williams is that they design/produce most of the stuff on their own.



#526 sofarapartguy

sofarapartguy
  • Member

  • 1,008 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 11 January 2012 - 10:19

I hope they never do that, part of the charm of Williams is that they design/produce most of the stuff on their own.

So you've been pretty "charmed" last year then, haven't you?

#527 KoezhVukotic

KoezhVukotic
  • Member

  • 235 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 11 January 2012 - 12:01

The point is they have their own hybrid power company so how would it look if they bought off the shelf from elsewhere?

#528 sofarapartguy

sofarapartguy
  • Member

  • 1,008 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 11 January 2012 - 12:09

The point is they have their own hybrid power company so how would it look if they bought off the shelf from elsewhere?


It would look stupid. It looked the same when Williams spectacularly failed to make their own innovative KERS work properly in 2010 after defending such a modern and hyper-expensive tool most of the other teams.

#529 Little Leaf

Little Leaf
  • Member

  • 1,072 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 11 January 2012 - 12:35

It would look stupid. It looked the same when Williams spectacularly failed to make their own innovative KERS work properly in 2010 after defending such a modern and hyper-expensive tool most of the other teams.


Isn't this the one that "works" in the Porsche hybrid?

Maybe it just isn't cut out for F1 use.

#530 sofarapartguy

sofarapartguy
  • Member

  • 1,008 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 11 January 2012 - 13:22

Isn't this the one that "works" in the Porsche hybrid?

Maybe it just isn't cut out for F1 use.


Who cares about road cars? BMW was really keen on KERS development to use it on road cars in the future, but this system ended their days in F1 as they have failed massively in 09.

Williams has lost 2 years already and i fail to understand what the team is focused on right now. They have to use every possibility, even stupid one, to get back to the midfield and fight for some nice positions as 2012 really is crucial.

#531 KoezhVukotic

KoezhVukotic
  • Member

  • 235 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 11 January 2012 - 13:38

They didn't use their 09 KERS, which was supposed to be quite good, because it was harder to package with larger tanks as it can't be broken into smaller batteries. And they didn't use KERS in 10 because it was agreed that no one would

#532 One

One
  • Member

  • 6,527 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 11 January 2012 - 13:40

At this end I start to think that Anyteam can buy chassis from the current WDC team, off the shelf drawings and all. In this way the teams equality at least at the starting point of the season is well guaranteed. :smoking:

#533 Little Leaf

Little Leaf
  • Member

  • 1,072 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 11 January 2012 - 13:47

Who cares about road cars? BMW was really keen on KERS development to use it on road cars in the future, but this system ended their days in F1 as they have failed massively in 09.

Williams has lost 2 years already and i fail to understand what the team is focused on right now. They have to use every possibility, even stupid one, to get back to the midfield and fight for some nice positions as 2012 really is crucial.


I was just pointing out that the system does "work", just that it isn't ideal for F1 due to packaging constraints.

They didn't use KERS in 2010 as it was agreed by all the teams not to use it.

Now they have their own battery system, which whilst it may be overweight if rumours are true, also works.

#534 MustangSally

MustangSally
  • Member

  • 372 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 11 January 2012 - 14:43

I was just pointing out that the system does "work", just that it isn't ideal for F1 due to packaging constraints.

They didn't use KERS in 2010 as it was agreed by all the teams not to use it.

Now they have their own battery system, which whilst it may be overweight if rumours are true, also works.


Yes, but Williams were not up to speed on the instability under braking and programming for starts and so on, again at a disadvantage working with Cosworth.

Williams Hybrid Systems, as far as I understand, is flywheel technology KERS and unsuitable for F1. Its applications are quite different too, like conveyor belts and buses while stationary.

Force India's MD said in an interview that he never gives things like gearboxes a second thought - they just concentrate on the go-faster stuff. There must be something to be said for that, with a small budget?

#535 SpeedRacer`

SpeedRacer`
  • Member

  • 756 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 11 January 2012 - 16:23

Who cares about road cars? BMW was really keen on KERS development to use it on road cars in the future, but this system ended their days in F1 as they have failed massively in 09.

Williams has lost 2 years already and i fail to understand what the team is focused on right now. They have to use every possibility, even stupid one, to get back to the midfield and fight for some nice positions as 2012 really is crucial.

Williams Hybrid cares about road cars. They can make money from that on the side that can be ploughed back into the racing team.

And besides, their 09 and 10 cars were pretty good so it didn't really effect them.

It sounds like for the 11 car they didn't take into account the differences between the build and packaging differences between Renault and Cosworth - not really Cosworth's fault.

#536 wewantourdarbyback

wewantourdarbyback
  • Member

  • 6,358 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 11 January 2012 - 22:59

Williams has lost 2 years already and i fail to understand what the team is focused on right now.


The FW34 I imagine,

#537 GSF1

GSF1
  • Member

  • 98 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 11 January 2012 - 23:14

I think your right Sam Michael had too much to do, too much pressure and could not focus on all aspects on the car, it seems they have more balance now with Coughlan, Sumerville, and Gillan. Seems Coughlan and Somerville, will be like Newey and Head were back in the 90's. one focusing on aero and one focusing on packaging the car. with Gillan bringing it all together and running the show. Seems a lot better set up than leaving it all up to Sam.

Good to see they they have finally announced something positive, collabration with Michael Johnson, he might save hundredths or thousands of a second on a pit stop. Looking at the little things, so must be positive of a more competitive car next year. Just hope they find 1 - 2 seconds a lap for the car, think that will beat the competition not the hundredths of a second per pit stop.

And a question why did Williams ever agree to using battery KERS, and not stick with there development of the flywheel, I know they were having some problems with the development, but it seemed a much better concept in regards to size, weight and efficiency, instead they brought Toyota's technology on battery KERS and went down that route. The confusion that has been Williams for the past few years. Hopefully we are finally over the shuffling of changing engines every two years, and get some mechanical stability within the team.


#538 Petroltorque

Petroltorque
  • Member

  • 1,627 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 12 January 2012 - 06:25

I think your right Sam Michael had too much to do, too much pressure and could not focus on all aspects on the car, it seems they have more balance now with Coughlan, Sumerville, and Gillan. Seems Coughlan and Somerville, will be like Newey and Head were back in the 90's. one focusing on aero and one focusing on packaging the car. with Gillan bringing it all together and running the show. Seems a lot better set up than leaving it all up to Sam.

Good to see they they have finally announced something positive, collabration with Michael Johnson, he might save hundredths or thousands of a second on a pit stop. Looking at the little things, so must be positive of a more competitive car next year. Just hope they find 1 - 2 seconds a lap for the car, think that will beat the competition not the hundredths of a second per pit stop.

And a question why did Williams ever agree to using battery KERS, and not stick with there development of the flywheel, I know they were having some problems with the development, but it seemed a much better concept in regards to size, weight and efficiency, instead they brought Toyota's technology on battery KERS and went down that route. The confusion that has been Williams for the past few years. Hopefully we are finally over the shuffling of changing engines every two years, and get some mechanical stability within the team.

The Damning indictment on Micheal was that the team started work on the FW33 early in 2010, yet it was still an abject failure. That illustrates that he's not a conceptual designer, just a nuts and bolts man.
I dont want to wrongly traduce Williams but I have not read that their KERS unit was overweight. I was prob down on power. Flywheel systems are heavier and don't allow the packaging advantage of batteries. As such flywheel systems are best suited for Sports car formulae where weight penalities are not as punitive.

#539 Petroltorque

Petroltorque
  • Member

  • 1,627 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 12 January 2012 - 16:17

I was reading the Autocourse annual for this year and I read that the Williams KERS system weighed 30kg! **** ME!!!!! That has got to be a misprint, right? What were they thinking, heavier gearbox + overweight KERS + sub standard aero equals shit box. You don't need an engineering degree to figure that one out If I was Sir Frank I would be livid!

Advertisement

#540 Little Leaf

Little Leaf
  • Member

  • 1,072 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 12 January 2012 - 17:39

I was reading the Autocourse annual for this year and I read that the Williams KERS system weighed 30kg! **** ME!!!!! That has got to be a misprint, right? What were they thinking, heavier gearbox + overweight KERS + sub standard aero equals shit box. You don't need an engineering degree to figure that one out If I was Sir Frank I would be livid!


How much lighter are the best KERS? I have no idea

#541 Anderis

Anderis
  • Member

  • 2,665 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 12 January 2012 - 17:48

Mercedes's KERS was believed to be around 20(+/-5) kg.

#542 MustangSally

MustangSally
  • Member

  • 372 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 12 January 2012 - 18:20

How much lighter are the best KERS? I have no idea


I think the weight is still significant . . . in that you have less freedom to play with ballast.

Didn't Newey employ some kind of cut-down KERS?

I read that Williams doesn't make its own KERS entirely . . . the battery internals are outsourced, for example. Try as they may, Williams can never do it all in-house.

Again, according to what I've read, there were two problems with the flywheel KERS for F1. The logical space for it was in the airbox or engine cover behind the driver . . . but along with the return to full tanks meant a longer car or a higher COG. SFW said something like, 'the car would need to be as long as a London Bus'. I remember this comment.

The other comment I remember from 2009 was that there was a problem with sufficiently durable bearings for the F1 flywheel at that time. Well, it was early days.

Patrick Head loves these engineering challenges of course. Williams pursued both KERS solutions . . . plus the 'world's smallest gearbox' . . . all of which took away enormous resources from designing a quick car.

My impression is that Head sent Michael down a number of blind alleys.


#543 Tifosi4ever

Tifosi4ever
  • Member

  • 786 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 12 January 2012 - 18:53

I think the weight is still significant . . . in that you have less freedom to play with ballast.

Didn't Newey employ some kind of cut-down KERS?

I read that Williams doesn't make its own KERS entirely . . . the battery internals are outsourced, for example. Try as they may, Williams can never do it all in-house.

Again, according to what I've read, there were two problems with the flywheel KERS for F1. The logical space for it was in the airbox or engine cover behind the driver . . . but along with the return to full tanks meant a longer car or a higher COG. SFW said something like, 'the car would need to be as long as a London Bus'. I remember this comment.

The other comment I remember from 2009 was that there was a problem with sufficiently durable bearings for the F1 flywheel at that time. Well, it was early days.

Patrick Head loves these engineering challenges of course. Williams pursued both KERS solutions . . . plus the 'world's smallest gearbox' . . . all of which took away enormous resources from designing a quick car.

My impression is that Head sent Michael down a number of blind alleys.


Newey had a cut down kers in so far as webber's didn't work most of the time :lol:

#544 Petroltorque

Petroltorque
  • Member

  • 1,627 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 12 January 2012 - 19:13

The only F1 capable Flywheel system I know of is Flybrids Clutchless Flywheel Transmission that is a self contained unit, weighing about 18 kg and connected directly to the crank shaft on the front of the engine, so it would be encased by the fuel tank. Williams in developping two systems ended up with the worse of both systems.
The standard setting KERS remains the Mercedes High Performance unit. It weighs just under 20kg and punches out 56kW, a truly outstanding piece of engineering.

#545 GSF1

GSF1
  • Member

  • 98 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 12 January 2012 - 23:32

This is one of the problems Williams faces then, they would be better off now going with a Red Bull KERS unit and share costs and expertise to develop, make lighter and work on increasing the output, but Williams been Williams they could never resort to not producing something themselves, and personally I would not want another manufacturer parts in our car. Also probably does not look good for a Hybrid manufacturer to be buying off shelf units from a competitor. Maybe with HRT using KERS it may give Willams a bit more money to speed on development, which they lost while working on the flywheel solution.

In regards to the flywheel, I was under the impression when Williams first started developing it, that technically the flywheel KERS would be better to packaged, as it requires less parts, and less cooling as you have one flywheel, opposed to what was a couple of years ago >30kg of batteries in a bank plus extra intakes for cooling, also the placement of batteries where either put on the floor or in the sidepods (which increases the centre of gravity or the packaging of the car). Williams solution was to sit behind the driver directly in front of the fuel tank, I know Williams are still developing it, but mainly more for mass transit, and rail projects. Also I thought the reason it got banned was because all the teams and FIA agreed to a battery only KERS solution , not flywheel. I'm sure it is written that way in the regs. I wonder if Williams would have brought the hybrid company, spending a year developing it and then going with the Toyota Battery KERS less than a year latter.

And in regards to length of the car, according to Brawn he wishes his Merc was a lot longer this year as it would have reduced the centre of gravity and increased the underfloor for the diffusers and this became increasingly more important once hot blowing became the rage. Another thing that stopped Williams from producing anything good last year.

It does seem like they do know the problems to last season, but the fixes do seem to be quiet an engineering challenge, making KERS lighter will not be an overnight fix, but I'm sure they have been working on that issue all year.

#546 Boing 2

Boing 2
  • Member

  • 2,505 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 13 January 2012 - 00:04

This is one of the problems Williams faces then, they would be better off now going with a Red Bull KERS unit and share costs and expertise to develop, make lighter and work on increasing the output, but Williams been Williams they could never resort to not producing something themselves, and personally I would not want another manufacturer parts in our car. Also probably does not look good for a Hybrid manufacturer to be buying off shelf units from a competitor. Maybe with HRT using KERS it may give Willams a bit more money to speed on development, which they lost while working on the flywheel solution.


The reason as i see it that Williams develop their own kit is that once you start buying it off the shelf you lose that area of expertise. If you're buying a gearbox you don't keep a gearbox dept, you disband it. Then what happens if the money comes in and you want to go back to making your own kit again to move up the grid? You have to rebuild that whole dept from scratch. Much easier to expand an existing department than build one from scratch.


#547 george1981

george1981
  • Member

  • 718 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 13 January 2012 - 00:36

I've got a feeling that when we have the next big change in regulations say 2014 we might see restrictions on the shrink wrapped tightly packaged body of late. I think the FIA may mandate larger body work so that cars don't need to be as tightly packaged. Teams are spending too much on packaging the cars and cooling all the systems, that the poorer teams are struggling to keep up, also if Redbull are still dominating it might slow them down a bit. This might free up some space for the Williams flywheel kers system if it happens.


#548 Little Leaf

Little Leaf
  • Member

  • 1,072 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 13 January 2012 - 07:56

It does seem like they do know the problems to last season, but the fixes do seem to be quiet an engineering challenge, making KERS lighter will not be an overnight fix, but I'm sure they have been working on that issue all year.


I am just hoping we don't see another sh!tbox from the team and the subsequent "I joined too late to influence this car" type comments from the new guys.

They need to improve and imrpove drastically

#549 MustangSally

MustangSally
  • Member

  • 372 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 13 January 2012 - 09:49

Also I thought the reason it got banned was because all the teams and FIA agreed to a battery only KERS solution , not flywheel.


I seem to remember that, in the Max days, Williams were expecting the FIA to mandate the flywheel system eventually. since it is greener. Those batteries are pretty damn toxic. Another of Max' contradictions.


#550 SpeedRacer`

SpeedRacer`
  • Member

  • 756 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 13 January 2012 - 10:48

BBC reporting that Senna is the strong favourite for the seat... I still think Barrichello is the better driver.