Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 5 votes

S.Q.T. (stupid question thread)


  • Please log in to reply
3181 replies to this topic

#3151 TC3000

TC3000
  • Member

  • 1,115 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 18 December 2014 - 14:23

Bearing in mind the abject failure of the "class of 69" 4WD F1 cars, why is 4WD now (apparently) successful in LMP1 Hybrid cars? Would F1 cars be able to lap faster if they were permitted to drive the front wheels with MGU power as with LMP1Hs?

 

There is no simple answer to this, and considering it from a hybrid/MGU perspective changes some things.

I remember that I had a discussion about this topic (4WD in F1) back in the mid 90's with someone, and based on the data of the time and taking the then current regs into account, it wouldn't be worth the added weight, complexity and other downsides which would have come with it. ( but this was based on 4WD via the ICE, not via electric drive ).

 

Things you would need to consider are.

- the weight penality ( a LMP is 850 - 900 kg now ( I think currently it's 850kg for the Hy cars), compared to app. 750kg in F1 ( F1 used to be much lower). If you have a high(ish) base weight, then you would consider to add "meaningful weight" (like a 4WD system), but if not, lower weight will "win the day" more often then not.

- tyres come into this quite heavily, you need a tyre designed around this idea to make it work, both in size (regs) and compound/construction

- aero, trumps many things, so having to change your aero philosophy to account for 4WD is perhaps a hard sell in F1, if anything else remains the same (regs)

- if you force the regs in a certain direction, low(er) bulkhead/nose height, high(er) base weight, mandated weight distribution, tyre sizes etc. you may come to a cross over point, where people will start to considering it. I don't think we are at this point right now.

- how much torque/power/drive you can transmit to the ground via the front wheels at max. acceleration?

That's the critical question, when we did the calculation back in the days we came to app. 15-20%, which wasn't enough to make it worthwhile, back at this time.

- to understand this in simple terms, consider a dragster or motor bike, who will lift the front wheels when accelerating hard, this is the extreme case, but shows the underlying problematic nicely. As harder you accelerate, as more difficult it gets to transmit power/drive via the front wheels to the ground. Where is the "cross over point"?

Track layout and aerodynamics, as well as engine characteristics come into this as well, a F1 car is "grip limited" for only so long ( for speeds of app < 140 km/h, give or take a bit), how often do you accelerate from lower speeds? After the car reaches this point 4WD will not help you accelerating any better/faster, but you may still pay the price for the compromises you made on the aero side and if it means your car is heavier then a non 4WD car, you pay big time, with the extra weight, and a bit for the added friction.

 

You may gain in low grip conditions, like in the rain etc., but then again on balance over the course of a season, how much/often you gain, and how often you lose out.

I don't think, that it would be a overall benefit for F1 right now, in the given frame work, but this may changes in the future.



Advertisement

#3152 blackhand2010

blackhand2010
  • Member

  • 296 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 18 December 2014 - 14:28

I really doubt that class has much to do with their mutual animosity. I think it's more likely they were just two very distinct people who didn't like the way the other operated. Class may influence *how* they've behaved, but I don't thinks it's snobbery or the inverse that led to their relationship.

 

It probably didn't help that during the 90's/00's Max was perceived to be doing as much as he could to help Ferrari, just at the time that McLaren were beginning to have some success with Merc (see the brake steer incident versus the Malaysian barge boards).

 

Tis many years ago, but I remember reading an article in BBC's old F1 season preview mag, where Ron was his usual florid self about Ferrari and hinted about FIA favouritism (If I recall, he said he struggled to work with Ferrari and FIA becasue of "...old wounds...").

 

As to Max becoming a tory M.P, again I remember reading/seeing somewhere that he was rather more taken with New Labour than the tories. Make of that what you will...



#3153 Amphicar

Amphicar
  • Member

  • 2,012 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 18 December 2014 - 14:40

There is no simple answer to this, and considering it from a hybrid/MGU perspective changes some things.

I remember that I had a discussion about this topic (4WD in F1) back in the mid 90's with someone, and based on the data of the time and taking the then current regs into account, it wouldn't be worth the added weight, complexity and other downsides which would have come with it. ( but this was based on 4WD via the ICE, not via electric drive ).

 

Things you would need to consider are.

- the weight penality ( a LMP is 850 - 900 kg now ( I think currently it's 850kg for the Hy cars), compared to app. 750kg in F1 ( F1 used to be much lower). If you have a high(ish) base weight, then you would consider to add "meaningful weight" (like a 4WD system), but if not, lower weight will "win the day" more often then not.

- tyres come into this quite heavily, you need a tyre designed around this idea to make it work, both in size (regs) and compound/construction

- aero, trumps many things, so having to change your aero philosophy to account for 4WD is perhaps a hard sell in F1, if anything else remains the same (regs)

- if you force the regs in a certain direction, low(er) bulkhead/nose height, high(er) base weight, mandated weight distribution, tyre sizes etc. you may come to a cross over point, where people will start to considering it. I don't think we are at this point right now.

- how much torque/power/drive you can transmit to the ground via the front wheels at max. acceleration?

That's the critical question, when we did the calculation back in the days we came to app. 15-20%, which wasn't enough to make it worthwhile, back at this time.

- to understand this in simple terms, consider a dragster or motor bike, who will lift the front wheels when accelerating hard, this is the extreme case, but shows the underlying problematic nicely. As harder you accelerate, as more difficult it gets to transmit power/drive via the front wheels to the ground. Where is the "cross over point"?

Track layout and aerodynamics, as well as engine characteristics come into this as well, a F1 car is "grip limited" for only so long ( for speeds of app < 140 km/h, give or take a bit), how often do you accelerate from lower speeds? After the car reaches this point 4WD will not help you accelerating any better/faster, but you may still pay the price for the compromises you made on the aero side and if it means your car is heavier then a non 4WD car, you pay big time, with the extra weight, and a bit for the added friction.

 

You may gain in low grip conditions, like in the rain etc., but then again on balance over the course of a season, how much/often you gain, and how often you lose out.

I don't think, that it would be a overall benefit for F1 right now, in the given frame work, but this may changes in the future.

Thank you for a very thoughtful and clear response - much appreciated.

 

I recall that the 1968 4WD F1 cars suffered from severe and unpredictable understeer: Bruce McLaren likened driving his own M9A to "trying to write your signature with someone constantly jogging your elbow"; and Jackie Stewart who briefly drove the Cosworth commented that "the car's so heavy on the front, you turn into a corner and whole thing starts driving you".

Presumably, modern differentials and/or electric drive have removed this problem from LMP1H cars?



#3154 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,883 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 18 December 2014 - 15:00

Initially because they had a common enemy in Jean-Marie Balestre, which brought them together - to quote Mosley himself:

 

"Within about 20 minutes of [Ecclestone] turning up at the [Grand Prix Constructors Association] meeting, it was apparent that here was someone who knew how many beans made five and after about half an hour he moved round the table to sit next to me, and from then on he and I started operating as a team. Within a very short time, the two of us were doing everything for the GPCA, instead of everyone moving around in a block, and from that developed FOCA"

 

So Mosley doesn't have an innate problem with working class kids made good, even if they run F1 teams better than he did.



#3155 SanDiegoGo

SanDiegoGo
  • Member

  • 641 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 18 December 2014 - 15:10

So Mosley doesn't have an innate problem with working class kids made good, even if they run F1 teams better than he did.

 

you don't piss of the man who makes you a rich man. mosely identified where his bread was buttered. for all we know he may think bernie is a frightful oik, but he would never say such things. we're only discussing what he openly say about people, his real thoughts about the untermensch can only be derived from his upbringing, his behaviour and his desires to rule.



#3156 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,883 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 18 December 2014 - 15:20

So we have to guess at his thoughts, but we're solid on his desires?

 

Maybe Max just found Dennis pretentious/insecure. Because it wasn't enough for him to be proud of his success or how far he came. He had to try to make himself into something else entirely. The somewhat strange mannerisms, the obsession with the branding/corporate angle. A bit like Jackie Stewart in a way. As if being a multiple World Champion and peerless safety advocate wasn't good enough. It's about impressing people with all the amaaaaaazing corporate ambassadorship you do.

 

So in that sense maybe it is class snobbery. Because I find that behaviour inelegant too.



#3157 TC3000

TC3000
  • Member

  • 1,115 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 18 December 2014 - 15:25

Thank you for a very thoughtful and clear response - much appreciated.

 

I recall that the 1968 4WD F1 cars suffered from severe and unpredictable understeer: Bruce McLaren likened driving his own M9A to "trying to write your signature with someone constantly jogging your elbow"; and Jackie Stewart who briefly drove the Cosworth commented that "the car's so heavy on the front, you turn into a corner and whole thing starts driving you".

Presumably, modern differentials and/or electric drive have removed this problem from LMP1H cars?

 

You are welcome Amphicar - glad you found it useful.

Now, going back to the 60's 4WD F1 cars, they may suffered from other things too, and I don't know all the in and outs of their designs.

One thing is certain (and would be even valid today) you put weight onto the front axle, you increase the MoI (moment of inertia) of a mid-engined car quite dramatically, which doesn't help to make a car "nimble". ( think Audi Quattro "problem").

 

Furthermore, you need to consider, that in a very tight turn (slow corner) [where 4WD would be "at it's best" - in theory], the front axle runs on a completely different arc then the rear axle, so seeing this from a wheelspeed perspective, your front wheels (assuming equal tyre diameters for now) would need to turn faster then your rear wheels.

Therefore with a single engine or gas tubine, you would need some form of "center diff", to account for this. Which would add friction, weight and complexity.

If you don't use one ( like in rallying or off road racing at times), then you will get all sorts of weired things happening.

Understeer may be one of them, loads of structural stress on your chassis/drivetrain (wind up) are others.

On a loose surface (snow, soil, gravel) it's less of an issue, because "the ground will move", (if the shear stress becomes too high), but with sticky wide racing slicks on try tarmac, "something else has to give".  --> tyre distortion will/can led to weired slipangles/velocity vectors at the tyres

 

So, yes, I'm sure that modern technology and specifically a dedicaded electric drive for the front axle, will/can adress some of these issues.

But you may also want to consider something else, to get things into a better context.

 

Who says, that some LMP teams went to the front layout, because they wanted to "drive" the front axle?

Maybe they just wanted to "harvest" energy from the front axle.

Because under braking, the above mentioned "coupling effect" (that you reduce load at the front axle) reverses, and you can/could do more of your braking with the front then with the rear (see brake size for a indication).

[the specifics will depend on things like weight distribution and distribution of downforce CG vs. CoP etc., as well as wheelbase size --> longer wheelbase = less effect]

 

So there can be inherently more potential to harvest energy from the front, then from the rear.

And if the regs ( 95% of engineering solutions in motorsport are rule driven, and not "best engineering/first principle" driven, so you have to see solutions in context of the rules at the time) put a premium on "energy harvesting", and you went to all the trouble to harvest the energy from the front, it's only a small step to feed some of this back at the front, because you have all the infrastructure (weight) in place anyway.

As Audi/Porsche do, but I think (but could be wrong) Toyota, while harvesting from the front, only feeds the power back via the rear axle - as always there are many ways to skin a cat

 

Therefore, in this context, the picture is perhaps slightly skewd, as to why we see, what we see in LMP racing.

Still, the main points stand, you have to see it "on balance", yes doing so, has it advantages, but as always in life, things come at a cost.

Will doing it give you a net benefit or not, and how often over they course of the season (tracks/weather etc.)? - that's a key question - IMHO

 

The answer to this question may changes over time, when either the rules change, or when we see some technological breakthroughts, which help to migate some of the negative aspects (better bearing technology, better lubrication, electronic control systems etc.), or engines start to become "too" powerful for the tyres at this point in time.

I believe, that this was the main idea/reason/consideration back in the late 1960's in F1, but tyre developments (sizes of rear tyres) and the advent of uttilizing aerodynamic downforce to combat this problem (wheelspin), provided "better"/simpler/lighter solutions to the initial problem.

Different people may come to different conclusions after weighting the pro&cons - see Brawn winning it's WDC/WCC without KERS as an example for such a compromise.

 

I don't think the answer is "clear cut", and it will be external factors like rules/tyres and tracks which may tip the balance in one direction (pro) or the other (con), at any given point in time.


Edited by TC3000, 19 December 2014 - 14:55.


#3158 SanDiegoGo

SanDiegoGo
  • Member

  • 641 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 18 December 2014 - 15:35

So we have to guess at his thoughts, but we're solid on his desires?

 

Maybe Max just found Dennis pretentious/insecure. Because it wasn't enough for him to be proud of his success or how far he came. He had to try to make himself into something else entirely. The somewhat strange mannerisms, the obsession with the branding/corporate angle. A bit like Jackie Stewart in a way. As if being a multiple World Champion and peerless safety advocate wasn't good enough. It's about impressing people with all the amaaaaaazing corporate ambassadorship you do.

 

So in that sense maybe it is class snobbery. Because I find that behaviour inelegant too.

 

 

i think we're veering into what you actually have problem with in dennis/stewart rather than what max had a problem with.


Edited by SanDiegoGo, 18 December 2014 - 15:38.


#3159 Imateria

Imateria
  • Member

  • 491 posts
  • Joined: January 14

Posted 18 December 2014 - 15:37

Thank you for a very thoughtful and clear response - much appreciated.

 

I recall that the 1968 4WD F1 cars suffered from severe and unpredictable understeer: Bruce McLaren likened driving his own M9A to "trying to write your signature with someone constantly jogging your elbow"; and Jackie Stewart who briefly drove the Cosworth commented that "the car's so heavy on the front, you turn into a corner and whole thing starts driving you".

Presumably, modern differentials and/or electric drive have removed this problem from LMP1H cars?

I think it pretty much goes without saying that modern motor technology is going to be lighter than the 4WD systems of 1968, but it should also be remembered that LMP1's aren't permanent 4WD, the hybrid power only kicks in on corner exit so that should eliminate some of the undesteer that is inherent in 4WD systems from having the front wheels being driven.



Advertisement

#3160 Amphicar

Amphicar
  • Member

  • 2,012 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 18 December 2014 - 15:47

 

As to Max becoming a tory M.P, again I remember reading/seeing somewhere that he was rather more taken with New Labour than the tories. Make of that what you will...

In the early 1980s, Mosley temporarily abandoned F1 to begin working for the Conservative Party in the hope of being selected as to a parliamentary candidate. He eventually gave up this aspiration, ostensibly because he was unimpressed by senior party officials. He also believed that his name and background would prevent his ever being selected. He later commented:"If I had a completely open choice in my life, I would have chosen party politics, but because of my name, that's impossible. In the late 1990s, following a meeting with the Labour leader John Smith, Mosley briefly became a supporter of the Labour Party.

 

Max's political trajectory bears a striking similarity to that of his father. Oswald Mosley was a Conservative MP from 1918 to 1921, an Independent MP from 1921 to 1924 and a Labour MP from 1926 to 1931 before falling out with mainstream politics to form the New Party, the British Union of Fascists and after WWII, the Union Movement and the National Party of Europe.



#3161 SanDiegoGo

SanDiegoGo
  • Member

  • 641 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 18 December 2014 - 15:51

chilling.



#3162 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,883 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 18 December 2014 - 15:59

i think we're veering into what you actually have problem with in dennis/stewart rather than what max had a problem with.

 

I'm saying some of the animosity can actually come from the behaviour of the targets.

 

 

 

Max's political trajectory bears a striking similarity to that of his father. Oswald Mosley was a Conservative MP from 1918 to 1921, an Independent MP from 1921 to 1924 and a Labour MP from 1926 to 1931 before falling out with mainstream politics to form the New Party, the British Union of Fascists and after WWII, the Union Movement and the National Party of Europe.

 

*wink wink nudge nudge*

 

 

chilling.

 

And there it is.


 



#3163 SanDiegoGo

SanDiegoGo
  • Member

  • 641 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 18 December 2014 - 16:07

I'm saying some of the animosity can actually come from the behaviour of the targets.

 

 

 

*wink wink nudge nudge*

 

 

 

And there it is.

 

 

i'm sorry, is there something you want to say? don't be shy.



#3164 purplehaireddolphin

purplehaireddolphin
  • Member

  • 212 posts
  • Joined: June 13

Posted 18 December 2014 - 17:41

Stupid Question.

 

Could someone tell me how the new power boost works? I know how Kers used to work cos the driver had a button and a limited number of seconds to use it, but this new system doesn't work like that, so how do the srivers choose when to use it?

 

Ta



#3165 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,883 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 18 December 2014 - 17:55

They don't, it's like an engine setting. It's sort of 'always on'. But adjustable, like fuel mix or rpm or engine map or etc.



#3166 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 5,143 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 18 December 2014 - 17:58

Stupid Question.

 

Could someone tell me how the new power boost works? I know how Kers used to work cos the driver had a button and a limited number of seconds to use it, but this new system doesn't work like that, so how do the srivers choose when to use it?

 

Ta

 

They push the throttle and the electronics does the rest.



#3167 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 5,143 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 18 December 2014 - 18:00

And in another deja-vu back to the previous page, does nobody have an idea?

 

pretty much the same way, you switch off your road car engine --> by switching off the ignition (labeled IGN).

Yes - see below for an example:

 

2014-F1-Spanish-GP-Williams-F1-cockpit.j

 

Why is there a Camera Off switch?



#3168 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 14,455 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 18 December 2014 - 18:43

In the early 1980s, Mosley temporarily abandoned F1 to begin working for the Conservative Party in the hope of being selected as to a parliamentary candidate. He eventually gave up this aspiration, ostensibly because he was unimpressed by senior party officials.

 

:D

 

"You can't fire me, I quit!"



#3169 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 9,883 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 December 2014 - 14:22

In case a driver retires, when is his number again available for a new driver to pick? And is it possible for a current driver to change his number?



#3170 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,883 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 19 December 2014 - 14:31

I'm pretty sure it's immediately available. So someone can take Magnussen's number.



#3171 PAGATRON

PAGATRON
  • Member

  • 477 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 19 December 2014 - 15:38

And in another deja-vu back to the previous page, does nobody have an idea?

 

 

Why is there a Camera Off switch?

Err... for the onboard cameras maybe?



#3172 Amphicar

Amphicar
  • Member

  • 2,012 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 19 December 2014 - 15:54

I'm pretty sure it's immediately available. So someone can take Magnussen's number.

I don't think so - the relevant FIA Regulation says:

 

"Prior to the start of the 2014 World Championship season race numbers will be permanently allocated to drivers by ballot, such numbers must then be used by that driver during every Formula One World Championship Event he takes part in throughout his career." (my emphasis)

 

Until it is clear that a driver's F1 career is over, the number allocated in 2014 remains permanently allocated to that driver - so missing a year does not mean that an allocated number is available for reallocation. It is far from clear that Magnussen's F1 career is over - he could well return either with McLaren or with a future Honda customer team. That being the case, I don't think Magnussen's race number is in play - yet.



#3173 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,883 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 19 December 2014 - 15:59

When is it clear that a driver's career is over? Do we include sabbaticals? Drivers that retire but then feel like getting back into it? Death?



#3174 Amphicar

Amphicar
  • Member

  • 2,012 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 19 December 2014 - 16:02

When is it clear that a driver's career is over? Do we include sabbaticals? Drivers that retire but then feel like getting back into it? Death?

I'm pretty sure death would do it but a sabbatical is by definition, a break that you intend to return from. If a driver announces his retirement then he can't complain if his number is reallocated.



#3175 Imateria

Imateria
  • Member

  • 491 posts
  • Joined: January 14

Posted 19 December 2014 - 16:03

This has been brought up in the Permanent Numbers thread. I think it was agreed that there's what amounts to a gentleman's agreement that numbers of drivers that stop racing in F1 from one year to the next get held in reserve for a couple years in case they come back. At least this was how Autosport were reporting it back at the start of the year.



#3176 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 57,883 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 19 December 2014 - 16:05

I'm pretty sure death would do it but a sabbatical is by definition, a break that you intend to return from. If a driver announces his retirement then he can't complain if his number is reallocated.

 

Didn't Mika go on sabbatical? Or did he eventually announce an upgrade?



#3177 Bleu

Bleu
  • Member

  • 805 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 December 2014 - 16:48

Didn't Mika go on sabbatical? Or did he eventually announce an upgrade?

 

Announced sabbatical during 2001 Italian GP weekend.

Announced retirement during 2002 (I think it was German GP weekend)



#3178 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 5,143 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted Yesterday, 00:54

Err... for the onboard cameras maybe?

 

So why is there a hardware switch for those on the car next to important stuff like fire extinguisher etc? 


Edited by KnucklesAgain, Yesterday, 00:57.


#3179 blackhand2010

blackhand2010
  • Member

  • 296 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted Yesterday, 16:58

With Vergne and Gutierrez now off to be test drivers at Ferrari, a thought struck; how much do the test drivers get paid these days, given the restrictions on, y'know, testing...?

 

I'm aware more and more test drivers pay for the privilege, but for those few who don't, I wonder if it's in their financial interests to do that rather than go off to race in another series, or whether they're just clinging onto the hope that one of the main drivers may develop a mild case of food poisoning...? 



Advertisement

#3180 Andrew Hope

Andrew Hope
  • Writer of 2013's Best Opening Post

  • 7,070 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted Yesterday, 17:09

No one thought Luca Badoer and Tonio Liuzzi were going to race in 2009, or d'Ambrosio in 2012, so it's worth a shot. If Raikkonen were to get sick, or Ferrari were to suddenly remember it's not 2004, Vergne would have to be at least ahead of Gutierrez on the depth chart.



#3181 ExFlagMan

ExFlagMan
  • Member

  • 1,921 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted Yesterday, 17:35

So why is there a hardware switch for those on the car next to important stuff like fire extinguisher etc?

I would hazard a guess that maybe the camera works off a separate battery supply to prevent interference on the in-car electric supply and hence requires its own isolator switch so it can be switched off as the driver has to able to switch off ALL the electric supplies in the car.
Alternately, maybe it allows the camera to be switched off whilst the car is in the garage, so other teams cannot see any dashboard/laptop data the team does not want them to see.

#3182 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 5,143 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted Yesterday, 18:12

I would hazard a guess that maybe the camera works off a separate battery supply to prevent interference on the in-car electric supply and hence requires its own isolator switch so it can be switched off as the driver has to able to switch off ALL the electric supplies in the car.
Alternately, maybe it allows the camera to be switched off whilst the car is in the garage, so other teams cannot see any dashboard/laptop data the team does not want them to see.

 

Thanks, esp. the first point sounds very reasonable to me.