3993 replies to this topic

[Disgrace]

Part I.

Part II.

[frosty125]

I noticed that at Melbourne while they didn't run monkey seat they ran quite a lot of wing which would be normal as it is a fairly high downforce circuit.
I wonder if they will go for less downforce and less drag at Malaysia considering the PU issues and the long straights. Red Bull were doing this last year to help with their engine deficit.

[lixlax]

At their current state they should go for the setup that brings them the best laptime. They'll be too slow on straights even with less wing/drag anyway.

Edited by lixlax, 23 March 2015 - 10:04.

[argiriano]

I didn`t realize before reading radio transcript that the comment about FI not keeping up with McLaren trough corners was made in FP2 over the radio but only after Jenson reported loss of power... which kinda makes it look even more intriguing about chassis potential. 

 

 

At their current state they should go for the setup that brings them the best laptime. They'll be too slow on straights even with less wing/drag anyway.

Sadly, the only thing McLaren-Honda will have to do in Malaysia is to survive trough the weekend and collect some precious data from the most severe conditions which will help them solve their heating issues. 

Edited by argiriano, 23 March 2015 - 10:08.

[kosmos]

I wonder what is going to happen with the high temperatures.

[Owen]

I wonder what is going to happen with the high temperatures.

I'm thinking engine reliability will take top priority to get mileage. So either it gets turned down further or it's time for gills all over the place. 

[PassWind]

I'm thinking engine reliability will take top priority to get mileage. So either it gets turned down further or it's time for gills all over the place. 

 

I must say this overheating issue intrigues me, I cannot help thinking that there in lies some of the innovation McLaren were on about pre-season, has there been any rumblings or rumours as to what exactly this innovative technology Honda with McLaren have brought to F1? Given the packaging of the car I had thought that they might be playing around with heat management methodology, that it isn't working right now and the lack of public feedback as in a fault of design (I don't believe there is one, I just believe that the design through race implementation phase isn't sorted yet).

[Owen]

Interactive diagram of the Honda PU

http://en.hondaracin.../honda-lab.html

[Nicktendo86]

Lots of rain predicted for Malaysia, should be helpful with cooling?

[OO7]

 

MP430 wrote: 

Why on earth would you put the MGU-K which drives the crankshaft/possibly gearbox up so high where you would have to transfer the power via gears or chain/belt? Its just plain insane to do so.


The MGU-H runs off the turbo and its not relevant to the placing of the MGU-K.

I'm not having a dig at you guys but seriously I am shaking my head because I feel that most of the negative posters are spouting their nonsense with no understanding of engines whatsoever! 

How can those comments be construed as being negative.

Do you have any constructive comments on where you believe the MGU-K has been placed?

[MirNyet]

Have we gotten past the nonsense of melting wiring looms and exploding sensors yet?

 

Also - while we are focusing on the MGU-K - what is the general thoughts on batteries as there was a problem reported with those in the first test.

[ConsiderAndGo]

Lots of rain predicted for Malaysia, should be helpful with cooling?

 

Will still be very very hot and humid.

[Osiris]

Why don't they just make the PU out of ceramics.  It'll be cool as the other side of the pillow. 

[MirNyet]

How can those comments be construed as being negative.

Do you have any constructive comments on where you believe the MGU-K has been placed?

 

Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault (to my knowledge) have the MGU-K offset to the side of the engine on the floor plane and transfer the torque via a belt of some sort. Its an interesting idea to have it directly as part of the crack but on on earth would that work? Surely the nearest possible position to the crack would be part of the clutch assembly or am I being silly?

[MirNyet]

Why don't they just make the PU out of ceramics.  It'll be cool as the other side of the pillow. 

 

Against the tech regs.

[Nicktendo86]

Interesting...

Silver lining for McLaren? See where Button ranked in the #AusGP Cornering Ratings: http://t.co/g3K9AQaL8R #F1Access http://t.co/ea6Sc487wg

[Osiris]

Damn you regs!!!!! 

 

Oh well,  I'm out of ideas. 

 

Let Alo fix it.

[argiriano]

Interactive diagram of the Honda PU

http://en.hondaracin.../honda-lab.html

Wait!

Interesting statement on that page that the Honda ICE produced 600bhp which was theoretical before the 2014 season for those kind of engines. We know that ERS output is limited to 160hp so if that`s true about ICE, than the Honda PU would be as "powerful" as last year Renault. 

 

I hope Honda didn`t put the real numbers from their PU. 

[PassWind]

Wait!

Interesting statement on that page that the Honda ICE produced 600bhp which was theoretical before the 2014 season for those kind of engines. We know that ERS output is limited to 160hp so if that`s true about ICE, than the Honda PU would be as "powerful" as last year Renault. 

 

I hope Honda didn`t put the real numbers from their PU. 

 

What they don't state is what power they are generating via the MGU-H, which is unlimited. 

[Owen]

Interesting...

Silver lining for McLaren? See where Button ranked in the #AusGP Cornering Ratings: http://t.co/g3K9AQaL8R #F1Access http://t.co/ea6Sc487wg

"the cornering data from Australia suggests the MP4-30, while uncompetitive overall, is not actually surrendering too much speed in the corners relative to other drivers - which hints at it having an inherently good level of downforce. "

 

[Nicktendo86]

Thanks Owen

[OO7]

Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault (to my knowledge) have the MGU-K offset to the side of the engine on the floor plane and transfer the torque via a belt of some sort. Its an interesting idea to have it directly as part of the crack but on on earth would that work? Surely the nearest possible position to the crack would be part of the clutch assembly or am I being silly?

Yes, Mercedes has their MGU-K in the position you described, I believe Renault does as well though I'm not sure about Ferrari.  My suggestion was of the MGU-K sitting above the crank.  I also mentioned the clutch assembly, but that seems highly unlikely at least using the concept I suggested.  I believe the regs mandate that the MGU-K must be placed ahead of the clutch BTW.

[OO7]

Interesting...

Silver lining for McLaren? See where Button ranked in the #AusGP Cornering Ratings: http://t.co/g3K9AQaL8R #F1Access http://t.co/ea6Sc487wg

This is what was suspected from the onboards, as the car looked really during Jenson's Q lap.

[Exb]

^ I really don't understand those ratings, I was having a nosy at them last night - for example the Mercedes in general were pretty low (around 6 overall and yet obviously have the best car) Kimi seemed to have the highest rating overall (an 8. something), and actually had a 10 for that corner statistic, as opposed to Vettel who had something like a 5 iirc, so I'm not sure how telling it is of car characterisics??? Maybe it would help if I knew what they all meant. 

 

Fingers crossed it does mean the car is good though need all the good news going before this weekend, hopefully it will rain (or maybe not - I no longer know what's good for the car) 

[Kimble]

http://www.formula1....-cornering.html

[fastpast]

Yes, Mercedes has their MGU-K in the position you described, I believe Renault does as well though I'm not sure about Ferrari.  My suggestion was of the MGU-K sitting above the crank.  I also mentioned the clutch assembly, but that seems highly unlikely at least using the concept I suggested.  I believe the regs mandate that the MGU-K must be placed ahead of the clutch BTW.

A quick thank you to both 007 and MirNyet as they understood the question that I posed to MP430, just to get his thoughts on where the MGU-K might be situated on the Honda PU as well as where the Mercedes is located. Wasn't looking for ridicule as I also commented that in the Vee is not out of the realm of possibilities, I probably should have also said but not likely?

Not to worry when you see my posts, I am a McLaren supporter through and through. I can also criticize them when needed as constructive criticism is a necessary evil.

With everything being quiet currently from the McLaren/Honda/Mobil 1 camps, I hope this is a good sign for this coming weekend.

[bonjon1979a]

Lots of rain predicted for Malaysia, should be helpful with cooling?

 

The biggest help will be the fact that the drivers won't be go as fast, so therefore won't be pushing the engine so hard. They're grip limited so will be going for less aggressive engine modes. Air may be cooler and more dense as well during a rain storm compared with blazing hot sun. All of this will help a car that is struggling with the heat - also, rain introduces random factors that mean there's a more of a chance for teams that are off the pace. I suspect a downpour or two would suit mclaren rather nicely.

[oetzi]

"the cornering data from Australia suggests the MP4-30, while uncompetitive overall, is not actually surrendering too much speed in the corners relative to other drivers - which hints at it having an inherently good level of downforce. "

So they're really slow in a straight line, but it's all fine because they're only a little bit slower round the corners?

[OO7]

A quick thank you to both 007 and MirNyet as they understood the question that I posed to MP430, just to get his thoughts on where the MGU-K might be situated on the Honda PU as well as where the Mercedes is located. Wasn't looking for ridicule as I also commented that in the Vee is not out of the realm of possibilities, I probably should have also said but not likely?

Not to worry when you see my posts, I am a McLaren supporter through and through. I can also criticize them when needed as constructive criticism is a necessary evil.

With everything being quiet currently from the McLaren/Honda/Mobil 1 camps, I hope this is a good sign for this coming weekend.

Don't be discouraged fastpast.  I enjoy these forums because they often allow me to learn something new from others.  It is not about being right or wrong for me, as my suggestions may be wide of the mark, but the opportunity to expand the discussion is always well come.

 

Your questions are valid, Keep posting.

[bonjon1979a]

How can those comments be construed as being negative.

Do you have any constructive comments on where you believe the MGU-K has been placed?

 

They're not negative, I'm not sure your or Fastpast's technical knowledge should be brought into question either.

 

There is a neat diagram on this page of how the renault pu works.

 

http://www.f1i.com/f...antes-fragiles/

 

You'll see already that the MGU-K is already attached to the crank shaft via a series of gears, rather than directly with a belt or chain. Looking at the diagram that's there, it might be possible to move the MGU-K up into the v of the engine and then use gears much as the renault engine does now to drive the crank shaft at the front of the engine. You put more weight up higher but maybe they gain much more aerodynamically by having such a slim rear.

 

You could also mount the MGU-K vertically and have the power transferred through 90 degrees as happens with most front engined road cars. I don't have enough engineering knowledge to understand exactly how difficult that would be to achieve reliably but I can see no reason why it isn't possible. But I can understand that potentially it might be difficult to achieve.

Edited by bonjon1979a, 23 March 2015 - 13:59.

[OO7]

They're not negative, I'm not sure your or Fastpast's technical knowledge should be brought into question either.

 

There is a neat diagram on this page of how the renault pu works.

 

http://www.f1i.com/f...antes-fragiles/

 

You'll see already that the MGU-K is already attached to the crank shaft via a series of gears, rather than directly with a belt or chain. Looking at the diagram that's there, it might be possible to move the MGU-K up into the v of the engine and then use gears much as the renault engine does now to drive the crank shaft at the front of the engine. You put more weight up higher but maybe they gain much more aerodynamically by having such a slim rear.

Thank you for that link bonjon.

That is exactly how my interpretation of an MGU-K in the 'V' would be (using gears), as you explained as well.

 

Regarding the higher CoG, I think the tech regs mandate a minimum CoG, but I'm not sure if this is for the ICE alone or the PU as a whole.  The chances are however, as per your suggestion, that CoG will suffer.

Edited by OO7, 23 March 2015 - 14:02.

[AustinF1]

So they're really slow in a straight line, but it's all fine because they're only a little bit slower round the corners?

No, it's not "all fine", but it does suggest very good downforce, which is really something considering they've had little setup time and from what I've read they were pretty much in launch spec aero trim. When they get the PU sorted, they'll be damn quick, imho. But it'll take time.

[Ferrari2183]

http://www.formula1....-cornering.html

This seems way too simplistic for me. Massa, as per that graph, was giving it horns relative to the others whereas Vettel was on a Sunday cruise and yet Massa made no impression on the gap.

 

This sort of comparison would work if everybody drove the same car...

 

Edit: Also, there has to be a way to remove Kimi from said graph as firstly, he was running a different compound and secondly, he retired which promoted Massa to the top.

Edited by Ferrari2183, 23 March 2015 - 14:07.

[bonjon1979a]

Thank you for that link bonjon.

That is exactly how my interpretation of an MGU-K in the 'V' would be (using gears), as you explained as well.

 

Regarding the higher CoG, I think the tech regs mandate a minimum CoG, but I'm not sure if this is for the ICE alone or the PU as a whole.  The chances are however, as per your suggestion, that CoG will suffer.

Indeed. it'll be a complicated equation. What's to be gained, versus what's lost. The car does SEEM to be longer than the other cars aft of the cockpit but it's very hard to judge from photos.

[Lazy]

So they're really slow in a straight line, but it's all fine because they're only a little bit slower round the corners?

At this stage of the game it's definitely a positive.

[brr]

Damn you regs!!!!! 

 

Oh well,  I'm out of ideas. 

 

Let Alo fix it.

 

If Alonso genuinely hates Ron Dennis, he will tell him "Don't worry about the engine problems. I got a few technical documents from a Mercedes engineer which should help."

[oetzi]

it does suggest very good downforce

What does? Losing time round the corners?

[Ferrari2183]

What does? Losing time round the corners?

I'm struggling to understand that whole comparison. Higher g-force is supposed to mean faster cornering.

 

Massa on the primes was matching Kimi on options and Vettel in return was setting similar laptimes to Massa with about half the effort in the turns. Is Vettel superman?

[oetzi]

If it's just measuring g forces it's mainly a tyre wear indicator I suppose. Which is probably why a slow, underpowered car appears 'consistent'. Too slow to kill the tyres.

Edited by oetzi, 23 March 2015 - 14:34.

[argiriano]

This seems way too simplistic for me. Massa, as per that graph, was giving it horns relative to the others whereas Vettel was on a Sunday cruise and yet Massa made no impression on the gap.

 

This sort of comparison would work if everybody drove the same car...

 

Edit: Also, there has to be a way to remove Kimi from said graph as firstly, he was running a different compound and secondly, he retired which promoted Massa to the top.

I tend to agree that it is simplistic and not just that... there`s unclear measurements involved in that formula of those ratings. For example I could argue that bigger steering input means that the driver going faster trough the corner because more steering could be the consequence of instability, understeery setup, driving style ect. I actually think that the driver with most balanced car will run trough the same corner with less steering and no corrections. 

Pure apex speeds plus braking and acceleration distances and G-forces will be much more informative about car behavior trough corners. 

[AustinF1]

What does? Losing time round the corners?

Ah, no. Finishing near the top in a cornering rating does. Is this so difficult?

[AustinF1]

I tend to agree that it is simplistic and not just that... there`s unclear measurements involved in that formula of those ratings. For example I could argue that bigger steering input means that the driver going faster trough the corner because more steering could be the consequence of instability, understeery setup, driving style ect. I actually think that the driver with most balanced car will run trough the same corner with less steering and no corrections. 

Pure apex speeds plus braking and acceleration distances and G-forces will be much more informative about car behavior trough corners. 

I don;t think steering input is figured into the Cornering Rating. It seems to be figured into the overall Race Performance Rating though.

 

"Cornering ratings are  calculated by averaging the latitudinal (side-to-side) g-forces acting on a car in each and every corner across a Grand Prix. The reason g-force data is used to assess cornering performance is because the faster a car negotiates a bend, the higher the g-force acting upon it. Therefore a higher score in this category suggests a driver is cornering harder.

As with the other categories, the raw telemetry figures for each car are compared and then each driver is ranked on a scale of 1-10. In this instance, the driver whose car produces the highest g-force readings will receive a score of 10."

[oetzi]

Ah, no. Finishing near the top in a cornering rating does. Is this so difficult?

Dunno. Does it work like ice dancing?

[fastpast]

Indeed. it'll be a complicated equation. What's to be gained, versus what's lost. The car does SEEM to be longer than the other cars aft of the cockpit but it's very hard to judge from photos.

in a much earlier post I had asked if those with the expertise to find the overhead views of the different makes to put in a comparative scale analysis for everyone, might be something interesting for one of you guys to do between now and Friday. Overall length width and bird's eye view of the cars would be good to see, there was an earlier post with I think McLaren and Force India, I think comparing the side view which would lead one to believe that the McLaren driver shell is slightly forward of most others? maybe all others? as well the side pod flare beginning earlier than others? I agree with you that the car does seem to be longer overall

[rasul]

I'm struggling to understand that whole comparison. Higher g-force is supposed to mean faster cornering.

 

Massa on the primes was matching Kimi on options and Vettel in return was setting similar laptimes to Massa with about half the effort in the turns. Is Vettel superman?

Yes, it doesn't make sense at all. And during the first stint, Vettel was faster than Kimi by over 1 second(when Kimi was stuck behind RIC), but Vettel's "cornering" rating is much lower. His trace is very stable and low throughout the race, which suggests it has to do with the driving style rather than anything conclusive about the car. Any car. 

[bonjon1979a]

If it's just measuring g forces it's mainly a tyre wear indicator I suppose. Which is probably why a slow, underpowered car appears 'consistent'. Too slow to kill the tyres.

Cornering speeds would be most informative, surely? You could have higher lateral g in a corner because you turned in much harder and then had to correct, rather than smoothly taking the corner with the minimum of steering angle, keeping more speed. Not sure i complete understand it.

[oetzi]

Cornering speeds would be most informative, surely? You could have higher lateral g in a corner because you turned in much harder and then had to correct, rather than smoothly taking the corner with the minimum of steering angle, keeping more speed. Not sure i complete understand it.

Yes. Yes. And neither does anyone else, I think.

Guess the teams are happy for fans to see something pretty opaque, but will get @rsey about data usage rights if it's not.

[bonjon1979a]

in a much earlier post I had asked if those with the expertise to find the overhead views of the different makes to put in a comparative scale analysis for everyone, might be something interesting for one of you guys to do between now and Friday. Overall length width and bird's eye view of the cars would be good to see, there was an earlier post with I think McLaren and Force India, I think comparing the side view which would lead one to believe that the McLaren driver shell is slightly forward of most others? maybe all others? as well the side pod flare beginning earlier than others? I agree with you that the car does seem to be longer overall

Yeah, while they can give an indicator I'm a bit dubious about those overhead comparison shots. Unless they're taken from the same spot with exactly the same lens and camera then it's very hard to compare them, even if you do line up the wheels etc. Images can be bowed, so the outer edges appear more stretched or the opposite may be true, images can be shortened depending on the camera lens etc. Here's a good website describing the possible pitfalls faced when comparing images so while they may be a useful indicator, a pinch of salt must be taken when doing these comparisons!

 

https://photographyl...t-is-distortion

[AlexS]

I don;t think steering input is figured into the Cornering Rating. It seems to be figured into the overall Race Performance Rating though.

 

"Cornering ratings are  calculated by averaging the latitudinal (side-to-side) g-forces acting on a car in each and every corner across a Grand Prix. The reason g-force data is used to assess cornering performance is because the faster a car negotiates a bend, the higher the g-force acting upon it. Therefore a higher score in this category suggests a driver is cornering harder.

As with the other categories, the raw telemetry figures for each car are compared and then each driver is ranked on a scale of 1-10. In this instance, the driver whose car produces the highest g-force readings will receive a score of 10."

 

 

Well if i am reading what the chart shows it means that someone that have a less fluid driving , miss apex turning a curve into a corner and so on will get a "better" result because it might increases the G reading.

[AustinF1]

Well if i am reading what the chart shows it means that someone that have a less fluid driving , miss apex turning a curve into a corner and so on will get a "better" result because it might increases the G reading.

Yeah, maybe so. But maybe not. If you miss the apex, you'll probably have to slow a bit to make the turn, thus likely lowering somewhat the G reading for the turn. If you go through at max possible speed, with the best possible line, grip, etc, that still might consistently produce the highest G force on the car, right? A high G reading doesn't necessarily indicate bigger changes of direction in the car. Small, quick, changes of direction in a faster moving car might produce bigger readings and may be what these guys were shooting for with this measurement. A relatively "smooth" driver could still produce high readings if he's able to maintain a higher speed through the turn.

Edited by AustinF1, 23 March 2015 - 15:42.