Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 4 votes

Williams Technical Thread (FW42)


  • Please log in to reply
1782 replies to this topic

#1751 Marklar

Marklar
  • Member

  • 28,821 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 19 March 2019 - 17:10

I am sure Williams have said they are being more conservative this year with cooling due to the issues they had last year with overheating.  

That's pretty extreme though.



Advertisement

#1752 WilliamsF1Fan

WilliamsF1Fan
  • Member

  • 1,072 posts
  • Joined: February 15

Posted 19 March 2019 - 18:35

That's pretty extreme though.

 

I agree, but perhaps at this stage it is better to be safe than sorry and maybe as the car evolves (or not) throughout the year, tighten it up a bit.  Perhaps when the designers were tasked with an extreme car, they took it the wrong way?!

 

Or, for those who love the idea the team is bankrupt could see perhaps it saves the team money but not overworking the engines  :drunk:



#1753 ToniF1

ToniF1
  • Member

  • 317 posts
  • Joined: April 14

Posted 21 March 2019 - 08:40

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

https://www.instagra.../p/BvLktj0FwXL/

 

Sorry...


Edited by ToniF1, 21 March 2019 - 08:41.


#1754 TheWilliamzer

TheWilliamzer
  • Member

  • 827 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 21 March 2019 - 13:29

Meanwhile, Williams Advanced Engineering is applying for new patents regarding efficiency in carbon fiber production.

 

https://www.composit...ite-structures/



#1755 tghik

tghik
  • Member

  • 2,162 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 21 March 2019 - 14:42

I hope they don't rush with the decision to move the resources to 2020.

Logic says Claire should wait until the replacement for Paddy arrives.



#1756 midgrid

midgrid
  • RC Forum Host

  • 7,295 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 22 March 2019 - 08:19

George said they had identified the fundamental issue with the car - anyone have further info on what that might be?



This week's Autosport suggests that the car is overweight.

 

Edit: Now published online.



#1757 wingwalker

wingwalker
  • Member

  • 7,155 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 22 March 2019 - 09:49

This week's Autosport suggests that the car is overweight.


Hm that's not really something they would have to identify. But maybe it is a result of some necessary fix to that fundamental issu.



#1758 KWSN - DSM

KWSN - DSM
  • Member

  • 18,964 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 22 March 2019 - 10:04

I am no technical director, I am however 100% certain that Williams problems is not an overweight car.

 

:cool:



#1759 DrProzac

DrProzac
  • Member

  • 2,395 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 22 March 2019 - 15:14

Soooo......sidepod inlets too small? if the Mercs aren't troubled then the engine isn't putting out abnormal amounts of heat so I can't imagine what else would require that size of opening.

 

It's possible they just wanted to play it safe. They knew they'll be last anyway, so putting less heat stress on the engine and gearbox isn't a bad idea, especially when you need more mileage on the car after a shortened test programme.

 

 

Since the TV hardly alluded to it how did Robert lose his front wing? As part of the scramble in turn 1 with Dan coming in way too hot with locked brakes or did he have his own accident?

 

Gasley hit his FW with his rear tire after contact with Sainz. Kubica tried to keep it safe but got hit anyway. The FW caused other damage to the car (floor, maybe something more). Also from what Kubica said the wing they've gave him during the pitstop "wasn't in the best shape" whatever that means (the spare was damaged?)



Advertisement

#1760 Paco

Paco
  • Member

  • 2,339 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 22 March 2019 - 15:24

Just saw that Autosport video talking about Williams. 

 

Seriously, that's their conclusions.  An overweight car with no indication as to where??  F1 sets a min. weight and Paddy surely knows that limit and COG as long with the fact they have easily 2 of leanest drivers on the grid!  Even if they say 5lbs.. that's hardly an issue and probably impossible during a season to do and they've easily got that alone in the weight of their 2 drivers some other pairings on the grid.

 

Back to blaming aero and yet no talk about gearbox status or rear end.  Just focused on last years aero stalls that don't seem to be their so 1 big issue from last year has been addressed.  Now, they need to address something all together different and yet zero insight into what that can be but a couple of kg.  LOLs.  A few kils is a few tenths not seconds.



#1761 MKSixer

MKSixer
  • Member

  • 155 posts
  • Joined: November 14

Posted 22 March 2019 - 15:32

Sadly, they're still adrift.  Seeing one of my favorite teams from my formative years struggle so much is lamentable.   :cry:



#1762 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 16,766 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 22 March 2019 - 15:33

A few kilos in the wrong place means a few more kilos in ballast to get the weight distribution correct. Hardly far-fetched, and is far more sensible that some of the problems imagined here.



#1763 Squeed

Squeed
  • Member

  • 171 posts
  • Joined: February 17

Posted 22 March 2019 - 16:21

A few kilos in the wrong place means a few more kilos in ballast to get the weight distribution correct. Hardly far-fetched, and is far more sensible that some of the problems imagined here.

The observation from the article cited above that the gap is significantly less under heavy fuel load vs light fuel load is telling.

#1764 Hati

Hati
  • Member

  • 2,159 posts
  • Joined: March 16

Posted 22 March 2019 - 17:14

So what, exactly, is this 'fundamental flaw' that apparently plagues the car?

Anyone have any ideas?

 

Well, if I had to make a guess based on this.

https://www.motorspo...4yIjI42Z9QlG9NY



#1765 GiorgioF1

GiorgioF1
  • Member

  • 617 posts
  • Joined: December 17

Posted 22 March 2019 - 18:21

If someone would magically add a lot of downforce across the whole car I bet the times would be tumbling down. The fundamental issue here must be the lack of it. The car is stable, predictable and reliable - it's just that it was born without enough of the most important thing - the downforce. It's as simple as that.



#1766 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 16,766 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 22 March 2019 - 18:38

If only it were that simple. I'd imagine all the F1 teams are on the phone to you to solve all their technical problems, GiorgioF1.



#1767 GiorgioF1

GiorgioF1
  • Member

  • 617 posts
  • Joined: December 17

Posted 22 March 2019 - 18:43

If only it were that simple. I'd imagine all the F1 teams are on the phone to you to solve all their technical problems, GiorgioF1.

 

Yeah, better argue about all the strange things that might be wrong with their car while ommitting the most obvious one. Kubica said the biggest thing they need right now is the downforce and this has to be their fundamental issue.



#1768 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 16,766 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 22 March 2019 - 19:02

More downforce is always welcome, but it's not easy. That's what I mean.

 

It's like saying to Renault, "You know what your problem is. You just need more power."



#1769 GiorgioF1

GiorgioF1
  • Member

  • 617 posts
  • Joined: December 17

Posted 22 March 2019 - 19:28

Well the good thing is that their correlation this year seems to be spot on and this alone should help them tremendously. Kubica said that their wind tunnel, cfd and simulator figures were confirmed in Barcelona.



#1770 Paco

Paco
  • Member

  • 2,339 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 22 March 2019 - 19:36

Well the good thing is that their correlation this year seems to be spot on and this alone should help them tremendously. Kubica said that their wind tunnel, cfd and simulator figures were confirmed in Barcelona.

 

i don't recalling Kub saying that correlation is bang on.  If so, how did they plan to design a car so slow whenever else got it all back from last year...

 

You're suggesting that Williams totally blew how much was going to be clawed back and what kind of pace 90% of the grid was going to be running this year..



#1771 taran

taran
  • Member

  • 2,834 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 22 March 2019 - 21:43

I don't buy the weight problem. Apparently, 10kg extra adds about 0.3s to the lap time (depending on the circuit).

The Williams is between 1 and 2 seconds slower. Does anyone really believe the car is 60 kilos overweight?

 

There is far more going wrong there....



#1772 tghik

tghik
  • Member

  • 2,162 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted Yesterday, 05:02

A few kilos in the wrong place means a few more kilos in ballast to get the weight distribution correct. Hardly far-fetched, and is far more sensible that some of the problems imagined here.

Unfortunately that's not the problem with this car.



#1773 RacingGreen

RacingGreen
  • Member

  • 2,248 posts
  • Joined: March 17

Posted Yesterday, 06:03

Just saw that Autosport video talking about Williams. 

 

Seriously, that's their conclusions.  An overweight car with no indication as to where??  F1 sets a min. weight and Paddy surely knows that limit and COG as long with the fact they have easily 2 of leanest drivers on the grid!  Even if they say 5lbs.. that's hardly an issue and probably impossible during a season to do and they've easily got that alone in the weight of their 2 drivers some other pairings on the grid.

 

Back to blaming aero and yet no talk about gearbox status or rear end.  Just focused on last years aero stalls that don't seem to be their so 1 big issue from last year has been addressed.  Now, they need to address something all together different and yet zero insight into what that can be but a couple of kg.  LOLs.  A few kils is a few tenths not seconds.

 

I think you'll find that the driver's mass makes a lot less difference these days due to the new rule 4.6

 

4.6 Weight of the driver :
4.6.1 The weight of the driver with his seat and driving equipment will be established by the FIA technical delegate at the first Event of the Championship, this reference weight may be amended at any time during the Championship season if deemed necessary by the FIA technical delegate. This reference weight will be used to establish the minimum weight of the driver and ballast referred to in Article 4.6.2 below.
4.6.2 The reference weight of the driver will be added to the weight of any ballast designated for this purpose and, at no time during the Event, may this be less than 80kg.
 
I take that to mean that the driver and seat together must weigh 80kg and if you have a little driver, who with his seat weigh less than 80kg, then ballast will be added so that little drivers aren't as advantageous over bigger ones as they used to be. 
 
Obviously a smaller driver will still have some advantage because the smaller you are the more ballast you can place really low in the seat to give your 80kgs the lowest possible centre of gravity.

Edited by RacingGreen, Yesterday, 06:04.


#1774 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 16,766 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted Yesterday, 07:25

Unfortunately that's not the problem with this car.

 

Oh do tell then.



#1775 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 34,856 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted Yesterday, 11:19

I think you'll find that the driver's mass makes a lot less difference these days due to the new rule 4.6

 

4.6 Weight of the driver :
4.6.1 The weight of the driver with his seat and driving equipment will be established by the FIA technical delegate at the first Event of the Championship, this reference weight may be amended at any time during the Championship season if deemed necessary by the FIA technical delegate. This reference weight will be used to establish the minimum weight of the driver and ballast referred to in Article 4.6.2 below.
4.6.2 The reference weight of the driver will be added to the weight of any ballast designated for this purpose and, at no time during the Event, may this be less than 80kg.
 
I take that to mean that the driver and seat together must weigh 80kg and if you have a little driver, who with his seat weigh less than 80kg, then ballast will be added so that little drivers aren't as advantageous over bigger ones as they used to be. 
 
Obviously a smaller driver will still have some advantage because the smaller you are the more ballast you can place really low in the seat to give your 80kgs the lowest possible centre of gravity.

 


The position of the ballast is specified in the rules, so it doesn't appear that a lighter driver will gain any real advantage.

#1776 KWSN - DSM

KWSN - DSM
  • Member

  • 18,964 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted Yesterday, 11:42

Oh do tell then.

 

Being overweight would be an issue, it would make the car slower by some tenths of a second, it would be an easy fix, and it would not be fundamental. The issues Williams have by what they have said themselves is fundamental problems which will take months to fix.

 

No the issues Williams face is not being over weight.

 

:cool:



#1777 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 16,766 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted Yesterday, 12:39

Being overweight would be an issue, it would make the car slower by some tenths of a second, it would be an easy fix, and it would not be fundamental. The issues Williams have by what they have said themselves is fundamental problems which will take months to fix.

 

No the issues Williams face is not being over weight.

 

:cool:

 

Being overweight would be fundamental. It wouldn't be an easy fix because it would require looking at how the whole car goes together in great detail to find those kilos. That would take months to fix if there was no obvious culprit.



#1778 KWSN - DSM

KWSN - DSM
  • Member

  • 18,964 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted Yesterday, 16:34

Being overweight would be fundamental. It wouldn't be an easy fix because it would require looking at how the whole car goes together in great detail to find those kilos. That would take months to fix if there was no obvious culprit.

 

I am surprised that you refuse to understand the point being made.

 

:cool:



#1779 Anderis

Anderis
  • Member

  • 3,775 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted Yesterday, 16:48

I find the reports about the car being overweight weird. I have read somewhere that previous Williams' cars had good weight.

I'm pretty sure it's not the "fundamental problem" Russell was talking about.



Advertisement

#1780 KWSN - DSM

KWSN - DSM
  • Member

  • 18,964 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted Yesterday, 16:55

I find the reports about the car being overweight weird. I have read somewhere that previous Williams' cars had good weight.

I'm pretty sure it's not the "fundamental problem" Russell was talking about.

 

Absolutely, positively not.

 

An overweight F1 car is not a fundamental problem.

 

:cool:



#1781 Danyy

Danyy
  • Member

  • 1,755 posts
  • Joined: September 17

Posted Yesterday, 16:59

Nothing wrong with a Big Beautiful Williams :D

Edited by Danyy, Yesterday, 17:09.


#1782 tghik

tghik
  • Member

  • 2,162 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted Yesterday, 18:42

"The comments of Russell and team-mate Robert Kubica about how it impacts the car's inherent performance at low-fuel, plus Williams suffering a bigger deficit in qualifying than in race trim"

 

has anyone seen these comments about bigger deficit in qualifying ? I can't find any



#1783 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 16,766 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted Yesterday, 20:21

I am surprised that you refuse to understand the point being made.

 

:cool:

 

What point am I not getting? If there is a problem with the car's weight, that's not automatically as easy to fix as you seem to think it is.