|
|
On September 15 2021 06:53 Amui wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2021 06:19 Excludos wrote:On September 15 2021 05:57 ChristianS wrote:
It’s not crazy to imagine a new engine of same spec might perform a bit better than one with some mileage, I would think? But yes, “new engine” should not matter anywhere near as much as in previous years, where it meant a new spec. It's not crazy to imagine, it's just wrong in F1 context is all. This isn't some engine that's been sitting in a car rusting and falling apart for 20 years. It's gone through very few miles, and taken apart for extensive maintenance after every race, and tuned to minute perfection. It's practically "new" every single race. The degradation they're worried about aren't of the type that causes HP leakage, there won't be scratches in the cylinder causing less compression, or oil leakage, or timing delays, or tired O-rings or bearings causing extra friction. They're more of the type that a brittle engine going through repeat heat cycles can crack and/or blow up. In a lot of cases, it's not necessarily a direct loss in performance, rather things like bearing clearances slowly loosening as they wear, and the slackening fit causing excessive vibrations when running at higher power levels, so they have to reduce power to keep the car from shaking itself apart, or limit revs etc. For every engine on a car, several have died on a dyno to give them extremely good insight into exactly what level of power is available for a given level of wear. I would bet that they can plug the lifetime throttle data, engine mode, and vibration data into a formula and get the maximum acceptable power level for any given engine.
Yea and it's near maximum power for even "old" power units, so whats the difference? There is virtually no difference. They might be able to push a new engine slightly higher, but it's nowhere near what people seem to make it be (or commentators for the matter). It's not gonna help shit. Didn't the first RB engines even had some minor vibration trouble leading them to "tune them down", despite still easily winning Baku with old engines against Merc with brand new ones? This really won't play any role at all in the championship.
|
On September 15 2021 07:53 Kaolla wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2021 06:53 Amui wrote:On September 15 2021 06:19 Excludos wrote:On September 15 2021 05:57 ChristianS wrote:
It’s not crazy to imagine a new engine of same spec might perform a bit better than one with some mileage, I would think? But yes, “new engine” should not matter anywhere near as much as in previous years, where it meant a new spec. It's not crazy to imagine, it's just wrong in F1 context is all. This isn't some engine that's been sitting in a car rusting and falling apart for 20 years. It's gone through very few miles, and taken apart for extensive maintenance after every race, and tuned to minute perfection. It's practically "new" every single race. The degradation they're worried about aren't of the type that causes HP leakage, there won't be scratches in the cylinder causing less compression, or oil leakage, or timing delays, or tired O-rings or bearings causing extra friction. They're more of the type that a brittle engine going through repeat heat cycles can crack and/or blow up. In a lot of cases, it's not necessarily a direct loss in performance, rather things like bearing clearances slowly loosening as they wear, and the slackening fit causing excessive vibrations when running at higher power levels, so they have to reduce power to keep the car from shaking itself apart, or limit revs etc. For every engine on a car, several have died on a dyno to give them extremely good insight into exactly what level of power is available for a given level of wear. I would bet that they can plug the lifetime throttle data, engine mode, and vibration data into a formula and get the maximum acceptable power level for any given engine. Yea and it's near maximum power for even "old" power units, so whats the difference? There is virtually no difference. They might be able to push a new engine slightly higher, but it's nowhere near what people seem to make it be (or commentators for the matter). It's not gonna help shit. Didn't the first RB engines even had some minor vibration trouble leading them to "tune them down", despite still easily winning Baku with old engines against Merc with brand new ones? This really won't play any role at all in the championship.
F1 is won on thousandths of a second gains. Just because Merc had a bad race doesn't mean the gains are intangible. If you lose just 1ms per upshift because the redline has been reduced by 100rpm to protect the engine, that could already be half a tenth per lap in timeloss. Other things like gearbox sync as well, a worn gearbox won't quite mesh as well as a fresh one, and there's a very brief throttle cut until the sensor reports that the gear has meshed. There's tons of areas where you can lose time on restricted components.
Worn components absolutely can and do cost performance that can win or lose races. Max and Lewis are often within a tenth of each other in race trim. It's just that under normal conditions, the restricted component changes are often synced due to regulations and specific race timings(eg. engine change at power circuits).
|
On September 15 2021 16:13 Amui wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2021 07:53 Kaolla wrote:On September 15 2021 06:53 Amui wrote:On September 15 2021 06:19 Excludos wrote:On September 15 2021 05:57 ChristianS wrote:
It’s not crazy to imagine a new engine of same spec might perform a bit better than one with some mileage, I would think? But yes, “new engine” should not matter anywhere near as much as in previous years, where it meant a new spec. It's not crazy to imagine, it's just wrong in F1 context is all. This isn't some engine that's been sitting in a car rusting and falling apart for 20 years. It's gone through very few miles, and taken apart for extensive maintenance after every race, and tuned to minute perfection. It's practically "new" every single race. The degradation they're worried about aren't of the type that causes HP leakage, there won't be scratches in the cylinder causing less compression, or oil leakage, or timing delays, or tired O-rings or bearings causing extra friction. They're more of the type that a brittle engine going through repeat heat cycles can crack and/or blow up. In a lot of cases, it's not necessarily a direct loss in performance, rather things like bearing clearances slowly loosening as they wear, and the slackening fit causing excessive vibrations when running at higher power levels, so they have to reduce power to keep the car from shaking itself apart, or limit revs etc. For every engine on a car, several have died on a dyno to give them extremely good insight into exactly what level of power is available for a given level of wear. I would bet that they can plug the lifetime throttle data, engine mode, and vibration data into a formula and get the maximum acceptable power level for any given engine. Yea and it's near maximum power for even "old" power units, so whats the difference? There is virtually no difference. They might be able to push a new engine slightly higher, but it's nowhere near what people seem to make it be (or commentators for the matter). It's not gonna help shit. Didn't the first RB engines even had some minor vibration trouble leading them to "tune them down", despite still easily winning Baku with old engines against Merc with brand new ones? This really won't play any role at all in the championship. F1 is won on thousandths of a second gains. Just because Merc had a bad race doesn't mean the gains are intangible. If you lose just 1ms per upshift because the redline has been reduced by 100rpm to protect the engine, that could already be half a tenth per lap in timeloss. Other things like gearbox sync as well, a worn gearbox won't quite mesh as well as a fresh one, and there's a very brief throttle cut until the sensor reports that the gear has meshed. There's tons of areas where you can lose time on restricted components. Worn components absolutely can and do cost performance that can win or lose races. Max and Lewis are often within a tenth of each other in race trim. It's just that under normal conditions, the restricted component changes are often synced due to regulations and specific race timings(eg. engine change at power circuits).
They are often within a tenth in race trim because whoever's leading is controlling the pace and saving tires knowing the other can't pass him anyway. That doesn't mean they can't go faster. Obviously worn parts can play a very small role, but it's not all that big as you make it seem to be (imo).
|
They've already switched PU this season, and several times in previous seasons. We know switching the PU does not entail tangible changes in speed. I already explained why last page. They're not "worn" like a regular engine is worn. Nothing is going slower, there's no loss of compression, there's no extra friction in the bearings. The engine is taken apart and "rebuilt" after every race, and is practically brand new at the start of every race weekend. The difference is the chances of the engines cracking due to repeat heat cycles
|
On September 15 2021 18:41 Excludos wrote:
They've already switched PU this season, and several times in previous seasons. We know switching the PU does not entail tangible changes in speed. I already explained why last page. They're not "worn" like a regular engine is worn. Nothing is going slower, there's no loss of compression, there's no extra friction in the bearings. The engine is taken apart and "rebuilt" after every race, and is practically brand new at the start of every race weekend. The difference is the chances of the engines cracking due to repeat heat cycles
The engines are not taken apart and rebuilt between races, at least not the sealed components(ICE, turbo, gearbox, which encompasses the moving parts of an engine) They can be taken apart under FIA supervision for inspection purposes, per the sporting regulations, but nothing that would constitute being rebuilt. Every part that came out of a sealed volume must go back in, or else it constitutes a change of component. If this is done, it's a factory operation, not usually done unless there was potential crash damage or an engine failure. The engines generally go from race to race with nothing more than an oil change.
I've copied the relevant sections of the technical regulations. The assemblies listed are included in the seal volume and are subject to the replacement limits in the sporting regulations, so any change in excess of those will incur a penalty.
Refer to the table in Appendix 2 of these regulations.
The parts listed as “EXC” in the table referred to above may be changed without incurring a
penalty under Article 23.3 of the F1 Sporting Regulations. If changing any of these parts
involves breaking a seal this may be done but must be carried out under FIA supervision. Any
parts changed may only be replaced by parts homologated in accordance with Appendix 4 of
the F1 Sporting Regulations.
All Engine sub-assemblies
sealed according to Article 23 of
the F1 Sporting Regulations (e.g.
engine components within cam-
covers, cylinder heads,
crankcase, any gear case)
And
PU pressure charging
components (e.g. compressor
from inlet to outlet including
wheel; turbine from inlet to
outlet including wheel; shaft,
bearings and housings)
|
On September 15 2021 23:27 Amui wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2021 18:41 Excludos wrote:
They've already switched PU this season, and several times in previous seasons. We know switching the PU does not entail tangible changes in speed. I already explained why last page. They're not "worn" like a regular engine is worn. Nothing is going slower, there's no loss of compression, there's no extra friction in the bearings. The engine is taken apart and "rebuilt" after every race, and is practically brand new at the start of every race weekend. The difference is the chances of the engines cracking due to repeat heat cycles The engines are not taken apart and rebuilt between races, at least not the sealed components(ICE, turbo, gearbox, which encompasses the moving parts of an engine) They can be taken apart under FIA supervision for inspection purposes, per the sporting regulations, but nothing that would constitute being rebuilt. Every part that came out of a sealed volume must go back in, or else it constitutes a change of component. If this is done, it's a factory operation, not usually done unless there was potential crash damage or an engine failure. The engines generally go from race to race with nothing more than an oil change. I've copied the relevant sections of the technical regulations. The assemblies listed are included in the seal volume and are subject to the replacement limits in the sporting regulations, so any change in excess of those will incur a penalty. Show nested quote +
Refer to the table in Appendix 2 of these regulations.
The parts listed as “EXC” in the table referred to above may be changed without incurring a
penalty under Article 23.3 of the F1 Sporting Regulations. If changing any of these parts
involves breaking a seal this may be done but must be carried out under FIA supervision. Any
parts changed may only be replaced by parts homologated in accordance with Appendix 4 of
the F1 Sporting Regulations.
Show nested quote +
All Engine sub-assemblies
sealed according to Article 23 of
the F1 Sporting Regulations (e.g.
engine components within cam-
covers, cylinder heads,
crankcase, any gear case)
And Show nested quote +PU pressure charging
components (e.g. compressor
from inlet to outlet including
wheel; turbine from inlet to
outlet including wheel; shaft,
bearings and housings)
Correct. Maybe I didn't make myself clear. I never meant (or said) "swap any internal components" (Tho I assume O-rings and bearings are probably swappable once you get clearance to get to them, but that's just a guess). Swapping components does indeed incur a grid penalty.
They do, however, take the engine apart. How that is done in terms of FIA and supervision, I do not know. I haven't read most of the technical regulations because.. holy shit I'm not that bored. However I can work out from statements made in interviews, where team principals often talk about taking apart the engine for either checkups after a crash or regular maintenance. I suspect supervision is required for the reason that someone needs to be there to make sure you're not swapping any parts, but is not an otherwise limiting factor
|
On September 16 2021 01:02 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2021 23:27 Amui wrote:On September 15 2021 18:41 Excludos wrote:
They've already switched PU this season, and several times in previous seasons. We know switching the PU does not entail tangible changes in speed. I already explained why last page. They're not "worn" like a regular engine is worn. Nothing is going slower, there's no loss of compression, there's no extra friction in the bearings. The engine is taken apart and "rebuilt" after every race, and is practically brand new at the start of every race weekend. The difference is the chances of the engines cracking due to repeat heat cycles The engines are not taken apart and rebuilt between races, at least not the sealed components(ICE, turbo, gearbox, which encompasses the moving parts of an engine) They can be taken apart under FIA supervision for inspection purposes, per the sporting regulations, but nothing that would constitute being rebuilt. Every part that came out of a sealed volume must go back in, or else it constitutes a change of component. If this is done, it's a factory operation, not usually done unless there was potential crash damage or an engine failure. The engines generally go from race to race with nothing more than an oil change. I've copied the relevant sections of the technical regulations. The assemblies listed are included in the seal volume and are subject to the replacement limits in the sporting regulations, so any change in excess of those will incur a penalty.
Refer to the table in Appendix 2 of these regulations.
The parts listed as “EXC” in the table referred to above may be changed without incurring a
penalty under Article 23.3 of the F1 Sporting Regulations. If changing any of these parts
involves breaking a seal this may be done but must be carried out under FIA supervision. Any
parts changed may only be replaced by parts homologated in accordance with Appendix 4 of
the F1 Sporting Regulations.
All Engine sub-assemblies
sealed according to Article 23 of
the F1 Sporting Regulations (e.g.
engine components within cam-
covers, cylinder heads,
crankcase, any gear case)
And PU pressure charging
components (e.g. compressor
from inlet to outlet including
wheel; turbine from inlet to
outlet including wheel; shaft,
bearings and housings)
Correct. Maybe I didn't make myself clear. I never meant (or said) "swap any internal components" (Tho I assume O-rings and bearings are probably swappable once you get clearance to get to them, but that's just a guess). Swapping components does indeed incur a grid penalty. They do, however, take the engine apart. How that is done in terms of FIA and supervision, I do not know. I haven't read most of the technical regulations because.. holy shit I'm not that bored. However I can work out from statements made in interviews, where team principals often talk about taking apart the engine for either checkups after a crash or regular maintenance. I suspect supervision is required for the reason that someone needs to be there to make sure you're not swapping any parts, but is not an otherwise limiting factor
The engine constitutes a lot more parts than the ICE. Cooling, oil pumps, wiring looms etc. can all fail and be replaced without breaking the FIA seals on the ICE. It's technically taking apart the engine, but not specifically the ICE.
O-rings and bearings inside the sealed volumes aren't replaceable. If bearings have been pressed onto a shaft for example, that's not something that can be reversed outside of a factory setting.
And yes, I have read most of the technical regulations because I'm a bored engineer.
|
meanwhile, Mclaren 1-2 since 2010; just saying
|
On September 16 2021 07:07 pebble444 wrote:
meanwhile, Mclaren 1-2 since 2010; just saying
Long may it continue!
|
On September 16 2021 07:07 pebble444 wrote:
meanwhile, Mclaren 1-2 since 2010; just saying
And the only 1-2 this season from any team. Pretty surprising how uncompetitive the #2 drivers on RB/Merc are to be honest.
|
Looks like Sochi will be dry on Sunday as F1 usually goes. Spa was an aberration. We wont get a 2nd Spa... or will we?
|
Most likely it will be Abu Dhabi or Bahrein or some middle eastern circuit
|
Sounds like it's touch and go right now if qualifying will happen. It could get rained out, and they will either do qualifying Sunday morning like they did in Japan a couple years back, or they will go with the FP2 result as qualifying.
I have a hunch this might be a sleepy race to watch. With Mercedes unchallenged at the front, Verstappen and Leclerc starting at the back, and Perez a ways down the order so far this weekend, there might not be a lot of action. Red Bull in general seemed to be on the back foot in FP1 and FP2. Verstappen's car looked very unsettled in FP2 and he was not fast at all.
Of course, everything goes out the window if the track starts damp and transitions to dry like Sainz suggested it might.
|
On September 25 2021 13:39 Ben... wrote:
I have a hunch this might be a sleepy race to watch. With Mercedes unchallenged at the front, Verstappen and Leclerc starting at the back
Sounds pretty exciting to me! There's going to be lots of overtakes
|
|
|
LET'S GO LANDO!
if Lewis can't get P1 tomorrow, without Max being anywhere near, I'll be laughing for a week
|
On September 25 2021 22:16 Excludos wrote:
LET'S GO LANDO!
if Lewis can't get P1 tomorrow, without Max being anywhere near, I'll be laughing for a week
Let's hope so. He is the primary reason why Max needs another engine.
|
This is one of those cases where I like being proven wrong. Good stuff from Lando, Sainz, and George. Mercedes imploded again. Apparently even without Hamilton throwing a wrench in everything by hitting they wall, they probably wouldn't have got fast laps in because they left everything too late.
Williams look to be genuinely getting into the territory where points are more regularly possible for them. George is great of course, but even Latifi is doing much better. Their car seems to actually have pace now.
On September 25 2021 21:24 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2021 13:39 Ben... wrote:
I have a hunch this might be a sleepy race to watch. With Mercedes unchallenged at the front, Verstappen and Leclerc starting at the back Sounds pretty exciting to me! There's going to be lots of overtakes
This comment was because Verstappen was unsure how easy it will be for him to overtake and get to higher places. It all depends if Red Bull got their race setup figured out because in FP2 Verstappen was quite concerned that their setup was not good and was going to make passing difficult.
|
On September 26 2021 02:32 Ben... wrote:This is one of those cases where I like being proven wrong. Good stuff from Lando, Sainz, and George. Mercedes imploded again. Apparently even without Hamilton throwing a wrench in everything by hitting they wall, they probably wouldn't have got fast laps in because they left everything too late. Williams look to be genuinely getting into the territory where points are more regularly possible for them. George is great of course, but even Latifi is doing much better. Their car seems to actually have pace now. Show nested quote +On September 25 2021 21:24 Excludos wrote:On September 25 2021 13:39 Ben... wrote:
I have a hunch this might be a sleepy race to watch. With Mercedes unchallenged at the front, Verstappen and Leclerc starting at the back Sounds pretty exciting to me! There's going to be lots of overtakes This comment was because Verstappen was unsure how easy it will be for him to overtake and get to higher places. It all depends if Red Bull got their race setup figured out because in FP2 Verstappen was quite concerned that their setup was not good and was going to make passing difficult.
Possibly. I feel like if they're not confident in their setup, they would probably have run a couple of laps in qualy just for more data. I don't know what's going on behind the scenes, but FP has never really been a good indicator for us fans of actual race pace
|
hmm, was Bottas 'strategically' demoted, via a power unit change, at the back of the pack, to keep Verstappen from advancing faster?.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
