- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
It also begs the obvious question... was the pre-test dyno moving around the factory floor like a rogue washing machine?
2017 F1 Constructor technical info/developmentFormula 1
- Thread starter LMSCorvetteGT2
- 2,124 comments
- 135,054 views
It also begs the obvious question... was the pre-test dyno moving around the factory floor like a rogue washing machine?
- 6,976
- United States
- 2,981
- Nowhere
- TheSweeney_
ROAD_DOGG33J
Premium
- 14,217
- IL, USA
- holyc0w1
- holyc0w
At that point it will be a GP3 engine.
- 2,981
- Nowhere
- TheSweeney_
Pete05
Premium
- 7,080
- Melbourne, Australia
That'll require a modern miracle to see out that duration.
If they're 30km/h down on the speed traps in testing, I think they're already at that point.
Poor Alonso
Maybe he should do what Alain Prost did in the lead up to the 1991 Australian GP & call the thing for what he really thinks it is.
Alain described the '91 Ferrari as a bus or a truck & was promptly fired. Prost didn't seem too distraught at the time & I can't recall him ever regretting his outburst.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
That'll require a modern miracle to see out that duration.
If they're 30km/h down on the speed traps in testing, I think they're already at that point.
Poor Alonso
Maybe he should do what Alain Prost did in the lead up to the 1991 Australian GP & call the thing for what he really thinks it is.
Alain described the '91 Ferrari as a bus or a truck & was promptly fired. Prost didn't seem too distraught at the time & I can't recall him ever regretting his outburst.
Wont happen, and Alonso has already done that. McLaren aren't Ferrari, where you can call them crap and have some punishment like being fired. Also it seems he is on their side, just not Honda's side. The situation almost reminds me of Red Bull and Renault in 2014 at this point.
![[Nor]MclarenF1](/forum/data/avatars/m/169/169289.jpg?1413287138){kind=avatar}
- 2,281
- Moss
- hoydeskrekk
From what I've gathered, Alonso seems to be happy with the balance and grip of the car, it's just that washing machine in the back he loathes.
You really have to wonder how many of the Honda engineers are walking around with their head up their a**. These kind of vibrations should have been detected the first day they ran it on a dyno.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
Yes. That's what I said in the post you quoted.
This is the part I'm curious on and not sure of, I doubt the dyno would have caught it, since it's a static set up. The Engine is dyno'd not the car and engine.
- 2,281
- Moss
- hoydeskrekk
If the vibrations are indeed coming from the engine itself, then they should manifest themselves regardless of it being mounted in the car or on a dyno. One would assume they would mount it on the dyno in the same way it would be in the car.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
But a dyno wouldn't reveal that like several days of testing that's my point. A static dyno doesn't do enough for a long enough duration to show you what is wrong with the car. They're only using it for a short period to assess the torque and power curves and then work out other important stuff like fuel flow predictions, where the peak power is compared ideally to other manufactures and so on. The reason I'm critical of it, is not because people think it should have been caught on a dyno, it's because it should have been a real thought during the design process.
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
I'd argue with that, I have to say, long runs on the dyno are de rigeur with simulation suspension/gearbox loads plugged in. This article's not about F1 but the similarities are obvious.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
They aren't though, perhaps gearbox but not suspension, they're a stress test and assessment of capabilities
Watched many videos on F1 dyno testing like a nerd, cause "it's cool dude"
- 23,800
- Philippines
Simulation on the dyno can only do so much. It's possible that vibration from actually running on the track at speed compounds an issue that's not present on the dyno, even with the engine set up as it is supposed to be installed on the car.
I hope they get things fixed. Not good to be this far down at the start of a new year. They SOMEHOW got everything working... somewhat... last year, despite a bad pre-season, but sixth place just isn't good enough for a team like McLaren. They really ought to be up in fourth, at least!
I hope they get things fixed. Not good to be this far down at the start of a new year. They SOMEHOW got everything working... somewhat... last year, despite a bad pre-season, but sixth place just isn't good enough for a team like McLaren. They really ought to be up in fourth, at least!
LeGeNd-1
Premium
- 7,264
- Australia
- GTP_LeGeNd-1
I'm loving the more aggressive designs this year. The low and wide stance really brings back memories of the early 2000s. Just needs 4 more things to be perfect:
1. Remove the thumb tip nose
2. Smooth out the step in the nose
3. Ban shark fins (or at least limit their size like the Mercedes fin)
4. Make the endplate of the rear wing 90 degree straight instead of the current narrow then widening near the top (seriously, it just looks weird from behind)
And bring back V10, but that's not gonna happen so I'll just hope for the 4 things above
1. Remove the thumb tip nose
2. Smooth out the step in the nose
3. Ban shark fins (or at least limit their size like the Mercedes fin)
4. Make the endplate of the rear wing 90 degree straight instead of the current narrow then widening near the top (seriously, it just looks weird from behind)
And bring back V10, but that's not gonna happen so I'll just hope for the 4 things above
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
No. They'd either have to extend the nose plane to cover it or remove the tip itself... which would be crazy stupid given some of the crashes we've seen.
Definitely.
Agreed. Several of the team bosses think they might be gone by Melbourne, Brawn certainly wants them gone.
Subjective I guess... but I like it
And bring back V10, but that's not gonna happen so I'll just hope for the 4 things above
Bring back a slower, heavier, far-less-efficient engine? Hmmm.
- 16,271
- Boise, ID
- GTP_EDK
It's different than you might think. Note the dynamic test rigs that James Allen notes in this article. It sounds as if the teams have some pretty sophisticated ways to simulate the rigors of the track.
/https://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2017...-have-learned-from-f1-new-car-testing-so-far/
James Allen on F1
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
I'm loving the more aggressive designs this year. The low and wide stance really brings back memories of the early 2000s. Just needs 4 more things to be perfect:
1. Remove the thumb tip nose
2. Smooth out the step in the nose
3. Ban shark fins (or at least limit their size like the Mercedes fin)
4. Make the endplate of the rear wing 90 degree straight instead of the current narrow then widening near the top (seriously, it just looks weird from behind)
And bring back V10, but that's not gonna happen so I'll just hope for the 4 things above
Still not understanding why bring back an engine design that was at its best then, and isn't faster than the current.
Thumb tip wont go, teams could design them better, but it's done for saftey. Step nose could be smooth already, teams tend to like to give a slight step for an s-duct. Another reason why the step is still there is nothing to do with the regs as much and more to do with the aggressive and revised front suspension design.
The only two I can see happening are the end plates and shark fin.
That doesn't show anything to do with an engine rather than the car itself, doesn't inform us if it's running while on the rig, or even if it has the engine in it. Also as far as talks go, everyone even McLaren and Honda have talked about being surprised to not have caught these issues on the dyno. A dyno isn't a dynamic rig it's a static one that tests various things as most of us know.
I just showed you an F1 dyno test the one that has been talked about, unless the team is claiming it's a harmonics issue that is causing things to come out of place. Then that's a big issue. Also an issue that once again would not be caught in a rig or fully set up in an F1 car on testing doing long hours. Doesn't change that there were still other issues with the engine.
Last edited:
- 16,271
- Boise, ID
- GTP_EDK
Right, I understand the difference between a dyno and dynamic rig.
Mercedes seems to have some limited details on their recruiting site regarding their rig. If you click on those dots in the photo, it references things like "Single and Multi-Axis testing apparatus with full track replay ability".
And this -
"We have a state-of-the-art Test and Development Centre that measures the performance, compliance and endurance of the car. The facility houses cutting edge technology and test rigs, operated by highly skilled technicians and engineers. This setup allows us to simulate track impacts so that we can analyse the loads acting on the car in dynamic conditions."
http://careers.mercedesamgf1.com/facilities/test-and-development-centre/
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
Okay and that's Mercedes, not McLaren or Honda. Back in the late 2000s, Alonso was interviewed and discussed the difference between at the time Renault's simulator and that of McLaren. Claiming that Renault might as well be a PS2 or something to that regard in terms of sophistication. Point being, that perhaps the rigor of the dynamic rig aren't in the same scale/magnitude as the Merc one. Thus a blanket ideal as if all F1 teams should be of the same ilk (they're not we know this for a fact) is just not correct.
Loads of the car, meaning they test the car much like I test components of an aircraft for my field. That doesn't mean the engine is one in the car, or two even running during the dynamic situation to see what would happen to the car. In reality it's a test of the car, just like the dyno is a test of the engine.
And let's say it is, even so that doesn't change the fact that they got it fundamentally wrong to the point that vibrations something any engineer has to consider, was over looked. If I over look it on a project for Aircraft do you know what happens? The point is the same here, something from what we can gather was grossly overlooked, and the results are by far lesser track time and data analysis compared to others, an already back foot before the season starts, and planned revising through the season to make up for a few lost days. That is massive and not forgivable at this level, that was my point. Where they failed to figure it out is splitting hairs.
Last edited:
- 3,035
- Kingston, Jamaica
- pj-gm
- PJwasHere876
A big part of me is hoping this is just being blown out of proportion by the press, and that Honda didn't really just take 0 steps forward and go 3 steps, or years, back.
Never thought things could get worse than 2015. I don't know how a group of designers could be so much more incompetent than the other 3 suppliers. Renault are getting their act together despite an abysmal start.
Never thought things could get worse than 2015. I don't know how a group of designers could be so much more incompetent than the other 3 suppliers. Renault are getting their act together despite an abysmal start.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
Not sure how winning 3 races is abysmal. And Renault have had their act together. What Red Bull didn't like was that they weren't number 1 because of engines dictating the better car than aero. If Renault were that bad, I'd have expected less. Honda is truly the worst right now and doesn't show signs of getting better any time soon.
I really wanted to see a four way battle, especially with how good the McLaren looks, but at best we'll see 3 teams fighting each other with some possible surprise podiums from FI, Williams and Renault. Though since Bottas isn't at Williams anymore, I'd struggle to see Williams getting any podiums, perhaps TR.
- 3,035
- Kingston, Jamaica
- pj-gm
- PJwasHere876
Red Bull built a good chassis in 2014, and won a couple races due to poor reliability of their competition, not because of the engine in the back. As you know, very few kind things were said about the engine that year.
It was expected to be a much worse ride for them than it actually turned out to be due to how little mileage they covered in testing due to almost equal levels of unreliability to what we see Honda going through, and the press were all over Renault. By the time Ricciardo stepped onto the podium in the first race, the criticisms were gone, at least until he was disqualified.
It was expected to be a much worse ride for them than it actually turned out to be due to how little mileage they covered in testing due to almost equal levels of unreliability to what we see Honda going through, and the press were all over Renault. By the time Ricciardo stepped onto the podium in the first race, the criticisms were gone, at least until he was disqualified.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
They also got podiums that year, they did what Ferrari couldn't, if the engine wasn't good enough to do such then they wouldn't have got it. Reliability is part of the game, the Renault stood better those days it needed to, and RBR got a win as the factory team. Also I'm aware of how little love was shared between the two groups, but once again that was RBR throwing crayons against the wall cause they weren't remotely in the same position for another WDC/WCC year. Too bad. Mercedes planned for this more than the others, and they got the reward.
Yes this is true, however, the difference between them and Honda, is this. Honda is on their third year of playing this game where the engine they build isn't even ready for pre-season, forget the season alone. That's an issue. Renault on the other hand had issues (as did Ferrari) and made up for it and worked hard to get back to it. Why Renault and their engines are still a talking point is because of how far ahead Mercedes are to the rest of them, and the fact that Renault were powering world champions and aren't any more.
LeGeNd-1
Premium
- 7,264
- Australia
- GTP_LeGeNd-1
No. They'd either have to extend the nose plane to cover it or remove the tip itself... which would be crazy stupid given some of the crashes we've seen.
Definitely.
Agreed. Several of the team bosses think they might be gone by Melbourne, Brawn certainly wants them gone.
Subjective I guess... but I like it
Bring back a slower, heavier, far-less-efficient engine? Hmmm.
Regarding the nose tip: I'm not aware that it's there for safety reasons. I thought it's just the team's way of maximising the aero despite the regulations mandating a certain size of the nose length/width etc. I wouldn't have thought such a small part would have a big part on crash safety. Then again Mercedes' car last year and this year have managed to do away with thumb noses so there's no reason why other teams can't follow suit.
I know the V10 is a dinosaur compared to the current crop of engines. But I just miss the screaming sound so much
When I look at a Formula shaped car, I expect to hear a high pitched blood curdling sound. The V6T's complex guttural sound is interesting too, but it's incongrous with the image of F1. A lot of it is nostalgia, but the watching the current cars it's just lacking soul.See above for the engine argument. It's a weak argument objectively and rationally, but then again when has racing ever been rational?
Mercedes is the prettiest car of this year for me because of the lack of thumb nose, smoothest nosecone design and minimalist shark fin (at least their first version was). If you can ignore the rear endplate curve it looks like 2017 could just be a continuation from 2008. But then you hear the cars and you're reminded that it's not early 2000s anymore
- 16,271
- Boise, ID
- GTP_EDK
I totally agree that this is an unacceptable failure on the part of the engineering teams.
To one of your points, and it remains unclear to me, those rigs might actuate only the chassis without the engine running. McLaren seems to have a few more details on their site.
http://www.mclaren.com/formula1/car/simulated-secs-how-f1-teams-find-laptime-1147741/
I had read that article from James the day it was posted, and it was what I thought of when I read your post. I interpreted his article to mean that the constructors are effectively running the cars on rigs at the factory, which is one of the things that allows them to amass so much test mileage once they are at the track.
The things I have been reading now suggest harmonics may be vibrating the electronics apart, which is not a good scenario to be in. Have experienced similar in the MR2 I race in. When a race engine gets up over 100 hours, the bearing clearances cause more vibration, we start getting weird failures like distributors and ECUs.
To be clear, I really wasn't trying to discredit your post, I was simply trying to add more information to the discussion.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
See above for the engine argument. It's a weak argument objectively and rationally, but then again when has racing ever been rational?
Mercedes is the prettiest car of this year for me because of the lack of thumb nose, smoothest nosecone design and minimalist shark fin (at least their first version was). If you can ignore the rear endplate curve it looks like 2017 could just be a continuation from 2008. But then you hear the cars and you're reminded that it's not early 2000s anymore
Racing is pretty rational, it's probably one of the best ways to stress test designs that later go on to other potential road based machines. I'd say there is irrational racing that is purely sport and entertainment, but F1 for decades has been something other than just sport, and so has top level sports car racing. I mean if you heard the cars after 2005 (ignore STR) you'd have come to the same realization. People complained when V12 were gone, people complained when DFV were no longer a thing, the when V10s went, when the power of the turbos first time around were no more, and then the last gen v8s. I mean people know these engines aren't ever lasting the sooner you get over that the sooner you can enjoy the sport more so, then living a nostalgic dream. Enjoying them is one thing, but each passing year wishing to seem them comeback is a whole other argument.
I imagine if it sounded more like it does in a test people would love them.
Exactly, the point I was making something that a dyno nor rig with engine attached would have ever shown. The only thing that would have shown I feel is if they did an endurance run over several days on the dyno with the engine. Something that we hear Le Mans teams do to verify that the engines are ideally sound to run races that happen to be 24 hours in length.
Also I know you're not trying to discredit my post nor do I feel anyone here is. I just enjoy the dialogue in this aspect of F1, which is why I keep making the thread every year. I just like the back and forth I know you're not trying to place any ill will toward me or anyone else. I just find what we both see as interesting.
Last edited:
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
