Hey there! Thanks for dropping by my blog! Take a look around and grab the RSS feed to stay updated. See you around!

Posts tagged with "exhaust"

Virgin and Innovation

Virgin launched its car today. It's a conservative-looking, if tidy effort. However, it turns out that at one point this looked like not being the case. Apparently Nick Wirth tested the exhaust-through-front-of-sidepod concept using his CFD facility. However, he decided that the conventional version of the exhausts, though slower, delivered better value for an outfit that needed value.

 

It's always going to be difficult for a team at the back of the grid to innovate. Low budgets make implementation of complicated ideas difficult. Still, it is heartening to know that Virgin has at least got the creativity to try this sort of thing out. Expect it to develop slowly but surely and eventually become a solid mid-fielder on this sort of evidence.

Detect language » English
Read More & Comment

Renault, Exhausts and KERS

Testing has been enjoyable so far in F1, particularly because of the innovation already on show. The prospect of a mid-grid team - Renault - having come up with a new innovation in F1 is exciting. They've got exhausts coming out of the sidepods instead of the back of the car. This should increase the amount of pressure underneath the car.

 

Sending exhaust fumes out using the Renault way should become increasingly useful in future seasons because the energy coming from the engine could be used to help power KERS. According to the rules, KERS has to be positioned between the cockpit and the front of the engine, so the movement of the fumes would be a viable means of kinetic energy recovery. Without the need for long-distance transmission of the energy before release, it would be possible to use a much greater proportion of the energy using this source than from the brakes. Energy harvesting would occur under acceleration (when there is generally little demand on the driver), which makes for much better handling than the brake-harvesting version (which ends up altering the behaviour of the car at the point where it is already at its least predictable).

 

Given that the Le Mans Series primary prototype class now allows any form of energy recovery rather than just the kinetic variety, it's conceivable that an enlightened FIA might permit heat recovery - another mechanism which would make the sidepod-exhausts more useful. Airbox kinetic/heat energy harvesting would be even more useful, but maybe that's hoping for too much innovation from a governing body which stands to gain from regulating as much as possible using as many rules as possible.

 

I don't agree with KERS in top-level racing, but if we must have KERS, it should be a sensible version. Hopefully, Renault's discovery will encourage the FIA to permit the best of a bad job to be made.

Read More & Comment

Re-Analysing The Championship Duel

Warning! Long entry alert!

This entry was inspired by a question asked by Lonny at F1 Insight. He wondered if Felipe Massa would have been champion if his engine failures and pit lane problem in Singapore had been taken into account, irrespective of the stewarding against Hamilton. As promised, I decided to do the maths.

I started doing a reply and then realised that it was much too long to work as a comment.

The analysis is formatted with the cumulative points after each race title. The original one is given first, then the modified one. A corrected analysis of Singapore changed the results towards the end; while the original is left in for historical purposes, the latter number should be taken as the more accurate final points count. Hamilton's score is always given before Massa's.

The first number by each driver underneath the race titles is the number of points actually scored in that race. After that, there is a modifier to take into account the effects of mechanical failures, pit-stop gremlins, bad stewarding and the effects of all these on drivers who would otherwise have finished in a position affecting their points scores. An explanation of all modifiers is given in brackets.

I calculate the following fortune-correction for Massa and Hamilton:

Australia (10-0 becomes 10-2)

Hamilton 10 + 0 (easy victory)

Massa 0 + 2 (engine failure while in 7th)

Malaysia (14-0 becomes 16-2)

Hamilton 4 + 2 (lost 15 seconds in botched McLaren pit stop)

Massa 0 + 0 (spun off on his own accord)

Bahrain (14-10 becomes 16-12)

Hamilton 0 + 0 (he clouted Alonso himself)

Massa 10 + 0 (easy victory)

Spain (20-18 becomes 22-20)

Hamilton 6 + 0 (uneventful third)

Massa 8 + 0 (uneventful second)

Turkey (28-28 becomes 30-30)

Hamilton 8 + 0 (uneventful second)

Massa 10 + 0 (easy victory)

Monaco (38-34 becomes 40-36)

Hamilton 10 + 0 (non-controversial victory, apart from the crash that he was lucky to drive away from)

Massa 6 + 0 (equally non-controversial second or third, as Nick subsequently corrected me)

Canada (38-38 becomes 40-41)

Hamilton 0 + 0 (he crashed of his own accord)

Massa 4 + 1 (lost a pitstop worth of time due to not being fuelable in first stop, a drama missed due to Hamilton's collision, but Raikkonen would have been ahead of him were it not for being hit by Hamilton. Net gain of one point.)

France (38-48 becomes 40-49)

Hamilton 0 + 0 (the chicane-cut rule may be woolly, but none of the known official interpretations permit the first-lap chicane-cut Hamilton did)

Massa 10 - 2 (would have been second but for Raikkonen's exhaust problem)

Britain (48-48 becomes 50-49)

Hamilton 10 + 0 (he won without controversy)

Massa 0 + 0 (he did all his own spins)

Germany (58-54 becomes 60-55)

Hamilton 10 + 0 (he won despite a tactical error)

Massa 6 + 0 (uneventful third)

Hungary (62-54 becomes 63-65)

Hamilton 4 - 1 (would have lost a position if Massa's engine had held. The potential win was lost by his own error)

Massa 0 + 10 (lost victory due to an engine failure)

Europe (70-64 becomes 71-73)

Hamilton 8 + 2 (would have gained Massa's place had a correct penalty been awarded)

Massa 10 - 2 (would have lost a pitstop had he been penalised correctly for unsafe release)

Belgium (76-74 becomes 83-81)

Hamilton 6 + 4 (controversial chicane-cut; on strict interpretation no modification should occur, but on the wording of the interpretations used both before and after the incident, Hamilton had given the place back and waited until Raikkonen erred before going through)

Massa 10 - 2 (would have lost the win if Hamilton had been adjudged by convention accurately instead of a misinterpretation of a post-dated interpretation)

Italy (78-77 becomes 83-84)

Hamilton 2 - 2 (should have been penalised for a chicane-cut against Heidfeld)

Massa 3 + 0 (uneventful sixth)

Singapore (84-77 becomes 91-85 or 91-87)

Hamilton 6 + 2 (Rosberg only finished ahead due to a slow penalty issue)

Massa 0 + 1 [3]
Original analysis comment:(he should have come out about ten seconds ahead of Raikkonen, but Raikkonen himself was sixteenth after all that. Giving Massa ten seconds more only promoted him to tenth, which would have become eighth after Trulli's retirement and Fisichella's performance fading)

Updated analysis comment(he should have come out one stoppage period ahead of Sutil. This would have promoted him to eighth, which makes him sixth after Trulli and Fisichella are taken into account)

Japan (84-79 becomes 93-85 or 93-87)

Hamilton 0 + 2 (the Massa/Bourdais thing wouldn't have been enough in itself to promote him any places as he was too far behind. The collection of penalisable incidents would have raised him one position, but he needed three more to gain a place. However, he should not have been hit by Massa in the first place and did nothing to earn the penalty issued to him from that incident. 43 seconds lost there. This gives him a net position of 7th, just behind Bourdais)

Massa 2 - 2 (should have received the penalty Bourdais got for the crash between them. Also should have been penalised for causing an avoidable collision in addition to one for a chicane-skip and another one for using a sterile area to pass Webber)

China (94-87 becomes 103-93 or 103-95)

Hamilton 10 + 0 (easy victory)

Massa 8 + 0 (technically receiving the position back from Raikkonen is against the Regulations, but convention says that in this situation it's OK. If I am to say Hamilton should not have been penalised for Spa, then I should also say that Massa was correctly unpenalised for this irrespective of my feelings about team orders)

Brazil (98-97 becomes 107-103 or 107-105)

Hamilton 4 + 0 (uneventful fifth from the perspective of this analysis)

Massa 10 + 0 (easy win)

The conclusion is that the gap was three [one if the updated score is used] points smaller than it would have been with all reliability issues, stewarding mishaps and so on taken into account. It remains in Hamilton's favour.
Read More & Comment