aside from RedBull it will be interesting how the rest of the field will lookDrM said:RBR could easily dominate in Monaco.
S. L. said:aside from RedBull it will be interesting how the rest of the field will look
"And Lewis has kept it running! Woooow!"AndyD said:And occasionally this:
Seanspeed said:"And Lewis has kept it running! Woooow!"
skybaby said:lol @ people saying hamilton's puncture was in no way his fault :lol
Hamilton's wheel rim failure confirmed
By Jamie O'Leary Tuesday, May 11th 2010, 12:37 GMT
McLaren has confirmed that Lewis Hamilton's penultimate-lap crash at last weekend's Spanish Grand Prix was caused by a wheel rim failure.
Hamilton looked set for a comfortable second place in the race, but crashed at the high-speed Renault corner when the rim failure caused his left-front tyre to deflate and sent him across the gravel and into the tyre wall.
Team principal Martin Whitmarsh said that the cause of the rim failure had yet to be determined though, and that an investigation remains ongoing.
"The analysis of the part came back yesterday [Monday]... We had Bridgestone here," Whitmarsh told a Vodafone teleconference on Tuesday.
"As we said at the time, we did not believe that the deflation was caused by a puncture or a tyre failure in that all the evidence told us that the rim failed, which caused the deflation.
"The rim failure is being investigated. It could be debris-related, it could be that a lack of tightness of the wheelnut allowed some flexing. What we know is that the rim failed, probably a human error somewhere in the process to cause it, and that led to the deflation and the accident."
Hamilton's crash left him sixth in the World Championship, 21 points behind his championship-leading McLaren team-mate Jenson Button.
personally i think Liuzzi is a waste of money, there are cheaper and better drivers availableDieH@rd said:I did well in f1racemanager
- they gave us 3mil for answer "12"
- gained 3 places in neogaf subleague [im 17th]
- gained 60 places in overal competition [im @ place ~260]
- i have enough money to buy Vitantonio Liuzzi, but im short 1.2mil for Petrov, 3.2mil for Hulkenberg and 3.9mil for Alguersuari. I REALLY HOPE that next bonus question will bring me 4mil.
Hamiltons driving style is hard on the rims!!!1Jinjo said:
S. L. said:personally i think Liuzzi is a waste of money, there are cheaper and better drivers available
How is that his fault again? He eats tires and eats wheels too? What next, he eats chassis? PEACE.Jinjo said:
Pimpwerx said:How is that his fault again? He eats tires and eats wheels too? What next, he eats chassis? PEACE.
Pimpwerx said:How is that his fault again? He eats tires and eats wheels too? What next, he eats chassis? PEACE.
Suspension failures I can't peg on drivers. The car needs to be able to take a pounding. The only thing that made me think Kimi was a car breaker was the engine/drivetrain gremlins that seemed to affect him more than DC or JPM. Just my opinion. He did have a lot more reliability at Ferrari, so he has more evidence supporting him. PEACE.h3ro said:It's the same crap Kimi got while at McLaren. "Oh, his car fails because he's a car breaker. He's too harsh on the suspension." Yeah, Hamilton is rough on his rear tires, but no one should be giving us this trash about how he's a car breaker and Jenson "is so smooth on the car".
Yes, I'm bitter that Kimi doesn't have more than 1 title.
navanman said:F1racemanager website hasn't been updated with any bonus question this week or any bets.
As it Monaco this week, FP1 and FP2 take place a day early on Thursday. The question will have to go up tonight, tomorrow morning to close before Thursday FP1.
AndyD said:Anyone know what channel I can see the race on in Paris on Sunday?
curls said:Bonus is up.
Not for me it isn't :|curls said:Bonus is up.
DieH@rd said:Anyone know the answer? Did he make some recent interview for Monaco?
navanman said:http://my.renaultf1.com/profiles/blogs/robert-kubicas-guide-to-monaco
Thanks to AndyD tip its was easy to find.
Yep mclaren has never liedJinjo said:
skybaby said:Yep mclaren has never lied
Yeah, I can't really afford any improvement that will guarantee a better result, so I think I will just sit there with 3 million in reserve.DieH@rd said:Its really bummer that they are giving only 3mil, i want 4.
AutosportMcLaren boss Martin Whitmarsh says his team is gunning for victory in the Monaco Grand Prix despite the impressive speed of rival Red Bull Racing in Barcelona.
With Mark Webber having dominated the Spanish Grand Prix last weekend, Red Bull arrive in Monte Carlo as hot favourite for victory, especially given its qualifying pace on a track where grid position is vital.
Whitmarsh, however, believes his drivers' performance in recent races has been encouraging despite Red Bull's pace and he reckons McLaren will be up for a fight in Monaco.
And he says he would welcome a dry race, despite that meaning Red Bull's advantage is likely to be bigger.
"If you ask drivers, they'd rather have a dry Monaco," said Whitmarsh during a phone-in on Tuesday. "I think it's a very tight and scary place without the rain. I think our drivers are both very good in the wet though.
"Their performance relative to the awesome speed of the Red Bulls has been pretty good, so I fancy our chances actually.
"I think Monaco is a unique circuit. Red Bull may have had impressive qualifying pace in Spain, but we got a bit closer in the race, and we have two drivers who are super and McLaren has won Monaco 15 times - many more times than any other team.
"And we're trying to make it 16, wet or dry or a combination."
Whitmarsh insisted splitting the drivers into two groups would have been his preferred choice for qualifying, as he reckons everybody will face a hard time trying to get a clean lap.
"I think Q1 in Monaco will be very, very difficult and it's difficult for all of the cars," he said. "At the moment we have to accept that there are six cars that are very difficult to avoid.
"They have been in the order of six/seven seconds slower and when you're trying to open a gap you have cars behind you so you can't back off, and it's a circuit where you're going to catch cars and a circuit at which it's very difficult for those cars to get out of the way, even if they want to.
"I think it's very difficult. By choice, I'd advocate that we divided it up somehow, either by splitting the field in half so you reduce the number of cars and don't have to manage the space quite so on such a small track, or you have a session if you thought perhaps unkindly that the six slower cars were going to fight it out among themselves, that they have the first five minutes to themselves, decided on order of merit, before the rest of the cars get onto the track.
"It's always been difficult, but with more cars and a greater performance differential, there will be controversy. There are some, and I'm not one of them, who think that controversy and stewards' hearings after the event are entertaining. I don't share that view, but it's what some people believe."
Lets see if I can do better than last week, I only got 2 right.Leunam said:Gentlemen, place your bets.
Yeah, same, but I got the last 3 pole bets right so was kind of getting used to it, and then got nothing but 2 of the bonus questions!Leunam said:I never get the Pole, 1st-3rd, and DNF bets right, but I do pretty good on the other questions.
Ferrari introduced a new engine spec in Spain; this was in order to resolve a problem with the pneumatic valve system. This raises two points; why are they allowed to change a frozen engine specification and what are the pneumatic valves?
Since the end of 2006 F1 engine specs have been frozen, this was a move to further reduce the costs for the engine suppliers. It was introduced even after stringent standard engine specifications and limited engines over season were introduced. Since the first homologation of the engines, teams have been allowed to retune the engine for different RPM limits and also to accommodate KERS. Offsetting this has been the increase to the parts covered by the specification freeze.
Teams are however allowed to make changes to the their engines for reliability reasons, this applies both to resolving issues that have blown up engines, as well as impending failures. To request a change, teams have to apply to the FIA outlining the reason for the change and the resulting changes. This information is passed around the other engine suppliers, this transparency helps to reduce excessive changes and reassures teams what their rivals might or might not be getting up to.
While the fundamental reason for this dispensation is to aid teams with reliability problems, any reliability change could also bring a performance gain. This could be either as a direct result of the reliability change i.e. lighter part making more power, or as a secondary result, i.e. new valve seat material allows a different fuel for more power. Clearly any possible advantage will be taken by the manufacturers when making changes to the engine.
Ferrari had an issue with leaking pneumatic valves; this meant the car may not be able to last a full race distance without the system being topped up. Thus Ferrari asked for and gained approval to make alterations to their valve system to resolve the problem.
Pneumatic valves are universal in F1 and have been for decades, first introduced by Renault on their V6 turbo engine, they replicate the effect of valve spring in closing the poppet valves in the cylinder head. Where as a valve spring could do the job, they are more difficult to manufacture to cope with ever higher RPMs. Although F1 engines are now limited to 18,000rpm, these pneumatic valves have worked on engines revving to over 20,000rpm. Metal coiled valve springs, suffer from harmonic and fatigue problems at higher revs. While still resolvable, these issues are simply cured with a switch to a pneumatic valve return system (PVRS). Instead of a valve being closed against the cam by a coil spring sat in a pocket in the head, the pocket is sealed by a cap and the resulting closed cylinder pressurised with nitrogen gas creating an airspirng. Of course the PVRS set up can lose pressure and F1 cars run with small nitrogen cylinder housed in the sidepod to keep the system pressurised. Sometimes when excessive leaking occurs, the car is topped up at a pitstop by a mechanic with a hand held gas cylinder. In Ferraris case their problem was that their system had always leaked to some degree, but with a ban on the longer fuel stops, pit stops are now too short for effective repressurising. Thus they applied to have their system altered. It is understood that the Ferrari solution takes some lessons from the Toyota teams experience, possibly through the new Ferrari Engine Head Luca Marmorini, who also ran Toyotas F1 engine operation until the end of 2008. A different PVRS set up, with different seals and revised oil formulation to aid sealing, the engine is now believed to be more powerful by some 12 horse power. Quite a gain from a change in this era of frozen specification.
Good one. You really got him there.skybaby said:Yep mclaren has never lied
Red Bull
Red Bull further bolstered their early season pace with an aero upgrade in addition to the major changes introduced in China. In Spain this consisted of a new front splitter, revised floor and changes around the exhaust area. Additionally the team had their new wing mirrors, as the old ones were mounted outboard. Their step up in pace is probably attributable to the new underfloor changes. Starting with the splitter the airflow is revised both under and over the floor, with the section of floor ahead of the rear wheels now sporting a slot, similar to McLarens and Ferrari solution. While just inboard of this area the panelling around the exhaust has been smoothed out to improve the route of the exhaust gasses into the diffuser.
Many observers are pointing to the exhaust driven diffuser as a key to the team pace, although the cars generally benign aerodynamics suiting both qualifying and race conditions are as bigger factor. Yet still these do require a suspension system that allows good control of the floors attitude, suggesting Red bull do have innovations in this area that are not yet understood.
Mercedes
After suffering since its launch with a forwards aero\weight bias, Mercedes finally had the upgrade to resolve the W01 of its intrinsic problems. Having had too much load on the front tyres, the car had fought excessive understeer from overloaded front tyres and excessive rear tyre wear through lack of traction at the back wheels.
They have chosen to do this by the simplest method of shifting the front wheels forwards relative to the chassis. While not as complex as new gearboxes or monocoques, this does involve a lot of other changes to the car as their performance or the regulations demand it. Both the front wing and splitter need to move forwards as the regulations use the front axle as a datum for their position. Then the front wing pillars, bargeboards, pod fins and other aerodynamic parts need to accommodate the new front wheel position.
Its the longer splitter that gives way most of the secrets of the wheelbase change. Firstly, the previously vertical mount to support the front edge of the splitter is now angled forwards as it maintains the same upper mounting to the monocoque, but now it has to reach forwards to steady the floor. This suggests the wheelbase shift is in the region of 5cm and not the 10cm suggested by some media. Secondly the splitter used to be a thick rectangular section to house the large slab of ballast, now the splitter is a thin section, with the tungsten weights now limited to its central section.
If its the new wheelbase that improved the Mercedes form, it was the revised roll structure that caught every ones attention. An evolution of the previous set up, with a tall central pillar and the engine air inlets formed either side of the pillar. As its only the central fin that is structural and subject to crash tests, the side scoops can be changed without having to crash test and re-homologate the monocoque. so Mercedes have lowered the inlet snorkel and set it back from the leading edge of the pillar, creating a long blade like fin that merges into the tail fin of the engine cover.
There will be two reasons for doing this, firstly improving the airflow to the rear wing due to the reduced cross section ahead of it. But also for engine performance, this year with the longer fuel tanks teams have had to make the snorkel feeding the air-box longer. There may be a horsepower benefit in having shorter inlets. The two inlets and tail fin are now part of the air-box and removed as one piece. This complex piece of bodywork bolts both the engine cover and to the inlet tray where the air-filter sits. All other teams have separate air-boxes sitting inside the engine cover.
McLaren
A raft of changes were applied the MP4-25 for Spain. The most influential and visible of these, were the new front wing endplate rear wing and a new add-on to the diffuser. At the front the endplate is the teams second iteration this year and somewhere between the complex multi vaned arrangement on the launch car and the simpler vented version used since Bahrain. Now the endplate features three distinct vents taking airflow from the outside to the inside, helping guide the airflow around the front tyre.
At the rear the F-duct rear wing has been revised with a new main plane and flap. In a similar set up to that used in Monaco last year the main plane has its own narrow inlet at the front which feeds a full width slot at the back of the wing. This is not related to the F-duct, as the blown slot is not driver actuated, instead the extra slot allows the rear wing to be steeper without stalling, creating more downforce. Wit the revised main plane the flap has had to be altered with the f-ducts slot now positioned further up the wings rear surface. It is this narrower slot that is blown to stall the wing, by the drivers leg closing the f-duct.
Below all this the diffuser has taken a new shape in the middle section with the curved profile between the upper and lower deck. Sitting in the exit of the upper deck is two element flap and a panel to streamline the air passing up under the tail lamp.
Ferrari:
Compromised by their monocoque Ferrari have managed to get the F-duct control near the drivers left hand.
As with most team teams Ferrari had a number of small changes, but most importantly they brought their full F-Duct rear wing for the first time. Following the same principal as McLarens version, the driver controls airflow through a duct, that feeds back to and stalls the rear wing, increasing top speed. However Ferraris system was designed after the monocoque was homologated, so they have had to compromise on its installation. Air enters the F-duct via an inlet in the top of the engine cover, this passes down the side of the cockpit surround and into the cockpit, exiting to the left of the steering wheel. when left open, the duct blows air into the cockpit. However when the driver presses the back of his specially gloved hand against the rubber outlet, the airflow instead passes back to the rear wing slot and stalls the wing, reducing drag and downforce for more top speed.
In Ferraris case they appear to split the duct feeding back to the rear downwards towards the gearbox. There are suggestions Ferrari also stall their diffuser with this feed. Although the routing of the duct down to the underfloor would be tortuous and the gains from stalling a low drag diffuser would be less effective than stalling the rear wing.
Virgin:
Even though the team knew at an early stage, that their cars fuel tank would not last an entire race at full power. The Virgin team have only managed to get one new car ready for Spain. This highlights the huge task in designing and building a new monocoque and the related aerodynamics and repackaging the components around the back of the chassis. Thus Virgin have had to lengthen the car to fit in larger fuel tank into a longer monocoque. As well as the new tub, Virgin brought a new shark fin engine cover and revised front wing cascades.
Lotus:
While their rivals have either stood still or had to reengineer their cars, Lotus were able to bring a major upgrade to the T127 for Spain. This is both a mechanical and aero upgrade, the suspension now sports Inerters (J-Dampers) and most of the bodywork has been revised.
Inerters were brought into F1 by McLaren in 2005 and their presence predates the Renault Mass Dampers, although they are both solutions to the same issue. Aiming to offset the hysteresis effect of Rubber pneumatic tyres have on the contact patch. The unequal damping of the tyres can work against the suspension and create load variations between the tyre and road. Inerters are fitted tot eh suspension like a heave damper and offset this effect. Inside an Inerter there is a mass that spins on a threaded rod and operates dependant on the movement of the suspension, this absorbed the loaded put through the suspension by the tyre to create more consistent contact patch loads. Lotus had been testing Inerters on a seven post rig in the weeks after China to gain more mechanical grip.
Meanwhile the aerodynamics have been updates with a totally new front wing plus revisions to the diffuser. The front wing sports a more elegant three element set up and endplates with integrated cascades. At the rear the diffuser has gained a pair of extra fences. The front wing itself was expected to be worth 0.5s, while the teams other developments added yet more speed to the car.
Renault:
Renault brought another update to their front wing, with a new flap arrangement. The inner ends of the flaps now longer meet the main plane instead they form a point. The wing was tested but not raced, as was the floor also tested in China, which still appears not to be significant gain over the current race specification.
Williams:
Their rivals Williams had a major upgrade, comprising a new diffuser which required a new gearbox casting. Also the sidepods had new inlets, in particular the left hand inlets being much smaller and r shaped compared to the previously raced version. The asymmetric inlets highlight that the sidepods contain different coolers, often the right-hand sidepod contains both water and oil coolers thus needs to airflow in and out of the sidepod. While teams often have different outlet sizes, its rare for the inlets to be different left to right.
S. L. said:i expected the renault to work well on this track, but they really seem to be up there (even thou i dont expect petrov to finish the race :lol )