F1 Design For Setup & Driver Characteristics

[Fil]

Other topics were being side-tracked, thought the topic should have its own home..


Each team's aim is to get 100% potential performance out of the car prior to driver setup obviously. The discussion is do these cars get designed with tendencies suiting their driver(s), or a neutral setup which can then be adjusted for all drivers.
There are arguments going both ways, both in theory and in real terms.
-Why was Schumacher always so much more dominant than his teammates if they both had neutral cars to work from?
-Yet Massa & Kimi seemed to deal fine with the Ferrari even with differing styles. But then Fisi struggled adapting to Ferrari's 'neutral' car, same with Badoer..
-Alonso & Hamilton seemed to adapt the MP4-22 to their own setups remarkably successfully, giving the neutral design more credibility.


Personally, i think the whole fundamental design of a car gets blurred by the confidence this car's tendency gives its driver to wrench that 100% of potential.
i also assume F1 cars have highly limited tolerances of adjustability to keep them close to their 100% performance window.

A classic video is the one of Herbert vs Schumacher telemetry. I read from this Schumacher gained confidence with oversteering tendencies, control them with steering whilst Herbert sought confidence in understeering tendencies, controlling with throttle. Two opposite setups would be needed here, surely putting stress on one or the other reaching close to the 100% potential of the car.
So did Benetton, and later Ferrari, design a car with more adjustability to suit Schumacher than his teammates? or was he simply that much more brilliant with a neutral car?

And FYI, here's another interesting read on Schumacher vs Barrichello.

[Jersey Tom]

A classic video is the one of Herbert vs Schumacher telemetry. I read from this Schumacher gained confidence with oversteering tendencies, control them with steering whilst Herbert sought confidence in understeering tendencies, controlling with throttle. Two opposite setups would be needed here, surely putting stress on one or the other reaching close to the 100% potential of the car.
So did Benetton, and later Ferrari, design a car with more adjustability to suit Schumacher than his teammates? or was he simply that much more brilliant with a neutral car?

I still don't know if I would call that "opposite" setup. That difference may be as subtle as one notch softer front springs on Schumi's setup. It's different, but not a polar opposite.

I also don't know if I'd say Badoer had trouble adapting to the car. He's certainly driven their cars plenty. He just may not be as quick.

Ideally when you're doing testing you want a driver that can put down 100% pace laps, all day, every day. You're just not gonna get that. No one is superman.

Suppose you have two drivers.. over the course of 5 laps one drives at 92%, 99%, 98%, 91%, 93%... the other drives at 95%, 95%, 95%, 95%, 95%. I'd go with the latter, even if they don't have quite the absolute raw speed.

A guy like Luca may be around because even if he's not unbelievably quick, he can CONSISTENTLY change with setups and give good detailed feedback to the engineers. Plus, it doesn't wear on the race drivers.

As for Schumacher being dominant.. the guy's just that good. You don't get to that many WDC's purely on luck or car performance for THAT long.

[gator]

I believe some things can be adjusted at the track that would enable a driver to setup the car to their preferred driving style. Springs, anti-roll bars, tire pressure, etc to allow for more or less understeer/ oversteer. In that regard, the car is very adjustable.

There are important characteristics built into the car that cannot be changed at the track however. Such as caster, or KPI, etc. I can remember hearing a lot about certain drivers not being able to get enough heat in the tires, and therefore their pace suffered. This is an area I think the designers look at past data and adjust acordingly, so yes I think designers build a car with someone in mind. That is why it is hard for people to watch a driver go to a new team and not do as well as everyone hoped.

The year Massa almost won the championship, I can remember Kimi commenting on not being able to get heat into his tires. From what I remember the broadcasters were speculating that Massa "threw" his car into the turns, where Kimi was "smooth" and less abusive to his tires. Later on in the season this wasn't an issue anymore, I believe because Kimi had a special set of uprights machined just for his driving style that would encourage more heat buildup in his tires.

So yes, F1 cars are very adjustable, to a certain degree. It comes down to who can best adapt and overcome, whether it is by making changes to the car or changes the driver has to make while driving, because a car is never "perfect".

[mike]

i think cars are neutural if the car is performing well, i mean if you car is 10 seconds faster setup is probly not going to change the outcome (brawn start of 09)

but when you push to the limit of getting every tenth out of the driving styles and cars will have a big say on the performance.

Schumacher pushes to the car to the limit and thats his style, similar to Kimi, faster speed in to a corner carry it to the mid corner and hold the car stable on the exit, but when the car is unable to turn in than they will have to correct the car and hence lost their advantage.

notice how Schumacher never driven a zero keel short wheelbased car, zero keels gives great front grip with roll from high roll center but it doesn't slide on the exit which makes the margin of error smaller as if you miss the entry you exit is going to make you even slower and if you make the wheelbase longer its even harder to push hard on the turn in.

on the other hand the 07 and 08 ferrari suited massa well, because he doesn't turn in the car as early but carries stablity and aim of a smooth and well directed exit. tracks like Bahrain Turkey Interlagos, he generally went well.

i think this is a good tread as we as a technical forum need to analyse driving styles as well as cars.

lets face it all of these man are great driver its the combination that bring them wins and championships, a simple he is faster is simply not good enough

[Roland Ehnström]

-Why was Schumacher always so much more dominant than his teammates if they both had neutral cars to work from?

Because he was a more skilled driver than either of his team-mates ever were.

-Yet Massa & Kimi seemed to deal fine with the Ferrari even with differing styles. But then Fisi struggled adapting to Ferrari's 'neutral' car, same with Badoer..

Again, Räikkönen and Massa are clearly better drivers than Fisichella and Badoer.

-Alonso & Hamilton seemed to adapt the MP4-22 to their own setups remarkably successfully [...]

...because they are possibly the two best drivers in F1 after the departure of Schumacher.

lets face it all of these man are great driver its the combination that bring them wins and championships, a simple he is faster is simply not good enough

Yes it is. Driving F1 is a sport, and in all sports some competitors are better than others. Even at the very top level. Why does Usain Bolt win all the time? Because he's faster. Why does Tiger Woods win all the time? Because he's better. I know this is F1 Technical, but driver skill does matter in F1 - possibly more so than most of us think. Drivers like Schumacher, Räikkönen or Alonso are simply faster/better than drivers like Herbert, Badoer or Fisichella. I'd say Schumacher/Räikkönen/Alonso would beat Herbert/Badoer/Fisichella even if the car was built for (and set up to perfectly suit) the driving style of Herbert/Badoer/Fisichella.

[marcush.]

surely we are not talking about steady state car behaviour in terms of over or understeer but more into transient behaviour .
Of course you can manipulate these transients with damper setups but as you work on a certain car you will see that as you try to achieve certain characteristics with the dampers you will inevitably loose somewhere else.
This maybe very true for your car but totally different on the other guys machine sporting a different weight distribution or suspension layout ,maybe different
anti squat or just different driving technique of your pilot.
In my view it is rather obvious that some guys seem to rely on a stable setup to build up confidence in driving ;they rely on the car doing what it is supposed to do and explore the limits of adhesion as they have the talent to work constantly near that limit.So give them the car with the potential to be stable near the physical limits and the raw speed as well and they win a championship.
Other guys ,namely MS and Lewis Hamilton,seem to not rely on a stable setup they are able manipulate the car to do the things they want to do .This is not to be confused with throwing around the car exceeding the physical limits permanently it is a controlled not dealing with the instability but actualy relying on it.Because of this approach these guys can actually drive fast with anything instantly and are getting the most out of it, be it 18th or 1st depending solely on the car performance available.
Stable setup does not mean US or OS ,mind you it does only describe the fact how easily the thing can be disturbed ,excited , react violently to inputs,driver or else induced or in other words does the cdevice react linear or progressively with input or does it perhaps change characteristic as you increase your effort?
Of course if you have a s or os balance you will throw away a lot of potential of the car as you basically just drive on two tyres at the limit ,dragging-pushing the two others along at below par performance.

[mike]

Other guys ,namely MS and Lewis Hamilton,seem to not rely on a stable setup they are able manipulate the car to do the things they want to do .This is a far cry from throwing around the car exceeding the physical limits permanently it is a controlled not dealing with the instability but actualy relying on it.Because of this approach these guys can actually drive with anything and are getting the most out of it, be it 18th or 1st.

relying on instablity makes it a stable setup, i think the key is predictablity

[PlatinumZealot]

A lot of things on the cars can be changed.. want a different caster? different wheel base too? Easy. Make a different set of control arms (maybe modify upright mounts too) for each driver. Dynamic behavior different? change the shocks and springs. You can change the brakes (Barichello Button), change the weight distribution. So many things can be switched out. If the car is good and one of the drivers is not comfortable after all of that I don't know what can help him.

On the stability issues... For two control systems, the one that can handle more instability and more conditions is the better one!

[Fil]

Some interesting comments from McLaren here..

"...you tend to design a racing car to be as neutral as possible. The only way a car is specifically designed for a driver is ergonomically, and, like I say, we're confident that won't be a problem for Jenson.

"You're trying to provide the driver with the broadest possible performance plateau upon which he can improvise to best suit his style. You'd be surprised, too, at how drivers' different approaches very often culminate in a similar lap time, so, in that respect, we're confident that our drivers will be a good match.

"Besides, you usually find that the competitive instinct takes over: when you make a Formula 1 car faster, it invariably works for both drivers. We only engineer for performance – not for individuality"

"We're lucky in that Lewis and Jenson both have fairly neutral driving styles – as does Pedro – so it's unlikely to be a problem for us next year.

"Without the variables of fuel-load and fuel-effect, people have suggested that tyre degradation will be the next most important performance-limiting factor during a race, but we don't think that's likely to be the case.

"If you look at previous examples of a guy who's kind to his tyres, and a guy who isn't, it's rare for the guy who pushes his tyres to slip backwards in a race. I think what you see is that a driver's speed comes from a broad range of variables – and it's invariably the characteristics of the car that create a degradation issue, rather than the drivers."

[Giblet]

I was going to post that same quote from Mr. Lowe.

I have read lots of things about a drivers style not being suited to a particular car, but this is not the same as the car being set up for his team mate.

A lot of engineers have said that they go for a balanced car, that has set up options in many different directions, and the more I see people saying a car was designed for someone, I think it is a myth.

The fact that some cars seem tailor made to a certain driver as opposed to his team mate reflects more the driver's ability to know what he needs to be quick, than the ability of the team to know what he needs to be quick and deliver it without help.

A car like the 2005 or 2006 Renault, can't remember which one or both, but the same car FA did lap one in during testing was the same tub he finished the year in. The car appearing suited to Alonso reflected his ability know his needs and pander to them with set up, where Fisi was not as good, and it made the car look like it was designed for someone else all together.

[mike]

it was 2006

i think they all design the car to be neutural but the range of setup may be different from car to car, no matter how hard to work on the setup F2008 is not going to be faster than MP4-23 in the wet. i know lewis is good in the wet but the car clear had some part to take for its speed (wet).

i also thinks that there are small things in the car where it takes time to make it to the drivers style. small things like moments of inertia cog front vs rear and aero maps of cars they don all follow to the square of the velocity. suspension geometries under bump etc.

[ISLAMATRON]

One thing mentioned in the McLaren article not yet mentioned here is the ergonomics, these can very instrumental in a driver's ability to extract those final tenths or even hundreths out of a car. For example the MP4/25 will have had been nearly totally designed before Button's signing, it will be interesting to see how much more his head pops out of the cockpit seeing how much taller he is to LH. His longer arms, legs, torso and even fingers(& feet) could cause him issues. These days aero design dictates driving position so the drivers are already in an unnatural seating position, being cramped in the cockpit surely wont help at all. With everybody testing ultra high front bulkheads midseason(copying the RB5) drivers view may be even further impeded next year.

[Giblet]

Like seeing Wurz in the Newey Mclaren. He just didn't fit, and considering Newey takes helmet brand into account when designing his cars, it won't mean nothin!

[marcush.]

seriously this cotradicts what we saw this year :
We saw kimi and Fisi fighting it out in Spa and as Fisi came to Ferrari he did not stand the slightest chance in equal machinery.
Now his race engineer was rob smedley who ,by coincidence was his engineer when he was driving for Jordan.. so we surely can assume Giancarlo hit the ground running when he came to the reds ,almost won the last race in a FI ,reunited with his former mate ,it all came down to the car suiting him or not.
You won´t tell me this veteran is unable to setup the car to his liking together with Smedley..
So ,I´m sorry set up is maximising the potential of what is in the car with the range
of adjustments at your disposal.If you cannot find a ways of setting up the car so you can apply your special gift ,the miracle for most of the guys is gone -see Button.
Are these drivers less talented ? In this regard yes ,as they are less adaptable ,they can only unleash the last fragments of time if the thing suits them like a glove.If something is amiss ,they just don´t strive.So thats also why a newboy can come into F1 and blow away his seasoned teammate.If it fits it fits.The Veteran should be able to give detailed input what is missing to make him fast and the engineering stuff has to look into ways to provide the missing characteristics.
Again ,i´m talking about transient behaviour not over or understeer.

[Giblet]

We're talking about designing a car to suit a driver, but you are talking about setting one up for a specific driver, so no contradiction.

Also Fisi had no KERS experience, said the braking was entirely different, and the steering wheel was a whole new animal to learn, and beside an entrenched alien like Kimi, he wasn't quick.

Fisi just didn't have any time to get quick in the car. We all know he can be quick but he needs some testing.

There are too many variables to say "Same driver, same engineer, he should be quick straight out of the box".