2023 Scuderia Ferrari F1 Team

[gastonmazzacane]

Not sure if i agree with the statement that Sainz got slower.

He didn't. He was always slow.

[Xyz22]

Not sure if i agree with the statement that Sainz got slower.

He didn't. He was always slow.

That's not fair.
Sainz is not a slow driver, the opposite.

[Vanja #66]

Ferrari to expand simulation programs: new software for incoming technicians

https://scuderiafans.com/f1-ferrari-to- ... chnicians/

t is no longer sufficient to find a good iteration between data collected on the track with aerodynamic tests and indoor work carried out in CFD, wind tunnels, and the driving simulator. The construction of mathematical models becomes essential to help be predictive of reality, indicating possible development directions. We are talking about applied sciences in which the divisions between one field of research and another can become increasingly blurred, reaching ever more coordinated and precise integrations. And then, it becomes easy to understand that we are not only facing a turnover phase of technicians, but the entry of fresh forces, young recruits from top teams like Mercedes and Red Bull, brings with it the need to review processes and work organization in line with these new requirements.

We are talking about skills, therefore, but also about new sophisticated software that has been implemented in various positions in 2023 to offer technicians the opportunity to act in simulation on three fronts: performance, reliability, and safety.

If this report is true, it is a step in the right direction. RB is at the forefront of simulation tools in F1 and I suspect they will not be overthrown, ever. One or two teams might come to share the leading position with RB, but as long as their culture remains that of relentless pursuit of improvement in all aspects, they won't be beaten.

Honestly, so far it's not easy to find a wrong move made by Vasseur. It's also not an easy thing to introduce new things in a big and often too rigid structure such as Ferrari, so even if some thing should have been done quicker - that may not have been possible...

[FDD]

Ferrari to expand simulation programs: new software for incoming technicians

https://scuderiafans.com/f1-ferrari-to- ... chnicians/

t is no longer sufficient to find a good iteration between data collected on the track with aerodynamic tests and indoor work carried out in CFD, wind tunnels, and the driving simulator. The construction of mathematical models becomes essential to help be predictive of reality, indicating possible development directions. We are talking about applied sciences in which the divisions between one field of research and another can become increasingly blurred, reaching ever more coordinated and precise integrations. And then, it becomes easy to understand that we are not only facing a turnover phase of technicians, but the entry of fresh forces, young recruits from top teams like Mercedes and Red Bull, brings with it the need to review processes and work organization in line with these new requirements.

We are talking about skills, therefore, but also about new sophisticated software that has been implemented in various positions in 2023 to offer technicians the opportunity to act in simulation on three fronts: performance, reliability, and safety.

If this report is true, it is a step in the right direction. RB is at the forefront of simulation tools in F1 and I suspect they will not be overthrown, ever. One or two teams might come to share the leading position with RB, but as long as their culture remains that of relentless pursuit of improvement in all aspects, they won't be beaten.

Honestly, so far it's not easy to find a wrong move made by Vasseur. It's also not an easy thing to introduce new things in a big and often too rigid structure such as Ferrari, so even if some thing should have been done quicker - that may not have been possible...

Same is confirmed by F. Nugnes.
https://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-si ... /10554975/

This part is quite interesting to me:
"The construction of mathematical models that help to be predictive of reality, indicating possible lines of development, becomes fundamental."
Prediction with mathematical modeling is theoretically possible but very hard to achieve in reality.
It is rock and a hard place to model/predict variables that has impact on the model, that is the key in mathematical prediction.
That means to forecast errors i.e. variations of the environment, predictions of quality and quantity of variations that will have impact on the model, BUT they still doesn't happen. The only source is to model them on historical data and that data has variations in the history and also interactions between different variables must be estimated and of the top of that impact of these exogens on the endogen i.e. the car for which you have data but it is also a complex system.
The crucial part of the model is the exogen which means to model something that never occurred.
I am very interested what and how they do in the process of mathematical modeling.
Obviously RB find something that is functioning real well or better to say useful.
"All models are wrong, but some are useful", George Box

[deadhead]

Ferrari to expand simulation programs: new software for incoming technicians

https://scuderiafans.com/f1-ferrari-to- ... chnicians/

t is no longer sufficient to find a good iteration between data collected on the track with aerodynamic tests and indoor work carried out in CFD, wind tunnels, and the driving simulator. The construction of mathematical models becomes essential to help be predictive of reality, indicating possible development directions. We are talking about applied sciences in which the divisions between one field of research and another can become increasingly blurred, reaching ever more coordinated and precise integrations. And then, it becomes easy to understand that we are not only facing a turnover phase of technicians, but the entry of fresh forces, young recruits from top teams like Mercedes and Red Bull, brings with it the need to review processes and work organization in line with these new requirements.

We are talking about skills, therefore, but also about new sophisticated software that has been implemented in various positions in 2023 to offer technicians the opportunity to act in simulation on three fronts: performance, reliability, and safety.

If this report is true, it is a step in the right direction. RB is at the forefront of simulation tools in F1 and I suspect they will not be overthrown, ever. One or two teams might come to share the leading position with RB, but as long as their culture remains that of relentless pursuit of improvement in all aspects, they won't be beaten.

Honestly, so far it's not easy to find a wrong move made by Vasseur. It's also not an easy thing to introduce new things in a big and often too rigid structure such as Ferrari, so even if some thing should have been done quicker - that may not have been possible...

Same is confirmed by F. Nugnes.
https://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-si ... /10554975/

This part is quite interesting to me:
"The construction of mathematical models that help to be predictive of reality, indicating possible lines of development, becomes fundamental."
Prediction with mathematical modeling is theoretically possible but very hard to achieve in reality.
It is rock and a hard place to model/predict variables that has impact on the model, that is the key in mathematical prediction.
That means to forecast errors i.e. variations of the environment, predictions of quality and quantity of variations that will have impact on the model, BUT they still doesn't happen. The only source is to model them on historical data and that data has variations in the history and also interactions between different variables must be estimated and of the top of that impact of these exogens on the endogen i.e. the car for which you have data but it is also a complex system.
The crucial part of the model is the exogen which means to model something that never occurred.
I am very interested what and how they do in the process of mathematical modeling.
Obviously RB find something that is functioning real well or better to say useful.
"All models are wrong, but some are useful", George Box

Hm, I wonder if that partnership with Oracle is actually deeper than it seems.. perhaps RB got some talent from Silicon Valley to do some simulation wizardry

[Vanja #66]

Same is confirmed by F. Nugnes.
https://it.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-si ... /10554975/

This part is quite interesting to me:
"The construction of mathematical models that help to be predictive of reality, indicating possible lines of development, becomes fundamental."
Prediction with mathematical modeling is theoretically possible but very hard to achieve in reality.
It is rock and a hard place to model/predict variables that has impact on the model, that is the key in mathematical prediction.
That means to forecast errors i.e. variations of the environment, predictions of quality and quantity of variations that will have impact on the model, BUT they still doesn't happen. The only source is to model them on historical data and that data has variations in the history and also interactions between different variables must be estimated and of the top of that impact of these exogens on the endogen i.e. the car for which you have data but it is also a complex system.
The crucial part of the model is the exogen which means to model something that never occurred.
I am very interested what and how they do in the process of mathematical modeling.
Obviously RB find something that is functioning real well or better to say useful.
"All models are wrong, but some are useful", George Box

You can always improve the mathematical models, simplest thing is to introduce new variables. You can also establish new and improved "fit" functions for all parameters. This is especially important in car dynamics models, I imagine. The better the input, the better the output. With more input and complex calculations required, the more computing power you need, so you also need to improve that from time to time.

CFD simulations are complex as they are and you can make a lot of improvements by improving the selection of car attitudes that you simulate, more or less yaw angles, more or less roll angles, steering angles, tyre deformation, bodywork deformation, etc. This is just the basic stuff... With the introduction of teraflop limits (it feels it's been ages already ) it became very important to optimise the calculations and make sure you can make them as fast as possible. With less and less reliance on wind tunnel and almost non-existent track testing, CFD is ever more important, closely followed by car simulator. Also, your turbulence models need correction every few months to fit the latest track-information. These are not big changes, but everything counts...

All of this and much more is where RB is ahead. They entered F1 when testing, WT and CFD limits have just begun, so it's logical to assume they put more focus on computation tools right away. I heard they hired some people from simulation software companies to help them improve in this area as soon as they entered F1, not sure if they keep feeding personnel from those companies on a regular basis.

[FDD]

You can always improve the mathematical models, simplest thing is to introduce new variables. You can also establish new and improved "fit" functions for all parameters. This is especially important in car dynamics models, I imagine. The better the input, the better the output. With more input and complex calculations required, the more computing power you need, so you also need to improve that from time to time.

CFD simulations are complex as they are and you can make a lot of improvements by improving the selection of car attitudes that you simulate, more or less yaw angles, more or less roll angles, steering angles, tyre deformation, bodywork deformation, etc. This is just the basic stuff... With the introduction of teraflop limits (it feels it's been ages already ) it became very important to optimise the calculations and make sure you can make them as fast as possible. With less and less reliance on wind tunnel and almost non-existent track testing, CFD is ever more important, closely followed by car simulator. Also, your turbulence models need correction every few months to fit the latest track-information. These are not big changes, but everything counts...

All of this and much more is where RB is ahead. They entered F1 when testing, WT and CFD limits have just begun, so it's logical to assume they put more focus on computation tools right away. I heard they hired some people from simulation software companies to help them improve in this area as soon as they entered F1, not sure if they keep feeding personnel from those companies on a regular basis.

Yes, more than sure that they hired some people from software companies.
I was working on applied math modeling and I know that in the whole process, here, the most important input is from the aero guys or better to say from all engineers involved in car design and development.
Why? Some can build very complex model, but the result is counting. I mean, only the engineers have the sense whether the results of the model has common sense or are stupid, cause math is stupid, human must to configure it to function "clever" and this need very sophisticated approach. Math guy can model vars which are estimated to have impact which is statistically highly important and with math correlation higher than 0.9, but the result when it is applied is stupid and here comes the aero guys for example, cause they are the only ones who can tell about the common sense of the model output etc.
Very complex model in most of the cases is bad model, cause model become non robust, making huge changes in the output with micro changes of the vars. I do not want to say that simple model in F1 is needed/possible, the point is that model must to be, let say not over engineered.
However in RB they found real formula for this and I think that the reason is the one that you already mention, they start to invest on this very much in the very beginning, having time to build step by step.

[Vanja #66]

Yes, that is the key issue - keep the model as simple as possible, but feed it with all the relevant parameters. It is a tricky business and experience is crucial for proper implementation.

It would be a step in the right direction if FIA and F1 decide to limit the simulator work just as they are limiting the aero testing. It would allow smaller teams to further reduce the gap and we would probably end up with multiple teams winning at least one GP every season. Some teams would inevitably build cars that are a lot better on certain tracks and this would increase the actual spectacle a lot.

[AR3-GP]

It would be a step in the right direction if FIA and F1 decide to limit the simulator work just as they are limiting the aero testing. It would allow smaller teams to further reduce the gap and we would probably end up with multiple teams winning at least one GP every season.

That sounds like a terrible idea to me. The only restriction that makes sense is the budget cap and I hope one day they will scrap the sliding scale aero system. It's becoming too much of a success ballast formula.

If we started off saying it wasn't fair for Ferrari/Merc/RB to have so much resources, it is no more fair for the leading teams to have much less resources.

I would rather live with standardized computational tools, than unequal resources.

[Xyz22]

I think they should re introduce private testing, regulated and accessible for all teams of course.

This should put less "focus" on simulation systems, which are way more complex than the good old classic testing cars on track. That should help teams with fewer capabilities in this area to develop more competitive cars.

[Vanja #66]

That sounds like a terrible idea to me. The only restriction that makes sense is the budget cap and I hope one day they will scrap the sliding scale aero system. It's becoming too much of a success ballast formula.

If we started off saying it wasn't fair for Ferrari/Merc/RB to have so much resources, it is no more fair for the leading teams to have much less resources.

I would rather live with standardized computational tools, than unequal resources.

Ah, I see where the confusion is. I didn't mean the sliding scale we have today, just the overall limit on CFD and WT time. Limit the drivers to some hours on the simulator per week and limit the number of variables the simulator takes into account. Just a thought...

It would introduce natural randomness (during every weekend) that F1 craves so much for some time, and at the same time it would put more emphasis on the on-track operations and setup. Lots of smaller teams will never be able to catch up to the big ones due to the limit on capital investments, no matter how much money they raise.

[organic]

According to formu1a.uno Ferrari is "one step away" from a 3-year contract extension with additional options

[deadhead]

Not sure if i agree with the statement that Sainz got slower.

He didn't. He was always slow.

Slower than LEC, but not slow in general. He is a solid mid to upper midfield driver.

[Vanja #66]

According to formu1a.uno Ferrari is "one step away" from a 3-year contract extension with additional options

You mean Leclerc? An option for 2029 is mentioned

[AR3-GP]

It will be a defining moment of the career of Charles Leclerc. Let us remember his choice. I'd have personally gone with the 1+1, but there's no getting between Leclerc and his passion for what Ferrari used to be.