How can teams resolve tyre issues?

[DaveW]

I recollect that MS Mk1 was reputed to prefer over-steer. If true, he probably wouldn't have used overly aggressive steering inputs. Now? Who knows.

I thought PM, on his anniversary outing, was competitive once his prime tyres were working, certainly enough to have won the race.... He clearly struggled for a while to get them to work, however.

[747heavy]

Interesting comment from Ross, but I´m not sure I fully understand what he is saying.
If I get this correct, then this tire saturates early but still provides a more or less constant grip independent from the vertical load.
Sure this is very unusual (IMHO) but why is it a problem ?
O.K. you don´t gain by forcing/pushing your front, but you don´t lose either - so where is the problem?
Looks like this tire would tolerate a varity of different setups on the front, and still producing the same grip.
I´m not sure if Hamilton and Alonso are really "smooth" with there front, but they seem to do o.k., compare to Massa/Button.

[marcush.]

Interesting comment from Ross, but I´m not sure I fully understand what he is saying.
If I get this correct, then this tire saturates early but still provides a more or less constant grip independent from the vertical load.
Sure this is vey unusual (IMHO) but why is it a problem ?
O.K. you don´t gain by forcing/pushing your front, but you don´t lose either - so where is the problem?
Looks like this tire would tolerate a varity of different setups on the front, and still producing the same grip.
I´m not sure if Hamilton and Alonso are really "smooth" with there front, but they seem to do o.k., compare to Massa/Button.

the comment from ross is certainly not matching Schumachers voice who reeatedly claims,that he has difficulty to find repeatability from tyre to tyre .
Maybe they have internal trouble ....doing things the once maestro is not aware off or all are a bit lazy because he´s out there to have fun only anyways and they would have preferred Heidfeld.
interestingly some teams have vented those tyre inconsistency claims in the last year (was it rosberg at williams or Heidfeld in 2008 at BMW ? i have this on the back of my mind)..

[seenathkumar]

Any way there will be the test drive which will collect all details of every analysis and this is helping to search other alternatives.

[marcush.]

Interesting comment from Ross, but I´m not sure I fully understand what he is saying.
If I get this correct, then this tire saturates early but still provides a more or less constant grip independent from the vertical load.
Sure this is very unusual (IMHO) but why is it a problem ?
O.K. you don´t gain by forcing/pushing your front, but you don´t lose either - so where is the problem?
Looks like this tire would tolerate a varity of different setups on the front, and still producing the same grip.
I´m not sure if Hamilton and Alonso are really "smooth" with there front, but they seem to do o.k., compare to Massa/Button.

in the light of needing more to come from the fronts ...you don´t want them to fade or saturate already....so in a nutshell they are reaching the ceiling even without adding downforce...mechanically overworking them ,due to front heavy ?

[747heavy]

I understand what you want to say Marcus,
But strictly speaking, he says they flatline - so you don´t lose
on the front, does not matter how much weight or downforce you add.
Therefore, mech. "overwork" is not the problem IMO.

If this was the case, why not just take off the wing (run less wing) and gain some straight line speed - less drag?

The may suffer from not getting the most out of their rear ties by having too much weight to the front.
They add to an end, which did not return a gain.

Anyway, we will see next year. I would not take every single word he says at face value.
Yes, they got it wrong and they suffer, and we will se next year, if they have really understood the mistake they made and why they made it.

[marcush.]

I understand what you want to say Marcus,
But strictly speaking, he says they flatline - so you don´t lose
on the front, does not matter how much weight or downforce you add.
Therefore, mech. "overwork" is not the problem IMO.

If this was the case, why not just take off the wing (run less wing) and gain some straight line speed - less drag?

The may suffer from not getting the most out of their rear ties by having too much weight to the front.
They add to an end, which did not return a gain.

Anyway, we will see next year. I would not take every single word he says at face value.
Yes, they got it wrong and they suffer, and we will se next year, if they have really understood the mistake they made and why they made it.

So the front tyre not load sensitive???

http://farnorthracing.com/images/tire_load_curve.jpg


of course it is when you go to the right side of the graph .It is NORMAL for the behaviour of the tyre to flatline...isn´t it?



there is no quirk in thé whole thing ..they are just fundamentally wrong in their
car and if Brawn is serious about this than I have to state.
JET was right ,they have in no ways reached the necessary weightshift to the back
as this seems to be the only logical explanation to me for him forwarding this statement.In effect ..they restrict themselves by not being able to put more front DF on the car AND trying to compensate lack of rear mechanical load by more rear wing...adding drag....and of course not low speed grip .
Funny that of course with more weight in the car the fronts do what they do -flatline ,but the rears come alive...and the car adds total grip compared to the competitors.-becuse they flatline front AND rear

[747heavy]

[

So the front tyre not load sensitive???

http://farnorthracing.com/images/tire_load_curve.jpg

of course it is when you go to the right side of the graph .It is NORMAL for the behaviour of the tyre to flatline...isn´t it?

I don´t know Marcus, he seemed rather surprised by this behavior, and even questioned if Pirelli would be able to produce a tire like this.
I think your graph misses the "interesting" part at the right side of the peak/optimum.

If it flatlines from there, then it is a very "forgiving" tire IMHO.
A more common behavior with racing tires, is that you start to lose grip,on the right side of the peak.
Maybe MGP/R.B. should be thankfull for Bridgstone to not produce a very "peaky" tire, or they would struggle much more.



And why other teams still chase front downforce (flexy wing) if there is nothing to gain from a "flatlining" tire?

I don´t know, really but as longer I think about it, and as more as emerges about the whole W01 thing. I can´t help but think, all they did is take the BGP1 and do a cut and shut job of fitting the larger full tank.
There does not seem to be much concept behind the new car, and the BGP1 just topped out in terms of concept, when other teams catched up with the DDD, as allready happend in the second half of 2009.
They just "got away with it (WDC/WCC)" because the where able to built a large enough gap in the first part of 2009, making use of a good engine and there DDD advantage.
Nothing wrong with that, but maybe you don´t get that lucky every year. On equal terms, they seem to struggle with speed of development, and a concept which is scaleable/expandable/adaptebale to new developments F-Duct,EBD, flexy wings etc.
Looks like they have painted themself into a corner, for one reason or the other - No ??
and not just with their weigth distribution.

[marcush.]

I found that one ..quite interesting ...

i don´t understand why teams do not gather more data with their cars in FP...after all they could do so....

http://www.optimumg.com/OptimumGWebSite ... Report.pdf

[747heavy]

I found that one ..quite interesting ...

i don´t understand why teams do not gather more data with their cars in FP...after all they could do so....

http://www.optimumg.com/OptimumGWebSite ... Report.pdf

agree with you in general Marcus
on the other hand, I´m not sure if this test equipment would withstand F1 speeds/forces.
As I remember the Kistler wheel on the R8 could not withstand full racing speeds at the R8.
And some of this equipment would have a huge aero influence on a F1 car, but still there could be something learned - I agree.
The question is, how valuable are the data, if they are not taken at the limit, for optimizing behavior at the limit?
Maybe there is more to be gained (in terms of laptime for a GP) by letting the driver just get used to the car, and go through the test parts. I supose it´s a question of priorities for the teams.

[marcush.]

I agree ,it does not make sense to test at lower than realistic inputs.The data gathered would only be meaningful in areas not that important for your understanding of the tyres.
BUT :it´s formula1 ,isn´t it? these are the very best in terms of engineers and cando attitude people..so don´t tell me its impossible to design something along those lines to survive on a F1 car at speed.

thinking twice ..I have to admit ..it may not legally possible to run the kistler device on a F1car in an official session ..(Rim is defined very precisely in the regs ,so they would run the car in illegal spec ?).

But again .if you lack information ...and some teams obviously lack a lot of information ..you need to fill the voids as quickly as possible...and gather reliable data of whats going on and derive your conclusions from what you have measured and the feedback of your drivers.

But ...it could as well be we are looking at the wrong end of the story...maybe
(or even not maybe !) it is not the tyres that should be looked at but the car ..
and the tyres will obviously do their work as soon as the car package is where it should be..as shown by RB...