Less torque to reduce tyre wear?

[raymondu999]

The Helmholtz provides a smooth transition between "on" and "off" throttle, in terms of exhaust gases. It's a partial "off throttle blowing" - in effect. The effect of adding the Helmholtz is in the same direction as the mapping - to keep stuff flowing out of the exhaust.

They debuted the Helmholtz in Silverstone IIRC - before said mapping.

[thearmofbarlow]

Just from the article...

The FIA's concern in Germany was that Red Bull were using reduced torque settings for a given engine speed. It felt these could act as a form of traction control, limiting wheelspin out of corners.

*ahem* You were saying?

[thearmofbarlow]

Which teams will loose the most due to the recent change of rules about the engine mapping?

You would have to assume, given that Red Bull were already caught violating the not-very-"new" rule that they would.

Like they suffered from losing the double diffuser, and suffered when the floor hole thing was clarified, and suffered at every other point that... oh, wait, they haven't suffered at all and have the reigning two-time world champion in their car.

[raymondu999]

Which teams will loose the most due to the recent change of rules about the engine mapping?

You would have to assume, given that Red Bull were already caught violating the not-very-"new" rule that they would.

Like they suffered from losing the double diffuser, and suffered when the floor hole thing was clarified, and suffered at every other point that... oh, wait, they haven't suffered at all and have the reigning two-time world champion in their car.

Let's not kid ourselves. I have no doubt losing those lost Red Bull performance over the field - but they have been good enough to bounce back all the time.

[thearmofbarlow]

Let's not kid ourselves. I have no doubt losing those lost Red Bull performance over the field - but they have been good enough to bounce back all the time.

How many others in the field were using systems similar enough to Red Bull's that they changed their ways before anyone else found out? I assume that there are no secrets in the paddock and that everyone is pushing the rules well beyond their intent.

[jz11]

I have another theory, people who like conspiracy theories and/or play chess will love it

when the team first rolls out a new car for the first race of the season, they don't deliver the best product intentionally, they roll it out just good enough to be at least on the level or a little bit ahead of the competition, and they have upgrades waiting back home that are in different stages of development, and they roll out those upgrades only if there is a need, never to improve already good car, just to have an ace up the sleeve, because if they show off all the goodies, everyone else will copy it in no time

and it can just be the case, that RB doesn't even benefit from that exhaust map by any meaningful margin, but suspect that others do, and they just don't want to explore that direction because they have other goodies in store, so they pushed the limit far enough to start the circus show, and hope for rule clarification from FIA

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

The Helmholtz provides a smooth transition between "on" and "off" throttle, in terms of exhaust gases. It's a partial "off throttle blowing" - in effect. The effect of adding the Helmholtz is in the same direction as the mapping - to keep stuff flowing out of the exhaust.

They debuted the Helmholtz in Silverstone IIRC - before said mapping.

Helmholtz also retains alot of the energy until after the driver has come of the throttle(mapping), blowing the extra retained energy during the off throttle phase. The issue surrounding the mapping in Germany wasn't specific only to hockenheim either. The mapping is set aggressively for each track in a tailored manor as you'd expect.

I cannot prove it, but my guess is that the mapping was set aggressively with the addition of the Helmholtz exhaust.
Again, we may still see Helmholtz exhausts, but it comes with losses that need to be offset against its merits.

[strad]

Which teams will loose the most due to the recent change of rules about the engine mapping?

You would have to assume, given that Red Bull were already caught violating the not-very-"new" rule that they would.

This is obvious, but apparently they arent the only ones who might be influenced by those changes.

Sauber I think...Have you heard them in slow to medium corners?

[hardingfv32]

[we may still see Helmholtz exhausts, but it comes with losses that need to be offset against its merits.

Can you expand?

This is what I do not understand about what and how the FIA are planning on controlling. Say you change the exhaust system so it produces less mid range torque, is this allowed with the proposed controls?

Brian

[rjsa]

Just from the article...

The FIA's concern in Germany was that Red Bull were using reduced torque settings for a given engine speed. It felt these could act as a form of traction control, limiting wheelspin out of corners.

*ahem* You were saying?

And obviously, since journos always get everything right, if it's written there it's true. Right?

Not.

The definition of traction control as many here, including me, adhere to includes the system identifying the early symptoms of traction breaking and modulating the torque to keep it just here (around the 2% slip in that chart a few pages back).

It's not so hard to get it: If the system is recieving feedback on body and wheel behaviour and reacting on these parameters - in what one would call a closed loop system - it's TC as forbidden by the FIA and enforced by the way of introducing the SECU.

Any open loop traction optimization feature, like running simulations and identifying an optimum plateau on the torque curve to make the car go faster around a certain track, is NOT TC by the definition above. It's as similar to TC as wedging the gas pedal with a wood block and since the driver will not be able to floor it there will be no traction breaks.

[thearmofbarlow]

Since so many people here seem incapable of reading...

9.3 Traction control
No car may be equipped with a system or device which is capable of preventing the driven wheels from spinning under power or of compensating for excessive torque demand by the driver.
Any device or system which notifies the driver of the onset of wheel spin is not permitted.

What else needs be said?

*raises hands in victory*
*pulls a muscle*
*out for 4-6 weeks*

[bhall]

What does "excessive torque demand" mean if available torque for demand is limited?

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

[we may still see Helmholtz exhausts, but it comes with losses that need to be offset against its merits.

Can you expand?

This is what I do not understand about what and how the FIA are planning on controlling. Say you change the exhaust system so it produces less mid range torque, is this allowed with the proposed controls?

Brian

That is not my understanding of it. I also do not have the figures, as I posted in reply to raymondu.
My understanding from this is that the mapping works in conjunction with the Helmholtz exhaust to creat the desired effect.
Remember even straightforward exhaust blowing(hot or cold) is quite complex in itself.
This year it's doubly hard to guess, and like I said it is a guess without knowing the exact numbers, what they have done with their maps, and how this correlates to their exhaust(Red bull).

It can only be witnessed before we can make an assessment. My 2 cents is that the mapping is attuned to produce a specific amount of flow of exhaust gasses, at certain points in the rev range that allows the Helmholtz exhaust chambers to mimick what was happening last year. There is also the added effect of less torque which has been perceived to be a form of traction.
There are many benefits from running this. Higher rear downforce, less wear/deg on the rear tyres and possibly less fuel consumption.
I'm very eager to see what red bull have in response to the ruling, Vettel seems unfazed. But I reckon that's bravado. Helmut Marko was doing his nut in the press this mornin, accusing the FIA and other teams of allsorts(nothing new from mr marko there but still).

[thearmofbarlow]

What does "excessive torque demand" mean if available torque for demand is limited?

It means whatever they decide it means. At this point I think you're asking patently stupid questions just to stir --- up.

[Cam]

What does "excessive torque demand" mean if available torque for demand is limited?

It means whatever they decide it means. At this point I think you're asking patently stupid questions just to stir --- up.

If I could -1 that comment, I would. Really? Bhallg2k has offered many great posts - hence his high number. The question is valid.