Mercedes AMG Petronas F1 Team 2015

[AnthonyG]

Clearly they got their simulations wrong for Singapore, the W05 and W06 have proven to be fast on every type of track so it's obviously a blip in their performance. Suzuka is a pretty similar track to Silverstone so I very much doubt we will see anything but Mercedes domination there.

Ben (Bhall2) did the work in the Singapore thread in digging out the numbers, but IMO they show some interesting data:

Code: Select all

Monaco 2014        2015

Merc: 1:15.989    1:15.098 (-0.891)
RB:   1:16.384    1:16.041 (-0.343)
Fer:  1:16.686    1:15.849 (-0.837)
Will: 1:18.082    1:17.278 (-0.804)

Singap 2014        2015

Merc: 1:45.681    1:45.300 (-0.381)
RB:   1:45.854    1:44.428 (-1.426)
Fer:  1:45.907    1:43.885 (-2.022)
Will: 1:46.000    1:45.676 (-0.324)

On two similar tracks (Monaco & Singapore), Mercedes was quicker last year than their competition than they were in Singapore. So perhaps Singapore was indeed an anomaly track wherein their car doesn't work as well as it does on other tracks. We see that in 2014 already, the difference between Mercedes and their closest competitor was larger (4 tenths), than it was in Singapore (1.8 tenths).

I personally think the PU advantage was clearly larger last year and masked their Singapore performance slightly, so no one ever really thought about it. This year in Singapore, interestingly, Renault and Ferrari teams made a huge jump relative to their 2014 times, whereas both Mercedes and Williams only found 3 tenths. Perhaps the problem isn't as much set-up related as it is PU related; perhaps in how the ERS works on this particular track - or too much torque out of slow corners or something else. Both Mercedes drivers thought that the car was fine (Rosberg & Hamilton on AMuS) after all.

I don't think they are in trouble at all. The performance difference between Mercedes and their competitors in more typical tracks like Monza, Spa, - actually just about any track so far this year - has been rather big. You don't lose that just like that. The engineers at Mercedes might be boggled by their performance in Singapore, but I hope they don't go into panic mode - as I think they've done a fantastic job this year so far and I see no reason why this shouldn't continue on a more typical track like Suzuka again. We'll see, but I assume business will resume in 5 days.

Track layout changed don't forget that. Mercedes was probably slower than in 2014.

(Details: https://www.formula1.com/content/fom-we ... ayout.html )

[WaikeCU]

FIA conspiracy just to make the 2015 more exciting? Talk about manipulating the season's results. The moment Ferrari started complaining about deflating Pirelli's, it's the moment when Pirelli and FIA introduced new PSI regulation. That Singapore difference of Ferrari in 2014 and 2015 is just eye popping and certainely gonna raise some eyebrows.

[FoxHound]

FIA conspiracy just to make the 2015 more exciting? Talk about manipulating the season's results. The moment Ferrari started complaining about deflating Pirelli's, it's the moment when Pirelli and FIA introduced new PSI regulation. That Singapore difference of Ferrari in 2014 and 2015 is just eye popping and certainely gonna raise some eyebrows.

There is something in it, how much is anyone's guess. Could be minimal, or could have a massive impact.

I think the problem lies in Mercedes set up, with engineers accustomed to using the lower range of pressures to extract performance. With the rise in pressures, all set up data will need to be re-correlated.
It's a knock on effect, hopefully the factory has the data from this race to be able to rectify the situation for Japan.

[Phil]

Maybe it's more an issue in low-speed "mechanical grip" corners? High speed corners would have more downforce, so more load on the tires in general. Perhaps why we didn't see them have any effect in Monza, but why the pressures might have been a factor in Singapore?

(just guessing)

If it is pressure related, I fail to see how Monza wasn't an issue. Yes, the engine is a factor there, but I think we would have seen at least some form of vulnerability if they had anything tire related? Everytime Toto was asked if it was pressure related, they immediately shrugged it off, claiming that they wouldn't be running different pressures anyway.

Also, as I just posted on the Japanese topic, the procedure are well defined that random sampling is done after the 5 minute signal to race start (but only for 2 minutes). If a team is found to be under, they can still correct.

[Cold Fussion]

Track layout changed don't forget that. Mercedes was probably slower than in 2014.

(Details: https://www.formula1.com/content/fom-we ... ayout.html )

The new layout should be a little slower than the old layout IMO.

FIA conspiracy just to make the 2015 more exciting? Talk about manipulating the season's results. The moment Ferrari started complaining about deflating Pirelli's, it's the moment when Pirelli and FIA introduced new PSI regulation. That Singapore difference of Ferrari in 2014 and 2015 is just eye popping and certainely gonna raise some eyebrows.

There is something in it, how much is anyone's guess. Could be minimal, or could have a massive impact.

I think the problem lies in Mercedes set up, with engineers accustomed to using the lower range of pressures to extract performance. With the rise in pressures, all set up data will need to be re-correlated.
It's a knock on effect, hopefully the factory has the data from this race to be able to rectify the situation for Japan.

The pressures for Singapore are only marginally higher than they were in 2014.

[GPR-A duplicate2]

'Freak' failure caused Lewis Hamilton to retire from Singapore GP

Lewis Hamilton's retirement in the Formula 1 Singapore Grand Prix was caused by a "freak" component failure, according to Mercedes motorsport chief Toto Wolff.

The reigning world champion reported a loss of power before dropping down the field and eventually pulling into the pits to retire the car.

Wolff said Mercedes had identified the problem and he is confident Hamilton will not have to change the engine for next weekend's Japanese Grand Prix.

"We had a very minor bit - a metal clamp, that broke and had a massive effect," said Wolff.

"The clamp was on plenum, and was holding the plenum together and when it jumped off it caused a boost leak.

"It was a freak, yeah. We ran that design for a long time. It's a typical metal clamp and it just broke.

"Lewis's engine shouldn't have any problem."

[mrluke]

Why would that show on the telemetry as not getting full throttle? Surely it would show as a boost leak?

[adrianjordan]

I know I'm probably being blind, but where can I find the info on pu usage for each driver??

[Phil]

PS: I'm posting this cross-reply in the Mercedes topic since it's more central to it, although perhaps the Pirelli topic would be better?

Teams have to be concerned with 2 different tire temperatures. The tread surface temperature, and the internal temperature. I think i've heard the internal one referred to as "bulk temperature".

and i mentioned here they couldn't get heat into their tires because of the higher pressures reducing sidewall flex.

Okay, I'm just going to go on a limb here from what *I* know about the correlation between temperature, pressure and grip:

For best optimal grip, you'd want:

1.) perfect tire pressure to achieve greatest contact patch (overinflated = less contact, underinflated = instable tire)
2.) perfect tire surface temperature where the compound generates the best grip (too hot = tire melts / smears, too low = less grip)
3.) optimal tire state/life (because the tires wear off and go through different phases)

To get there; teams have to tackle multiple issues, that being: temperature inside the tire is variable: it's dependent on various factors; Corners, load, set-up, agressiveness of driving, etc. Because temperature is linked to pressure, the pressure of the tire is variable and thus grip levels inconsistent.

So a tire might start with at temperature X and therefore pressure N. If you under-inflate the tire, you have more tire-flex which will heat up the tire more (quicker). If you over-inflate the tire, it will likely result in an overal over-inflated tire with less grip levels (less contact patch) and you will not get into the window.

The best thing is to get the starting pressures right in light of the track you are driving on so that the tire gets into a state of perfect balance where the pressure while on the track is at the best spot where it can stay consistently, has the optimal grip and therefore has the widest operating window (the tire lives longer because it wears consistent across the entire width and because of less tire slip due to bad traction).

If teams purposely under-inflate tires, it's to get heat quicker into them and because the car (and its setup which is linked to suspension and camber) heats the tires to achieve the perfect pressure while the car extracts the performance on track. If you offset that tire pressure by a little in the positive, you could in theory end up with a tire that doesn't get to that point as quick, at all or overshoots the target (it'll be over-inflated under normal racing circumstances).

So to me, this does conclude that tire pressures could be a major issues for some teams, following the assumption that the Mercedes is one of these cars that generates more heat through its suspension and set-up and that the purposely under-inflation of its tires lead to the perfect combination on track.

The problem with this theory is that the perfect pressure for their car varies from track to track. In Singapore, we didn't have any downforce in the corners, so grip is entirely mechanical and the tires cope with very different loads. On a downforce track, you consistently have more weight on the tires due to the downforce and that works the tires differently. This could be one of the reasons why in Monza, the minimal pressure limits did not hamper the Mercedes, whereas in Singapore it did. Someone else also mentioned that Singapore is a unique track with practical identical corners all around. If you stuff one up, you mess them all up, which might have been what happened in QF.

Can anyone else tell me if this is complete rubbish or reasonably correct? Tim?

[Kiril Varbanov]

Autosport:

Mercedes non-executive chairman Niki Lauda plans to speak to Formula 1 chief Bernie Ecclestone about his team's lack of television coverage during the Japanese Grand Prix.

Both Lauda and Mercedes motorsport chief Toto Wolff commented after the race at Suzuka on Sunday about how little they felt Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg appeared on the TV pictures en route to a one-two finish for the team.

It's getting funny. LH and NR cruise comfortably with visible gap, while behind the young guns are killing each other for 12-th place. Guess what we want to watch. Sorry, Mercedes, that's a small price to pay for the good job you did.

[toraabe]

Autosport:

Mercedes non-executive chairman Niki Lauda plans to speak to Formula 1 chief Bernie Ecclestone about his team's lack of television coverage during the Japanese Grand Prix.

Both Lauda and Mercedes motorsport chief Toto Wolff commented after the race at Suzuka on Sunday about how little they felt Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg appeared on the TV pictures en route to a one-two finish for the team.

It's getting funny. LH and NR cruise comfortably with visible gap, while behind the young guns are killing each other for 12-th place. Guess what we want to watch. Sorry, Mercedes, that's a small price to pay for the good job you did.

As true as it can be. Viewers wants to see action and drivers taking risks. But I wondered yesterday when none of MB laps were shown

[GPR-A duplicate2]

[elf341]

I take the point on Hamilton procession being boring to watch, but Rosberg's race was far from boring. Where was the coverage of the battle for 2nd with Vettel - especially through the traffic? I was left watching a train of cars behind Nasr for 25 minutes with nothing happening.

I wondered yesterday when we hardly saw any quali coverage of the mercs, and then today - it's clear Bernie has an issue with them.

[dans79]

I wondered yesterday when we hardly saw any quali coverage of the mercs, and then today - it's clear Bernie has an issue with them.

F bernie......

I hope VW holds off buying RBR just long enough for the grid to drop bellow 16 cars, so the FIA can tear up Bernie's contract. Then VW can enter and F1, can carry on without Bernie.

[GPR-A duplicate2]

I guess a subscription from Sutton or Getty or someone could be more clearer and beneficial than this....