2018 United States Grand Prix - Austin, 19-21 October

[Edax]

Silicone would be gone before they even left the pit lane

There are silicone versions which can withstand up to 1500°C and are being used in blast furnaces. I don't think that such material would be gone before they even left the pit lane.

These are not silicone but silicate “glues”. Different chemistry.

https://www.aremco.com

Silicones start to decompose at high >350C temperatures depending on type and atmosphere. They are however used in applications which might see heat, for instance in an electrical insulation that might get burned, reason being is that if they burn the ash is non conductive and may prevent shorts (so then it is one time only).

For wheel rims I guess an ordinary epoxy or silicone glue might suffice. If the temperatures really get high then you quickly get out of reach of polymeric systems and you better go to a pyro putty, perhaps metal filled, like the ones on the aremco site. They are not that great, it feels like sticking things together with mud, but if you don’t have to worry about mechanical loads then they work fine.

[Restomaniac]

3 races left in the season, he's got to turn it up if he's going to win it.

Vettel can not win the title, he can only be gifted it from now on by some monumental misfortune occuring to Hamilton. Even if Vettel wins all three races, Hamilton only needs one 7th place finish out of three races. Short of an awful accident that puts Hamilton out of the next race and the rest of the season, there isn't much hope for Vettel. Heck, even if Hamilton has to take a grid penalty, the reality is that the top 6 are so far ahead of the rest in terms of race performance that he can make up a pit lane start to finish 6th or better quite easily.

All Vettel can do is try to win each race. That's it. The rest is down to misfortune occuring to others.

Indeed so much so that Hamilton could take a new engine set and still win it in Mexico.

[LM10]

Silicone would be gone before they even left the pit lane

There are silicone versions which can withstand up to 1500°C and are being used in blast furnaces. I don't think that such material would be gone before they even left the pit lane.

These are not silicone but silicate “glues”. Different chemistry.

https://www.aremco.com

Silicones start to decompose at high >350C temperatures depending on type and atmosphere. They are however used in applications which might see heat, for instance in an electrical insulation that might get burned, reason being is that if they burn the ash is non conductive and may prevent shorts (so then it is one time only).

For wheel rims I guess an ordinary epoxy or silicone glue might suffice. If the temperatures really get high then you quickly get out of reach of polymeric systems and you better go to a pyro putty, perhaps metal filled, like the ones on the aremco site. They are not that great, it feels like sticking things together with mud, but if you don’t have to worry about mechanical loads then they work fine.

Very informative. Thank you!

[Sieper]

If the holes are not there in next weeks rim we will know for sure. And otherwise in Brasil If the manufacturer cant make new rims in time (but a week seems plenty).

[cooken]

Seems as plausible as the rear wheel steering that was bandied about recently. Good grief.

[PlatinumZealot]

Those holes work only with that type of brake shroud (cake tin). No way would mercedes plug those holes and melt tgeir brakes! So absurd. They would have to change back to the old brake shrouds before they plug those holes.

[Phil]

To be fair, I've been hearing some discussion going on about the rims Mercedes has been using too. Can't lend any credibility to 'filling the holes with silicone', but there is some banter going on that the wheel hubs have not only been there to better control the tires from overheating, but that they could have been used for "aerodynamic purposes" (which of course would be illegal).

I'm going to post something in the Mercedes team topic shortly on this with links to the discussion. Everyone can judge themselves if there's truth to this discussion or not.

If true however, it would lend credibility on why the FIA haven't reacted sooner. As in, the holes are legal, but not if an aerodynamic benefit can be proven and perhaps why Mercedes had to react in order to not risk someone [Ferrari] contesting the race result.

[Roxi]

Fantastic drive from Kimi, and Verstappen. However, I did not like Max's thoughts at the end of the race. Seems like if Hamilton pushed harder at the end, Max was going to take them both of the track out of spite.

I am a red bull fan, but that kinda' made me think a little lol

[Sieper]

huh? how come you make that statement, I have not heard him say anything even remotely in that direction. If any, he said Hamilton could have still given less space (and he would have been fine with that).

[turbof1]

If true however, it would lend credibility on why the FIA haven't reacted sooner. As in, the holes are legal, but not if an aerodynamic benefit can be proven and perhaps why Mercedes had to react in order to not risk someone [Ferrari] contesting the race result.

That's going into the rabit's hole (pun fully intended). Where do you draw the line for aerodynamic benefit/influence? Redirecting hot airflow into the tyre can be described as such. It's not immediately a downforce improvement, but an aerodynamic benefit translating into thermodynamic effects.

For the record, it is in my eyes legal. I'm just lamenting the vagueness of the regulations on these.

[Phil]

No you are right. It most definitely is a rabit hole. I personally think the case is fairly clear. If there is no aero-dynamic effect/benefit, you are reasonably safe. However if there is some benefit, it could become subject to a formal post race protest (see Haas with the T-tray) that then could lead to potential disqualification - after all, there's a precedent in this specific instance with RedBull pursuing such a solution.

In the end, that is something the FIA must decide and answer. It's save to say, Mercedes is the only one who is currently using a solution with a wheel hub with holes in them. The only team who did (and did use it for aero) was RedBull and they were told to not use it, that it was illegal. I personally don't know either way, but I would think it's an interesting topic/discussion to pursue and perhaps to compare RedBulls solution (that was deemed illegal) and Mercedes that is IMO questionable.

In Mercedes shoes, and IF this discussion with the FIA did take place prior to the race, making absolutely sure there was no aero-benefit seems like a no-brainer with the championship at stake and under the presumption of a possible protest.

[LM10]

If true however, it would lend credibility on why the FIA haven't reacted sooner. As in, the holes are legal, but not if an aerodynamic benefit can be proven and perhaps why Mercedes had to react in order to not risk someone [Ferrari] contesting the race result.

That's going into the rabit's hole (pun fully intended). Where do you draw the line for aerodynamic benefit/influence? Redirecting hot airflow into the tyre can be described as such. It's not immediately a downforce improvement, but an aerodynamic benefit translating into thermodynamic effects.

For the record, it is in my eyes legal. I'm just lamenting the vagueness of the regulations on these.

In your opinion, what are the differences between what RBR had years ago and what Mercedes has currently?

[WaikeCU]

I feel this is a scrutineering issue. Updates on cars should be approved through scrutineering prior putting on the car. Banning the update is easy, but deciding after 3-4 races it's an illegal part and penalise the team? That's just a gamebreaker to me.

[Phil]

I feel this is a scrutineering issue. Updates on cars should be approved through scrutineering prior putting on the car. Banning the update is easy, but deciding after 3-4 races it's an illegal part and penalise the team? That's just a gamebreaker to me.

It's just not possible. Because you can't scrutineer everything. And as in most competitions, it's open to any competitor to formally protest a result if there is the hint that a competitor used something that is at the very least suspect to running an illegal car.

Especially with F1 that includes various different intepretations of rules, I feel the same could apply to the wheel hub. The FIA may deem it's "ok", but that might not hold up if the result is formally protested by another team.

Same thing with the Haas. They knew the risk of running that t-tray and in the end, a competitor did protest it post-race and they got disqualified.

[dans79]

Especially with F1 that includes various different intepretations of rules, I feel the same could apply to the wheel hub. The FIA may deem it's "ok", but that might not hold up if the result is formally protested by another team.

The FIA is utterly useless then, if it's fine one day and then not the next because someone might complain!