Pre-Season Winter testing : 2014 Season

[Kewee]

I tend to agree with mjo on this point Mephistopheles. Pushing these cars to their limit or as close as possible will provide the engineers with data thats just not able to be gathered in any other way due to the newness of these designs. Referring back to The Artists posting, he was saying how performance with varying fuel loads could be predicted by comparing data and made reference to power to weight. We still have to acknowledge how different 2014 is to the years we've just left behind. The technology the teams are dealing with and learning about is so complex I'm sure there's not a designer on pit lane who wishes it was as simple as power to weight. Running these cars and stressing them is the only way they will learn so they can achieve the best handling package for the length of a GP.
As they gather data they will be able to learn from their computers but they'll have to input a hell of a lot more information yet before they reach that stage.

It's worth looking at Red Bull. I'm sure Renault would want to see their engines continuing to power the World Champion and they'll be fully aware of Adrian Newey's role in trying to achieve that. They would almost certainly believe he would be their best chance based on reputation alone. You can be sure Renault will have been providing Newey with lots of information regarding the new engine to help achieve a seamless blending of their engine in a Newey chassis yet look where they are at present. To quote….
Vettel, "pace is a problem".
Christian Horner, "I don't know how long it will take to solve our reliability problem".
Helmut Marko, "We may not be able to make up the deficit, we may already be too far behind".
Think about it, the combined talents of Renault and Adrian Newey have produced a car that is currently four seconds off the pace. You can be sure they will be wishing they had been able to put in the miles on the track, including full on qualifying laps.

 

[The Pits]

During the course of an F1 weekend, the car needs to be able to perform strongly across a wide range of conditions. Fuel level, tyre deg, engine modes etc.

All this needs to be tested, to optimise the set up of the car.

As a result, the teams testing programs will involve an element of each, to understand how the car behaves. There is little point just going out and setting a banzai lap straight out of the pits on day 1 of testing, however, over the course of a testing program, it stands to reason that you will want to see how the car behaves at the maximum limit.

What is the value of trying to hide your pace? most of the other teams will know anyway, and the copying of parts across the paddock will happen anyway.

Do you really believe that if Red Bull had put in a lap 2 seconds faster than anyone else, that all of a sudden the other teams would have a communal face palm, followed by a trip to the drawing board to add their own 2 seconds?

The teams will have an order of priority however, which may or may not include quali simulations.

I would add, that it could be that some teams did qualifying runs, and they were just really slow.

 

[RasputinLives]

Sandbagging was far more frequent in the days of 'test whever you like' because you were able to go away and trial your true pace behind closed doors.

Since the testing ban we've seen far less of it although funding issues have led to a trend of smaller teams doing times on fumes in order to attract sponsors (sponsors by the way Williams suddenly have an abundance of!).

What we have seen a trend of in revent years is teams managing to claw back the time they are behind through the practice sessions and quali in the first GP (Mclaren are a good example of this) and this is again down to the lack of testing and teams frantically trying new things on race weekend. Again this would have all been done behind closed doors before.

We might very well see the Red Bulls back in the pace but this will be down to parts developed in this space before the season starts and tested in practice rather than any form of sandbagging. IMO anyways.

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

Didn't most people think that all the other teams apart from Brawn were sandbagging in 2009?

 

[Bill Boddy]

I'm not sure that if I were looking for an engine designer that Adrian Newey would be on my list of prime targets.

 

[ZakspeedYakspeed]

I am going to go out on a tree limb that probably cannot support by body weight and say that the new design rules seem ... SEEM ... to be prejudiced against the design principles of one Newey, Adrian Esq. .... namely his noted stubborness to compromise design for packaging ....

I am NOT saying this is deliberate ... or targeted .... but it appears to be a outcome of the issues that beset the RBR so far...

Not that the other teams are complaining ... or the fans .... or the hedge fundians who own the cash flow rights to F1 ... or the Ecclestone daughters ....

 

[Blog Zbod]

The new ace comedy duo of Lauda and Marko (thick as thieves, those two) appeared together on German Servus TV. When Lauda commented that the 2014 Mercedes V-6 turbo was producing about 580 bhp, Marko replied, "Interesting data, I would be happy if I had 580hp."

One might doubt Lauda being forthcoming in such a statement, but I find that number credible because it represents a reasonable increase in brake specific fuel consumption, about 18%, over 2013's V-8s. Petrol direct injection typically can be credited with a 12-15% increase in BSFC, and being that F1 have never before implemented this technology, they well might have got beyond even the higher number.

12-15% leaves just 3-5% to "other sources." Petrol engine technology is sufficiently mature that every further percentage point gained is hard won, and a 3% improvement represents a laudable effort, even from the likes of F1 boffins. The number that surfaced last week attached to the Mercedes' performance -- 690bhp -- might be correct IF the car were in qualy trim, but under the 100kg/305km limit, that would represent roughly a 29% increase in BSFC. That I do not find credible, even if Mercedes managed to push PDI to a 20% gain.


I agree it is unlikely that any of the teams are sandbagging on the circuit, but I am reading a rumour, mostly amongst Italian tifosi, that Ferrari are sandbagging on the timing and scoring sheet (at least when they are hot-lapping). The Italians are not beyond the occassional self-delusion where the Scuderia are concerned, but the fact remains Ferrari have suffered a number of suspiciously-timed telemetry failures ....


I apologise not hot linking to the article from which I got the information about Mercedes being the only engine tested during development with its bag o' gears attached. I have tried for two days but cannot retrace my steps to that source. It is not my habit to post information of (potentially eyebrow-raising) fact without also posting the source but I broke with protocol in that instance and have lived to regret it. I do recall it came from a "news" source, an analyst, not a blogger, and was stated as fact. But it was almost a throw-away line, not the focus of the article, which compounds my task of finding it again. I already have said my 25 "Hail, Juan Manuels" in penance.

 

[ZakspeedYakspeed]

Hmmm ..... http://willthef1journo.wordpress.com/

Mercedes sandbagging ?

It is all smoke and mirrors right now, but in Bahrain I heard talk that the team was nowhere near running at 100% and had a second and a half in hand. I had a brief word with a source at the team before I left testing. He laughed, winked and replied, “A second and a half? Not quite that much.”

 

[LifeW12]

Oh boy, Mercedes stinkfests

 

[Bill Boddy]

My Italian son-in-law has a brother who works for Alfa Romeo, who are owned by Fiat, as are Ferrari. He has inside knowledge that Ferrari were sandbagging to the tune of 15 seconds on every lap that they did in winter testing. Honest.

 

[Kewee]

Bill Boddy I've always believed Ferrari will make up about a minute every four laps so your son-in-law's brother seems spot on.

 

[Il_leone]

Bushi - Lotus just signed an agreement with Renault to say they are working in for long term gain so to suddenly break it would be bad for them and there must be a hefty get out clause which I don't think Genii Capital are going to stump up the money for


Toro Rosso have Renault engines so sister team Red Bull can be a good benchmark between the two teams and it would seem plain daft for them having signed a 3 year deal as well to break that deal

Caterham don't have the money and would only get Honda engines if they field a japanese driver - cue Kobayashi (although he was Toyota man before)

 

[Il_leone]

the most troublesome fly away race would be Bahrain as it was ran during the day in the middle of desert heat but since it is a night race this should not cause an issue to the engines

--------------

RasputinLives

Red Bull are suppose to be the team with the most resources on the grid and spent the most last year and have the best designer and one of the best drivers so you can only blame them for getting their preparations wrong for 2014 and not dividing their resources adequately between 2013 and 2014 ( they are not part of any resource restriction agreement last I remember )

It just goes to show even a genuis like Newey can't always get it right
-----------------------------------------------

As for showing your hand in testing - it is obvious the cars bolted with a Mercedes engines could dominate the Q3 with the exception of Ferrari at the moment

- teams need to find out what sort of car they've got underneath them because it gives a baseline to work from

- the problem at Red Bull is they seem to have a multitude of problems when one area is fixed and another appears. If you compare Mclaren last year - they knew they did not have a fast car but then really did not get the root of the problem and tried to cover everything which is not effective use of time and resources

 

[Plutus]

From a source within the F1 paddock that I can't name, I have been hearing that Caterham and Marussia have been sandbagging the last four years and have been secretly preparing for 2014.

 

[The Pits]

To be fair, they have been bloody convincing!!

 

[The Artist.....]

I tend to agree with mjo on this point Mephistopheleswas saying how performance with varying fuel loads could be predicted by comparing data and made reference to power to weight. We still have to acknowledge how different 2014 is to the years we've just left behind. The technology the teams are dealing with and learning about is so complex I'm sure there's not a designer on pit lane who wishes it was as simple as power to weight. Running these cars and stressing them is the only way they will learn so they can achieve the best handling package for the length of a GP.
As they gather data they will be able to learn from their computers but they'll have to input a hell of a lot more information yet before they reach that stage.

A few things
1. Qualifying setup is largely irrelevant nowadays, as the teams are in parc ferme conditions
2. You're correct that the teams will want to know how the car performs across a race distance, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they've necessarily had to run the cars at every weight from empty to absolutely full!
3. Teams can use interpolation and trends to calculate pace based on weight!
4. What would be the exact difference between running 10kg of fuel and 3 kg of fuel? Certainly you could interpolate expected laptimes by knowing how fast the car went with 20, 15, and 10 kg of fuel and fresh tyres....

Even when a team says that they're doing a low fuel, qualifying type run, we don't know whether they've stripped down to minimum fuel weight, or they're running with a bit in spare, so that, say, if something went wrong with a lap, they could do another couple to get data!!!

 

[Mephistopheles]

Basically none of us know what fuel levels or set up parameters any of the teams have run throughout the entire 12 days of testing and next week we will have a better idea where each team is than we do now.

But carry on taking the piss with the:

A mate of my granddads told him that someone down the duck and lobster reckoned that his aunt Doris said that her grandson who is four knows for certain that RedBull set their own cars on fire in an attempt to lure the other teams into a false sense of security.

Posts if you like, it doesn't bother me...

 

[Kewee]

No ones taking the piss out of anyone. This entire thread has been a discussion on testing based on what we've been watching and what the teams have been saying. I would have agreed with most of, if not all the points The Artist..... made if the teams had a full and complete understanding of these new cars. They would have all the necessary information stored on their computers to enable them to compare data as The Artist..... is suggesting, unfortunately it will take a full season to gather all the information they need to do this, that will be part of the fun for us watching the season unfold. The other possibility of course is the entire season could be ruined by unreliability.

 

[The Artist.....]

So, you think that teams need to run every possible situation and collect data on every possible situation before they can start to model it?

Well, I'm glad you're not responsible for helping me with computer modelling !!! (No I don't work for a motor racing team, no I don't know exactly what the teams are doing, but I do know quite a lot about using data).

 

[Kewee]

The Artist.....

No I don't think the teams need to run every possible situation but as the season progresses and they do gather more and more information their understanding of these cars will improve dramatically.
I touched on this in a previous posting, we can be sure Red Bull would have spent hundreds of hours on their computers during the design process of their car and would have undoubtably had information from Renault to help the process. Just goes to show there's no substitute for track time, testing every possible performance outcome.
Just for the record, I don't work for a motor racing team either, I do however spend way too many hours sometimes weeks redesigning product that has been CAD produced but is unable to reach any degree of success as a production item.