Less torque to reduce tyre wear?

[jz11]

deja vu, lets define what is an intake/exhaust system, where it starts and with what it ends, and take it from there

else it's going to be another 15 pages of arguing whether a ford fiesta 110hp engine instead of 680hp 2.4l v8 is a form of traction control system

[Raptor22]

Did you read the quote by jz11?

Yes and I am very surprised by that since VVT has been part of F1 engine technology since the 80's. Variable length trumpets I could understand were fairly complex and worked in conjunction with VVT.

[gato azul]

Did you read the quote by jz11?

Yes and I am very surprised by that since VVT has been part of F1 engine technology since the 80's. Variable length trumpets I could understand were fairly complex and worked in conjunction with VVT.

I think, it (VVT & VVL) "died" in 2006 when the V8's where introduced into F1.

[red300zx99]

It's sad as these are technologies that trickle down to production cars.

[raymondu999]

I have a question that is somewhat related, yet not entirely.

What about doing what Hamilton did in Hungary 2012, or Vettel in Brazil 2011? Using an intermediate map in dry conditions? Someone mentioned a possible (I was one of them, too) use of Hamilton doing that was that he would have an easier time managing wheelspin under traction, to help preserve the rears in that final stint of the grand prix.

Given that it seems to have been a thing that most teams do at times, and really nobody protests, I'm assuming it's legal.

But would it have the same effects? ie you stamp the throttle harder for the same level of torque/power output, and get more exhaust gases? While at the same time, the reduced torque/power output means the driver can manage the wheelspin better under traction?

[Raptor22]

Did you read the quote by jz11?

Yes and I am very surprised by that since VVT has been part of F1 engine technology since the 80's. Variable length trumpets I could understand were fairly complex and worked in conjunction with VVT.

I think, it (VVT & VVL) "died" in 2006 when the V8's where introduced into F1.

Thinking back, it may have come in as part of the RRA in 2009? I recall Renault objecting to a lot of the engine technology being removed since some of the change impacted directly on the reliabilityof their engine. If I recall correctly, valve timing was such an issue since they did often keep the exhaust valve open off throttle to allow for better internal engine cooling orsomething along those lines. I thought a compromise was reached since Renault eventually agreed terms with the FIA.

[Cam]

I have a question that is somewhat related, yet not entirely.

What about doing what Hamilton did in Hungary 2012, or Vettel in Brazil 2011? Using an intermediate map in dry conditions? Someone mentioned a possible (I was one of them, too) use of Hamilton doing that was that he would have an easier time managing wheelspin under traction, to help preserve the rears in that final stint of the grand prix.

Given that it seems to have been a thing that most teams do at times, and really nobody protests, I'm assuming it's legal.

But would it have the same effects? ie you stamp the throttle harder for the same level of torque/power output, and get more exhaust gases? While at the same time, the reduced torque/power output means the driver can manage the wheelspin better under traction?

I see where you're going. You have more flexibility with wet running engine settings - those same settings would ultimately reduce wheel spin in dry conditions, so why not run a wet setup in the dry. Apart from the flashing red light giving the game away, why would they not do that now? Surely it's not illegal to run a wet setting in the dry. The teams must have considered this, no?

[gato azul]

Thinking back, it may have come in as part of the RRA in 2009? .

well, why make things more complicated then they are?
Just google for the 2006 FIA regs, and you will know,they are "out there".
In the meantime, this may help.

2006–2012

For 2006, the engines had to be 90° V8 of 2.4 litres maximum capacity with a 98 mm maximum circular bore, which imply a 39.7 mm minimum stroke. They had to have two circular inlet and exhaust valves per cylinder, be normally aspirated and have a 95 kg (209 lb) minimum weight.
Pre-cooling air before it enters the cylinders, injection of any substance other than air and fuel into the cylinders, variable-geometry intake and exhaust systems, variable valve timing were forbidden. Each cylinder could have only one fuel injector and a single plug spark ignition

[gato azul]

But would it have the same effects? ie you stamp the throttle harder for the same level of torque/power output, and get more exhaust gases? While at the same time, the reduced torque/power output means the driver can manage the wheelspin better under traction?

The same effect as what? As the "magic" Renault/RBR engine map in Hockenheim?
Not quite, as this was reported to work at 100% accelerator pedal position (APP).
And there is no difference in 100% APP between a dry and a wet pedal shaping map (PSM).

It does/can help the driver to "put the power down", and can/will help with tyre conservation, if traction is a problem.
But it will do so, in a different manner to the RBR map.
What a different PSM can do is make it easier to hold a desired APP for optimum acceleration, by reducing the responsiveness of the pedal.
What an PSM does, is defining the relationship between physical APP and the command input into the ECU.
If it would be linear, the ECU input would follow the physical APP directly for example 50%->50% 60%->60% 70%-70% etc.
Now if driver want to apply 60% input into the ECU for good acceleration out of an specific corner (just an example), it may is a bit tricky to find this point 60% consistently and hold it.
If the wet PSM, makes the relationship 60%->60% ,62%->60.1%, 64%->60.2%, 66%->60.3%, 68%->60.4% etc. it's much easier to stay close to the desired (ECU input) value and hold it while driving over bumps/kerbs etc.).
Therefore it does make life a bit easier for the driver (and the tyres perhaps).
At one point, because 100% will need to correspondent with 100% again, you will need a steeper gradient, if you used a flatter gradient at one point (no free cheese ), but you can do it in an ranger where it does not "hurt" you that much. (where you are not that much grip/traction limited anymore for example).
So why does not anybody do it then? Good question, I don't know the answer, just some possible reasons, pick the one you like best.

- other cars have better "traction" (mechanical grip) &/or more downforce - no need to do it
- other cars have better "tyre managment", tyres where in better shape at this point - no need to do it
- other cars/engines have a "better" (for want of a better word)/smoother more sophisticated dry tyre ASM to start with
- other cars/engines have better "drivability" / smoother power delivery (engine characteristic) - no need to do it
- they did not think about it
- they think it's up do their drivers do deal with it
- etc. etc.

make up your own mind / take your pick.
I noticed it too (during the broadcast) and had the same thought, it made me smile at the time.
But I think, that there is nothing "wrong" with it, and it's all fair game.
I don't think the current regs "ban" the use of the alternative ASM (wet) in the dry, otherwise they would not use "may" in the wording (IMO). It's just a roundabout way of saying that you only can have two (2) ASM.
The main reason IMHO, is that the dry/wet tyres have different diameters, which will result in a different force at the CP for the same torque input to the wheel (via the driveshaft/halfshaft from the g/box/diff).

just another example of an PSM:


the vertical (z) axis [Throttle %]would be the input parameter into the ECU (drive by wire), for different APP's [throttle pedal %] at different engine speeds [rpm]
@ 8000rpm the input would be linear to APP

[Cam]

So it seems RBR was on the right track with what they we're doing. Mercedes engines are wearing the tyres out faster than Ferrari and Renault.

Auto Motor und Sport said Mercedes has "recognised the problem" and is working at full speed to improve its engine torque maps.

So, how will this translate with the recent dramas? This could be a sticky wicket for Mercedes, if I understand correctly, they will have to reduce the overall torque of their engine, in-line with what the map should correlate with. Is this correct? I don't think they free to produce any map to control the engine - as that's what RBR did, so a new map is not enough?

Edit: apologies in not technically the right thread, but have you seen the Mercedes Threads........

[raymondu999]

I think it's the right thread - the use of torque maps to keep wheelspin in check,mand hence tyre life. It just needs a new name. Mods, perhaps we can rename to a more generic title?

Apparently it's the mid-range of the Merc that's impressive. Sergio Perez was recently quoted as saying: "On the way out of corners, we are able to keep up, but then there comes a phase when the Force India can pull away, so long as their tires are fresh."

I'm not a fan of the US TV network SpeedTV, but here's their article on it: http://formula-one.speedtv.com/article/ ... lli-tires/

[Cam]

Good call on the Thread Name.

I'm not familiar with the engine freeze regs, will Merc be able to adjust their engines or is it maps only? And if it's maps only, won;t they fall into the same trap as RBR, that is, the engine map would be less than the engine is capable?

[red300zx99]

Good call on the Thread Name.

I'm not familiar with the engine freeze regs, will Merc be able to adjust their engines or is it maps only? And if it's maps only, won;t they fall into the same trap as RBR, that is, the engine map would be less than the engine is capable?

As long as 100% throttle = ~100% torque they should be fine. They should have a bunch of room to play around with in the partial throttle openings.

[red300zx99]

Apart from the flashing red light giving the game away, why would they not do that now? Surely it's not illegal to run a wet setting in the dry. The teams must have considered this, no?

Well I know of atleast one car who's had the red light flashing in the dry...

[allstaruk08]

5.5.4 The accelerator pedal shaping map in the ECU may only be linked to the type of the tyres fitted to the car : one map for use with dry‐weather tyres and one map for use with intermediate or wet‐weather tyres

doesn't look like you can run a wet or inter map in the dry.