FIA tender for standard F1 gearboxes

[Zynerji]

Cut labor by outsourcing, save lots of money.

How much of that money is yours?

How much do you pay F1?

I don't understand what you are saying?

I work in business. If I need a specific skill-set that 9 competitors also need, the price for that skill-set goes up (astronomically) in a bidding war. By consolidating that skill-set into a seperate business, myself and my competitors can contract that business for our needs at a significant cost savings to all of us, without reducing quality. It's simply an economy of scale.

This is a very simple business understanding, and has been working in the US for over 200 years.

F1 does NOT exist to employ people. That employment exists because of the NEEDS of an F1 team, and if those needs are met elsewhere, the employment ends.

[Just_a_fan]

Personal comments removed.

And to say "it works well" as a system, only applies to one end of the equation. The business owner does well out of reducing costs, the people they dump on the scrap heap, less so.

[henry]

If the gearbox cluster is specified by the FIA and designed and manufactured by a commercial supplier what will happen to the gearbox reliability rules?

If a bearing goes or selectors wear or jam where does the fault lie? Casing design, hydraulics design, control systems?

If there are no restrictions the wealthy teams could build dynamo meters to run in and measure gearbox efficiency, select the best and use them one per race.

If there are restrictions fans will be incensed because favourite_driver gets a grid penalty because selected_supplier made a bad component.

There will, no doubt, be some savings but I wonder how much this is marketing in the same way that these PUs are in some way road relevant.

[Jolle]

If the gearbox cluster is specified by the FIA and designed and manufactured by a commercial supplier what will happen to the gearbox reliability rules?

If a bearing goes or selectors wear or jam where does the fault lie? Casing design, hydraulics design, control systems?

If there are no restrictions the wealthy teams could build dynamo meters to run in and measure gearbox efficiency, select the best and use them one per race.

If there are restrictions fans will be incensed because favourite_driver gets a grid penalty because selected_supplier made a bad component.

There will, no doubt, be some savings but I wonder how much this is marketing in the same way that these PUs are in some way road relevant.

There was the same kind of discussion when the FIA went for a standerd ECU, some even wondering if McLaren would gain a advantage.

So far, there were no real problems with the ECU, and if all goes to plan, Xtrac will probably get the contract and everybody will get more or less the Mercedes gearbox, which is pretty reliable.

Gearbox reliability is not only dependent of the amount of GPs it has run but also how long it's run in the complete seamless setting. The different settings will stress the gearbox more or less. So it's still up to the teams themselves how far they are stretching the gearboxes.

[Tommy Cookers]

...Gearbox reliability is not only dependent of the amount of GPs it has run but also how long it's run in the complete seamless setting. The different settings will stress the gearbox more or less.

what are the other ways of running a 'completely seamless' gearbox ?

[saviour stivala]

A formula one seamless gearbox can only be run/used as a seamless gearbox, there is no such thing as part-time seamless/complete or not complete seamless setting.

[Jolle]

...Gearbox reliability is not only dependent of the amount of GPs it has run but also how long it's run in the complete seamless setting. The different settings will stress the gearbox more or less.

what are the other ways of running a 'completely seamless' gearbox ?

The time the ignition is shot off for the shift. In the most aggressive setting there will be virtual no gap, and that will stress the gearbox. In a more easy setting, there will be a longer period that the ignition is shut down and eliminates the stress on the shifters.

[saviour stivala]

I believe that the ignition cut-off has been done away with by the use of seamless gear change gearbox.

[Jolle]

I believe that the ignition cut-off has been done away with by the use of seamless gear change gearbox.

In qualifying mode, yes, but it puts a lot of stress on the gearbox. The gearbox uses a kind of freewheel/teeth to catch the next gear. This means there is a few degree where it goes from one gear to slam into the next “tooth”. This makes shifts quite harsh on the equipment. A few milliseconds to shift will reduce all this stress, stops the big slam and lengthen the life of a gearbox, with a small time penalty.

[saviour stivala]

I believe that the ignition cut-off has been done away with by the use of seamless gear change gearbox.

In qualifying mode, yes, but it puts a lot of stress on the gearbox. The gearbox uses a kind of freewheel/teeth to catch the next gear. This means there is a few degree where it goes from one gear to slam into the next “tooth”. This makes shifts quite harsh on the equipment. A few milliseconds to shift will reduce all this stress, stops the big slam and lengthen the life of a gearbox, with a small time penalty.

On the contrary, the seamless shift type formula one gearbox among other advantages eliminates a lot of stress from that of the previous type of sequential dog shift type of gearbox had. What made this type of seamless shift possible was the use of a type of ‘one-way-clutch’ that could be used that made it possible to engage two gears at the same time without locking the gearbox while still retaining engine braking capabilities. This developed gear change mechanism eliminated interruption of torque delivery while shifting. The previously used sequential dog-shift type of gearbox needed the use of ‘ignition cut-off’ which in itself interrupts torque delivery. Ignition cut-off is not needed when a seamless shift gearbox is used because the next gear to be used has already been selected and engaged.

[Mudflap]

So far, there were no real problems with the ECU, and if all goes to plan, Xtrac will probably get the contract and everybody will get more or less the Mercedes gearbox, which is pretty reliable.

Why the Merc gearbox though - they are the only manufacturer that cut their own gears as far as I am aware ?

At the end of the day F1 manufacturers compete to showcase their engineering prowess, any move towards standard parts is really against the nature of the sport. I would think a good chunk of F1 fans want to see the most advanced machinery going all out on the track.

Since a few manufacturers believe (and for good reasons) that they can build better gearboxes than what the likes of Xtrac have to offer I don't see why they should be stopped.

It is a given that teams will always blow every last penny available so introducing spec parts would only shift their spending towards lower gain items.

[Jolle]

So far, there were no real problems with the ECU, and if all goes to plan, Xtrac will probably get the contract and everybody will get more or less the Mercedes gearbox, which is pretty reliable.

Why the Merc gearbox though - they are the only manufacturer that cut their own gears as far as I am aware ?

At the end of the day F1 manufacturers compete to showcase their engineering prowess, any move towards standard parts is really against the nature of the sport. I would think a good chunk of F1 fans want to see the most advanced machinery going all out on the track.

Since a few manufacturers believe (and for good reasons) that they can build better gearboxes than what the likes of Xtrac have to offer I don't see why they should be stopped.

It is a given that teams will always blow every last penny available so introducing spec parts would only shift their spending towards lower gain items.

Mercedes runs Xtracs gears, funny enough they are one of the few that outsourced their gears outside F1.

Of course it’s also quite possible that a party like Williams (probably the reason they didn’t close that department last year), RedBull, McLaren and/or Ferrari have made a bid.

[Jolle]

I believe that the ignition cut-off has been done away with by the use of seamless gear change gearbox.

In qualifying mode, yes, but it puts a lot of stress on the gearbox. The gearbox uses a kind of freewheel/teeth to catch the next gear. This means there is a few degree where it goes from one gear to slam into the next “tooth”. This makes shifts quite harsh on the equipment. A few milliseconds to shift will reduce all this stress, stops the big slam and lengthen the life of a gearbox, with a small time penalty.

On the contrary, the seamless shift type formula one gearbox among other advantages eliminates a lot of stress from that of the previous type of sequential dog shift type of gearbox had. What made this type of seamless shift possible was the use of a type of ‘one-way-clutch’ that could be used that made it possible to engage two gears at the same time without locking the gearbox while still retaining engine braking capabilities. This developed gear change mechanism eliminated interruption of torque delivery while shifting. The previously used sequential dog-shift type of gearbox needed the use of ‘ignition cut-off’ which in itself interrupts torque delivery. Ignition cut-off is not needed when a seamless shift gearbox is used because the next gear to be used has already been selected and engaged.

first off, in F1 its forbidden to run two gears at the same time, that's why we never had any time of dual clutch gearbox. The system works with a ring with teeth that "catches" the higher gear while the lower gear goes into a kind of freewheel mode.

You also underestimate the forces on the whole drivetrain and these "teeth" when slowing a PU on full power down a 1000 rpm. This is extremely violent and delivers a great shock from crank to tires. Of course a transmission damper will take away a bit of these stresses, but forces are immense. lengthening the "power off" time, will not only reduce stress on the drivetrain and thereby expanding it's lifespan, but also lengten tire life. In the pre-hybrid times they had a gearbox switch on the steering wheel were they could choose how aggressive the gearshifts were, these day's it's incorperated into the Strat settings.

[gruntguru]

Jolle you are absolutely correct. The inertia of the engine guarantees a very high spike in torque when a higher gear is selected. This spike has to be attenuated to avoid loss of traction.

[Zynerji]

Yes, I know all of that, but what has the cost of F1 got to do with you? Is it your money that you're trying to save by having them make people unemployed?

And to say "it works well" as a system, only applies to one end of the equation. The business owner does well out of reducing costs, the people they dump on the scrap heap, less so.

The cost-capping talks have ALWAYS referred to reducing team size.

F1 is NOT a union. No one has the RIGHT to work in the sport. No one has an OBLIGATION to continue to employ unnecessary staffing.

Personal comments removed.