F1 Design For Setup & Driver Characteristics

[mstar]

i was thinking of this when i was karting, to be fast in a kart you need to feel comfortable controlling the backend sliding to be devastating fast. button was a great karter in fact -one of the best around at his time, so if he hates cars backend moving around now, where did his driving style change??? obviouly he must of adapted to his smooth style when he went into proper cars from karting.

lewis to me has sticked to his driving style as he can live with a levely backend just from his karting days.

just a thought anyway [-o<

[Jersey Tom]

The handling you want in a kart is not the same as the handling you want in a grand prix car...

[ISLAMATRON]

yep, having a full suspension changes alot of things

[Richard]

Tracks vary hugely from tight streets to fast sweeping bends. That must require a car that is adaptable to different driving styles required by the different circuits.

There are quotes from McLaren on the MP4/25 thread that say they we make the fastest possible car, and then the fastest driver is the one who exploits that speed. They also mention that the optimum set up should be a broad plateau, not a peak, so they have room for mechanical adjustment and human variability.

Seems to be a case of the team saying "here's the fastest car we can manufacture, can you drive it?"

[Fil]

Seems to be a case of the team saying "here's the fastest car we can manufacture, can you drive it?"

And the drivers answer,

"For sure"

[ISLAMATRON]

Except for NP Jr... Renault said "Can you crash it?"

And he said FOR SURE!

[Fil]

Tracks vary hugely from tight streets to fast sweeping bends. That must require a car that is adaptable to different driving styles required by the different circuits.
[...]
Seems to be a case of the team saying "here's the fastest car we can manufacture, can you drive it?"

i like this. coupled with a team-targeted neutral-handling car, this makes the most sense and logic to me.

[Raptor22]

Other topics were being side-tracked, thought the topic should have its own home..


Each team's aim is to get 100% potential performance out of the car prior to driver setup obviously. The discussion is do these cars get designed with tendencies suiting their driver(s), or a neutral setup which can then be adjusted for all drivers.
There are arguments going both ways, both in theory and in real terms.
-Why was Schumacher always so much more dominant than his teammates if they both had neutral cars to work from?
-Yet Massa & Kimi seemed to deal fine with the Ferrari even with differing styles. But then Fisi struggled adapting to Ferrari's 'neutral' car, same with Badoer..
-Alonso & Hamilton seemed to adapt the MP4-22 to their own setups remarkably successfully, giving the neutral design more credibility.


Personally, i think the whole fundamental design of a car gets blurred by the confidence this car's tendency gives its driver to wrench that 100% of potential.
i also assume F1 cars have highly limited tolerances of adjustability to keep them close to their 100% performance window.

A classic video is the one of Herbert vs Schumacher telemetry. I read from this Schumacher gained confidence with oversteering tendencies, control them with steering whilst Herbert sought confidence in understeering tendencies, controlling with throttle. Two opposite setups would be needed here, surely putting stress on one or the other reaching close to the 100% potential of the car.
So did Benetton, and later Ferrari, design a car with more adjustability to suit Schumacher than his teammates? or was he simply that much more brilliant with a neutral car?

And FYI, here's another interesting read on Schumacher vs Barrichello.

Each car is designed to be as neutral as possible. A neutral car is a fast car.

Moving ballast around and changing steering racks allows the engineers to taylor the feel of the car at turn in to suit the driver better.
However the cars dynamic balance is a different kettle of fish since this now includes speed in relation to downforce and grip to get the car around a corner. SOme cars will feel nervous when they are aerodynamically balanced because the aero in not in harmony with the mechanics (Suspension) of the car.

The more neutral a car is at the apex the easier it is for a driver to get it around the corner.
An individual drivers preference for controlling the car on the throttle, on the steering or both is what determines how the dynamic balance is upset. Often a car can be too good and won;lt allow a driver to exercise his style over it which means there is a loss of confidence if he cannot adapt his style.

There so much at work here that its difficult tosay a car is designed for a driver.

I'd like to think that the better drivers are able to adapt better to teh car that they're given. Its far easiet for an engineer to work with than to design a car thats taylord to suit a peculiar style

[Giblet]

I would just like to hear one snippet from any team saying they design cars for drivers. Everything in the design and modelling processes and scale testing process is the team trying to make the car as fast as possible sans driver, sans driving for the most part. The teams have enough trouble trying to make the car basically quick, just in the tunnel, before they can think about microscopic tweaks for drivers.

It's not even until the car is complete and crash tested does the driver even bother molding his seat, metaphorically. Other than really tall drivers, there seems to be very little evidence teams design for drivers.

[Jersey Tom]

Everything in the design and modelling processes and scale testing process is the team trying to make the car as fast as possible sans driver

Not entirely true.. but I can't elaborate.

[marcush.]

I would just like to hear one snippet from any team saying they design cars for drivers. Everything in the design and modelling processes and scale testing process is the team trying to make the car as fast as possible sans driver, sans driving for the most part. The teams have enough trouble trying to make the car basically quick, just in the tunnel, before they can think about microscopic tweaks for drivers.

It's not even until the car is complete and crash tested does the driver even bother molding his seat, metaphorically. Other than really tall drivers, there seems to be very little evidence teams design for drivers.

If these were microscopic items ,I don´t see the reason why a well established driver like fisichella should suddenly from being on race winning pace to fall back suddenly
to something like .5to 1 second behind behind his teammate.It just doesn´t stack up in a field which is only separated by around 2.5 seconds.
I remember the Development of Bennetton in the Schumacher days was extremely converging towards Schumachers preferences and feedback to a point were a guy of Herberts calibre just was not able to drive on the same level as MSin that machine.Also Berger and alesi had big crashes trying to wrestle a time outoff this MS inspired direction.It took Bennetton two years to come back to a win in hockenheim with berger ...food for thought.

[ringo]

Fisichella's problem was seat time, he simply did not get used to the car enough. I think if he tested the car he would have been quicker. The car does not have to be tailored for one driver resulting in another driver to be uncomfortable in it.
It just so happens that the F60 itself was alien to Fisi.
The ferrari's handling and speed could have completely different limits than the Force India not to mention KERS opperation and and execution. If the car has different limits and features, it means the drivers perception of what he can do with it around a corner will have to be adjusted from what he was driving before.

I switch between an old 80's car and a 200x car. Every time i step between the 2 i have to slightly adjust my driving style because they are drastically different even though they are the same make, but it doesn't mean one suits me more, in fact they are both excellent cars. One is just different with different limits. It's my responsibility to maximize the car.

[ringo]

Anyhow, if it is the case that an F1 car can be tailor made for a specific driver; what are the quantifiable aspects that constitutes a driver's "style"? Can the engineers write it down and say "looks like we got the raw essence of Button's style, let's load it up on the computer"?
And i don't mean generalizations like: one likes over steer and one like instability.

I mean real hard numbers and facts some thing like that nursery rhyme:
(just visualize the engineers pondering this)

What is Hami style made of?
What is Hami style made of?
Frogs and snails and puppy dogs tails.
That's what Hami style's made of!

And what is Button style made of?
What is Button style made of?
Sugar and spice and all that's nice,
oh that's what Button style's made of! =D>

Yes so to this effect , how can something so qualitative as style be quantified?
It's the only way it can be physically implemented into a permanent design. This question is for those who believe it can.

[ESPImperium]

Fisichella's problem was seat time, he simply did not get used to the car enough. I think if he tested the car he would have been quicker. The car does not have to be tailored for one driver resulting in another driver to be uncomfortable in it.
It just so happens that the F60 itself was alien to Fisi.
The ferrari's handling and speed could have completely different limits than the Force India not to mention KERS opperation and and execution. If the car has different limits and features, it means the drivers perception of what he can do with it around a corner will have to be adjusted from what he was driving before.

I switch between an old 80's car and a 200x car. Every time i step between the 2 i have to slightly adjust my driving style because they are drastically different even though they are the same make, but it doesn't mean one suits me more, in fact they are both excellent cars. One is just different with different limits. It's my responsibility to maximize the car.

I think you have it spot on there. No matter what car you drive you need the seat time and the operation and execution comes with it. Take Heidfeld in 08, a car that was seemingly tailored more for Kubica, but Nick took the car to more points finishes than what Kubica did, and had the most consistant season in F1, posibly ever, only failing to complkete arround 5 laps of the total race laps.

I even find that whatever car im driving, out on a road thats diffrent to what i drive, i have to adjust. Even in sim racers, one car i may set up to be very neurtal as it drives quickest like that, one car i may want a little more peaky as it will drive arround a track quickest like that. Horses for courses they saying goes i think.

The thing that a deesigner and his design team has to do is design a car that can be fast for a driver that suits a more understeer-y car and a smoother style, where the driver that likes the car to be more lively and active to oversteer must also be kept happy as well. Thats why i think that the designer should be in the loop for what drivers are hired, take Red Bull, Webber and Vettel are both a simmilar size in height and have a simmilar style, 2 things that a designer likes in designing a car, as he can get the car righ and both drivers can be in the points at the end of the season, whitch wins champoinships not just races.

[PlatinumZealot]

I mean how is driver style quantified as input into designing the CHASSIS? (not the shocks, not the weight dist, not the springs, not the brakes and all the auxiliary things that the driver can change) Can the supporters of this myth please give examples of how you design the dynamics of the CHASSIS to suit another driver.

I mean, Hey the downforce and the suspension can be screwed up to hell and the car handles like a rodeo bull and only the best drivers can handle it. But how is that a result of the car being designed for one driver? ( Heikki fan: "Hamilton's input screwed up the MP4-24!! )

Even if I put my self in a position to support the myth it still doesn't make sense, because when you try to be empathetic by asking about driver styles all they will say "oohh, he likes understeer/over steer and he is hard on the brakes! " I just don't follow because these things can be easily adjusted! Transient behaviour can be adjusted too.

The only exception is when the car just SUCKS or the car is just too much for the driver so no one can drive it.