F1technical.net

Sevach wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2020, 16:01

Honda didn't make any great progress with the no party mode rule.

Renault is solid number 2 now.

Moore77 wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2020, 06:29

Williams has been running the PU to the maximum in qualifyings so far and even in races, probably much harder than Mercedes themselves due to their relative track positions in races. Their cooling isn't as aerodynamically efficient as Mercedes, hence their packaging is also not as great. But their cooling package does its job of keeping the PU as cool as required. So, I don't think Mercedes need to detune the PU for Williams' sake.

1158 wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2020, 18:38

Moore77 wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2020, 06:29

Williams has been running the PU to the maximum in qualifyings so far and even in races, probably much harder than Mercedes themselves due to their relative track positions in races. Their cooling isn't as aerodynamically efficient as Mercedes, hence their packaging is also not as great. But their cooling package does its job of keeping the PU as cool as required. So, I don't think Mercedes need to detune the PU for Williams' sake.

For a couple laps you are correct. I'm wondering about running the PU in a higher mode for an extended period of time. The amount of heat the PU generates in the high mode is one reason they cannot sustain that mode for more than a short period of time.

If the mode is fixed for the race and the same mode applies for all teams using a given PU I was suggesting cooling requirements across all customers would need to be taken into account or it could lead to PU damage for teams with less efficient cooling packages.

Moore77 wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2020, 18:53

1158 wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2020, 18:38

Moore77 wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2020, 06:29

Williams has been running the PU to the maximum in qualifyings so far and even in races, probably much harder than Mercedes themselves due to their relative track positions in races. Their cooling isn't as aerodynamically efficient as Mercedes, hence their packaging is also not as great. But their cooling package does its job of keeping the PU as cool as required. So, I don't think Mercedes need to detune the PU for Williams' sake.

For a couple laps you are correct. I'm wondering about running the PU in a higher mode for an extended period of time. The amount of heat the PU generates in the high mode is one reason they cannot sustain that mode for more than a short period of time.

If the mode is fixed for the race and the same mode applies for all teams using a given PU I was suggesting cooling requirements across all customers would need to be taken into account or it could lead to PU damage for teams with less efficient cooling packages.

Let me clarify. I am of the belief that, Williams has been using the PU on their car in more aggressive modes than Mercedes in the past races. Because Mercedes used to disappear in a couple of laps in races, they always used to turn down their engines and didn't really expose their cooling package.

Whereas Williams and Racing Points were fighting for positions in races and must have been using more aggressive engine modes to retain positions OR to try and gain a position or two. If they have been doing that, then their cooling packages must have been good enough to run the PU in more aggressive manner than that of Mercedes. In fact, this must be more a challenge for Mercedes than their customers. May be that is why Mercedes was trialing two different engine covers in practice with different cooling outlets?

siskue2005 wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2020, 19:42

Moore77 wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2020, 18:53

1158 wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2020, 18:38

For a couple laps you are correct. I'm wondering about running the PU in a higher mode for an extended period of time. The amount of heat the PU generates in the high mode is one reason they cannot sustain that mode for more than a short period of time.

If the mode is fixed for the race and the same mode applies for all teams using a given PU I was suggesting cooling requirements across all customers would need to be taken into account or it could lead to PU damage for teams with less efficient cooling packages.

Let me clarify. I am of the belief that, Williams has been using the PU on their car in more aggressive modes than Mercedes in the past races. Because Mercedes used to disappear in a couple of laps in races, they always used to turn down their engines and didn't really expose their cooling package.

Whereas Williams and Racing Points were fighting for positions in races and must have been using more aggressive engine modes to retain positions OR to try and gain a position or two. If they have been doing that, then their cooling packages must have been good enough to run the PU in more aggressive manner than that of Mercedes. In fact, this must be more a challenge for Mercedes than their customers. May be that is why Mercedes was trialing two different engine covers in practice with different cooling outlets?

i dont think Merc allows their customers to run in higher mode than what they prescribed.
They cant run mode aggressive modes, the modes and number of laps they are allowed to do that are controlled by mercedes

TimW wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2020, 20:58

I think it way too early to draw any conclusions on the impact of the single mode. Only thing we can conclude is that Red Bull is poor in Monza.

What surprised me is that there was still a big improvement from Q1 to Q2, ~0.4s for the top 10. From Q2 to Q3 there was no improvement.
Can so much (and consistent) lap time be attributed to improving track conditions, and 'getting the hang of it'?

TimW wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2020, 20:58

I think it way too early to draw any conclusions on the impact of the single mode. Only thing we can conclude is that Red Bull is poor in Monza.

What surprised me is that there was still a big improvement from Q1 to Q2, ~0.4s for the top 10. From Q2 to Q3 there was no improvement.
Can so much (and consistent) lap time be attributed to improving track conditions, and 'getting the hang of it'?

Sieper wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2020, 21:33

TimW wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2020, 20:58

I think it way too early to draw any conclusions on the impact of the single mode. Only thing we can conclude is that Red Bull is poor in Monza.

What surprised me is that there was still a big improvement from Q1 to Q2, ~0.4s for the top 10. From Q2 to Q3 there was no improvement.
Can so much (and consistent) lap time be attributed to improving track conditions, and 'getting the hang of it'?

Yes, and like the other poster was saying. Q1 they will come Through anyway, so you don,t put the car on the absolute limit. Q3 you do take (some) risk. They showed Kimi’s fast lap on tv today (when he was at Ferrari) and he had his left front 90% on the grass to make the turn as wide as possible.

1158 wrote: ↑

05 Sep 2020, 21:07

I do believe each PU has a certain number of higher mode uses, every PU manufacturer is like that. I believe they leave it up to the teams to decided how many times per event the highest mode is used, but there is a finite amount of uses for each PU.

I'd guess track evolution does play a role in the jump. Could also be better optimization of the deployment modes after experiencing conditions in Q1.