Pirelli 2014

Here are our CFD links and discussions about aerodynamics, suspension, driver safety and tyres. Please stick to F1 on this forum.
Huntresa
Huntresa
54
Joined: 03 Dec 2011, 11:33

Re: Pirelli 2014

Post

FoxHound wrote:
amc wrote:Pirelli? Doing Something by design? Come on... :wink:

Pirelli do as the FIA tell them. 8)
FIA: we want rubbish tyres to spice up the show.
Pirelli: yes sir, 2 bags full sire!

Tyres begin to disintegrate.
FIA: what are these rubbish tyres we cant race on?!
Pirelli: :wtf:
FIA: change it at once.
Pirelli: yes sir, 2 bags full sire!

Pirelli are caught between the teams, the fia and the regulations.

I doubt pirelli selected any teams, although they may have pit the recommendations forward.
Its the FIA with final say on these matters.

I think the decision to choose these 3 teams is a good one, seeing as they have the closest links to the power trains.
Its funny how you think FIA has this kind of power... It was Bernie & Co that wanted new tyres, and it was they who got Pirelli onboard, sure FIA needed to approve Pirelli but thats it.

User avatar
Tim.Wright
330
Joined: 13 Feb 2009, 06:29

Re: Pirelli 2014

Post

FoxHound wrote:
amc wrote:Pirelli? Doing Something by design? Come on... :wink:

Pirelli do as the FIA tell them. 8)
FIA: we want rubbish tyres to spice up the show.
Pirelli: yes sir, 2 bags full sire!

Tyres begin to disintegrate.
FIA: what are these rubbish tyres we cant race on?!
Pirelli: :wtf:
FIA: change it at once.
Pirelli: yes sir, 2 bags full sire!

Pirelli are caught between the teams, the fia and the regulations.

I doubt pirelli selected any teams, although they may have pit the recommendations forward.
Its the FIA with final say on these matters.

I think the decision to choose these 3 teams is a good one, seeing as they have the closest links to the power trains.
I will keep replying to these as long as people keep bringing it up.

Pirelli delivered tyres with 2 distinct characteristics this year:
1. Tyres which degrade at an artificially high rate
2. Tyres which fail catastrohpically during normal use

2 very different failure modes. Someone please show me where the FIA asked for tyres that structurally fail under normal use??
Not the engineer at Force India

User avatar
FoxHound
55
Joined: 23 Aug 2012, 16:50

Re: Pirelli 2014

Post

@ tim and huntresa

Appreciate your comments lads.
However, show me a supplier brought into stringent regulations under mandatory obligation.

No pirelli fan btw
JET set

User avatar
spinmastermic
2
Joined: 28 Oct 2008, 18:13
Location: Dark places

Re: Pirelli 2014

Post

Tim.Wright wrote:
FoxHound wrote:
amc wrote:Pirelli? Doing Something by design? Come on... :wink:

Pirelli do as the FIA tell them. 8)
FIA: we want rubbish tyres to spice up the show.
Pirelli: yes sir, 2 bags full sire!

Tyres begin to disintegrate.
FIA: what are these rubbish tyres we cant race on?!
Pirelli: :wtf:
FIA: change it at once.
Pirelli: yes sir, 2 bags full sire!

Pirelli are caught between the teams, the fia and the regulations.

I doubt pirelli selected any teams, although they may have pit the recommendations forward.
Its the FIA with final say on these matters.

I think the decision to choose these 3 teams is a good one, seeing as they have the closest links to the power trains.
I will keep replying to these as long as people keep bringing it up.

Pirelli delivered tyres with 2 distinct characteristics this year:
1. Tyres which degrade at an artificially high rate
2. Tyres which fail catastrohpically during normal use

2 very different failure modes. Someone please show me where the FIA asked for tyres that structurally fail under normal use??
The tyres failed because they were miss-used. Under-pressured and on the wrong sides of the car. All the cars with failures in the British GP did this.

flmkane
flmkane
13
Joined: 08 Oct 2012, 08:13

Re: Pirelli 2014

Post

spinmastermic wrote: The tyres failed because they were miss-used. Under-pressured and on the wrong sides of the car. All the cars with failures in the British GP did this.
The tyres were used by teams in the manner that would allow them to complete the race distance in the shortest time possible, in other words they were used exactly as F1 racing tyres are expected to be used. If the tyres blew up, it's because the tyres are not capable of performing to the requirements of the teams. Which means that they did not meet the requirements of F1 racing, hence they were bad tyres.

They simply did not meet the design criteria, or the design criteria were ill-defined. Or both.

User avatar
spinmastermic
2
Joined: 28 Oct 2008, 18:13
Location: Dark places

Re: Pirelli 2014

Post

flmkane wrote:
spinmastermic wrote: The tyres failed because they were miss-used. Under-pressured and on the wrong sides of the car. All the cars with failures in the British GP did this.
The tyres were used by teams in the manner that would allow them to complete the race distance in the shortest time possible, in other words they were used exactly as F1 racing tyres are expected to be used. If the tyres blew up, it's because the tyres are not capable of performing to the requirements of the teams. Which means that they did not meet the requirements of F1 racing, hence they were bad tyres.

They simply did not meet the design criteria, or the design criteria were ill-defined. Or both.
Well they did when the were used the way they were designed. The teams took a risk and they paid the price. Get off Pirellis back, they're stuck between a rock and a hard place.

User avatar
Tim.Wright
330
Joined: 13 Feb 2009, 06:29

Re: Pirelli 2014

Post

FoxHound wrote:@ tim and huntresa

Appreciate your comments lads.
However, show me a supplier brought into stringent regulations under mandatory obligation.

No pirelli fan btw
Well in my opinion, any supplier who has entered F1 in the last 5 years had the same problem. I'm sure there are literally dozens of them. In actual fact, the testing rules for Pirelli are absolutely free. They can test what they want, when they want. This is my opinion from the Pirelli 2013 thread:
Tim.Wright wrote:
They can test with almost anything they want. Given their car is not subject any regulations, it would only be a question of money to modify it to reproduce current downforce levels.

If they can't/don't want to do it themselves, there is the excellent Toyota facility in Cologne setup to do exactly that kind of customer work. Other options could be Dallara or Wirth Research. Additionally there are countless other small-medium companies around who could do this work. There are absolutely no technical barriers stopping them from running a car with representative downforce levels.

Whats stopping them is their own lack of investment or motivation or both.

Remember that when the tyre supply went to tender, Michelin's offer was several times more expensive that Pirelli.

In my opinion, now its becoming clear why
In terms of this using the tyres outside their operating conditions...
spinmastermic wrote:
flmkane wrote:
spinmastermic wrote: The tyres failed because they were miss-used. Under-pressured and on the wrong sides of the car. All the cars with failures in the British GP did this.
The tyres were used by teams in the manner that would allow them to complete the race distance in the shortest time possible, in other words they were used exactly as F1 racing tyres are expected to be used. If the tyres blew up, it's because the tyres are not capable of performing to the requirements of the teams. Which means that they did not meet the requirements of F1 racing, hence they were bad tyres.

They simply did not meet the design criteria, or the design criteria were ill-defined. Or both.
Well they did when the were used the way they were designed. The teams took a risk and they paid the price. Get off Pirellis back, they're stuck between a rock and a hard place.
Their tyres have an unacceptably small operating range to the point where its questionable whether they were ever acceptable to run on F1 cars. And for the reasons I mentioned above, they are not caught between a rock and a hard place. They are literally the only body who can test what they want, when they want. This is why all Pauls complaining about testing is really just hot air...
Not the engineer at Force India

Jonnycraig
Jonnycraig
6
Joined: 12 Apr 2013, 20:48

Re: Pirelli 2014

Post

SectorOne wrote:
And this was initiated by a rational vote among all teams present in F1 and simply not a move made by the kingpins of Formula 1 to maintain some form of advantage over the "peasants"? :)
It's hardly surprising that Pirelli would want to have the 'best' cars testing. The last thing they need is a repeat of early 2013 with the tyres unable to handle the levels of downforce being exerted.

Jersey Tom
Jersey Tom
166
Joined: 29 May 2006, 20:49
Location: Huntersville, NC

Re: Pirelli 2014

Post

Jonnycraig wrote:It's hardly surprising that Pirelli would want to have the 'best' cars testing. The last thing they need is a repeat of early 2013 with the tyres unable to handle the levels of downforce being exerted.
Double edged sword. Design your stuff around the car making the most downforce and there's the risk of everyone else not being able to get sufficient heat in the tires - a problem which I believe they've had before.
Grip is a four letter word. All opinions are my own and not those of current or previous employers.

User avatar
SectorOne
166
Joined: 26 May 2013, 09:51

Re: Pirelli 2014

Post

Jonnycraig wrote:It's hardly surprising that Pirelli would want to have the 'best' cars testing. The last thing they need is a repeat of early 2013 with the tyres unable to handle the levels of downforce being exerted.
I doubt Pirelli told what teams they wanted for their test.
It was most likely the less democratic side of Formula 1 that chose what teams do the test and who does not.
"If the only thing keeping a person decent is the expectation of divine reward, then brother that person is a piece of sh*t"

Jonnycraig
Jonnycraig
6
Joined: 12 Apr 2013, 20:48

Re: Pirelli 2014

Post

Jersey Tom wrote:
Jonnycraig wrote:It's hardly surprising that Pirelli would want to have the 'best' cars testing. The last thing they need is a repeat of early 2013 with the tyres unable to handle the levels of downforce being exerted.
Double edged sword. Design your stuff around the car making the most downforce and there's the risk of everyone else not being able to get sufficient heat in the tires - a problem which I believe they've had before.
Well yes that is the dilemma. Hamper those who've built the best car because everyone else can't keep up, or hamper those who've built the best car so that everyone else can keep up. Your viewpoint on that likely depends on whether you enjoy the spectacle of a beast like the RB9 being unleashed or would rather see a Force India written off by its driver as undrivable just missing out on podiums.
SectorOne wrote:
Jonnycraig wrote:It's hardly surprising that Pirelli would want to have the 'best' cars testing. The last thing they need is a repeat of early 2013 with the tyres unable to handle the levels of downforce being exerted.
I doubt Pirelli told what teams they wanted for their test.
It was most likely the less democratic side of Formula 1 that chose what teams do the test and who does not.
But equally Marussia, Caterham & Force India doing the test isn't going to be in many peoples interest either.

User avatar
Juzh
161
Joined: 06 Oct 2012, 08:45

Re: Pirelli 2014

Post

spinmastermic wrote: The tyres failed because they were miss-used. Under-pressured and on the wrong sides of the car. All the cars with failures in the British GP did this.
Nope. Mclaren stated on multiple occasions they followed every recommendation set by pirreli regarding camber, pressures and alignment. Segio's tires still went pop. Your argument is invalid.

User avatar
SectorOne
166
Joined: 26 May 2013, 09:51

Re: Pirelli 2014

Post

Jonnycraig wrote:But equally Marussia, Caterham & Force India doing the test isn't going to be in many peoples interest either.
You hit the nail on the head right there.
It is certainly in all the teams interest to get an idea of the tire, it´s not in everyone´s interest to ensure everyone´s interest is fullfilled.
"If the only thing keeping a person decent is the expectation of divine reward, then brother that person is a piece of sh*t"

Jersey Tom
Jersey Tom
166
Joined: 29 May 2006, 20:49
Location: Huntersville, NC

Re: Pirelli 2014

Post

Jonnycraig wrote:
Jersey Tom wrote:
Jonnycraig wrote:It's hardly surprising that Pirelli would want to have the 'best' cars testing. The last thing they need is a repeat of early 2013 with the tyres unable to handle the levels of downforce being exerted.
Double edged sword. Design your stuff around the car making the most downforce and there's the risk of everyone else not being able to get sufficient heat in the tires - a problem which I believe they've had before.
Well yes that is the dilemma. Hamper those who've built the best car because everyone else can't keep up, or hamper those who've built the best car so that everyone else can keep up.
...or just bring enough of a variety of test cars so you cover all your bases.
Grip is a four letter word. All opinions are my own and not those of current or previous employers.

Huntresa
Huntresa
54
Joined: 03 Dec 2011, 11:33

Re: Pirelli 2014

Post

flmkane wrote:
spinmastermic wrote: The tyres failed because they were miss-used. Under-pressured and on the wrong sides of the car. All the cars with failures in the British GP did this.
The tyres were used by teams in the manner that would allow them to complete the race distance in the shortest time possible, in other words they were used exactly as F1 racing tyres are expected to be used. If the tyres blew up, it's because the tyres are not capable of performing to the requirements of the teams. Which means that they did not meet the requirements of F1 racing, hence they were bad tyres.

They simply did not meet the design criteria, or the design criteria were ill-defined. Or both.
No the tyres were used in the wrong way, but it was bad from Pirellis side not stopping this before cause they knew the teams did this.